UK Politics

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Compel**

I think the concern is more that some companies will happily actively choose to harm the society in order to promote short term self interest.

In other words, a gigantic form of the Tragedy of the Commons - except the companies can simply go, "screw you guys, I'm going to Latveria. And by the way, I made a heap of money by screwing you guys.

**notprop**

r_squared wrote:Newsflash, that big company you work for exists inside this society.
If it thinks the actions of that society are going to harm the company it is likely it will do something to protect that. Could be anything from communicating to government, national or local, layoffs, or restructuring and re-organisation. I imagine they might try talking first, before doing anything else.
If, for example the government turned around tomorrow and brought in measure or legislation that was potentially harmful or risky, or costly to the building industry how do you think they would react?
I think you'd be naive to suggest they wouldn't at least try and lobby government to protect their industry, business' and employees.
Suggesting that that is somehow selfish is a bit much tbh.

Of course they are selfish, that is the point I am making.

It is this fact that makes their input irrelevant as they do not give two hoots about you or I or our rights or the general betterment of society.

They will campaign against anything that risks the status quo or their forecasted position.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:......And on another point which is unrelated toy your comment, I can't believe that it's taken 13 years for the Heathrow expansion to get the nod.

Whether or not you're pro or anti third runway, 13 years is a damning indictment of how slowly things get done, and we're going to have to up our game post-Brexit.

Indeed, Brown the wet fether we know about but is this an indictment against coalition?

I look forward to 13 further years of appeals and arguing.

Should have just built another runway at Stanstead and improve the train line - it's by far the best choice for business travel from central London it just need more destinations to become bigger. Of course they probably still will.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Compel wrote:
I think the concern is more that some companies will happily actively choose to harm the society in order to promote short term self interest.

In other words, a gigantic form of the Tragedy of the Commons - except the companies can simply go, "screw you guys, I'm going to Latveria. And by the way, I made a heap of money by screwing you guys.

That's what I don't like about business in a way. Even if we had voted to stay, they'd still up sticks and move if they thought they could get a better deal elsewhere.

Fair enough, business is there to make money and they have their 5 year plans, but I have my 5 year plan, and it doesn't include EU membership.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

notprop wrote:
r_squared wrote:Newsflash, that big company you work for exists inside this society.
If it thinks the actions of that society are going to harm the company it is likely it will do something to protect that. Could be anything from communicating to government, national or local, layoffs, or restructuring and re-organisation. I imagine they might try talking first, before doing anything else.
If, for example the government turned around tomorrow and brought in measure or legislation that was potentially harmful or risky, or costly to the building industry how do you think they would react?
I think you'd be naive to suggest they wouldn't at least try and lobby government to protect their industry, business' and employees.
Suggesting that that is somehow selfish is a bit much tbh.

Of course they are selfish, that is the point I am making.

It is this fact that makes their input irrelevant as they do not give two hoots about you or I or our rights or the general betterment of society.

They will campaign against anything that risks the status quo or their forecasted position.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:......And on another point which is unrelated toy your comment, I can't believe that it's taken 13 years for the Heathrow expansion to get the nod.

Whether or not you're pro or anti third runway, 13 years is a damning indictment of how slowly things get done, and we're going to have to up our game post-Brexit.

Indeed, Brown the wet fether we know about but is this an indictment against coalition?

I look forward to 13 further years of appeals and arguing.

Should have just built another runway at Stanstead and improve the train line - it's by far the best choice for business travel from central London it just need more destinations to become bigger. Of course they probably still will.

Perhaps you or somebody else can give me an answer to this, but why was Heathrow chosen?

By that I mean there is talk about having to choose between Heathrow and Gatwick for expansion. Why not choose both? And Stanstead?

Build them all!

God knows the infastructure investment and job opportunities is what is needed right now...

**notprop**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Compel wrote:
I think the concern is more that some companies will happily actively choose to harm the society in order to promote short term self interest.

In other words, a gigantic form of the Tragedy of the Commons - except the companies can simply go, "screw you guys, I'm going to Latveria. And by the way, I made a heap of money by screwing you guys.

That's what I don't like about business in a way. Even if we had voted to stay, they'd still up sticks and move if they thought they could get a better deal elsewhere.

Fair enough, business is there to make money and they have their 5 year plans, but I have my 5 year plan, and it doesn't include EU membership.

Access isn't the only reason that Financial Services thrive in the UK, we have rules capital rules that encourage them. Something the EU tried to change on a number of occasions over the years to restrict our competitive advantage. It isn't a one issue problem no matter what the announcement might make you believe.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
...
Perhaps you or somebody else can give me an answer to this, but why was Heathrow chosen?

By that I mean there is talk about having to choose between Heathrow and Gatwick for expansion. Why not choose both? And Stanstead?

Build them all!

God knows the infastructure investment and job opportunities is what is needed right now...

The obvious reason would be dogma. British avionics is focused on Heathrow, indeed it is one of the major hub airports for the world air transport system forming a stop over port for people across the globe. It already had allot of internal infrastructure supporting additional flights and passengers and a local community and business that can support the expansion.

UK domestic transport, particularly London have allot of very good rail and road links to Heathrow. This is less true for say Stanstead or Luton and definitely for Boris island ( I would love this by the way - so Thunderbirds).

It will generate 180,000 jobs and £220Bn in GDP.

Flying is a heavy polluter ( in air and noise terms) and the good people around Heathrow are more that used to that. Flippant but true.

I would expect that there will be further expansion at other Airports anyway.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

It gets worse. Even if there wasn't a ton of High Court and Supreme Court appeals to fight off, and even if they started work in January 2017, it's going to take until 2025 to build the thing!!!

Eight years to build a runway?

Bloody hell!

**notprop**

What were you expecting; A few Navi's and a tarmac roller to knock it out over the weekend?

There'll be a terminal, maintenance facilities, emergency facilities, strip that needs to take massive impact and heat loads while not deteriorating for a few decades, more car parks and hotels, a bazillion shops and probably one of those travellator things that make you think you are walking really fast.

Of course they'll have to find someone to manage that for a not insignificant sum........hmmmmmm.

**reds8n**

Surely we could just get some Polish guys in to do it cheaper and quicker.......oh... yeah.

I think it is indeed a wee bit disingenuous to describe it as " a runway".

The location itself will provide some ...unique..... challenges along the way.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

notprop wrote:
What were you expecting; A few Navi's and a tarmac roller to knock it out over the weekend?

There'll be a terminal, maintenance facilities, emergency facilities, strip that needs to take massive impact and heat loads while not deteriorating for a few decades, more car parks and hotels, a bazillion shops and probably one of those travellator things that make you think you are walking really fast.

Of course they'll have to find someone to manage that for a not insignificant sum........hmmmmmm.

No, I wasn't expecting cowboy builders to turn up 2 hours late, do half an hour's work, and then go off for a 3 hour lunch

but neither was I expecting 8 years!

They built the Channel Tunnel in that time, which was a far harder and more impressive feat of engineering.

**r_squared**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
r_squared wrote:
Newsflash, that big company you work for exists inside this society.
If it thinks the actions of that society are going to harm the company it is likely it will do something to protect that. Could be anything from communicating to government, national or local, layoffs, or restructuring and re-organisation. I imagine they might try talking first, before doing anything else.
If, for example the government turned around tomorrow and brought in measure or legislation that was potentially harmful or risky, or costly to the building industry how do you think they would react?
I think you'd be naive to suggest they wouldn't at least try and lobby government to protect their industry, business' and employees.
Suggesting that that is somehow selfish is a bit much tbh.

There has to be a balance between legitimate concerns from business, and business laying down the law to government...

And on another point which is unrelated toy your comment, I can't believe that it's taken 13 years for the Heathrow expansion to get the nod.

Whether or not you're pro or anti third runway, 13 years is a damning indictment of how slowly things get done, and we're going to have to up our game post-Brexit.

Well the problem is that on here it appears that any pronouncement, by any business, with regards to Brexit is decried as business' going too far.
Admittedly the Govt and Bankers are making an issue over passporting, and a small number of other companies have said that either they maybe relocating to the EU, or are expecting some sort of effect to their bottom line, but it hasn't exactly been a tidal wave of business panicking and running for the hills.
That in itself should be viewed with some positivity.

However, if any business says anything other than "everything is awesome", it seems that the response to criticism adopted by some on this board is the same as that advocated by the tabloids last week, ie to tell business' to shut up.
Wishing that business don't represent their interests to government is naive, and they will likely make the point as strongly as costs allow. After all it suits them to stay as we are, democracy and "the greater good" arent generally things business' consider as part of their business plan.

**reds8n**

https://politicalscrapbook.net/2016/10/may-and-cameron-slammed-labours-third-runway-now-tories-give-it-go-ahead/

. whooops.

Still election isn't for a few more years...

And there's -- almost literally -- no opposition.

**notprop**

A PM has different considerations to a local MP, so I think Teresa May has some leeway on this - seems to be her raison d'etre anyway!

**reds8n**

Aye.

and TBF a fair old bit can happen in 6 years or so too.

If the facts change then it's sensible to change one's opinion -- possibly.

.....

don't think either of them thought we'd vote for a self inflicted economic maiming either

**notprop**

I thought we voted for Sovereignty and Freedom; I even painted my face blue and everything.

**Whirlwind**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
It gets worse. Even if there wasn't a ton of High Court and Supreme Court appeals to fight off, and even if they started work in January 2017, it's going to take until 2025 to build the thing!!!

Eight years to build a runway?

Bloody hell!

The runway is also going to go over the existing M25, so they are going to have to completely rebuild that section of the motorway (I for one am glad I don't have to do that commute everyday). As it will have to be kept open as well that always slows things down and makes it more of a logistical nightmare.

I suppose the disappointing thing about all this is that it shows just how Londoncentric governments views are. They could have instead prioritised expanding other airports further north or west to try and drive development and investment in those areas.

I also feel sorry for the people that live in the affected villages. They have effectively just had their lives put on hold because they are going to find it extremely difficult to relocate as I imagine their ability to sell their properties just plummeted.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

reds8n wrote:
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/07/voting-intention-conservative-lead-11-points/

I think perhaps that's a wee bit unfair to Mr Farron......

.. that said apart from an average-- no shame there TBF -- showing when on HIGNFY I can't really recall him/his party actually doing much....?

Strangely these polls didn't reflect the Witney byelection though where the proportions were more:-

Tories - -15%
Lib Dem - +23.4%
Labour - -2.2%

Tories majority was slashed from over 20,000 to about 5,500. It's also going to interesting what happens in Goldsmiths constituency.

**reds8n**

notprop wrote:
I thought we voted for Sovereignty and Freedom; I even painted my face blue and everything.

Behold the power of Nicola Sturgeon !

**Kilkrazy**

notprop wrote:
You all know that the City of London and its financial markets existed long before we joined the Common Market right?
...

Not in its modern form. The massive flowering of the City of London as an international trading entrepot for currencies, Eurobonds and so on has come about since the mid-1970s.

We were big in shipping insurance before that, of course (Lloyds of London, etc.) and the GBP was a reserve currency for a long time. It actually gained importance after EUnification due to blah blah blah denied by Brexiteers.

**Mr. Burning**

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
notprop wrote:
What were you expecting; A few Navi's and a tarmac roller to knock it out over the weekend?

There'll be a terminal, maintenance facilities, emergency facilities, strip that needs to take massive impact and heat loads while not deteriorating for a few decades, more car parks and hotels, a bazillion shops and probably one of those travellator things that make you think you are walking really fast.

Of course they'll have to find someone to manage that for a not insignificant sum........hmmmmmm.

No, I wasn't expecting cowboy builders to turn up 2 hours late, do half an hour's work, and then go off for a 3 hour lunch

but neither was I expecting 8 years!

They built the Channel Tunnel in that time, which was a far harder and more impressive feat of engineering.

HS2. In all likelihood it'll be finished before HS2.

**welshhoppo**

You know what I'd like to see? More motorways in Wales. Seriously we have 1. Everything else is B road and causes nothing but pain. Supposedly there is a northern half to our country, but no one has been able to reach it.

**MrDwhitey**

welshhoppo wrote:
You know what I'd like to see? More motorways in Wales. Seriously we have 1. Everything else is B road and causes nothing but pain. Supposedly there is a northern half to our country, but no one has been able to reach it.

There's not much up there so it's ok really.

**Kilkrazy**

Whirlwind wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
It gets worse. Even if there wasn't a ton of High Court and Supreme Court appeals to fight off, and even if they started work in January 2017, it's going to take until 2025 to build the thing!!!

Eight years to build a runway?

Bloody hell!

The runway is also going to go over the existing M25, so they are going to have to completely rebuild that section of the motorway (I for one am glad I don't have to do that commute everyday). As it will have to be kept open as well that always slows things down and makes it more of a logistical nightmare.

I suppose the disappointing thing about all this is that it shows just how Londoncentric governments views are. They could have instead prioritised expanding other airports further north or west to try and drive development and investment in those areas.

I also feel sorry for the people that live in the affected villages. They have effectively just had their lives put on hold because they are going to find it extremely difficult to relocate as I imagine their ability to sell their properties just plummeted.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

reds8n wrote:
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/07/voting-intention-conservative-lead-11-points/

I think perhaps that's a wee bit unfair to Mr Farron......

.. that said apart from an average-- no shame there TBF -- showing when on HIGNFY I can't really recall him/his party actually doing much....?

Strangely these polls didn't reflect the Witney byelection though where the proportions were more:-

Tories - -15%
Lib Dem - +23.4%
Labour - -2.2%

Tories majority was slashed from over 20,000 to about 5,500. It's also going to interesting what happens in Goldsmiths constituency.

The Liberals will win. The borough has always leant Liberal, returning 4 or 5 Liberal members in the past 6 elections. To return a Liberal now is by far the most strategic protest vote against Heathrow and also against Brexit.

**welshhoppo**

MrDwhitey wrote:
welshhoppo wrote:
You know what I'd like to see? More motorways in Wales. Seriously we have 1. Everything else is B road and causes nothing but pain. Supposedly there is a northern half to our country, but no one has been able to reach it.

There's not much up there so it's ok really.

How do you know? Communication with the northern Welsh is impossible.

But seriously, our road system is awful. Rather than spending rediculous amounts of money on a train, which would be costed just as rediclously becUse trains are extremely expensive for some reason. Build some bloody new roads and fix our old ones!

**r_squared**

welshhoppo wrote:
MrDwhitey wrote:
welshhoppo wrote:
You know what I'd like to see? More motorways in Wales. Seriously we have 1. Everything else is B road and causes nothing but pain. Supposedly there is a northern half to our country, but no one has been able to reach it.

There's not much up there so it's ok really.

How do you know? Communication with the northern Welsh is impossible.

But seriously, our road system is awful. Rather than spending rediculous amounts of money on a train, which would be costed just as rediclously becUse trains are extremely expensive for some reason. Build some bloody new roads and fix our old ones!

At least you have the A55 now, before it was dualled, it was agony driving that road.
It's not just Wales either, Lincolnshire, is one of the largest counties in the country and has a total of 22 miles of dual carriageway. Fortunately most of the tractor drivers are considerate enough to pull over regularly to let the queue of traffic behind past. Few towns have bypasses and everyone suffers from congestion regularly. Hardly any of our rail services are electrified, most still run diesel, and despite East coast rail being the only profitible service in the country, being state owned, they sold it to Virgin trains who have done nothing to improve the services.
I've mentioned before that I've lived in all corners of the country, and everywhere is the same, except the south east. They've just promised to spend £22 billion on Heathrow, on top of cross rail and HS2, the amount of money pouring into infrastructure is eye watering, but only benefits those around London.
It's fething bollocks, yet for some reason we've put up with it. We need to tell government to stop shovelling cash into the southern trough, and start spreading it about, starting with major infrastructure projects like upgrading every link road in the country. In France virtually every town is linked by a Web of dual carriageways, that would be a start at least.

**Do_I_Not_Like_That**

Whirlwind wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
It gets worse. Even if there wasn't a ton of High Court and Supreme Court appeals to fight off, and even if they started work in January 2017, it's going to take until 2025 to build the thing!!!

Eight years to build a runway?

Bloody hell!

The runway is also going to go over the existing M25, so they are going to have to completely rebuild that section of the motorway (I for one am glad I don't have to do that commute everyday). As it will have to be kept open as well that always slows things down and makes it more of a logistical nightmare.

I suppose the disappointing thing about all this is that it shows just how Londoncentric governments views are. They could have instead prioritised expanding other airports further north or west to try and drive development and investment in those areas.

I also feel sorry for the people that live in the affected villages. They have effectively just had their lives put on hold because they are going to find it extremely difficult to relocate as I imagine their ability to sell their properties just plummeted.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

reds8n wrote:
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/09/07/voting-intention-conservative-lead-11-points/

I think perhaps that's a wee bit unfair to Mr Farron......

.. that said apart from an average-- no shame there TBF -- showing when on HIGNFY I can't really recall him/his party actually doing much....?

Strangely these polls didn't reflect the Witney byelection though where the proportions were more:-

Tories - -15%
Lib Dem - +23.4%
Labour - -2.2%

Tories majority was slashed from over 20,000 to about 5,500. It's also going to interesting what happens in Goldsmiths constituency.

The M25? Bloody hell! We're doomed!

Years ago, I was stuck on the M25 on a bank holiday weekend

Never been the same since

But still, M25? I would take EU membership over another trip on the M25, any day of the week!

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kilkrazy wrote:
notprop wrote:
You all know that the City of London and its financial markets existed long before we joined the Common Market right?
...

Not in its modern form. The massive flowering of the City of London as an international trading entrepot for currencies, Eurobonds and so on has come about since the mid-1970s.

We were big in shipping insurance before that, of course (Lloyds of London, etc.) and the GBP was a reserve currency for a long time. It actually gained importance after EUnification due to blah blah blah denied by Brexiteers.

Yeah, but we're getting New Zealand lamb and butter back, and my father and your father are happy, and that's what counts!

Seriously, though, I've never seen my father so happy. As far as he's concerned, Ted Heath's 'betraya'l has been rectified.

He really didn't like Ted Heath...

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr. Burning wrote:
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
notprop wrote:
What were you expecting; A few Navi's and a tarmac roller to knock it out over the weekend?

There'll be a terminal, maintenance facilities, emergency facilities, strip that needs to take massive impact and heat loads while not deteriorating for a few decades, more car parks and hotels, a bazillion shops and probably one of those travellator things that make you think you are walking really fast.

Of course they'll have to find someone to manage that for a not insignificant sum........hmmmmmm.

No, I wasn't expecting cowboy builders to turn up 2 hours late, do half an hour's work, and then go off for a 3 hour lunch

but neither was I expecting 8 years!

They built the Channel Tunnel in that time, which was a far harder and more impressive feat of engineering.

HS2. In all likelihood it'll be finished before HS2.

That's actually worth a punt - what will be built first? HS2 or Heathrow?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

welshhoppo wrote:
You know what I'd like to see? More motorways in Wales. Seriously we have 1. Everything else is B road and causes nothing but pain. Supposedly there is a northern half to our country, but no one has been able to reach it.

Wales? Third world country, what did you expect?

**Ketara**

Whirlwind wrote:

I also feel sorry for the people that live in the affected villages. They have effectively just had their lives put on hold because they are going to find it extremely difficult to relocate as I imagine their ability to sell their properties just plummeted.

They won't have to worry about that, at least. Nobody will buy there, but the government will issue compulsory purchase orders to those directly underneath, and give the option to many more along the outskirts. They'll actually make more money than if Heathrow hadn't gone ahead. Whether they want to leave is, of course, another kettle of fish altogether.

https://www.ft.com/content/2b17b4d0-99f7-11e6-8f9b-70e3cabccfae

Plans by Heathrow Airport Holdings, the private company that owns the airport, to build the third runway, include invoking compulsory purchase orders on 750 homes and giving another 3,750 households in the area the option of selling their homes to the airport.

All of these homeowners will be offered the “unblighted” market value of their houses — the value without the effect of the airport’s presence — plus an additional 25 per cent. For the compulsory purchase area alone, this now totals £330m.

**Whirlwind**

Ketara wrote:

They won't have to worry about that, at least. Nobody will buy there, but the government will issue compulsory purchase orders to those directly underneath, and give the option to many more along the outskirts. They'll actually make more money than if Heathrow hadn't gone ahead. Whether they want to leave is, of course, another kettle of fish altogether.

Yeah I agree with this; it was more the period in between now and the compulsory purchase. Given the time it has taken to 'faff' over the runway it could be a number of years before the compulsory purchases are actually actioned. We have a year of consultation, then the report, then any legal challenges, and possibly a parliamentary rebellion which may stretch out the process. In the mean time the owners that may want to move before hand (new job, have a family, want to settle their child into another school for their GCSEs, want to retire to Cornwall etc) are going to find it hard to sell up as buyers are likely to be in short supply (unless the government/whoever owns Heathrow will buy their houses now). That potentially puts any plans they had for their lives on hold for a period of time unfortunately.

**Ketara**

I wouldn't see that being a problem. Were I a less cynical man, perhaps, but I'd wager that even as I type, an investment agent somewhere is collating a list of all the houses within the catchment zone for his 'purchase immediately if available' portfolio. Pay (probably below) market rate now and get that back plus 25% in four years? That sounds like the opportunity of a lifetime to me. Even better if you can utilise a year or two in the middle to put up loads of extensions and conservatories and things that would increase the nominal market value of the property for less than the construction cost.

Even if the government then changes its mind in a year, you've still got a valuable property portfolio worth more than what you paid for it.

**Kilkrazy**

Yeah, but we're getting New Zealand lamb and butter back, and my father and your father are happy, and that's what counts!

Seriously, though, I've never seen my father so happy. As far as he's concerned, Ted Heath's 'betraya'l has been rectified.

He really didn't like Ted Heath... ...

The thing is, NZ lamb and butter never went away. You can buy it in supermarkets right now, partly because the tariff rate is zero. In fact the Kiwis aren't even exporting their full quota to the EU. Though why we should want to import lamb meat from the other side of the world when the UK is a major lamb meat producer (6th in the world) and has a dairy industry too I have no idea.

The EU is a major sheep meat producer accounting for 9% of global tonnage.

**Future War Cultist**

The director-general of the WTO says that Brexit is unlikely to disrupt UK trade

Finally, a little good news. But I won't pretend that Brexit will be easy. Divorce never is.

**jouso**

Kilkrazy wrote:

Yeah, but we're getting New Zealand lamb and butter back, and my father and your father are happy, and that's what counts!

Seriously, though, I've never seen my father so happy. As far as he's concerned, Ted Heath's 'betraya'l has been rectified.

He really didn't like Ted Heath... ...

The thing is, NZ lamb and butter never went away. You can buy it in supermarkets right now, partly because the tariff rate is zero. In fact the Kiwis aren't even exporting their full quota to the EU. Though why we should want to import lamb meat from the other side of the world when the UK is a major lamb meat producer (6th in the world) and has a dairy industry too I have no idea.

The EU is a major sheep meat producer accounting for 9% of global tonnage.

When it comes to dairy products the EU as a whole overproduces. That's why there is a quota per country and it isn't terribly attractive for an outside country to export commodity dairy products (like butter) to the EU.

Go to the most starved country on earth and you'll find French and Dutch butter on their markets. Overproduction is a real problem and has been for the last few decades.

**reds8n**

Remember this :

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/pa/article-3693897/Brexit-boost-Australia-seeks-free-trade-deal-UK.html

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brexit-liam-fox-eu-australia-trade-deals-2016-10

Australia has ruled out negotiating free-trade deals with Theresa May's government until Britain has formally completed its departure from the European Union.

Steven Ciobo, Australia's trade minister, said on Tuesday that he had received advice telling him entering formal talks with Britain before Brexit is complete would be illegal, The Times reports.

This new development is a major blow to Ciobo's British counterpart, Liam Fox, and the rest of May's government.

Fox had intended to begin negotiating free-trade deals with states like Australia before the Article 50 period comes to an end, which would lay the foundations for deals to be signed shortly after Britain completes its exit.

Ciobo said a UK-Australia trade deal would be negotiated as "efficiently and promptly as possible" once Brexit is officially completed but said legal restrictions meant formal talks cannot begin while Britain remains in the EU.

In theory, this means a UK-Australia deal could be years down the line, perhaps the best part of a decade.

Speaking to Business Insider on Monday, Linda Lim, a trade expert at the University of Michigan's Ross School of Business, said that negotiating a trade deal usually takes around five years.

"Seven years is not unusual," she said, referring to the time taken to negotiate the Canada-EU deal, which currently hangs in the balance. "They all take at least five years. TPP took five. Two years is very short."

A YouGov survey published last month revealed that Brits who voted Leave in the June referendum believed striking a deal with Australia should be Britain's number one priority when it comes to post-Brexit trade deals.

Senior members of the Australian administration hope any post-Brexit deal with Britain will include permission for Australian financial service companies to expand to the UK, according to The Times, plus privileged access to labour markets for Australian workers, which, ironically, would mean more immigration to the UK.

Another stellar performance courtesy of Liam, disgraced minister, Fox.