politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The gilded cage. How the DUP are using the new rules of the ga
Options
Comments
-
Bubble and squeaked in?Benpointer said:
They already squeaked in.Theuniondivvie said:
Incoming gammon jokes...AmpfieldAndy said:
Wouldn’t know but it’s raining hard in Hamshire if you’re interested.Benpointer said:
What's the weather like in Moscow Andy?AmpfieldAndy said:Recidivist said:
Membership of the European Union has never caused me a moment of unhappiness. I will miss some of the benefits if we actually do leave - though as we still haven't worked out how to do so and the time left is less than the gestation period of a chinchilla that has to be doubted.AmpfieldAndy said:
And if revoke A 50 we’re going to live happily ever after are we. The Muppet Show makes more sense - and have better punch linesBenpointer said:
Hahahahahaha!AmpfieldAndy said:
Unlike Remainers, most Leavers don’t believe in fairy tales.anothernick said:
Indeed.AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah yes, Project Fear again.tottenhamWC said:
No deal is a sure route to rapid decline.AmpfieldAndy said:grabcocque said:What we've learned from Brexit is that the Dunning-Kruger effect can apply to entire political parties and indeed electorates.
Yep - all those Remainers claiming we can’t manage on our own and wanting “managed decline” being a prime example.
Wolf, wolf!
Many leavers have forgotten how the story ends.
But they will shortly be reminded.
"The easiest deal in the world"
"They need us more than we need them"
Hahaha!
Great - but we voted to Leave0 -
SighBenpointer said:
Then May's Deal suits you.AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah yes, the Hammond labelling of all Brexit supporters as extremists. Funny how quick Remainers are to resort to insults. FOM was a big reason Leave won. There were riots in Brussels today about fears of more immigration. I don’t want riots in the UK. Ending FOM will suit me.Benpointer said:
Which May's Deal would do. Sadly though for you, it looks like your extreme Brexiteer comrades are going to to blow it and we'll be Remaining after all.AmpfieldAndy said:
Great - but we voted to leave and stop it.Anazina said:
I would extend it, not retract it. That’s cutting your nose off to spite your face.AmpfieldAndy said:
I have been an ex-pat working abroad. Filling in a few forms is not that difficult. Immigration apartheid on the other hand is abhorrent.Anazina said:
.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
Honestly, you are just making yourself look stupid now.AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah e you explain the difference between FOM and May’s mobility provisions whilst you’re at it and explain why we won’t have to pay to trade just because the WA is silent in the issue. Seems to me you haven’t thought about the issues for someone who claims others are the numpties.Benpointer said:
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.AmpfieldAndy said:
. No Brexit at all is a better deal, and I say that as a Leaver.kle4 said:
Other than us leaving the EU of course. However imperfectly people feel it does so, it does that.AmpfieldAndy said:
No deal is the only game in town. May’s deal gives us nothing.Brom said:
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Yes, free movement ends at the end of the transition period, unless the UK and EU decide to sign a separate treaty as part of the future relationship extending free movement in the future. Currently the UK government opposes this idea. "
0 -
Turgid syntax, muddled argument.John_M said:
You mean Switzerland and the EEA countries, I presume. Please don't flail around with non sequiturs and accuse Leavers of illogic.Anazina said:
Er no. It really doesn’t. There are several European countries that enjoy FOM who are not even in the EU. Leavers’ ultra weak logic exposed here.John_M said:
I've been moving around the globe since I was 25 (58 now), including Europe and the Americas. I don't understand the obsession with FoM. It's lovely for young itinerants with no dependants or homes, but for any family person emigration/migration is not something you do on a whim, and the amount of paperwork saved is minimal.Anazina said:I ask again.
What is it about freedom of movement that Leavers dislike so much? Why would they wish themselves to be less free.
It’s been a fabulous addition to business life. People from across Europe learning from each other, improving companies.
The UK diaspora is overwhelmingly within the Anglosphere; perhaps that will change, but I don't see much sign of that.
Ultimately, FoM requires me to acquiesce to the creation of a Federal Europe. I'll take work permits and avoid that (for me) undesirable outcome.
If we were in the EEA I wouldn't have a problem with Freedom of Movement, though I wouldn't care about it either. If I were in Switzerland I wouldn't have a problem with it, because Switzerland is also outside the EU's treaty structures.
However, if you're a citizen of an EU member state, you are going to be part of the drive to ever closer union. FoM is a benefit that also comes with a cost.
There are ways of retaining FOM while leaving the EU, as you well know.
Brexitism and logic make poor bedfellows.
0 -
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.Anazina said:
About six minutes ago you were lamenting the labour barriers on the Anzac nations. Make your bloody mind up man!Donny43 said:
Yes, let's aim for a population of 150 million. Brilliant plan.Anazina said:
So why not extend it to those countries and others? The fact that some countries are excluded is a poor reason to end it!Donny43 said:
I hate the way it makes us discriminate against Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians.Anazina said:
Dweebs.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
Honestly, you are just making yourself look stupid now. Have a read of this:AmpfieldAndy said:
So we should ignore Macron’s threats to demand access to U.K. fishingBenpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.AmpfieldAndy said:
Not in any meaningful sense. We can’t deviate from EU laws; fishing, freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration and all dependent upon what actually happens during the trade negotiations where we have to contend with the ridiculous backstop. No Brexit at all is a better deal, and I say that as a Leaver.kle4 said:
Other than us leaving the EU of course. However imperfectly people feel it does so, it does that.AmpfieldAndy said:
No deal is the only game in town. May’s deal gives us nothing.
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Yes, free movement ends at the end of the transition period, unless the UK and EU decide to sign a separate treaty as part of the future relationship extending free movement in the future. Currently the UK government opposes this idea. "
Extend it!
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
Ah well, we all know my puns are definitely first class!Big_G_NorthWales said:
I will go for your upgrade. My daughter regularly travels from Abergele/Rhyl to Bridgend and Llanelli for meetings and not only does she have to stay in a hotel overnight, she has chaotic delays and cancellations all via the new Wales government franchiseydoethur said:
I'm disappointed, Big G. Why wouldn't you go for, 'is a complete train wreck?'Big_G_NorthWales said:
Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarrayEl_Capitano said:
I’m no Corbynista (I’ve only voted Labour once in my life), but Lee Waters, Drakeford’s new appointee for deputy economy and transport (which, in practice, means transport) is outstanding.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Of course it takes a conservative Secretary of State for Wales to do the right thing for business and the Welsh economy. Not that lot of Corbynistas now in CardiffMexicanpete said:
Thank you Alun Cairns, you absolute god! Paid my last toll yesterday, and for old times sake Highways England detoured me over the old bridge.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good news for Wales - the severn crossing tolls are being removed after 50 years and by Easter both bridges will be at motorway standard.
And the UK SoS for Transport? Chris Grayling. Only ever described as “outstanding” when followed by the word “muppet”.
That sucks for your daughter. Would say, hope they sort it out but that won't happen any time soon.
The problem is and always has been unfortunately that ultimately all railways in the UK point towards London. That's great in Scotland, where traffic basically flows to Edinburgh or Glasgow and then on. It's rubbish in Wales where there is actually no railway line from north to south - and never really has been (yes, in pencil you can trace a line Cardiff, Swansea, Carmarthen, Aberystwyth, Machynlleth, Pwllheli, Bangor, but it involved at least three changes).
I don't see it ever being fixed, bluntly, given the logistics and economics. Much mocked though Ieuan Air was, it was probably the right idea for Wales.0 -
And how many more times will we have to vote for it before it happens?Benpointer said:
Well, I suspect you may get the chance to vote for it again.AmpfieldAndy said:
If we wanted that we would just stay in the EU. We voted to Leave.Benpointer said:
Well, of course any future government could agree that, even after your desired No Deal exit. In fact it's probably more likely with your No Deal agreement.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
Honestly, you are just making yourself look stupid now. Have a read of this:AmpfieldAndy said:
So we should ignore Macron’s threats to demand access to U.K. fishing grounds once the WA is in place based on your say so should we. Ah e you explain the difference between FOM and May’s mobility provisions whilst you’re at it and explain why we won’t have to pay to trade just because the WA is silent in the issue. Seems to me you haven’t thought about the issues for someone who claims others are the numpties.Benpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.AmpfieldAndy said:
Not in any meaningful sense. We can’t deviate from EU laws; fishing, freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration and all dependent upon what actually happens during the trade negotiations where we have to contend with the ridiculous backstop. No Brexit at all is a better deal, and I say that as a Leaver.kle4 said:
Other than us leaving the EU of course. However imperfectly people feel it does so, it does that.AmpfieldAndy said:
No deal is the only game in town. May’s deal gives us nothing.
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Yes, free movement ends at the end of the transition period, unless the UK and EU decide to sign a separate treaty as part of the future relationship extending free movement in the future. Currently the UK government opposes this idea. "
At least with May's Deal the UK could just sit in the backstop and enjoy CU benefits for no fees and with no FoM.
0 -
Of course it is not to do with BrexitMarqueeMark said:
How is the collapse of Jaguar sales in China the fault of Brexit? Just curious......Freggles said:0 -
What you don't realise Anazina, is that every single person who voted Leave voted for exactly the same sort of Leave as AmpfieldAndy wants. None of them voted for any other kind of Leave, not even those Cabinet Leavers who are busy promoting May's Deal.Anazina said:
No, a very narrow majority of those who actually voted, voted to leave the EU. That was all.AmpfieldAndy said:
Great - but we voted to leave and stop it.Anazina said:
So extend FOM. I have had (and lost) a great NZ employee. I would extend it, not retract it. That’s cutting your nose off to spite your face.AmpfieldAndy said:
I have been an ex-pat working abroad. Filling in a few forms is not that difficult. Immigration apartheid on the other hand is abhorrent.Anazina said:
.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
Honestly, you are just making yourself look stupid now. Have a read of this:AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah e you explain the difference between FOM and May’s mobility provisions whilst you’re at it and explain why we won’t have to pay to trade just because the WA is silent in the issue. Seems to me you haven’t thought about the issues for someone who claims others are the numpties.Benpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.AmpfieldAndy said:
Not in any meaningful sense. We can’t deviate from EU laws; fishing, freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration and all dependent upon what actually happens during the trade negotiations where we have to contend with the ridiculous backstop. No Brexit at all is a better deal, and I say that as a Leaver.kle4 said:AmpfieldAndy said:Brom said:.
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
.."
Nothing must get in the way of the One True Brexit!0 -
There was some brilliant polling on FOM. Even Leavers support it when asked:Benpointer said:
I think for a lot of Leavers FoM is fine so long as it doesn't involve foreigners.Anazina said:I ask again.
What is it about freedom of movement that Leavers dislike so much? Why would they wish themselves to be less free.
It’s been a fabulous addition to business life. People from across Europe learning from each other, improving companies.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/07/most-leave-voters-back-free-movement-you-just-have-explain-it
0 -
Actually, he called JRM and his supporters extremists.AmpfieldAndy said:Ah yes, the Hammond labelling of all Brexit supporters as extremists. Funny how quick Remainers are to resort to insults. FOM was a big reason Leave won. There were riots in Brussels today about fears of more immigration. I don’t want riots in the UK. Ending FOM will suit me.
I think the only thing we can criticise him for there is undue generosity.0 -
A second referendum is certainly being pushed hard by those who never accepted the result of the first. Not democracy really is it. And we don’t know the question yet do we. Apart from that, great point.Benpointer said:
Well, I suspect you may get the chance to vote for it again.AmpfieldAndy said:
If we wanted that we would just stay in the EU. We voted to Leave.Benpointer said:
At least with May's Deal the UK could just sit in the backstop and enjoy CU benefits for no fees and with no FoM.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.htmlAmpfieldAndy said:
So we should ignore Macron’s threats to demand access to U.K. fishing grounds once the WA is in place based on your say so should we. Ah e you explain the difference between FOM and May’s mobility provisions whilst you’re at it and explain why we won’t have to pay to trade just because the WA is silent in the issue. Seems to me you haven’t thought about the issues for someone who claims others are the numpties.Benpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.AmpfieldAndy said:
Not in any meaningful sense. We can’t deviate from EU laws; fishing, freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration and all dependent upon what actually happens during the trade negotiations where we have to contend with the ridiculous backstop. No Brexit at all is a better deal, and I say that as a Leaver.kle4 said:
Other than us leaving the EU of course. However imperfectly people feel it does so, it does that.AmpfieldAndy said:
No deal is the only game in town. May’s deal gives us nothing.Brom said:
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Yes, free movement ends at the end of the transition period, unless the UK and EU decide to sign a separate treaty as part of the future relationship extending free movement in the future. Currently the UK government opposes this idea. "0 -
Not much of a short term problem for the consumer - the UK will recognise EC goods as in conformity with UK regulations for the time being at least.IanB2 said:
It's a fact that a lot of our trade with non-EU currently relies on the EU's own trade agreements and recognition of EU standards, etc, which we would lose on 1 April. It's not just a question of goods and services to and from the Eu.Floater said:
Channel 4 always happy to lend a helping handAmpfieldAndy said:
Talking of Project Fear, you are its chief exponent. Figured out the assumptions behind Hammond’s forecasts yet so that you can say why they should be believed. No - thought not.IanB2 said:
LolololololololAmpfieldAndy said:
Unlike Remainers, most Leavers don’t believe in fairy tales.anothernick said:
Indeed.AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah yes, Project Fear again.tottenhamWC said:
No deal is a sure route to rapid decline.AmpfieldAndy said:grabcocque said:What we've learned from Brexit is that the Dunning-Kruger effect can apply to entire political parties and indeed electorates.
Yep - all those Remainers claiming we can’t manage on our own and wanting “managed decline” being a prime example.
Wolf, wolf!
Many leavers have forgotten how the story ends.
But they will shortly be reminded.
no mobile phones abroad (debunked)
no air travel (debunked)
car industry shutting down (oh wait - silly channel 4, that is the usual annual shut down)
just in time supply chains destroyed (remind me, how does a just in time supply chain where the supplier is outside the EU work then)?
No one is saying there will not be challenges but can we please deal in facts.0 -
Finally a SPOTY winner that actually you know like has personality.0
-
JRM is many things; extremist isn’t one.ydoethur said:
Actually, he called JRM and his supporters extremists.AmpfieldAndy said:Ah yes, the Hammond labelling of all Brexit supporters as extremists. Funny how quick Remainers are to resort to insults. FOM was a big reason Leave won. There were riots in Brussels today about fears of more immigration. I don’t want riots in the UK. Ending FOM will suit me.
I think the only thing we can criticise him for there is undue generosity.0 -
The first since notorious boozer, whorer and pot smoker Beefy Botham?FrancisUrquhart said:Finally a SPOTY winner that actually you know like has personality.
0 -
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
Ah, SPOTY. The runner up from a sport where the team with the best car wins and the winner from a sport where the team with the best drugs wins.FrancisUrquhart said:Finally a SPOTY winner that actually you know like has personality.
0 -
Why? Better to relax it on all of them. I have superb employees from France, Spain and Italy. What on earth have you got against them, for crying out loud?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.Anazina said:
About six minutes ago you were lamenting the labour barriers on the Anzac nations. Make your bloody mind up man!Donny43 said:
Yes, let's aim for a population of 150 million. Brilliant plan.Anazina said:
So why not extend it to those countries and others? The fact that some countries are excluded is a poor reason to end it!Donny43 said:
I hate the way it makes us discriminate against Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians.Anazina said:
Dweebs.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
Honestly, you are just making yourself look stupid now. Have a read of this:AmpfieldAndy said:
So we should ignore Macron’s threats to demand access to U.K. fishingBenpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.AmpfieldAndy said:
Not in any meaningful sense. We can’t deviate from EU laws; fishing, freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration and all dependent upon what actually happens during the trade negotiations where we have to contend with the ridiculous backstop. No Brexit at all is a better deal, and I say that as a Leaver.kle4 said:
Other than us leaving the EU of course. However imperfectly people feel it does so, it does that.AmpfieldAndy said:
No deal is the only game in town. May’s deal gives us nothing.
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Extend it!
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
Which is what Patten said at lunchtime.ydoethur said:
Actually, he called JRM and his supporters extremists.AmpfieldAndy said:Ah yes, the Hammond labelling of all Brexit supporters as extremists. Funny how quick Remainers are to resort to insults. FOM was a big reason Leave won. There were riots in Brussels today about fears of more immigration. I don’t want riots in the UK. Ending FOM will suit me.
I think the only thing we can criticise him for there is undue generosity.0 -
A in-law of mine emigrated to NZ about 10 years ago because they were unhappy about the high levels of immigrants in this country (yes, I know, but the irony was lost on them). Anyway they have moved back now to Scotland because... you guessed it, it turned out that 'NZ is letting in too many immigrants from the far east'!Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.Anazina said:
About six minutes ago you were lamenting the labour barriers on the Anzac nations. Make your bloody mind up man!Donny43 said:
Yes, let's aim for a population of 150 million. Brilliant plan.Anazina said:
So why not extend it to those countries and others? The fact that some countries are excluded is a poor reason to end it!Donny43 said:
I hate the way it makes us discriminate against Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians.Anazina said:
Dweebs.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
Honestly, you are just making yourself look stupid now. Have a read of this:AmpfieldAndy said:
So we should ignore Macron’s threats to demand access to U.K. fishingBenpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.AmpfieldAndy said:kle4 said:AmpfieldAndy said:
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Yes, free movement ends at the end of the transition period, unless the UK and EU decide to sign a separate treaty as part of the future relationship extending free movement in the future. Currently the UK government opposes this idea. "
Extend it!
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
He always had a ChrisP mind.IanB2 said:
Which is what Patten said at lunchtime.ydoethur said:
Actually, he called JRM and his supporters extremists.AmpfieldAndy said:Ah yes, the Hammond labelling of all Brexit supporters as extremists. Funny how quick Remainers are to resort to insults. FOM was a big reason Leave won. There were riots in Brussels today about fears of more immigration. I don’t want riots in the UK. Ending FOM will suit me.
I think the only thing we can criticise him for there is undue generosity.
0 -
No offence to likes of Andy Murray, but personality is not exactly what he displays when they are doing the day job.ydoethur said:
The first since notorious boozer, whorer and pot smoker Beefy Botham?FrancisUrquhart said:Finally a SPOTY winner that actually you know like has personality.
0 -
I agree but at least the new service promised by labour would be good, but do not trust labour or grayling with the railways, they are both hopelessydoethur said:
Ah well, we all know my puns are definitely first class!Big_G_NorthWales said:
I will go for your upgrade. My daughter regularly travels from Abergele/Rhyl to Bridgend and Llanelli for meetings and not only does she have to stay in a hotel overnight, she has chaotic delays and cancellations all via the new Wales government franchiseydoethur said:
I'm disappointed, Big G. Why wouldn't you go for, 'is a complete train wreck?'Big_G_NorthWales said:
Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarrayEl_Capitano said:
I’m no Corbynista (I’ve only voted Labour once in my life), but Lee Waters, Drakeford’s new appointee for deputy economy and transport (which, in practice, means transport) is outstanding.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Of course it takes a conservative Secretary of State for Wales to do the right thing for business and the Welsh economy. Not that lot of Corbynistas now in CardiffMexicanpete said:
Thank you Alun Cairns, you absolute god! Paid my last toll yesterday, and for old times sake Highways England detoured me over the old bridge.Big_G_NorthWales said:Good news for Wales - the severn crossing tolls are being removed after 50 years and by Easter both bridges will be at motorway standard.
And the UK SoS for Transport? Chris Grayling. Only ever described as “outstanding” when followed by the word “muppet”.
That sucks for your daughter. Would say, hope they sort it out but that won't happen any time soon.
The problem is and always has been unfortunately that ultimately all railways in the UK point towards London. That's great in Scotland, where traffic basically flows to Edinburgh or Glasgow and then on. It's rubbish in Wales where there is actually no railway line from north to south - and never really has been (yes, in pencil you can trace a line Cardiff, Swansea, Carmarthen, Aberystwyth, Machynlleth, Pwllheli, Bangor, but it involved at least three changes).
I don't see it ever being fixed, bluntly, given the logistics and economics. Much mocked though Ieuan Air was, it was probably the right idea for Wales.
Her route is either through Crewe or Wrexham0 -
I have no issue with people who honestly and openly want a Federal Europe; I like williamglenn's position, it's sincerely held and passionately argued.Anazina said:
Turgid syntax, muddled argument.John_M said:
You mean Switzerland and the EEA countries, I presume. Please don't flail around with non sequiturs and accuse Leavers of illogic.Anazina said:
Er no. It really doesn’t. There are several European countries that enjoy FOM who are not even in the EU. Leavers’ ultra weak logic exposed here.John_M said:
I've been moving around the globe since I was 25 (58 now), including Europe and the Americas. I don't understand the obsession with FoM. It's lovely for young itinerants with no dependants or homes, but for any family person emigration/migration is not something you do on a whim, and the amount of paperwork saved is minimal.Anazina said:I ask again.
What is it about freedom of movement that Leavers dislike so much? Why would they wish themselves to be less free.
It’s been a fabulous addition to business life. People from across Europe learning from each other, improving companies.
The UK diaspora is overwhelmingly within the Anglosphere; perhaps that will change, but I don't see much sign of that.
Ultimately, FoM requires me to acquiesce to the creation of a Federal Europe. I'll take work permits and avoid that (for me) undesirable outcome.
If we were in the EEA I wouldn't have a problem with Freedom of Movement, though I wouldn't care about it either. If I were in Switzerland I wouldn't have a problem with it, because Switzerland is also outside the EU's treaty structures.
However, if you're a citizen of an EU member state, you are going to be part of the drive to ever closer union. FoM is a benefit that also comes with a cost.
There are ways of retaining FOM while leaving the EU, as you well know.
Brexitism and logic make poor bedfellows.
However, that's not what I want, so it's goodbye to the indivisible Four Freedoms. Pity, but those are the rules. I can't be any clearer without using crayons. You can disagree with me, of course.0 -
Given that those you included are all predominantly white, we all know what's driving your suggestion.Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
Something that those three countries have in common that I just can't quite put my finger on..Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).
0 -
Geriant Thomas SPOTY as predicted here on July 29th
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/07/29/the-welsh-vote-could-give-thomas-the-edge-for-spoty/0 -
I doubt it given that Lee Waters has only been in post a couple of days now...Big_G_NorthWales said:Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarray
But, still, I was a frequent traveller on the previous franchise (Arriva Trains Wales). It was, without doubt, the single worst train company I've ever travelled on. Not that our "local" train company, GWR, exactly cover themselves in glory; and there are very few operators I'd consider respectable. Chiltern, perhaps, and London Overground. London Midland were ok but I haven't travelled enough by their replacements to judge.0 -
Because freedom of movement with the whole world is a policy for a population of 150 million.Anazina said:
Why? Better to relax it on all of them. I have superb employees from France, Spain and Italy. What on earth have you got against them, for crying out loud?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.Anazina said:
About six minutes ago you were lamenting the labour barriers on the Anzac nations. Make your bloody mind up man!Donny43 said:
Yes, let's aim for a population of 150 million. Brilliant plan.Anazina said:
So why not extend it to those countries and others? The fact that some countries are excluded is a poor reason to end it!Donny43 said:
I hate the way it makes us discriminate against Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians.Anazina said:
Dweebs.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
Honestly, you are just making yourself look stupid now. Have a read of this:AmpfieldAndy said:
So we should ignore Macron’s threats to demand access to U.K. fishingBenpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Extend it!
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).
I have superb employees from Italy and Romania. I had superb employees from Australia and New Zealand. The latter had to go home because we couldn't get visas for them.
Superb employees should be able to come and stay wherever they are from.0 -
Go on, spell it out.Benpointer said:
Given that those you included are all predominantly white, we all know what's driving your suggestion.Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
He wants to Pak them in. But Jamaica success of immigration is difficult.Theuniondivvie said:
Something that those three countries have in common that I just can't quite put my finger on..Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).
I'll get my coat.
Goodnight.0 -
I stand correctedBenpointer said:
What you don't realise Anazina, is that every single person who voted Leave voted for exactly the same sort of Leave as AmpfieldAndy wants. None of them voted for any other kind of Leave, not even those Cabinet Leavers who are busy promoting May's Deal.Anazina said:
No, a very narrow majority of those who actually voted, voted to leave the EU. That was all.AmpfieldAndy said:
Great - but we voted to leave and stop it.Anazina said:
So extend FOM. I have had (and lost) a great NZ employee. I would extend it, not retract it. That’s cutting your nose off to spite your face.AmpfieldAndy said:
I have been an ex-pat working abroad. Filling in a few forms is not that difficult. Immigration apartheid on the other hand is abhorrent.Anazina said:
.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
Honestly, you are just making yourself look stupid now. Have a read of this:AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah e you explain the difference between FOM and May’s mobility provisions whilst you’re at it and explain why we won’t have to pay to trade just because the WA is silent in the issue. Seems to me you haven’t thought about the issues for someone who claims others are the numpties.Benpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.AmpfieldAndy said:
Not in any meaningful sense. We can’t deviate from EU laws; fishing, freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration and all dependent upon what actually happens during the trade negotiations where we have to contend with the ridiculous backstop. No Brexit at all is a better deal, and I say that as a Leaver.kle4 said:AmpfieldAndy said:Brom said:.
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
.."
Nothing must get in the way of the One True Brexit!
0 -
Brexiteers got greedy and they are now likely to see the irony of being responsible for the demise of their dreamAmpfieldAndy said:
A second referendum is certainly being pushed hard by those who never accepted the result of the first. Not democracy really is it. And we don’t know the question yet do we. Apart from that, great point.Benpointer said:
Well, I suspect you may get the chance to vote for it again.AmpfieldAndy said:
If we wanted that we would just stay in the EU. We voted to Leave.Benpointer said:
At least with May's Deal the UK could just sit in the backstop and enjoy CU benefits for no fees and with no FoM.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.htmlAmpfieldAndy said:
So we should ignore Macron’s threats to demand access to U.K. fishing grounds once the WA is in place based on your say so should we. Ah e you explain the difference between FOM and May’s mobility provisions whilst you’re at it and explain why we won’t have to pay to trade just because the WA is silent in the issue. Seems to me you haven’t thought about the issues for someone who claims others are the numpties.Benpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.AmpfieldAndy said:
Not in any meaningful sense..kle4 said:
Other than us leaving the EU of course. However imperfectly people feel it does so, it does that.AmpfieldAndy said:
No deal is the only game in town. May’s deal gives us nothing.Brom said:
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Yes, free movement ends at the end of the transition period, unless the UK and EU decide to sign a separate treaty as part of the future relationship extending free movement in the future. Currently the UK government opposes this idea. "0 -
They're all countries I've had experience of losing great employees from.Theuniondivvie said:
Something that those three countries have in common that I just can't quite put my finger on..Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
John_M said:
I have no issue with people who honestly and openly want a Federal Europe; I like williamglenn's position, it's sincerely held and passionately argued.Anazina said:
Turgid syntax, muddled argument.John_M said:
You mean Switzerland and the EEA countries, I presume. Please don't flail around with non sequiturs and accuse Leavers of illogic.Anazina said:
Er no. It really doesn’t. There are several European countries that enjoy FOM who are not even in the EU. Leavers’ ultra weak logic exposed here.John_M said:
I've been moving around the globe since I was 25 (58 now), including Europe and the Americas. I don't understand the obsession with FoM. It's lovely for young itinerants with no dependants or homes, but for any family person emigration/migration is not something you do on a whim, and the amount of paperwork saved is minimal.Anazina said:I ask again.
What is it about freedom of movement that Leavers dislike so much? Why would they wish themselves to be less free.
It’s been a fabulous addition to business life. People from across Europe learning from each other, improving companies.
The UK diaspora is overwhelmingly within the Anglosphere; perhaps that will change, but I don't see much sign of that.
Ultimately, FoM requires me to acquiesce to the creation of a Federal Europe. I'll take work permits and avoid that (for me) undesirable outcome.
If we were in the EEA I wouldn't have a problem with Freedom of Movement, though I wouldn't care about it either. If I were in Switzerland I wouldn't have a problem with it, because Switzerland is also outside the EU's treaty structures.
However, if you're a citizen of an EU member state, you are going to be part of the drive to ever closer union. FoM is a benefit that also comes with a cost.
There are ways of retaining FOM while leaving the EU, as you well know.
Brexitism and logic make poor bedfellows.
However, that's not what I want, so it's goodbye to the indivisible Four Freedoms. Pity, but those are the rules. I can't be any clearer without using crayons. You can disagree with me, of course.
Crayons are unnecessary.
The illogicality of your position is crystal clear when written in normal ink.0 -
1 - Supply chains. These are embedded around the EU to take advantage of economies of scale and specialisation. For example, a single component at the Mini factory in Oxford can cross into and out of the UK several times before being installed. Without membership of the Single market (with its associated common regulations, underwriting, and standards-checking regime), what happens here? This is just one factory out of a huge number in the UK. Do they all start manufacturing in-house? How much disruption is caused and jobs lost?AmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.
2 - Port delays. The delays at Dover and the tailbacks and disruption that would occur as soon as we leave without any deal which reflects a common recognition of standards and checks are well known. Unless we simply throw open the borders and check nothing (which won't help on the way out), the lorry parks in Kent will exist. (And if we throw open our borders and accept whatever comes in, unchecked and unregistered, what the hell did we 'take back control' of?). What is going to be tied up in the ports and the M20/M2 lorry parks?
3 - Supply chains redux. We know that supermarkets don't keep extensive stocks - that's economic suicide. Even with them stockpiling where they can, the shelves could run out quickly if lorries aren't coming in regularly, and if they're in a big truck jam, they won't be coming in regularly. Panic buying can accompany this.
4 - Supply chains redux again. Factories (which aren't getting their widgets- the ones they do something to - going to and fro regularly) are also going to have to get the widgets-for-incorporation stockpiled rather than delivered just-in-time. This will be an additional shock/disruption.
5 - Medical and others - we import medicines quite a lot (again, economies of scale and specialisation). Medicines which have to hit certain regulations and standards. We can do emergency shipments (as if we're a third world country that's had a natural disaster), but that's not sustainable and fraught with issues. What happens in the medium term here?
6 - The Irish border. Unless we accept a sort of de facto backstop where Northern Ireland accepts everything from the Republic whatever the standards and regulations that applies to it (and there will certainly be chancers around for this), there's a hard border and shit happens there.
That's just off the top of my head.0 -
What a fatuous comment. Brexiteers won the referendum. Nothing greedy about that.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Brexiteers got greedy and they are now likely to see the irony of being responsible for the demise of their dreamAmpfieldAndy said:
A second referendum is certainly being pushed hard by those who never accepted the result of the first. Not democracy really is it. And we don’t know the question yet do we. Apart from that, great point.Benpointer said:
Well, I suspect you may get the chance to vote for it again.AmpfieldAndy said:
If we wanted that we would just stay in the EU. We voted to Leave.Benpointer said:
At least with May's Deal the UK could just sit in the backstop and enjoy CU benefits for no fees and with no FoM.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.htmlAmpfieldAndy said:
So we should ignore Macron’s threats to demand access to U.K. fishing grounds once the WA is in place based on your say so should we. Ah e you explain the difference between FOM and May’s mobility provisions whilst you’re at it and explain why we won’t have to pay to trade just because the WA is silent in the issue. Seems to me you haven’t thought about the issues for someone who claims others are the numpties.Benpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.AmpfieldAndy said:
Not in any meaningful sense..kle4 said:
Other than us leaving the EU of course. However imperfectly people feel it does so, it does that.AmpfieldAndy said:
No deal is the only game in town. May’s deal gives us nothing.Brom said:
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Yes, free movement ends at the end of the transition period, unless the UK and EU decide to sign a separate treaty as part of the future relationship extending free movement in the future. Currently the UK government opposes this idea. "0 -
South West Trains used to be good but they lost their franchise to FirstGroup/MTR (South Western Railway) and it's all gone tits up since then. But I am sure FirstGroup offered more dosh, so that's all fine thenEl_Capitano said:
I doubt it given that Lee Waters has only been in post a couple of days now...Big_G_NorthWales said:Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarray
But, still, I was a frequent traveller on the previous franchise (Arriva Trains Wales). It was, without doubt, the single worst train company I've ever travelled on. Not that our "local" train company, GWR, exactly cover themselves in glory; and there are very few operators I'd consider respectable. Chiltern, perhaps, and London Overground. London Midland were ok but I haven't travelled enough by their replacements to judge.
0 -
Can't believe I missed that. And that America didn't take the chance to screw us further like they had been threatening.ydoethur said:
Bad example, that's been dealt with:Alistair said:
Could you explain how this one is debunked?Floater said:
no air travel (debunked)
For example what happens to the UK-US aviation agreement that is currently via the European Open Skies agreement. Repeat for every other country in the world outside the European Union.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-463804630 -
A German hate preacher has been allowed to live in Britain despite leading a banned Islamist group accused of inspiring 140 jihadists to join Isis and al-Qaeda.
Brahim Belkaid was able to settle in Leicester almost five years ago after returning to Europe from Syria, where he is suspected of supporting terrorists.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/may-let-german-who-launched-140-jihadists-live-in-leicester-m68x2hf380 -
Nah. Boris, is, as ever, full of it. I don't think you can have too much democracy.williamglenn said:0 -
Well we could easily accommodate a population of 150 million if we raise density levels to those of the Brexiteer utopia that is Singapore.Donny43 said:
Because freedom of movement with the whole world is a policy for a population of 150 million.Anazina said:
Why? Better to relax it on all of them. I have superb employees from France, Spain and Italy. What on earth have you got against them, for crying out loud?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.Anazina said:
About six minutes ago you were lamenting the labour barriers on the Anzac nations. Make your bloody mind up man!Donny43 said:
Yes, let's aim for a population of 150 million. Brilliant plan.Anazina said:
So why not extend it to those countries and others? The fact that some countries are excluded is a poor reason to end it!Donny43 said:
I hate the way it makes us discriminate against Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians.Anazina said:
Dweebs.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
Honestly, you are just making yourself look stupid now. Have a read of this:AmpfieldAndy said:
So we should ignore Macron’s threats to demand access to U.K. fishingBenpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Extend it!
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).
I have superb employees from Italy and Romania. I had superb employees from Australia and New Zealand. The latter had to go home because we couldn't get visas for them.
Superb employees should be able to come and stay wherever they are from.0 -
I don't need to - everyone knows.Donny43 said:
Go on, spell it out.Benpointer said:
Given that those you included are all predominantly white, we all know what's driving your suggestion.Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
Labour have only just signed the new 15 year franchise and it makes Arriva/TFW look like the Orient ExpressEl_Capitano said:
I doubt it given that Lee Waters has only been in post a couple of days now...Big_G_NorthWales said:Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarray
But, still, I was a frequent traveller on the previous franchise (Arriva Trains Wales). It was, without doubt, the single worst train company I've ever travelled on. Not that our "local" train company, GWR, exactly cover themselves in glory; and there are very few operators I'd consider respectable. Chiltern, perhaps, and London Overground. London Midland were ok but I haven't travelled enough by their replacements to judge.
I know, my daughter is a regular north - south Wales business traveller.
0 -
Coward.Benpointer said:
I don't need to - everyone knows.Donny43 said:
Go on, spell it out.Benpointer said:
Given that those you included are all predominantly white, we all know what's driving your suggestion.Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
Yes, I have noticed from tonight’s discussion that it certainly takes lots of explaining. Good night all. Leavers, do more homework!Foxy said:
There was some brilliant polling on FOM. Even Leavers support it when asked:Benpointer said:
I think for a lot of Leavers FoM is fine so long as it doesn't involve foreigners.Anazina said:I ask again.
What is it about freedom of movement that Leavers dislike so much? Why would they wish themselves to be less free.
It’s been a fabulous addition to business life. People from across Europe learning from each other, improving companies.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/07/most-leave-voters-back-free-movement-you-just-have-explain-it0 -
Hammond wasn't calling all Brexiteers extremists, he was talking about the ERG. Completely unfair, of course.
They're not extremists, they're just very, very stupid.0 -
'Final Say' - much better than People's Vote imo.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/10744230713716572160 -
You didn't notice that the three countries I mentioned are less white than, for example, Bulgaria and Romania, did you?Benpointer said:
I don't need to - everyone knows.Donny43 said:
Go on, spell it out.Benpointer said:
Given that those you included are all predominantly white, we all know what's driving your suggestion.Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
Nationalise the lot. Franchising simply does not work.Benpointer said:
South West Trains used to be good but they lost their franchise to FirstGroup/MTR (South Western Railway) and it's all gone tits up since then. But I am sure FirstGroup offered more dosh, so that's all fine thenEl_Capitano said:
I doubt it given that Lee Waters has only been in post a couple of days now...Big_G_NorthWales said:Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarray
But, still, I was a frequent traveller on the previous franchise (Arriva Trains Wales). It was, without doubt, the single worst train company I've ever travelled on. Not that our "local" train company, GWR, exactly cover themselves in glory; and there are very few operators I'd consider respectable. Chiltern, perhaps, and London Overground. London Midland were ok but I haven't travelled enough by their replacements to judge.0 -
What does he mean "risks reopening old divisions"?John_M said:
Nah. Boris, is, as ever, full of it. I don't think you can have too much democracy.williamglenn said:
The divisions seem as open as they ever were.0 -
Now granted in reality this has more to do with the rapid switch away from Diesel to Electricity but it's going to hit home
https://twitter.com/RLong_Bailey/status/10743573711940403200 -
And make them just as good as Network Rail, which is already responsible for the vast majority of delays on the railways?Anazina said:
Nationalise the lot. Franchising simply does not work.Benpointer said:
South West Trains used to be good but they lost their franchise to FirstGroup/MTR (South Western Railway) and it's all gone tits up since then. But I am sure FirstGroup offered more dosh, so that's all fine thenEl_Capitano said:
I doubt it given that Lee Waters has only been in post a couple of days now...Big_G_NorthWales said:Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarray
But, still, I was a frequent traveller on the previous franchise (Arriva Trains Wales). It was, without doubt, the single worst train company I've ever travelled on. Not that our "local" train company, GWR, exactly cover themselves in glory; and there are very few operators I'd consider respectable. Chiltern, perhaps, and London Overground. London Midland were ok but I haven't travelled enough by their replacements to judge.0 -
You are in denial. The Country voted leave but not to trash the economy, business and the unionAmpfieldAndy said:
What a fatuous comment. Brexiteers won the referendum. Nothing greedy about that.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Brexiteers got greedy and they are now likely to see the irony of being responsible for the demise of their dreamAmpfieldAndy said:
A second referendum is certainly being pushed hard by those who never accepted the result of the first. Not democracy really is it. And we don’t know the question yet do we. Apart from that, great point.Benpointer said:
Well, I suspect you may get the chance to vote for it again.AmpfieldAndy said:
If we wanted that we would just stay in the EU. We voted to Leave.Benpointer said:
At least with May's Deal the UK could just sit in the backstop and enjoy CU benefits for no fees and with no FoM.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.htmlAmpfieldAndy said:
So we should ignore Macron’s threats to demand access to U.K. fishing grounds once the WA is in place based on your say so should we.Benpointer said:
Don't be a numpty - fishing (i.e. membership of the CFP), freedom of movement, payment for trade and immigration, all end if we enter the backstop.AmpfieldAndy said:
Not in any meaningful sense..kle4 said:
Other than us leaving the EU of course. However imperfectly people feel it does so, it does that.AmpfieldAndy said:
No deal is the only game in town. May’s deal gives us nothing.Brom said:
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Yes, free movement ends at the end of the transition period, unless the UK and EU decide to sign a separate treaty as part of the future relationship extending free movement in the future. Currently the UK government opposes this idea. "
The comment is far from fatuous, it is well on the way to happening0 -
The air traffic is a good example of why the most extreme of the extreme disaster situations won't occur under No Deal Brexit, as it would absolutely screw everybody, not just the UK.Alistair said:
Can't believe I missed that. And that America didn't take the chance to screw us further like they had been threatening.ydoethur said:
Bad example, that's been dealt with:Alistair said:
Could you explain how this one is debunked?Floater said:
no air travel (debunked)
For example what happens to the UK-US aviation agreement that is currently via the European Open Skies agreement. Repeat for every other country in the world outside the European Union.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46380463
Those wanting to realistically warn about the dangers should be concentrating on the much more likely scenarios that because of increased checks etc, JIT approaches can't operate, thus more warehousing requires / slower rates of production and processing, resulting in higher cost to the consumer.0 -
Totally agree.Anazina said:
Nationalise the lot. Franchising simply does not work.Benpointer said:
South West Trains used to be good but they lost their franchise to FirstGroup/MTR (South Western Railway) and it's all gone tits up since then. But I am sure FirstGroup offered more dosh, so that's all fine thenEl_Capitano said:
I doubt it given that Lee Waters has only been in post a couple of days now...Big_G_NorthWales said:Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarray
But, still, I was a frequent traveller on the previous franchise (Arriva Trains Wales). It was, without doubt, the single worst train company I've ever travelled on. Not that our "local" train company, GWR, exactly cover themselves in glory; and there are very few operators I'd consider respectable. Chiltern, perhaps, and London Overground. London Midland were ok but I haven't travelled enough by their replacements to judge.0 -
If the "obvious reason" for Ireland is that we used to be in a political union with them, it applies to the EU26 too.Donny43 said:My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
Not possible in Wales now. Labour have signed a new 15 year franchise with TFWAnazina said:
Nationalise the lot. Franchising simply does not work.Benpointer said:
South West Trains used to be good but they lost their franchise to FirstGroup/MTR (South Western Railway) and it's all gone tits up since then. But I am sure FirstGroup offered more dosh, so that's all fine thenEl_Capitano said:
I doubt it given that Lee Waters has only been in post a couple of days now...Big_G_NorthWales said:Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarray
But, still, I was a frequent traveller on the previous franchise (Arriva Trains Wales). It was, without doubt, the single worst train company I've ever travelled on. Not that our "local" train company, GWR, exactly cover themselves in glory; and there are very few operators I'd consider respectable. Chiltern, perhaps, and London Overground. London Midland were ok but I haven't travelled enough by their replacements to judge.0 -
Apparently the very existence of the Anglosphere makes us all racists. By and large, I've not hired many Indonesians, but I have hired a lot of Yanks, Canadians, Australians and New Zealanders. Of course, the fact that they all have ethnic minorities thrice our own percentage kind of spoils the whole Aryan master race thang, but this is the Internet, so racist something something something.Donny43 said:
You didn't notice that the three countries I mentioned are less white than, for example, Bulgaria and Romania, did you?Benpointer said:
I don't need to - everyone knows.Donny43 said:
Go on, spell it out.Benpointer said:
Given that those you included are all predominantly white, we all know what's driving your suggestion.Donny43 said:
It wasn't an exhaustive list.Theuniondivvie said:
No other Commonwealth countries due for some 'loosening'?Donny43 said:
My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
Also, in perspective...eek said:Now granted in reality this has more to do with the rapid switch away from Diesel to Electricity but it's going to hit home
https://twitter.com/RLong_Bailey/status/1074357371194040320
A total of 93,000 retail jobs have been lost in the past year amid a crunch on the High Street.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-6501825/Britains-High-Street-crisis-claims-93-000-jobs-year-chains-going-bust-store-closures.html0 -
Everything negative is because of BrexitMarqueeMark said:
How is the collapse of Jaguar sales in China the fault of Brexit? Just curious......Freggles said:
Everything positive is despite Brexit
You should know the drill by now :-)
0 -
Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.0 -
That's a fair point, as are your examples. Personally I think there will be quite serious disruption at airports in the UK and in Europe, dnot due to grounded planes but because the changing processes will cause a lot of confusion and at most airports it only takes a very minor issue to escalate to serious delays.FrancisUrquhart said:
The air traffic is a good example of why the most extreme of the extreme disaster situations won't occur under No Deal Brexit, as it would absolutely screw everybody, not just the UK.Alistair said:
Can't believe I missed that. And that America didn't take the chance to screw us further like they had been threatening.ydoethur said:
Bad example, that's been dealt with:Alistair said:
Could you explain how this one is debunked?Floater said:
no air travel (debunked)
For example what happens to the UK-US aviation agreement that is currently via the European Open Skies agreement. Repeat for every other country in the world outside the European Union.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46380463
Those wanting to realistically warn about the dangers should be concentrating on the much more likely scenarios that because of increased checks etc, JIT approaches can't operate, thus more warehousing requires / slower rates of production and processing, resulting in higher cost to the consumer.0 -
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.0 -
What Mini component(s) cross the channel multiple times?Andy_Cooke said:
1 - Supply chains. These are embedded around the EU to take advantage of economies of scale and specialisation. For example, a single component at the Mini factory in Oxford can cross into and out of the UK several times before being installed. Without membership of the Single market (with its associated common regulations, underwriting, and standards-checking regime), what happens here? This is just one factory out of a huge number in the UK. Do they all start manufacturing in-house? How much disruption is caused and jobs lost?AmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.
2 - Port delays. The delays at Dover and the tailbacks and disruption that would occur as soon as we leave without any deal which reflects a common recognition of standards and checks are well known. Unless we simply throw open the borders and check nothing (which won't help on the way out), the lorry parks in Kent will exist. (And if we throw open our borders and accept whatever comes in, unchecked and unregistered, what the hell did we 'take back control' of?). What is going to be tied up in the ports and the M20/M2 lorry parks?
3 - Supply chains redux. We know that supermarkets don't keep extensive stocks - that's economic suicide. Even with them stockpiling where they can, the shelves could run out quickly if lorries aren't coming in regularly, and if they're in a big truck jam, they won't be coming in regularly. Panic buying can accompany this.
4 - Supply chains redux again. Factories (which aren't getting their widgets- the ones they do something to - going to and fro regularly) are also going to have to get the widgets-for-incorporation stockpiled rather than delivered just-in-time. This will be an additional shock/disruption.
5 - Medical and others - we import medicines quite a lot (again, economies of scale and specialisation). Medicines which have to hit certain regulations and standards. We can do emergency shipments (as if we're a third world country that's had a natural disaster), but that's not sustainable and fraught with issues. What happens in the medium term here?
6 - The Irish border. Unless we accept a sort of de facto backstop where Northern Ireland accepts everything from the Republic whatever the standards and regulations that applies to it (and there will certainly be chancers around for this), there's a hard border and shit happens there.
That's just off the top of my head.
How many Mini components cross the channel multiple times?
What percentage of components cross the channel multiple times?
Pretty basic info.0 -
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.0 -
I suspect Donny means the CTA, the Ireland Act and the reciprocal Irish legislation.williamglenn said:
If the "obvious reason" for Ireland is that we used to be in a political union with them, it applies to the EU26 too.Donny43 said:My mind is made up, man, and I'm being totally consistent.
There's nothing wrong with the total level of immigration that we have. We should be loosening immigration controls on Australians, New Zealanders and Canadians as we tighten them on people from the 26 EU countries (excluding Ireland, for obvious reasons).0 -
I haven't noticed much difference, both are mediocre. I'd say the new outfit has marginally better customer service. Reliability (except for the strike) is similar and of course the timetable and rolling stock haven't changed, except for the inevitable repainting.Benpointer said:
South West Trains used to be good but they lost their franchise to FirstGroup/MTR (South Western Railway) and it's all gone tits up since then. But I am sure FirstGroup offered more dosh, so that's all fine thenEl_Capitano said:
I doubt it given that Lee Waters has only been in post a couple of days now...Big_G_NorthWales said:Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarray
But, still, I was a frequent traveller on the previous franchise (Arriva Trains Wales). It was, without doubt, the single worst train company I've ever travelled on. Not that our "local" train company, GWR, exactly cover themselves in glory; and there are very few operators I'd consider respectable. Chiltern, perhaps, and London Overground. London Midland were ok but I haven't travelled enough by their replacements to judge.0 -
Likely to be worse after Christmas too.FrancisUrquhart said:
Also, in perspective...eek said:Now granted in reality this has more to do with the rapid switch away from Diesel to Electricity but it's going to hit home
https://twitter.com/RLong_Bailey/status/1074357371194040320
A total of 93,000 retail jobs have been lost in the past year amid a crunch on the High Street.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-6501825/Britains-High-Street-crisis-claims-93-000-jobs-year-chains-going-bust-store-closures.html
https://www.itv.com/news/2018-12-16/consumers-hit-the-shops-but-weekend-footfall-down-on-last-year/0 -
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.
0 -
If cross parties agree and labour hold out it would very damaging to themBenpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
However, I believe it when I see it0 -
I wouldn't be surprised either. Airports now operate at an incredibly pace and massive numbers of people pass through every day. Changes to any procedures, I am sure will initially cause disruption.Benpointer said:
That's a fair point, as are your examples. Personally I think there will be quite serious disruption at airports in the UK and in Europe, dnot due to grounded planes but because the changing processes will cause a lot of confusion and at most airports it only takes a very minor issue to escalate to serious delays.FrancisUrquhart said:
The air traffic is a good example of why the most extreme of the extreme disaster situations won't occur under No Deal Brexit, as it would absolutely screw everybody, not just the UK.Alistair said:
Can't believe I missed that. And that America didn't take the chance to screw us further like they had been threatening.ydoethur said:
Bad example, that's been dealt with:Alistair said:
Could you explain how this one is debunked?Floater said:
no air travel (debunked)
For example what happens to the UK-US aviation agreement that is currently via the European Open Skies agreement. Repeat for every other country in the world outside the European Union.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46380463
Those wanting to realistically warn about the dangers should be concentrating on the much more likely scenarios that because of increased checks etc, JIT approaches can't operate, thus more warehousing requires / slower rates of production and processing, resulting in higher cost to the consumer.
I remember after 9/11, when they made big changes to security checks and there were a lot of delays to get through to air side. Now, they have stream lined all of that, with the automated tray thingy and you can normally get through pretty quickly.0 -
It's essentially the "papal conclave" method. Except hopefully nobody has to die.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
The UK is inventing new Constitution on the fly.0 -
He has a pretty damning analysis of the consequences of leaving with an unmanaged deal and I would like to see an equally robust counter argument before I'd want to jump off the cliffAmpfieldAndy said:OllyT said:
You could try this for a start.AmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.Andy_Cooke said:
I am, I confess, having some issues understanding your reasoning.AmpfieldAndy said:
Unlike Remainers, most Leavers don’t believe in fairy tales.anothernick said:
Indeed.AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah yes, Project Fear again.tottenhamWC said:
No deal is a sure route to rapid decline.AmpfieldAndy said:grabcocque said:What we've learned from Brexit is that the Dunning-Kruger effect can apply to entire political parties and indeed electorates.
Yep - all those Remainers claiming we can’t manage on our own and wanting “managed decline” being a prime example.
Wolf, wolf!
Many leavers have forgotten how the story ends.
But they will shortly be reminded.
It seems to be: forecasts of instant doom, made by Osborne and the Treasury, to occur following the referendum were false.
Therefore everything will be fine following No Deal crashout, and all the industry concerns from all sectors across the piece can be safely ignored and what you want to believe will, in fact, be what happens. You don't seem to have ever addressed any of the issues raised, merely shouting about false forecasts in the past.
I'm genuinely worried. Put my fears to rest - please. And not with a fairy tale of "I don't want to believe that so it won't happen," because that's all that's coming across at the moment.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/the-nine-lessons-of-brexit/
I am not a subscriber but if it’s Ivan Rogers speech, I’ve already read it. Not sure a former ambassador is the most reliable guide to economic consequences of any particular course of action.0 -
I was reading about just how nuts the retail world is these days. Amazon (and all the others) get massive amount of returns, but costs too much to process them. So they sell massive job lots via B2B, who then sell them on to small resellers, who send them into Amazon FBA to sell them on....Amazon....Foxy said:
Likely to be worse after Christmas too.FrancisUrquhart said:
Also, in perspective...eek said:Now granted in reality this has more to do with the rapid switch away from Diesel to Electricity but it's going to hit home
https://twitter.com/RLong_Bailey/status/1074357371194040320
A total of 93,000 retail jobs have been lost in the past year amid a crunch on the High Street.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/news/article-6501825/Britains-High-Street-crisis-claims-93-000-jobs-year-chains-going-bust-store-closures.html
https://www.itv.com/news/2018-12-16/consumers-hit-the-shops-but-weekend-footfall-down-on-last-year/0 -
But as a Brexiteer you know the answer.ralphmalph said:
What Mini component(s) cross the channel multiple times?Andy_Cooke said:
1 - Supply chains. These are embedded around the EU to take advantage of economies of scale and specialisation. For example, a single component at the Mini factory in Oxford can cross into and out of the UK several times before beingAmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.
2 - Port delays. The delays at Dover and the tailbacks and disruption that would occur as soon as we leave without any deal which reflects a common recognition of standards and checks are well known. Unless we simply throw open the borders and check nothing (which won't help on the way out), the lorry parks in Kent will exist. (And if we throw open our borders and accept whatever comes in, unchecked and unregistered, what the hell did we 'take back control' of?). What is going to be tied up in the ports and the M20/M2 lorry parks?
3 - Supply chains redux. We know that supermarkets don't keep extensive stocks - that's economic suicide. Even with them stockpiling where they can, the shelves could run out quickly if lorries aren't coming in regularly, and if they're in a big truck jam, they won't be coming in regularly. Panic buying can accompany this.
4 - Supply chains redux again. Factories (which aren't getting their widgets- the ones they do something to - going to and fro regularly) are also going to have to get the widgets-for-incorporation stockpiled rather than delivered just-in-time. This will be an additional shock/disruption.
5 - Medical and others - we import medicines quite a lot (again, economies of scale and specialisation). Medicines which have to hit certain regulations and standards. We can do emergency shipments (as if we're a third world country that's had a natural disaster), but that's not sustainable and fraught with issues. What happens in the medium term here?
6 - The Irish border. Unless we accept a sort of de facto backstop where Northern Ireland accepts everything from the Republic whatever the standards and regulations that applies to it (and there will certainly be chancers around for this), there's a hard border and shit happens there.
That's just off the top of my head.
How many Mini components cross the channel multiple times?
What percentage of components cross the channel multiple times?
Pretty basic info.
You simply must to have any creditabilty on JIT manufacturing and the impact on the no deal you want0 -
Ivan Rogers, of course, was fire by Mrs May for the crime of being Too Competent.OllyT said:
He has a pretty damning analysis of the consequences of leaving with an unmanaged deal and I would like to see an equally robust counter argument before I'd want to jump off the cliffAmpfieldAndy said:
I am not a subscriber but if it’s Ivan Rogers speech, I’ve already read it. Not sure a former ambassador is the most reliable guide to economic consequences of any particular course of action.0 -
The UK has always invented its constitution on the fly. It’s what we do.grabcocque said:
It's essentially the "papal conclave" method. Except hopefully nobody has to die.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
The UK is inventing new Constitution on the fly.0 -
I believe it was Mr Heywood who got tired of him.grabcocque said:
Ivan Rogers, of course, was fire by Mrs May for the crime of being Too Competent.OllyT said:
He has a pretty damning analysis of the consequences of leaving with an unmanaged deal and I would like to see an equally robust counter argument before I'd want to jump off the cliffAmpfieldAndy said:
I am not a subscriber but if it’s Ivan Rogers speech, I’ve already read it. Not sure a former ambassador is the most reliable guide to economic consequences of any particular course of action.0 -
You may be right - I hope you are.grabcocque said:
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.
I struggle to see how we could Remain without a further referendum though.0 -
Regardless, government is increasingly aware of the risks, and it underlines why, apart from a few extremists, they simply won't countenance no deal. The economic consequences and hence the political risks are too severe.OllyT said:
He has a pretty damning analysis of the consequences of leaving with an unmanaged deal and I would like to see an equally robust counter argument before I'd want to jump off the cliffAmpfieldAndy said:OllyT said:
You could try this for a start.AmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.Andy_Cooke said:
I am, I confess, having some issues understanding your reasoning.AmpfieldAndy said:
Unlike Remainers, most Leavers don’t believe in fairy tales.anothernick said:
Indeed.AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah yes, Project Fear again.tottenhamWC said:
No deal is a sure route to rapid decline.AmpfieldAndy said:grabcocque said:What we've learned from Brexit is that the Dunning-Kruger effect can apply to entire political parties and indeed electorates.
Yep - all those Remainers claiming we can’t manage on our own and wanting “managed decline” being a prime example.
Wolf, wolf!
Many leavers have forgotten how the story ends.
But they will shortly be reminded.
It seems to be: forecasts of instant doom, made by Osborne and the Treasury, to occur following the referendum were false.
Therefore everything will be fine following No Deal crashout, and all the industry concerns from all sectors across the piece can be safely ignored and what you want to believe will, in fact, be what happens. You don't seem to have ever addressed any of the issues raised, merely shouting about false forecasts in the past.
I'm genuinely worried. Put my fears to rest - please. And not with a fairy tale of "I don't want to believe that so it won't happen," because that's all that's coming across at the moment.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/the-nine-lessons-of-brexit/
I am not a subscriber but if it’s Ivan Rogers speech, I’ve already read it. Not sure a former ambassador is the most reliable guide to economic consequences of any particular course of action.0 -
The Mini crankshaft is an example.ralphmalph said:
What Mini component(s) cross the channel multiple times?Andy_Cooke said:
1 - Supply chains. These are embedded around the EU to take advantage of economies of scale and specialisation.AmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.
2 - Port delays. The delays at Dover and the tailbacks and disruption that would occur as soon as we leave without any deal which reflects a common recognition of standards and checks are well known. Unless we simply throw open the borders and check nothing (which won't help on the way out), the lorry parks in Kent will exist. (And if we throw open our borders and accept whatever comes in, unchecked and unregistered, what the hell did we 'take back control' of?). What is going to be tied up in the ports and the M20/M2 lorry parks?
3 - Supply chains redux. We know that supermarkets don't keep extensive stocks - that's economic suicide. Even with them stockpiling where they can, the shelves could run out quickly if lorries aren't coming in regularly, and if they're in a big truck jam, they won't be coming in regularly. Panic buying can accompany this.
4 - Supply chains redux again. Factories (which aren't getting their widgets- the ones they do something to - going to and fro regularly) are also going to have to get the widgets-for-incorporation stockpiled rather than delivered just-in-time. This will be an additional shock/disruption.
5 - Medical and others - we import medicines quite a lot (again, economies of scale and specialisation). Medicines which have to hit certain regulations and standards. We can do emergency shipments (as if we're a third world country that's had a natural disaster), but that's not sustainable and fraught with issues. What happens in the medium term here?
6 - The Irish border. Unless we accept a sort of de facto backstop where Northern Ireland accepts everything from the Republic whatever the standards and regulations that applies to it (and there will certainly be chancers around for this), there's a hard border and shit happens there.
That's just off the top of my head.
How many Mini components cross the channel multiple times?
What percentage of components cross the channel multiple times?
Pretty basic info.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu
Seems a bit unnecessary to me, but then I am not in that line of work.0 -
Anyone is worth listening to as long as they aren't an economist.AmpfieldAndy said:OllyT said:
You could try this for a start.AmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.Andy_Cooke said:
I am, I confess, having some issues understanding your reasoning.AmpfieldAndy said:
Unlike Remainers, most Leavers don’t believe in fairy tales.anothernick said:
Indeed.AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah yes, Project Fear again.tottenhamWC said:
No deal is a sure route to rapid decline.AmpfieldAndy said:grabcocque said:What we've learned from Brexit is that the Dunning-Kruger effect can apply to entire political parties and indeed electorates.
Yep - all those Remainers claiming we can’t manage on our own and wanting “managed decline” being a prime example.
Wolf, wolf!
Many leavers have forgotten how the story ends.
But they will shortly be reminded.
It seems to be: forecasts of instant doom, made by Osborne and the Treasury, to occur following the referendum were false.
Therefore everything will be fine following No Deal crashout, and all the industry concerns from all sectors across the piece can be safely ignored and what you want to believe will, in fact, be what happens. You don't seem to have ever addressed any of the issues raised, merely shouting about false forecasts in the past.
I'm genuinely worried. Put my fears to rest - please. And not with a fairy tale of "I don't want to believe that so it won't happen," because that's all that's coming across at the moment.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/12/the-nine-lessons-of-brexit/
I am not a subscriber but if it’s Ivan Rogers speech, I’ve already read it. Not sure a former ambassador is the most reliable guide to economic consequences of any particular course of action.0 -
A similar thing was done for Lord's reform proposals.grabcocque said:
It's essentially the "papal conclave" method. Except hopefully nobody has to die.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
The UK is inventing new Constitution on the fly.0 -
I have used the East Coast Mainline to travel to Aberdeen for the last 5 years. The Operators run a system called Delay/Repay which means that if your train is more than an hour late you get your full fare back.Anazina said:
Nationalise the lot. Franchising simply does not work.Benpointer said:
South West Trains used to be good but they lost their franchise to FirstGroup/MTR (South Western Railway) and it's all gone tits up since then. But I am sure FirstGroup offered more dosh, so that's all fine thenEl_Capitano said:
I doubt it given that Lee Waters has only been in post a couple of days now...Big_G_NorthWales said:Is that why the new 15 year rail Wales franchise negotiated by labour is in chaos and disarray
But, still, I was a frequent traveller on the previous franchise (Arriva Trains Wales). It was, without doubt, the single worst train company I've ever travelled on. Not that our "local" train company, GWR, exactly cover themselves in glory; and there are very few operators I'd consider respectable. Chiltern, perhaps, and London Overground. London Midland were ok but I haven't travelled enough by their replacements to judge.
In the 4 or so years up to June this year I had to claim exactly once, in early 2017.
In the 6 months since the publicly owned LNER took over from Virgin I have had to claim 4 times. Needles to say I am not impressed with the way the service has deteriorated.0 -
I was at an event held by the dairy industry the other week. There was general consternation at the lack of information about what will happen after 29 March. Most milk used in the UK is home produced but large quantities of butter and cream are imported, cream from Holland and butter from Ireland. Producers are stockpiling butter, which can be frozen, but there is limited capacity for storage. Cream cannot be stockpiled and supplies would dry up in a few days if there delays at cross channel ports. The general expectation was that a no deal Brexit would mean shortages of some items and big price increases for those that were available.Andy_Cooke said:
1 - Supply chains. These are embedded around the EU to take advantage of economies of scale and specialisation. For example, a single component at the Mini factory in Oxford can cross into and out of the UK several times before being installed. Without membership of the Single market (with its associated common regulations, underwriting, and standards-checking regime), what happens here? This is just one factory out of a huge number in the UK. Do they all start manufacturing in-house? How much disruption is caused and jobs lost?
2 - Port delays. The delays at Dover and the tailbacks and disruption that would occur as soon as we leave without any deal which reflects a common recognition of standards and checks are well known. Unless we simply throw open the borders and check nothing (which won't help on the way out), the lorry parks in Kent will exist. (And if we throw open our borders and accept whatever comes in, unchecked and unregistered, what the hell did we 'take back control' of?). What is going to be tied up in the ports and the M20/M2 lorry parks?
3 - Supply chains redux. We know that supermarkets don't keep extensive stocks - that's economic suicide. Even with them stockpiling where they can, the shelves could run out quickly if lorries aren't coming in regularly, and if they're in a big truck jam, they won't be coming in regularly. Panic buying can accompany this.
4 - Supply chains redux again. Factories (which aren't getting their widgets- the ones they do something to - going to and fro regularly) are also going to have to get the widgets-for-incorporation stockpiled rather than delivered just-in-time. This will be an additional shock/disruption.
5 - Medical and others - we import medicines quite a lot (again, economies of scale and specialisation). Medicines which have to hit certain regulations and standards. We can do emergency shipments (as if we're a third world country that's had a natural disaster), but that's not sustainable and fraught with issues. What happens in the medium term here?
6 - The Irish border.0 -
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.0 -
Brexit is the Schleswig-Holstein question de nos jours.0
-
Given the SM has existed for ~25 years, it's not unreasonable for businesses to have evolved and adapted to the business climate afforded by the SEA.ralphmalph said:
What Mini component(s) cross the channel multiple times?Andy_Cooke said:AmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.
That's just off the top of my head.
How many Mini components cross the channel multiple times?
What percentage of components cross the channel multiple times?
Pretty basic info.
It's also not unreasonable for people to worry about the effect of a rapid change in that business climate. A goodly number of FDI decisions were made on the basis that the UK was a member of the SM, and Brexit is going to cause those decisions to be reassessed, and frankly, not necessarily in the UK's favour (though note the big tech companies have made large and recent investments in the UK).
One of the effects of the Single Market (as an emergent behaviour ) is that European economies have begun to specialise, hence our dependency on imported pharma as one example.
Business will adapt; it always does. However, the idea that businesses can just take any change in its stride, no matter what the delta is frankly silly.
I'm very worried about the insouciance of some Leavers about 'no deal'. It's not so much trade as *commerce*, which includes pure services, goods-dependent services and capital flows around Europe and beyond.
I say that as PB's #1 Supreme Brexiteer and lifelong member of the League of Empire Loyalists. The burden of proof is on the no-dealers. Simply throwing down 'WTO terms' doth not an answer make. 0 -
Isn't the economy in general optimised for efficiency rather than robustness?FrancisUrquhart said:
I wouldn't be surprised either. Airports now operate at an incredibly pace and massive numbers of people pass through every day. Changes to any procedures, I am sure will initially cause disruption.Benpointer said:
That's a fair point, as are your examples. Personally I think there will be quite serious disruption at airports in the UK and in Europe, dnot due to grounded planes but because the changing processes will cause a lot of confusion and at most airports it only takes a very minor issue to escalate to serious delays.FrancisUrquhart said:
The air traffic is a good example of why the most extreme of the extreme disaster situations won't occur under No Deal Brexit, as it would absolutely screw everybody, not just the UK.Alistair said:
Can't believe I missed that. And that America didn't take the chance to screw us further like they had been threatening.ydoethur said:
Bad example, that's been dealt with:Alistair said:
Could you explain how this one is debunked?Floater said:
no air travel (debunked)
For example what happens to the UK-US aviation agreement that is currently via the European Open Skies agreement. Repeat for every other country in the world outside the European Union.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46380463
Those wanting to realistically warn about the dangers should be concentrating on the much more likely scenarios that because of increased checks etc, JIT approaches can't operate, thus more warehousing requires / slower rates of production and processing, resulting in higher cost to the consumer.0 -
Was that riot about migration within the EU or from outside the EU?AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah yes, the Hammond labelling of all Brexit supporters as extremists. Funny how quick Remainers are to resort to insults. FOM was a big reason Leave won. There were riots in Brussels today about fears of more immigration. I don’t want riots in the UK. Ending FOM will suit me.Benpointer said:
Which May's Deal would do. Sadly though for you, it looks like your extreme Brexiteer comrades are going to to blow it and we'll be Remaining after all.AmpfieldAndy said:
Great - but we voted to leave and stop it.Anazina said:
So extend FOM. I have had (and lost) a great NZ employee. I would extend it, not retract it. That’s cutting your nose off to spite your face.AmpfieldAndy said:
I have been an ex-pat working abroad. Filling in a few forms is not that difficult. Immigration apartheid on the other hand is abhorrent.Anazina said:
.AmpfieldAndy said:
“....unless...” And your irrational confidence that the EU won’t insist on this as the price for a trade deal is or that the U.K. won’t cave in to secure a trade agreement is ? Stupid is as stupid does.Benpointer said:
Honestly, you are just making yourself look stupid now.AmpfieldAndy said:
Ah e you explain the difference between FOM and May’s mobility provisions whilst you’re at it and explain why we won’t have to pay to trade just because the WA is silent in the issue. Seems to me you haven’t thought about the issues for someone who claims others are the numpties.Benpointer said:
The craiziest thing about the current situation is that people are vehemently opposing things they have not bothered to get the slightest understanding of.AmpfieldAndy said:
. No Brexit at all is a better deal, and I say that as a Leaver.kle4 said:
Other than us leaving the EU of course. However imperfectly people feel it does so, it does that.AmpfieldAndy said:
No deal is the only game in town. May’s deal gives us nothing.Brom said:
http://eulawanalysis.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-brexit-withdrawal-agreement.html
"Key question: Does the withdrawal agreement end free movement of people?
Yes, free movement ends at the end of the transition period, unless the UK and EU decide to sign a separate treaty as part of the future relationship extending free movement in the future. Currently the UK government opposes this idea. "0 -
Divisions are a matter of record. Mainly so that voters know what their MP did while in the Commons.rural_voter said:
Can MPs have some of these votes by secret ballot or must they traipse through the lobbies, causing some to change their vote out of sheer fear of the mob? That's what 'respecting the vote' is code for.Stark_Dawning said:
Wasn’t this the idea that was hatched on here several days back?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.0 -
And they must all be desperate for something they looks like they have recovered the initiative and are working through things. The reputational damage to all politicians over recent months has been severe.grabcocque said:
Labour really doesn't want to have to have its internal contradictions exposed any more than the Tories do. Labour's looking for a way to backpedal from their confused mess of a Brexit policy as much as the Tories.Benpointer said:
Sounds too much like common sense to be plausible. What's in it for Labour?grabcocque said:Sam Gyimah is suggesting that he knows what Number 10's current thinking is.
1) Meaningful Vote. They expect to lose, hard.
2) They agree a series of indicative votes, in conference with the other party leaders, to be put the house.
3) If no winner emerges, least popular choices will be eliminated and the process repeated (an exhaustive ballot, essentially)
4) All the party leaders (including the PM) will agree, beforehand, the the votes will be free votes, and the party's whips will agree to be bound by the result of the indicative votes.
By making the votes all be free votes, it's hoped that no one party will get the blame for the (almost certain) remain result this process will produce.0 -
Spot on. No one can dictate what form Leave MUST take. For me and many other Leavers May's deal. although far from perfect is certainly Leave which is why it should be supported - if only for fear of allowing Remain back in.Anazina said:
No, a very narrow majority of those who actually voted, voted to leave the EU. That was all.
Edit; since I notice I have answered two points from you in succession, Evening by the way 0 -
Brilliant answer if I may say so Big_G!Big_G_NorthWales said:
But as a Brexiteer you know the answer.ralphmalph said:
What Mini component(s) cross the channel multiple times?Andy_Cooke said:
1 - Supply chains. These are embedded around the EU to take advantage of economies of scale and specialisation. For example, a single component at the Mini factory in Oxford can cross into and out of the UK several times before beingAmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.
2 - Port delays. The delays at Dover and the tailbacks and disruption that would occur as soon as we leave without any deal which reflects a common recognition of standards and checks are well known. Unless we simply throw open the borders and check nothing (which won't help on the way out), the lorry parks in Kent will exist. (And if we throw open our borders and accept whatever comes in, unchecked and unregistered, what the hell did we 'take back control' of?). What is going to be tied up in the ports and the M20/M2 lorry parks?
3 - Supply chains redux. We know that supermarkets don't keep extensive stocks - that's economic suicide. Even with them stockpiling where they can, the shelves could run out quickly if lorries aren't coming in regularly, and if they're in a big truck jam, they won't be coming in regularly. Panic buying can accompany this.
4 - Supply chains redux again. Factories (which aren't getting their widgets- the ones they do something to - going to and fro regularly) are also going to have to get the widgets-for-incorporation stockpiled rather than delivered just-in-time. This will be an additional shock/disruption.
5 - Medical and others - we import medicines quite a lot (again, economies of scale and specialisation). Medicines which have to hit certain regulations and standards. We can do emergency shipments (as if we're a third world country that's had a natural disaster), but that's not sustainable and fraught with issues. What happens in the medium term here?
6 - The Irish border. Unless we accept a sort of de facto backstop where Northern Ireland accepts everything from the Republic whatever the standards and regulations that applies to it (and there will certainly be chancers around for this), there's a hard border and shit happens there.
That's just off the top of my head.
How many Mini components cross the channel multiple times?
What percentage of components cross the channel multiple times?
Pretty basic info.
You simply must to have any creditabilty on JIT manufacturing and the impact on the no deal you want 0 -
The trouble is, so many of them are like Nadine Dorries, starting from what they want to believe and then searching, sifting and disregarding evidence and argumentation accordingly.John_M said:
Given the SM has existed for ~25 years, it's not unreasonable for businesses to have evolved and adapted to the business climate afforded by the SEA.ralphmalph said:
What Mini component(s) cross the channel multiple times?Andy_Cooke said:AmpfieldAndy said:
Articulate why you have such fears in a comprehensible manner rather than simply regurgitate Hammonds reincarnation of Project Fear.
That's just off the top of my head.
How many Mini components cross the channel multiple times?
What percentage of components cross the channel multiple times?
Pretty basic info.
It's also not unreasonable for people to worry about the effect of a rapid change in that business climate. A goodly number of FDI decisions were made on the basis that the UK was a member of the SM, and Brexit is going to cause those decisions to be reassessed, and frankly, not necessarily in the UK's favour (though note the big tech companies have made large and recent investments in the UK).
One of the effects of the Single Market (as an emergent behaviour ) is that European economies have begun to specialise, hence our dependency on imported pharma as one example.
Business will adapt; it always does. However, the idea that businesses can just take any change in its stride, no matter what the delta is frankly silly.
I'm very worried about the insouciance of some Leavers about 'no deal'. It's not so much trade as *commerce*, which includes pure services, goods-dependent services and capital flows around Europe and beyond.
I say that as PB's #1 Supreme Brexiteer and lifelong member of the League of Empire Loyalists. The burden of proof is on the no-dealers. Simply throwing down 'WTO terms' doth not an answer make.0 -
Surely the root cause of that though is that for years farmers were forced to pour milk down the drain because of quotas. If they have any foresight farmers should welcome the fact they would be able to start building their dairy herds again.anothernick said:
I was at an event held by the dairy industry the other week. There was general consternation at the lack of information about what will happen after 29 March. Most milk used in the UK is home produced but large quantities of butter and cream are imported, cream from Holland and butter from Ireland. Producers are stockpiling butter, which can be frozen, but there is limited capacity for storage. Cream cannot be stockpiled and supplies would dry up in a few days if there delays at cross channel ports. The general expectation was that a no deal Brexit would mean shortages of some items and big price increases for those that were available.0
This discussion has been closed.