Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[JamboX2]

5 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

I remember the EU being widely praised for coming up with a solution (the backstop with the internal UK border) when the UK was deemed to be unable to do so.

Bu history and facts seem to be very loose concepts on this whole subject.

 

It's a consequence of the UK government's red lines. 

[JamboX2]

5 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Are the first chinks appearing in the armour of the so far remarakable and impressive unity of the EU, with the Polish PM and CSU leaders in Germany calling for the EU to be a bit more flexible, Coincidence that the CSU is the main party in Bavaria, home of BMW for which the UK is its second biggest foreign market?

 

It won't be enough to effect the outcome. For the leaders of the EU 27 and their governments the unity of the EU is a vital issue. Viewed as an economic bulwark against Trump and his threats about NATO and Putin and his actual threat to Europe's East. 

 

That's their interest. To hell with us. We're the ones squabbling and begging them for concessions at the moment. 

 

The unity of Europe means more than us to them. Much like the security of the euro meant more than the concerns of Euro using Greece.

[Francis Albert]

21 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

It's a consequence of the UK government's red lines. 

Or the EU's red lines. Take your pick.

[Francis Albert]

23 minutes ago, JamboX2 said:

 

It won't be enough to effect the outcome. For the leaders of the EU 27 and their governments the unity of the EU is a vital issue. Viewed as an economic bulwark against Trump and his threats about NATO and Putin and his actual threat to Europe's East. 

 

That's their interest. To hell with us. We're the ones squabbling and begging them for concessions at the moment. 

 

The unity of Europe means more than us to them. Much like the security of the euro meant more than the concerns of Euro using Greece.

Yet Brexit or no Brexit the EU will depend on NATO, including the USA and UK, for defence against Putin. Or China or any other foe. The tiny underfunded military of the combined might of EU nations military resources (or the as yet to be established European Army) is about as threatening to a determined foe as ... well a post-Brexit UK if it quit NATO.

 

As for an "economic bulwark against Trump" the current recession in Italy. massive unemployment in much of the EU and the low growth rates of much of the EU have  diddly squat to do with Trump. The EU's relative economic power and wealth is in decline, Trump or no Trump

Edited February 1, 2019 by Francis Albert

[Cade]

Poland, Hungary and Italy make a lot of noise but they'd be bankrupt without the EU.

They're all total basket cases.

[Francis Albert]

3 minutes ago, Cade said:

Poland, Hungary and Italy make a lot of noise but they'd be bankrupt without the EU.

They're all total basket cases.

Such are the benefits of being in the EU!

[ri Alban]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

Such are the benefits of being in the EU!

The way you go on, you'd think the EU had chucked the UK out. The UK had the best deal of all EU member states, and still acted like fuds.  The EU should now tell them to GTF and gies all peace.

[Francis Albert]

... and you can throw in the Baltic States where "free movement" is stripping them of up to 20% of their population, leaving the rural elderly and poor in half abandoned villages and the elderly and poor in the cities in half abandoned housing blocks.

[ri Alban]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

... and you can throw in the Baltic States where "free movement" is stripping them of up to 20% of their population, leaving the rural elderly and poor in half abandoned villages and the elderly and poor in the cities in half abandoned housing blocks.

Sounds like Scotland, where the young go chasing the billions of its money stolen by WM to upgrade London.

[John Findlay]

5 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

The way you go on, you'd think the EU had chucked the UK out. The UK had the best deal of all EU member states, and still acted like fuds.  The EU should now tell them to GTF and gies all peace.

The UK had the best deal how? I would say smallER population countries like ROI and the Benelux nations do better.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

14 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Sounds like Scotland, where the young go chasing the billions of its money stolen by WM to upgrade London.

Don't forget buck house. And the ungrateful witch doesn't even like the place. 

[Francis Albert]

48 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

The way you go on, you'd think the EU had chucked the UK out. The UK had the best deal of all EU member states, and still acted like fuds.  The EU should now tell them to GTF and gies all peace.

UK has been the second biggest net contributor to EU funds after Germany. I am not sure how that equates to the "best deal".

And Germany, thanks to the Euro has enjoyed at least by way of recompense the advantage of trading with an undervalued currency with nations with an overvalued currency, to the great advantage of its manufacturing industry.

[jake]

17 hours ago, Ulysses said:

 

Except the trolls, the backwoodsmen and the bigots. 

 

 

 

I think Brexit needs to happen.  The UK needs to be out of the EU, and the rest of the EU needs the UK to be gone.

 

There are ways and means to make it happen in a way that limits the damage to the UK and to its neighbours and partners.  I'm as certain as I can be that a majority of British people would like that to happen.  I'm also as sure as I can be that for a lot of people living in one corner of the UK it simply needs to happen.

 

But it's not happening.  Instead of it happening, all we're getting is a mess, caused entirely by the failure of the British government to act in the best interests of the country and the British people.  It is a disgraceful abdication of responsibility and a failure of the political system.

 

And why is that happening?  Because the people who lead the country are also the people who lead the Conservative Party - and they are acting to save their own party and save their own political skins.

 

It's also unfortunate that Brexit has allowed xenophobia towards Europeans and bigotry towards my nationality in particular to become a bit more prominent.  Most of that is social media guff and the spouting of people whose bigotry isn't that surprising, so maybe it's best not taken too seriously.  But some of it is coming from unexpected places, and for me at least some of it is just a wee bit close to home.  Given the difficult shared history Ireland and the United Kingdom have, and the remarkable progress we've made (or thought we'd made) in the last 20-25 years, that is  both disappointing and uncomfortable.

 

But c'est la vie, and people have to muddle through, because there's no other way to manage things.  And while we're muddling through sometimes the things people say make us laugh - well they make me laugh at any rate.  And however little I enjoy Brexit, I do enjoy a good laugh.

Good post.

And you are right about the UK and its relationship with the EU.

 

Ideally I hope that people realise the bankruptcy of our political parties and demand better.

 

The bigotry towards your nationality in Scotland still exists no doubt. Are you meaning from the English?

 

 

 

[Cade]

All three of the Baltic nations have more than doubled their GDP since joining the EU.

 

They may have rather high unemployment but nothing like as bad as it was before they joined.

Trying to make out that the former Soviet bloc nations that joined the EU in 2004 have somehow been impoverished shows a stunning lack of knowledge.

[Thunderstruck]

5 hours ago, John Findlay said:

The UK had the best deal how? I would say smallER population countries like ROI and the Benelux nations do better.

 

Thanks to Juncker and his shenanigans in the case of Amazon and Corporation Tax, Luxembourg does very well out of the EU. 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jan/01/jean-claude-juncker-blocked-eu-curbs-on-tax-avoidance-cables-show

 

Corrupt and untouchable. 

[Cade]

UK had the most number of opt-outs, special arrangements and rebates than any other of the 28 member states.

Nobody else had a better deal with the EU than we did.

[Ulysses]

3 hours ago, jake said:

 

 

The bigotry towards your nationality in Scotland still exists no doubt. Are you meaning from the English?

 

 

I wouldn't like to describe bigotry or xenophobia as being from "the English" or "the Scots" or anything like that, because that kind of generalisation is itself prejudiced.  And anyway, I wouldn't want to disrespect the very many decent and honourable people I know from all corners of the UK.

 

It is up to individuals to decide whether to be bigoted or not.  Unfortunately some people lately have been failing the test of decency, and some of those in recent weeks and months have felt more free than usual to target the Irish.  Most of that has come from unsurprising quarters; it's been more than a little educational to watch the social media outputs of some UKIP, DUP and Conservative members and elected representatives, for example. 

 

As for the "close to home" bit, it's been less than comfortable for me to see the same sentiments creep into some comments here.  In fairness, although two or three people have sailed close to the wind I've only noticed one person actually breaking the rules, and the moderators have been quick to deal with the posts in that person's case.  But being xenophobic or bigoted isn't necessary and it doesn't add anything to the discussion anyway.

 

I have the Irish background I have, and I'm very proud of it, especially when I see where we have come to as a community in the last 10 years or so.  But equally I have a British heritage spanning two world wars and I won't apologise to anyone for that.  I remember 30 years ago when it was very hard to explain to an Irish person what was good about being British, and just as hard to explain to a British person what was good about being Irish.  We travelled a long way in those 30 years, and we do have a shared social, cultural, and economic space.  We managed to go from severe mistrust to being pretty good neighbours.  I think we are losing that, and it is a pity.  Maybe we won't miss each other until it's too late.

 

See, it's easier to take the piss than to be serious, isn't it? 

[JamboX2]

 

16 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Or the EU's red lines. Take your pick.

 

The border issue and the market alignment are problems the backstop is designed to protect because May's negotiating position took no account of the Irish border. She basically ignored it. In seeking a resolution she and her then Brexit Secretary David Davis created this idea of maxfac borders or technology solving the issue. Neither would be ready for March 2019 and the EU27 were not happy with the idea the UK collect tariffs on their behalf and distribute funds back. So the backstop was created by the UK team to get us through to March 2019. Nothing more than that. 

 

This is now being picked on as the great betrayal but that ignores the fact that this deal is for 2 years until our future relationship is finalised, I.e. a free trade treaty. 

 

However, if No Deal is the price of her inability to lead her party without it's hard right spinning off then be it on their heads as it'll tear up the UK. 

[JamboX2]

16 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

Yet Brexit or no Brexit the EU will depend on NATO, including the USA and UK, for defence against Putin. Or China or any other foe.

 

Us? Really? France has bigger conventional forces than us. Under Cameron and May the French navy is now bigger in combat ship numbers than the Royal Navy; a first since Napoleon.

 

Quote

 

The tiny underfunded military of the combined might of EU nations military resources (or the as yet to be established European Army) is about as threatening to a determined foe as ... well a post-Brexit UK if it quit NATO.

 

How can our allies be a threat to us? What is our defence concerns from the EU? You can't in the one hand demand a stronger military from EU nations and then bemoan them increasing their strength.

 

This "EU Army" is a furthering of EU Defence Co-operation. The aim being to pool resource together to cut the costs of material and procurement by acting together. Rather than replicating capabilities they will have complementing capabilities. That's good and compliments NATO.

 

Ultimately why would they not want to start doing that given Trump's attitudes to his allies. NATO is viewed as a waste of money. KORUS (The US South Korea trade deal underpinning the defence of of ROK) has regularly been something he wants to end (read both the Wolf and Woodward books about Trump and you'll see panic in the Pentagon over this).

 

America will not be a reliable ally for us as long as he is in the White House.

 

Quote

 

As for an "economic bulwark against Trump" the current recession in Italy. massive unemployment in much of the EU and the low growth rates of much of the EU have  diddly squat to do with Trump. The EU's relative economic power and wealth is in decline, Trump or no Trump

 

Trump is consistently threatening tariffs and reopening trade deals to do better for US companies. The EU, rightly, don't want to compromise on food standards and on big pharma. The UK government idea is that US trade will replace EU trade. But that's far fetched. We, like the US, are a services economy. A net importer of goods. The idea that we have a huge amount to offer the US is odd post Brexit. At present a US bank can HQ here and passport into the EU. That's about to go: that's our biggest sell to the Yanks. Hence moves to Dublin and the Continent. 

 

With that in mind Redcar steel or Upper Clyde ships aren't things Trump or the US want or need to import; it runs counter to his trade strategy. The result is the US pushing us to accept unrestricted access to domestic markets for its food and agricultural sectors (which would decimate UK farmimg) and for its big beast industries of pharmaceuticals and health care providers wanting into our domestic health "market". To me that's a bad deal.

[coconut doug]

5 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Us? Really? France has bigger conventional forces than us. Under Cameron and May the French navy is now bigger in combat ship numbers than the Royal Navy; a first since Napoleon.

 

 

How can our allies be a threat to us? What is our defence concerns from the EU? You can't in the one hand demand a stronger military from EU nations and then bemoan them increasing their strength.

 

This "EU Army" is a furthering of EU Defence Co-operation. The aim being to pool resource together to cut the costs of material and procurement by acting together. Rather than replicating capabilities they will have complementing capabilities. That's good and compliments NATO.

 

Ultimately why would they not want to start doing that given Trump's attitudes to his allies. NATO is viewed as a waste of money. KORUS (The US South Korea trade deal underpinning the defence of of ROK) has regularly been something he wants to end (read both the Wolf and Woodward books about Trump and you'll see panic in the Pentagon over this).

 

America will not be a reliable ally for us as long as he is in the White House.

 

 

Trump is consistently threatening tariffs and reopening trade deals to do better for US companies. The EU, rightly, don't want to compromise on food standards and on big pharma. The UK government idea is that US trade will replace EU trade. But that's far fetched. We, like the US, are a services economy. A net importer of goods. The idea that we have a huge amount to offer the US is odd post Brexit. At present a US bank can HQ here and passport into the EU. That's about to go: that's our biggest sell to the Yanks. Hence moves to Dublin and the Continent. 

 

With that in mind Redcar steel or Upper Clyde ships aren't things Trump or the US want or need to import; it runs counter to his trade strategy. The result is the US pushing us to accept unrestricted access to domestic markets for its food and agricultural sectors (which would decimate UK farmimg) and for its big beast industries of pharmaceuticals and health care providers wanting into our domestic health "market". To me that's a bad deal.

Redcar steel works closed years ago. Shipbuilding on the upper clyde is exclusively military. We already have a considerable trade surplus with the USA. that is now likely to change.

 

 America has hardly ever been a trustworthy ally to any country. Trump wont change that and neither will the removal of Trump. 

[JamboX2]

2 hours ago, coconut doug said:

Redcar steel works closed years ago. Shipbuilding on the upper clyde is exclusively military.

 

I know - struggled to think of other manufacturers at the time. Exclusive military yards could be handy in a coordinated EU approach to procurement. Glasgow yards building Danish frigates.

 

2 hours ago, coconut doug said:

We already have a considerable trade surplus with the USA. that is now likely to change.

 

 America has hardly ever been a trustworthy ally to any country. Trump wont change that and neither will the removal of Trump. 

 

Not being as cynical as that. The support to NATO allies in the EU from 1945 on was key to preventing Stalin moving West and it kept the peace through deterrent. The Marshall plan built Europe after the war as well. The military and intelligence support in the Falklands was vital also. 

 

Not to mention near 30 years of loans keeping us going from the 1950s to the 80s.

 

The reliability has been key. Our interests by our alliance have been mutual to a high degree. Till now at least. Trump is a wrecker and will not care a jot for us should he win re-election.

[Francis Albert]

9 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

 

The border issue and the market alignment are problems the backstop is designed to protect because May's negotiating position took no account of the Irish border. She basically ignored it. In seeking a resolution she and her then Brexit Secretary David Davis created this idea of maxfac borders or technology solving the issue. Neither would be ready for March 2019 and the EU27 were not happy with the idea the UK collect tariffs on their behalf and distribute funds back. So the backstop was created by the UK team to get us through to March 2019. Nothing more than that. 

 

This is now being picked on as the great betrayal but that ignores the fact that this deal is for 2 years until our future relationship is finalised, I.e. a free trade treaty. 

 

However, if No Deal is the price of her inability to lead her party without it's hard right spinning off then be it on their heads as it'll tear up the UK. 

Assuming the withdrawal/transition agreement is agreed the backstop if it forms part of that deal doesn't kick in for at least two years and if a trade agreement reflecting the political declaration or anything like it is agreed a hard border will be unnecessary. If a withdrawal/transition agreement is not agreed then of course the back stop doesn't apply. There is no reason why the backstop has to be agreed now. The issue belongs in the negotiations of the future trading relationship between the UK and EU, on which the need for and form of a border if any will be determined.

 

[Francis Albert]

8 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

Us? Really? France has bigger conventional forces than us. Under Cameron and May the French navy is now bigger in combat ship numbers than the Royal Navy; a first since Napoleon.

The UK and French and other EU military forces are an irrelevance in terms of world power, where the USA and NATO is our bulwark against external military threat.

 

How can our allies be a threat to us? What is our defence concerns from the EU? You can't in the one hand demand a stronger military from EU nations and then bemoan them increasing their strength.

I am not sure where I suggested our allies could be a threat to us.

 

This "EU Army" is a furthering of EU Defence Co-operation. The aim being to pool resource together to cut the costs of material and procurement by acting together. Rather than replicating capabilities they will have complementing capabilities. That's good and compliments NATO.

The recent Macron/Merkel talks suggested that was a first stage towards military cooperation. But see my first point above.

 

Ultimately why would they not want to start doing that given Trump's attitudes to his allies. NATO is viewed as a waste of money. KORUS (The US South Korea trade deal underpinning the defence of of ROK) has regularly been something he wants to end (read both the Wolf and Woodward books about Trump and you'll see panic in the Pentagon over this).America will not be a reliable ally for us as long as he is in the White House

Again see above. The EU can do what it likes, but even if it doubles its average defence spnding as a percentage of GDP to the UK level, it will remain defenceless against any Russian (or Chinese) military threat without the USA and NATO.

 

Trump is consistently threatening tariffs and reopening trade deals to do better for US companies. The EU, rightly, don't want to compromise on food standards and on big pharma. The UK government idea is that US trade will replace EU trade. But that's far fetched. We, like the US, are a services economy. A net importer of goods. The idea that we have a huge amount to offer the US is odd post Brexit. At present a US bank can HQ here and passport into the EU. That's about to go: that's our biggest sell to the Yanks. Hence moves to Dublin and the Continent. 

The UK/EU  political declaration commits the parties to a very  wide trade agreement ... assuming we believe the EU means it which I do.

 

With that in mind Redcar steel or Upper Clyde ships aren't things Trump or the US want or need to import; it runs counter to his trade strategy. The result is the US pushing us to accept unrestricted access to domestic markets for its food and agricultural sectors (which would decimate UK farmimg) and for its big beast industries of pharmaceuticals and health care providers wanting into our domestic health "market". To me that's a bad deal.

Redcar steel and Upper Clyde shipyards make no contribution to our current very large trade surplus in goods and services with the US.

See above in bold.

[Ulysses]

9 hours ago, JamboX2 said:

 

This is now being picked on as the great betrayal but that ignores the fact that this deal is for 2 years until our future relationship is finalised, I.e. a free trade treaty. 

 

 

Exactly.  And we know that given how hard it was to get a temporary agreement, and how untrustworthy the UK government has been in the negotiations, that it will be even more difficult to agree an ongoing post-Brexit trading relationship.  No matter what any bigot, backwoodsman or troll tells you, a soft border is essential on this island - there simply cannot be a hard border, and there cannot be no border at all.  Therefore an agreement to ensure that is essential.  Personally I couldn't have cared less what the agreement looked like, but the arrangement that was agreed was the backstop. And whatever that arrangement is, it has to be one that the UK government cannot walk away from unilaterally.  If there is an arrangement that allows the Tories and the DUP to weasel out of their obligations, then weasel out is what they will do.

[Lovecraft]

Be careful what you wish for.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-47102708

 

61.3% voted to leave.

 

 

[redjambo]

8 minutes ago, Lovecraft said:

Be careful what you wish for.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-47102708 

 

61.3% voted to leave.

 

 

And I'm sure they will be relaxed about it anyway.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/its-blackmail-really-nissan-employees-on-the-brexit-compensation-demand

 

[Lovecraft]

8 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

And I'm sure they will be relaxed about it anyway.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/its-blackmail-really-nissan-employees-on-the-brexit-compensation-demand

 

The owner said he thought the government should call Nissan’s bluff. “We have already been decimated with the pits and shipyards closing down. It’s about time the government actually invested. They should have the balls to say to Nissan, ‘Fine, you leave. We’ll buy it and we’ll run it.’ I’d like to see that plant wholly UK-owned. Why can’t they step in and say, ‘Let’s build the best car in the world?’ Why do we have to be held to ransom by these fellas?”

 

 

Yeah, because that's what the Tories do best.

[jake]

On 01/02/2019 at 23:09, Ulysses said:

 

I wouldn't like to describe bigotry or xenophobia as being from "the English" or "the Scots" or anything like that, because that kind of generalisation is itself prejudiced.  And anyway, I wouldn't want to disrespect the very many decent and honourable people I know from all corners of the UK.

 

It is up to individuals to decide whether to be bigoted or not.  Unfortunately some people lately have been failing the test of decency, and some of those in recent weeks and months have felt more free than usual to target the Irish.  Most of that has come from unsurprising quarters; it's been more than a little educational to watch the social media outputs of some UKIP, DUP and Conservative members and elected representatives, for example. 

 

As for the "close to home" bit, it's been less than comfortable for me to see the same sentiments creep into some comments here.  In fairness, although two or three people have sailed close to the wind I've only noticed one person actually breaking the rules, and the moderators have been quick to deal with the posts in that person's case.  But being xenophobic or bigoted isn't necessary and it doesn't add anything to the discussion anyway.

 

I have the Irish background I have, and I'm very proud of it, especially when I see where we have come to as a community in the last 10 years or so.  But equally I have a British heritage spanning two world wars and I won't apologise to anyone for that.  I remember 30 years ago when it was very hard to explain to an Irish person what was good about being British, and just as hard to explain to a British person what was good about being Irish.  We travelled a long way in those 30 years, and we do have a shared social, cultural, and economic space.  We managed to go from severe mistrust to being pretty good neighbours.  I think we are losing that, and it is a pity.  Maybe we won't miss each other until it's too late.

 

See, it's easier to take the piss than to be serious, isn't it? 

Really appreciate your post Uly.

 

[Ulysses]

2 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

And I'm sure they will be relaxed about it anyway.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/its-blackmail-really-nissan-employees-on-the-brexit-compensation-demand

 

 

1 hour ago, Lovecraft said:

The owner said he thought the government should call Nissan’s bluff. “We have already been decimated with the pits and shipyards closing down. It’s about time the government actually invested. They should have the balls to say to Nissan, ‘Fine, you leave. We’ll buy it and we’ll run it.’ I’d like to see that plant wholly UK-owned. Why can’t they step in and say, ‘Let’s build the best car in the world?’ Why do we have to be held to ransom by these fellas?”

 

 

Yeah, because that's what the Tories do best.

 

Ah here lads, fair's fair.  That's not in response to today's news - it's an article from September 2016.  I'm sure those associated with Nissan's operations are a bit more anxious now, and no matter how we feel about remaining or leaving we don't wish job losses or that kind of worry on any working people.

[Ulysses]

31 minutes ago, jake said:

Really appreciate your post Uly.

 

 

And I appreciate your questions.

 

Whatever happens, here's hoping we all muddle through.

[Ulysses]

A report in the Independent suggesting that officials are working on how to make a customs union work.

 

Brexit: Whitehall officials begin ‘serious work’ on UK staying in EU customs union as way to rescue deal

[ri Alban]

The Queen and her family prepared for evacuation.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

The Queen and her family prepared for evacuation.

 

Contingency plans to evacucate the royal family/government have been in place for decades, covering all kinds of emergencies, including civil unrest, this is a non-story.

[ri Alban]

43 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Contingency plans to evacucate the royal family/government have been in place for decades, covering all kinds of emergencies, including civil unrest, this is a non-story.

The Saxe Coburg and Gotha family can stay , just like the rest of us. On saying that, they might decide brexit isn't for them and go home to Germany.

[Justin Z]

48 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Contingency plans to evacucate the royal family/government have been in place for decades, covering all kinds of emergencies, including civil unrest, this is a non-story.

 

A nice attempt at deflection, but no. Whether those plans have been in place as a general matter of national security in the past is pretty irrelevant. But how often new, specific plans are drawn up to respond to a significant crisis? Quite topical.

 

“These emergency evacuation plans have been in existence since the Cold War”--like you said, been around for decades--“but have now been repurposed in the event of civil disorder following a no-deal Brexit,” a Cabinet Office source told The Sunday Times.

So they're repurposing plans that were in place in the case of something like a ****ing nuclear attack by the Soviet Union . . . for Brexit. That is not a "non-story".

[Mikey1874]

11 hours ago, Lovecraft said:

Be careful what you wish for.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-47102708

 

61.3% voted to leave.

 

 

 

Article suggests cancelling of new production may be more about reduced demand for diesel.

 

But plenty other affects taking place. 

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, ri Alban said:

The Queen and her family prepared for evacuation.

The Brexit bonus at last!

[Jambo-Jimbo]

29 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

A nice attempt at deflection, but no. Whether those plans have been in place as a general matter of national security in the past is pretty irrelevant. But how often new, specific plans are drawn up to respond to a significant crisis? Quite topical.

 

“These emergency evacuation plans have been in existence since the Cold War”--like you said, been around for decades--“but have now been repurposed in the event of civil disorder following a no-deal Brexit,” a Cabinet Office source told The Sunday Times.

So they're repurposing plans that were in place in the case of something like a ****ing nuclear attack by the Soviet Union . . . for Brexit. That is not a "non-story".

 

No attempt at deflection whatsoever, merely pointing out that there are already evacuation plans in place, and of course those plans will be updated as time goes by and when new threats arise, such as brexit, cyber attacks or widespread outbreak of disease like bird flu for example, all things which were not thought about during the 'cold war era'.

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 hour ago, Francis Albert said:

The Brexit bonus at last!

 

What if Holyrood House is the safe house?

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 hour ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

No attempt at deflection whatsoever, merely pointing out that there are already evacuation plans in place, and of course those plans will be updated as time goes by and when new threats arise, such as brexit, cyber attacks or widespread outbreak of disease like bird flu for example, all things which were not thought about during the 'cold war era'.

 

Brexit is not a threat it's an opportunity. 

[jake]

3 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

A nice attempt at deflection, but no. Whether those plans have been in place as a general matter of national security in the past is pretty irrelevant. But how often new, specific plans are drawn up to respond to a significant crisis? Quite topical.

 

“These emergency evacuation plans have been in existence since the Cold War”--like you said, been around for decades--“but have now been repurposed in the event of civil disorder following a no-deal Brexit,” a Cabinet Office source told The Sunday Times.

So they're repurposing plans that were in place in the case of something like a ****ing nuclear attack by the Soviet Union . . . for Brexit. That is not a "non-story".

It's a crock of shit that the guardian practices daily.

Wish you could see that Justin as a lot of that rags stories on brexit fail beyond the headline.

 

[Mikey1874]

1 hour ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Brexit is not a threat it's an opportunity. 

 

Opportunity for Sunderland to do something different to car making. 

 

For example. 

[Dawnrazor]

8 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Opportunity for Sunderland to do something different to car making. 

 

For example. 

How many job losses will occur in the Sunderland plant due to this? 

[Lovecraft]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47107561

 

Now updated to say they will be built in Japan.

 

Says 7000 jobs, but not how many will be lost.

 

 

 

[Lovecraft]

13 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Opportunity for Sunderland to do something different to car making. 

 

For example. 

 

Maybe they could get into the blue passport business?

 

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

1 hour ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Brexit is not a threat it's an opportunity. 

 

It's the end of the World according to some.

 

[Jambo-Jimbo]

28 minutes ago, Dawnrazor said:

How many job losses will occur in the Sunderland plant due to this? 

 

None according to Sky News, as all the current models built in Sunderland will continue to be built there.

The X-Trail was a future order and should have no impact upon the current workforce.

 

[Francis Albert]

1 hour ago, jake said:

It's a crock of shit that the guardian practices daily.

Wish you could see that Justin as a lot of that rags stories on brexit fail beyond the headline.

 

Don't spoil the fun! Seeing a shot of Buck House in one report of this "news"  story I was having a nice daydream of a replay of the American evacuation from their Saigon embassy at the end of the Vietnam war.

We could watch what in this case would be "hangers on" in both a  literal and figurative sense, clinging to the helicopters as they lifted off from the roof.

[The Mighty Thor]

2 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Brexit is not a threat it's an opportunity. 

It is indeed.

 

For a very small number it will be the money making wheeze of all time. 

 

For most it will be an excellent opportunity to be considerably poorer.

[Seymour M Hersh]

7 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

It is indeed.

 

For a very small number it will be the money making wheeze of all time. 

 

For most it will be an excellent opportunity to be considerably poorer.

 

Show us exactly why this will happen. And don't just quote project fear.