I presume they're also not about to start building Diesel cars in Europe.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Brexit
- Thread starter KingstonSeagull
- Start date
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,767
If you could, no matter how small, that would be wonderful given the growing Tsunami of Brexit bad news which is now a daily occurrence, (apparently to the surprise of one or two). And you'll also please a lot of marketing departments by spreading their tweets with their scarcity of any real content.
You could be NSC's little twinkle in the darkness
(I'm so glad you've come to your senses and decided once again that you are going to post on this thread before we exit the EU, despite your earlier statement).
Last edited:
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,767
I didn't realise the new Nissan model was diesel only ?
Silly me, I thought they had announced they wouldn't be building the new petrol version here either.
If you could, no matter how small, that would be wonderful given the growing Tsunami of Brexit bad news which is now a daily occurrence, (apparently to the surprise of one or two).
You could be NSC's little twinkle in the darkness
(I'm so glad you've come to your senses and decided once again that you are going to post on this thread before we exit the EU, despite your earlier statement).
Out of interest, were you such a condescending twit to your staff, customers and suppliers when you ran your IT empire or is it a skill you've developed since becoming a grumpy retired **** ?
Is that sarcasm?
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,272
Thanks, looks like May can find a Magic Money Tree when necessary.
Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk
- Jul 10, 2003
- 27,767
https://twitter.com/ridgeonsunday/status/1091993307599831040?s=21
Another set of voters that voted leave I believe?
Another set of voters that voted leave I believe?
pb21
Well-known member
- Apr 23, 2010
- 6,687
I would be surprised if this was the only letter that has been sent out to foreign companies pledging a 'Government package of support'. Maybe the socialists will end up getting their way and we will see a whole raft of nationalised industries post Brexit.
Edit: or actually not as the case may more likely be.
Baldseagull
Well-known member
Well, yes, the EU is not going to stop making rules, but only in the areas that we have already agreed that the EU should.
vegster
Sanity Clause
- May 5, 2008
- 28,272
If you could, no matter how small, that would be wonderful given the growing Tsunami of Brexit bad news which is now a daily occurrence, (apparently to the surprise of one or two). And you'll also please a lot of marketing departments by spreading their tweets with their scarcity of any real content.
You could be NSC's little twinkle in the darkness
(I'm so glad you've come to your senses and decided once again that you are going to post on this thread before we exit the EU, despite your earlier statement).
Don't worry WZ, I have top secret amazing news about an expanding company ! Apparently, the approaching Brexit has focused many hundreds of minds on Britain's glorious past status and historical derring do !
So much so that there will shortly be a spanking brand new factory manufacturing Rolls Royce Merlin engines ! …..yes, the makers of Airfix say they are selling nearly 400 More WW2 aircraft model kits a week since the referendum, so they have bought an extra injection moulder ! bright times ahead !
Baldseagull
Well-known member
I know that our situation would not change significantly unless there was a referendum agreeing to it. I can't say what the results of referendums on questions that have not yet been asked would be, obviously, but I know it would take more than 35% of a 65% turnout to get a change ratified, yet we could have a hard left or hard right Government with a majority on those numbers, that could take the majority of us in a direction we didn't want.
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
Twelve reasons why the Irish backstop makes no sense at all
The Sunday Telegraph 3 Feb 2019, HENRY NEWMAN
1. It is intended to prevent a hard Irish border if there’s no deal. But the backstop is now the obstacle blocking a deal, and so risks a hardening of that border.
2. Ireland’s Europe minister, Helen McEntee, recently suggested that the UK would have to apply parts of the backstop even if there’s no deal. If that’s true, why do we need a backstop in the deal?
3. The EU’s Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, said if there’s no deal, the EU will “find … an operational way” of avoiding a hard border by carrying out checks away from the frontier. If so, what’s the point of the backstop?
4. The deal commits Brussels to using “best endeavours” to find “alternate solutions” to the backstop. But Barnier’s deputy has said “no such alternatives exist”. In that case, can the UK be sure the EU made those promises in good faith, and that the backstop won’t trap us permanently?
5. In the Brexit deal, the “intention” is only to have a temporary backstop because the EU argues that, under its laws, the divorce deal cannot create permanent structures. If it’s supposed to be temporary, why not have a backstop time limit?
6. Ireland insists the deal can’t be changed because it was signed off by EU leaders in December. But in 2009 Ireland itself had a protocol added to the Lisbon Treaty because it couldn’t complete domestic ratification, even though EU leaders had approved the Treaty in 2007.
7. When Parliament rejected the deal in December, Brussels declared it didn’t know what the UK’s objection was – nor how a parliamentary majority could be found. On Tuesday, MPs spelt that out, backing the deal if the backstop’s issues were addressed. But Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, then claimed that they “still don’t know what the UK does want”.
8. Barnier’s team say they are “open” to alternatives to the backstop including technology, yet they can’t consider those until after the deal is agreed. But it was Brussels that insisted on phasing Brexit negotiations, forcing the UK to agree a backstop without clarity on future relations.
9. Ireland insists the backstop is needed to protect the Good Friday Agreement, but some constitutional experts* argue that the backstop itself undermines that agreement.
10. The EU are furious that the UK wants to change a deal that has been signed off. But what did they expect after the biggest defeat in parliamentary history? Unless and until MPs back a deal, there can be no agreement.
11. We keep hearing that the deal “is not open for renegotiation”. But last Saturday, Brussels suggested they could soften the backstop if the UK moved towards a customs union. Is the deal locked down or not?
12. The EU now suggests we could avoid the backstop by staying in the customs union and single market. How does this not make a mockery of the right to leave under Article 50?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/02/twelve-reasons-irish-backstop-makes-no-sense/
* https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/the-backstop-paralysis-a-way-out/
Insisting a deal that has been defeated in the HoC by 230 votes is the only option for a way forward seems rather absurd. Time for the EU/Irish government to get back round the table .... tick tock.
The Sunday Telegraph 3 Feb 2019, HENRY NEWMAN
1. It is intended to prevent a hard Irish border if there’s no deal. But the backstop is now the obstacle blocking a deal, and so risks a hardening of that border.
2. Ireland’s Europe minister, Helen McEntee, recently suggested that the UK would have to apply parts of the backstop even if there’s no deal. If that’s true, why do we need a backstop in the deal?
3. The EU’s Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, said if there’s no deal, the EU will “find … an operational way” of avoiding a hard border by carrying out checks away from the frontier. If so, what’s the point of the backstop?
4. The deal commits Brussels to using “best endeavours” to find “alternate solutions” to the backstop. But Barnier’s deputy has said “no such alternatives exist”. In that case, can the UK be sure the EU made those promises in good faith, and that the backstop won’t trap us permanently?
5. In the Brexit deal, the “intention” is only to have a temporary backstop because the EU argues that, under its laws, the divorce deal cannot create permanent structures. If it’s supposed to be temporary, why not have a backstop time limit?
6. Ireland insists the deal can’t be changed because it was signed off by EU leaders in December. But in 2009 Ireland itself had a protocol added to the Lisbon Treaty because it couldn’t complete domestic ratification, even though EU leaders had approved the Treaty in 2007.
7. When Parliament rejected the deal in December, Brussels declared it didn’t know what the UK’s objection was – nor how a parliamentary majority could be found. On Tuesday, MPs spelt that out, backing the deal if the backstop’s issues were addressed. But Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, then claimed that they “still don’t know what the UK does want”.
8. Barnier’s team say they are “open” to alternatives to the backstop including technology, yet they can’t consider those until after the deal is agreed. But it was Brussels that insisted on phasing Brexit negotiations, forcing the UK to agree a backstop without clarity on future relations.
9. Ireland insists the backstop is needed to protect the Good Friday Agreement, but some constitutional experts* argue that the backstop itself undermines that agreement.
10. The EU are furious that the UK wants to change a deal that has been signed off. But what did they expect after the biggest defeat in parliamentary history? Unless and until MPs back a deal, there can be no agreement.
11. We keep hearing that the deal “is not open for renegotiation”. But last Saturday, Brussels suggested they could soften the backstop if the UK moved towards a customs union. Is the deal locked down or not?
12. The EU now suggests we could avoid the backstop by staying in the customs union and single market. How does this not make a mockery of the right to leave under Article 50?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/02/02/twelve-reasons-irish-backstop-makes-no-sense/
* https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/the-backstop-paralysis-a-way-out/
Insisting a deal that has been defeated in the HoC by 230 votes is the only option for a way forward seems rather absurd. Time for the EU/Irish government to get back round the table .... tick tock.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
Seems like 12 questions rather than 12 reasons.
In answer to 12. I assume it doesn't make a mockery of the right to leave under Article 50 because countries that are not in the EU already have similar arrangements. It might not be what Brexiteers want, but it isn't making a mockery of leaving either.
ManOfSussex
We wunt be druv
Corrected for you.
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
The French and Dutch electorates probably thought that when they voted against the EU constitution ....
JC Footy Genius
Bringer of TRUTH
- Jun 9, 2015
- 10,568
Good luck getting a majority for that in the HoC ...