Brexit discussion

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Parliament should be carrying out the will of the electorate, given the result of the referendum. Parliament does not exist to actually thwart the will of the people!

No quite. Parliament is there to govern the country on half of the electorate. If they determine that the deal returned from Brussels is not in the best interests of the country then they have a duty to intervene.

This does come down to just dogma for some people: "I must Leave irrespective of the cost to me personally, my family, the people who did not want this and the country. The detail is secondary to the principle. I must Leave at all costs"

Sad times ..

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

It's not the only option, no deal at all is better than that, they'll like that option only slightly less than us plus on the upside we'll be able to become a fully fledged tax haven on the coast of Europe rather than simply masquerading as one like we do currently, they can also stick their much vaunted fair and level playing field where the sun doesn't shine to then as well

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

You're forgetting we signed the indefinite back stop agreement and wish it to apply to the whole of the UK.

No deal back on the table where it needed to be, was crazy to have removed your biggest threat

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Parliament should be carrying out the will of the electorate, given the result of the referendum. Parliament does not exist to actually thwart the will of the people!

Thwart, hearing that word makes me think we are back in the 1930's, which I imagine isn't far of the time a lot of brextremists would like to be in anyway

Originally Posted by ianch99

No quite. Parliament is there to govern the country on half of the electorate. If they determine that the deal returned from Brussels is not in the best interests of the country then they have a duty to intervene.

This does come down to just dogma for some people: "I must Leave irrespective of the cost to me personally, my family, the people who did not want this and the country. The detail is secondary to the principle. I must Leave at all costs"

Sad times ..

Wonder how keen people will be if it's effects actually start to noticeably hit them, I'd be quite keen to know what people will be prepared to sacrifice to leave, I think we've all accepted we'll be a tiny bit poorer but what if it's worse than that

Originally Posted by ianch99

No quite. Parliament is there to govern the country on half of the electorate. If they determine that the deal returned from Brussels is not in the best interests of the country then they have a duty to intervene.

Not entirely accurate. Parliament isn’t answerable to a written constitution, interpreted by a Supreme Court. If it has any duty to intervene then it could be construed as a moral duty only, not a legal one.

The issue here is that parliament is sovereign, the only limitation being that it cannot bind its successors by any decision it takes. We don’t have an act of Parliament describing the authority or otherwise of a referendum, and even if we did, such a need act could not prevent Parliament from overriding it.

Referendums are alien to our evolving, uncodified constitution so its not surprising that there is this tension around the authority vested in them. What we do have, however, in the absence of a written constitution, is a very powerful sense of precedent and convention. Parliament is not, and cannot be, bound by any law or referendum result, in any legal sense, but the political power behind the referendum result, granted it by an act of Parliament and by the actions of our politicians before, during and after the vote, is difficult to resist.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Wonder how keen people will be if it's effects actually start to noticeably hit them, I'd be quite keen to know what people will be prepared to sacrifice to leave, I think we've all accepted we'll be a tiny bit poorer but what if it's worse than that

I doubt there will be much sacrifice going on at all.

The affluent amongst us may notice a small increase in Rolex prices or the cost of that new Maserati. Exotic foreign holidays may be a tad more expensive but still easily affordable.

The poorer folk will just carry on getting further into debt buying the latest iPhone that they want but don't need, and possibly decide to keep that old Vauxhall Zafira for another year instead of trading up to an 08 plate Astra. Primark may see a rise in footfall

Seriously . . I don't envisage much change to peoples lifestyles at all, been there done that etc

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Chris

Not entirely accurate. Parliament isn’t answerable to a written constitution, interpreted by a Supreme Court. If it has any duty to intervene then it could be construed as a moral duty only, not a legal one.

The issue here is that parliament is sovereign, the only limitation being that it cannot bind its successors by any decision it takes. We don’t have an act of Parliament describing the authority or otherwise of a referendum, and even if we did, such a need act could not prevent Parliament from overriding it.

Referendums are alien to our evolving, uncodified constitution so its not surprising that there is this tension around the authority vested in them. What we do have, however, in the absence of a written constitution, is a very powerful sense of precedent and convention. Parliament is not, and cannot be, bound by any law or referendum result, in any legal sense, but the political power behind the referendum result, granted it by an act of Parliament and by the actions of our politicians before, during and after the vote, is difficult to resist.

You are right of course, a moral duty if not a legal one. Referenda have always been avoided wherever possible because they lead to situations like this.

If Lemmings voted to leap over a small gap that they were promised was just small and easy to cross, are you then duty bound to at least ask them, once you all realise that there is indeed a cliff there instead, to consider their decision again? Or do you just watch them jump according to their original decision? The bad news is that they have tied themselves to you!

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by ianch99

You are right of course, a moral duty if not a legal one. Referenda have always been avoided wherever possible because they lead to situations like this.

If Lemmings voted to leap over a small gap that they were promised was just small and easy to cross, are you then duty bound to at least ask them, once you all realise that there is indeed a cliff there instead, to consider their decision again? Or do you just watch them jump according to their original decision? The bad news is that they have tied themselves to you!

Get to the back you'll have something to land on

[1andrew1]

Nothing to see here, folks. It'll be just fine, trust me.

Tom Williams, Chief Operating Officer of Airbus Commercial Aircraft, commented:
“In any scenario, Brexit has severe negative consequences for the UK aerospace industry and Airbus in particular. Therefore, immediate mitigation measures would need to be accelerated. While Airbus understands that the political process must go on, as a responsible business we require immediate details on the pragmatic steps that should be taken to operate competitively. Without these, Airbus believes that the impacts on our UK operations could be significant. We have sought to highlight our concerns over the past 12 months, without success. Far from Project Fear, this is a dawning reality for Airbus. Put simply, a No Deal scenario directly threatens Airbus’ future in the UK.”

https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/pres...-scenario.html

[Chloé Palmas]

Originally Posted by Carth

I doubt there will be much sacrifice going on at all.

The affluent amongst us may notice a small increase in Rolex prices or the cost of that new Maserati. Exotic foreign holidays may be a tad more expensive but still easily affordable.

The poorer folk will just carry on getting further into debt buying the latest iPhone that they want but don't need, and possibly decide to keep that old Vauxhall Zafira for another year instead of trading up to an 08 plate Astra. Primark may see a rise in footfall

Seriously . . I don't envisage much change to peoples lifestyles at all, been there done that etc

Nah pretty much all of what you said is fairly accurate actually. Your sarcasm is mostly true.

Just if someone who is rich says it, it will come off as snobbery / elitism etc.

---------- Post added 22-06-2018 at 00:11 ---------- Previous post was 21-06-2018 at 23:51 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Parliament should be carrying out the will of the electorate, given the result of the referendum. Parliament does not exist to actually thwart the will of the people!

Technically Parliament is the will of the people.

Each individual constituency voted for a member of parliament - they all sit in the house now.

Some things were done as a result of it - that stuff led to May continuing on as PM.

So when the will of the people is raw in form, every member of the House is in office, having been elected.

When people tamper about with the system, you end up with what Cameron had - a coalition government with a parent (Tory) and child (Liberal Democrat) partnership. Or like in this instance, May who is propped up by the DUP.

The raw will of the people gave May no mandate, no majority and with a plurality of the MPs in the house, she decided to command a government and ended up ummm....thwarting the will of the people who chose not to give her a majority?

Now obviously there is so much cringe in that post, I would need to take a bath to cleanse myself from all the filth of it but to anyone who continues "this will of the people" stuff, there is an equally nauseating response.

I wish people would grow a spine on every level and stop harping on about it as if it is some sacred / holy cow. Like the Democrats keep saying that Hillary got 3 million more votes...clearly the EC and parliamentary mechanisms for winning elections and forming governments exist for a reason but seriously cut the crap about Parliament carrying out the will of the electorate. Only if they were to do that, they would have thrown May out of the window by now. Yet it is your lot who keep her hanging around - who else would want this mes on their hands?

---------- Post added at 00:24 ---------- Previous post was at 00:11 ----------

Originally Posted by Carth

I guess the reason we're not progressing much is because the EU don't want us to.

I don't know whether they do or not but it is hardly incumbent upon them to do it for Britain, is it?

Maybe if they conceded a little here and there things would progress faster?

Arrrrgghhhh - why should they? They have their 4 basic principles - why do they have to compromise, on anything? Davis came up with that same boat load of crap to Barnier, and what did Barnier tell him to go do?

How about this. Every time May says that she has a red line, how about everyone tells her to just "concede a little here and there?"

I mean she already does....ohhhh I get it!

Because we have a spineless leader who surrenders at every go, you want them to have one to level up the playing field!

Of course, that makes sense now.

Carry on.

But that's not really in their agenda is it, they want the cake, plate and all the crumbs from underneath the table too

Ummm...it's their cake. We are the ones who want a permanent Icing (trade) flour (financial) and egg (security) co-operation from them.

All the while saying that we don't have to contribute anything to it, don't help make it and all boast about having our cake, eating it and of course ignore the fact that such analogies are really masquerading for the fact that the size of our cakes are significantly less than their's with a way lower caloric count.

---------- Post added at 00:33 ---------- Previous post was at 00:24 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

5

Well, I guess it depends on which forecasts you are comparing. There have been many occasions I have noted where the regional forecast has said the exact opposite of the national forecast for my area. They are both issued by the Met Office!
So provide two different forecasts and compare the reality with whichever one was correct! ��

---------- Post added at 13:30 ---------- Previous post was at 13:24 ----------



You didn't say it, Andrew, but you seem to love quoting them and the economists supporting your arguments as if their forecasts prove your point.

My point is that the forecasts they make a rarely correct. This is largely down to the assumptions made, so if their assumptions are wrong, the projections will be wrong.

And let's not forget that economists and civil servants always tend to take an over-cautious stance.

Oh dear Lord.

I never thought that Spicy's fight with the media after Trump's inauguration would actually have some purpose to show a point for another political argument ever again, but here we are.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...fering-weather

"There are times, like anything else, it's not alternative facts, it's that there's sometimes you can watch two different stations and get two different weather reports. That doesn’t mean the station was lying to you," Spicer said.

Yeah, seriously.

"The press was trying to make that seem like we were ignoring the facts. ... You can look at a weather report and one weather report comes out and says it's going to be cloudy, and the next one says there's going to be light rain," Spicer said. "No one lied to you, it just means you interpreted the data in a way that you felt got you to a conclusion."

I love Spicy, but seriously - that was a stretch and then some.

However you have somehow managed to take that analogy, to a whole new level.

I m speechless.

---------- Post added at 00:40 ---------- Previous post was at 00:33 ----------

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Some philosophically claim the chicken crossing the road is about suicide, possibly a good analogy for this thread topic to

https://www.esquire.com/uk/life/news...the-road-joke/

Yeah I thought that the weather analogies were something...Hugh has a lot to answer for, lol.

---------- Post added at 00:46 ---------- Previous post was at 00:40 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

I have decided to cross the road.

Looking around, I see a lorry coming towards me, but having decided to cross the road, I will not let any obstacles, no matter how dangerous, stop me crossing the road - any pain I suffer will be worth it in the long term, as long as I have achieved my goal.

It doesn't matter that no one mentioned lorries were going to intersect my path when I made my decision, the important thing is I do not let relevant current information which was not available at the time I decided to cross the rooad which might validly affect what I am trying to do change my mind.

Excellent approach to life.

Oh I dunno lol...chickens crossed roads at Dover / Calais for decades and ended up dead / roadkill / meat for those in the jungle.

Now with queues and lorries backed up to a standstill after March of next year around the ports, chickens crossing roads in front of lorries has never looked like having more of a chance of success!

Boris even predicted as much in his latest audio recording.

Means that Gove definitely won't have to make the decision on whether to import in Chlorinated chickens or not. So in that sense, leaving the EU has definitely worked out for Gove - chickens everywhere and Kamikaze analogies in threads continue.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by jonbxx

It's alright, our transport secretary will have things covered

Saw the salary range BTW; £62,519 - £70,859. Really going to attract the cream of the crop there...

More like the bottom of the barrel you mean.

Airbus could be leaving. North Wales probably going to be the worst hit but Bristol and Portsmouth have stuff too I think.

[denphone]

This is what you get when the government has created its own shambolic mess over the Brexit negotiations...

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by denphone

This is what you get when the government has created its own shambolic mess over the Brexit negotiations...

tbf the Govt. advised against Brexit. The people that caused this mess are the ones that believed the lies and voted for it. No one else to blame.

Originally Posted by Damien

Airbus could be leaving. North Wales probably going to be the worst hit but Bristol and Portsmouth have stuff too I think.

Airbus has said it will reconsider its investments in the U.K if there’s no transition deal post Brexit. Not quite the same thing.

I don’t know if you’re aware of exactly what goes on at Broughton, but it was part of my news reporting patch back in the day so I’m acquainted with it a little. The operation is enormous, and highly technical, employing large numbers of highly skilled men and women who manufacture wings for a number of Airbus planes.

Such is the expertise at the site that when the A380 was developed, they chose to build the wings there even at the inconvenience of having to work out how to transport them by road to the nearest port so they could then go by coastal barge to France for assembly.

They simply aren’t going to move the manufacture of any current product out of North Wales. It would cause massive disruption and cost to their business.

Fair enough but if they start reducing their investments it becomes a matter of slowly winding it down doesn't it? No big sharp shock but the slow starvation of investment. New equipment is built elsewhere until the point where there is nothing left to do here: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/n...ears-f6jnc7x2j

The European aerospace company Airbus is set to become the first big manufacturer to pull investment from Britain after losing patience with Theresa May’s stalled Brexit negotiations.

Airbus, which generates £1.7 billion in tax revenues, is preparing to abandon plans to build aircraft wings at its British plants and move production to China, the US or elsewhere in Europe. It is making a series of investment decisions this summer because of worries that EU safety certifications will not apply from March next year and uncertainty over customs checks.

“In the absence of any clarity, we have to assume the worst-case scenario,” Tom Williams, the chief operating officer of Airbus, told The Times. “It is the dawning realisation that we now have to get on with it.”

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Wonder how keen people will be if its effects actually start to noticeably hit them, I'd be quite keen to know what people will be prepared to sacrifice to leave, I think we've all accepted we'll be a tiny bit poorer but what if it's worse than that

I think because things move so slowly and other factors are involved, you'd need something like Airbus relocating for people to realise the impact of Brexit.
From the company's own website

Tom Williams, Chief Operating Officer of Airbus Commercial Aircraft, commented:

“In any scenario, Brexit has severe negative consequences for the UK aerospace industry and Airbus in particular. Therefore, immediate mitigation measures would need to be accelerated. While Airbus understands that the political process must go on, as a responsible business we require immediate details on the pragmatic steps that should be taken to operate competitively. Without these, Airbus believes that the impacts on our UK operations could be significant. We have sought to highlight our concerns over the past 12 months, without success. Far from Project Fear, this is a dawning reality for Airbus. Put simply, a No Deal scenario directly threatens Airbus’ future in the UK.”
To read the Risk Assessment Memorandum in full, please click here: http://www.airbus.com/company/worldw...k.html#Economy

https://www.airbus.com/newsroom/pres...-scenario.html

As reported in today's Times:
"Airbus prepares to take flight
The European aerospace company Airbus is set to become the first big manufacturer to pull investment from Britain after losing patience with Theresa May's stalled Brexit negotiations. Airbus, which generates £1.7 billion in tax revenues, is preparing to abandon plans to build aircraft wings at its British plants and move production to China, the US or elsewhere in Europe. It is making a series of investment decisions this summer because of worries that EU safety certifications will not apply from March next year and uncertainty over customs checks."

---------- Post added at 09:48 ---------- Previous post was at 09:37 ----------

Originally Posted by Chris

Airbus has said it will reconsider its investments in the U.K if there’s no transition deal post Brexit. Not quite the same thing.

I don’t know if you’re aware of exactly what goes on at Broughton, but it was part of my news reporting patch back in the day so I’m acquainted with it a little. The operation is enormous, and highly technical, employing large numbers of highly skilled men and women who manufacture wings for a number of Airbus planes.

Such is the expertise at the site that when the A380 was developed, they chose to build the wings there even at the inconvenience of having to work out how to transport them by road to the nearest port so they could then go by coastal barge to France for assembly.

They simply aren’t going to move the manufacture of any current product out of North Wales. It would cause massive disruption and cost to their business.

It's worth reading Airbus's risk assessment, including this:

In the absence of a Brexit agreement, UK aerospace companies will not be covered anymore under existing regulatory approvals including EASA approvals. All UK companies will need to transfer their DOA, POA and MOA into the EU. This means that should a single supplier not be certified, its parts cannot be installed and consequently prevent the delivery of aircraft. It is therefore vital that the EU supply chain gets duly prepared.
This is why Brexit imposes additional major risks to the aerospace sector compared to other industries and Airbus is getting increasingly concerned by the lack of progress on the Brexit process...
Until we know and understand the new EU/UK relationship, Airbus should carefully monitor any new investments in the UK and should refrain from extending its UK suppliers/partners base.

http://www.airbus.com/company/worldw...k.html#Economy
Of course, some people believe that the talks are making good progress and everyone else is deluded.