UK voters should make final Brexit decision if talks with EU collapse: poll

[CG1 Blue]

8 hours ago, kwilco said:

You will note that the BMW mini plant has gone to a 3 day week until Xmas...... this is to anticipate chaos in their supply chain of parts and materials post Brexit.

That's not true.  The Mini plant shuts down for 1 month for maintenance, usually in the summer. In 2019 they'll move that forward to April 1st just in case there is any disruption as we leave the EU.

 

Owner BMW said its summer maintenance shutdown had been brought forward to 1 April to reduce any "possible short-term parts-supply disruption.

"While we believe this worst case scenario is an unlikely outcome, we have to plan for it," BMW said.

The German firm said it "remained committed" to its UK operations. (Source BBC News)

 

The scaremongering continues...

[CG1 Blue]

1 minute ago, CG1 Blue said:

8 hours ago, kwilco said:

You will note that the BMW mini plant has gone to a 3 day week until Xmas...... this is to anticipate chaos in their supply chain of parts and materials post Brexit.

That's not true.  The Mini plant shuts down for 1 month for maintenance, usually in the summer. In 2019 they'll move that forward to April 1st just in case there is any disruption as we leave the EU.

 

Owner BMW said its summer maintenance shutdown had been brought forward to 1 April to reduce any "possible short-term parts-supply disruption.

"While we believe this worst case scenario is an unlikely outcome, we have to plan for it," BMW said.

The German firm said it "remained committed" to its UK operations. (Source BBC News)

 

The scaremongering continues...

On the subject of cars, Land Rover are going down the toilet because they are renowned for their diesel vehicles, and nobody wants diesel vehicles anymore. Outrageously their CEO tries to blame their woes on Brexit. That is just insulting the British public's intelligence!

[tomacht8]

3 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

But when you make your OWN food you are in control, not the UK government or the EU. Therefore you can take heed of the information available but do what you want your way.

 

If you wish to make commercially for sale, then yes you DO have to take notice of the rules. So if a company in the UK wishes to sell to an EU company then it needs to abide by the EU rules. If it does not but still wishes to sell on the UK or world market then It has to comply with other rules, which may be stricter or not.

 

The UK used to have its own rules but they were overridden by the EU rules.

 

Hence the similarity with Brexit.

Understand.

But now, as an EU member, u can kill ur chicken (if you are an autonomous farmer (self-sufficient)) and eat it.

No EU rule prevents you from doing that.

 

if you want to sell your poultry in the domestic UK weekly market you will be subject to random checks by the regional health authorities. 

It is true that health limits and storage regulations exist, partly according to eu law.

Question: Are the limits of the number of Salmonella or the storage regulations of the EU so bad? or too strict?

 

If you want to sell your poultry in big UK supermarket chains, then there are individual, much stiffer regulations that do not come from eu law but are created by the supermarkets themselves.

 

If you want to export your poultry, this is subject to the EU quality and testing requirements. 

 

So after Brexit only the export case changes. What would change then, after brexit, within the uk in this poultry example?
I can not see the added benefit here.

 

 

[JAG]

56 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

On the subject of cars, Land Rover are going down the toilet because they are renowned for their diesel vehicles, and nobody wants diesel vehicles anymore. Outrageously their CEO tries to blame their woes on Brexit. That is just insulting the British public's intelligence!

A very significant part of Land Rover's drop in production has been a reduction in the size of the army in recent years, and a subsequent reduction in its "B vehicle" fleet. 

 

Put bluntly, they are a major customer who are not buying anything like as many green Land Rovers as before.

[CG1 Blue]

44 minutes ago, JAG said:

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

On the subject of cars, Land Rover are going down the toilet because they are renowned for their diesel vehicles, and nobody wants diesel vehicles anymore. Outrageously their CEO tries to blame their woes on Brexit. That is just insulting the British public's intelligence!

A very significant part of Land Rover's drop in production has been a reduction in the size of the army in recent years, and a subsequent reduction in its "B vehicle" fleet. 

 

Put bluntly, they are a major customer who are not buying anything like as many green Land Rovers as before.

Good point.

And yet their CEO wants to pretend it's about Brexit.  Shameless!

[billd766]

2 hours ago, tomacht8 said:

Understand.

But now, as an EU member, u can kill ur chicken (if you are an autonomous farmer (self-sufficient)) and eat it.

No EU rule prevents you from doing that.

 

if you want to sell your poultry in the domestic UK weekly market you will be subject to random checks by the regional health authorities. 

It is true that health limits and storage regulations exist, partly according to eu law.

Question: Are the limits of the number of Salmonella or the storage regulations of the EU so bad? or too strict?

 

If you want to sell your poultry in big UK supermarket chains, then there are individual, much stiffer regulations that do not come from eu law but are created by the supermarkets themselves.

 

If you want to export your poultry, this is subject to the EU quality and testing requirements. 

 

So after Brexit only the export case changes. What would change then, after brexit, within the uk in this poultry example?
I can not see the added benefit here.

 

 

 

The UK could revert to the old H&S rules after updating them for chickens not destined for the EU or they can keep the current EU standards (which would be easier) and carry on as before. This of course makes more sense but common sense has been in short supply both in the EU and the UK over the last couple of years.

 

As I am not a member of the Brexit negotiation team I am unable (as they most probably are)  to give you a firm answer.

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, rixalex said:

And how many times does it have to be explained to you that in this case, the MPs, acting in the best interest of the country, their constituents and their party, in their role as representatives of the people, collectively voted in favour of allowing the general public decide. They turned the decision over to us. Nobody put a gun to their heads. THEY made that decision. And they promised they would stick to it.

 

Technically, can they go back on that promise? Of course they can. Just as the President of the USA can most likely pardon himself if he wants to.

 

There are lots of thing people in positions of power CAN do, be they politicians or otherwise. Doesn't mean they SHOULD.

 

Sad to see how quickly some people seem prepared to ditch basic democratic values, using legal technicalities as their defense, just to get their way. If they succeed, there will be a price to pay.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Referendum_Act_2015#Origin

 

Look under The Referendum

 

"This act required a referendum to be held on the question of the UK’s continued membership of the European Union before the end of 2017. The bill did not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, nor set a time limit by which a vote to leave the EU should be implemented. Instead, this is a type of referendum known as pre-legislative or consultative, which enables the electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in its policy decisions."

 

Just be told!

Edited September 19, 2018 by Grouse

[CG1 Blue]

10 minutes ago, Grouse said:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Referendum_Act_2015#Origin

 

Look under The Referendum

 

"This act required a referendum to be held on the question of the UK’s continued membership of the European Union before the end of 2017. The bill did not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, nor set a time limit by which a vote to leave the EU should be implemented. Instead, this is a type of referendum known as pre-legislative or consultative, which enables the electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in its policy decisions."

 

Just be told!

Are you suggesting that in the lead up to the referendum you didn't think the result would be binding - that it was more like a survey?

[Grouse]

3 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

On the subject of cars, Land Rover are going down the toilet because they are renowned for their diesel vehicles, and nobody wants diesel vehicles anymore. Outrageously their CEO tries to blame their woes on Brexit. That is just insulting the British public's intelligence!

Real Land Rovers have V8s

 

(I have 2)

 

Great at traffic lights! Floor a 4L V8 and two tons of Birmingham steel leaves the motorcycles in a cloud of smoke and a roar like a Vulcan (slight exaggeration)

 

Fuel consumption? Don't even think about it.

 

Nothing wrong with modern diesels. The whole thing is an American plot just because they are years behind Europe and Japan.

 

The emissions standards were not fit for purpose. Who ever thought measuring emissions at idle at a test station was a good idea. Any engineer will tell you it's best to measure emissions, fully loaded, maximum acceleration and up hill. (At least that probably happens in open country. Anyone want guess how good VW golf diesel emissions are when idling at the traffic lights? That's right, excellent.)

 

Beware of the greens; the twits are anti nuclear ?

[Grouse]

24 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Are you suggesting that in the lead up to the referendum you didn't think the result would be binding - that it was more like a survey?

Correct! I didn't receive the leaflet (which was erroneous) because I live in Thailand, though I flew back just to vote.

 

https://fullfact.org/europe/was-eu-referendum-advisory/

 

The above explains everything

Edited September 19, 2018 by Grouse

[aright]

6 hours ago, tebee said:

Right, but if you were producing that needed to be certified - say a piece of medical equipment, you would need to get that certification done by someone in the EU post brexit, as UK certification authorities would no longer be recognized.   

Firstly your post referred to SME's which aren't famous for producing complex medical equipment but be that as it may you continue to feed project fear.

Existing products already have a CE mark . New qualifying products would need to  get one but that rule would apply should we be part or apart from the European Union. I am sure British Manufacturers developing category goods would already have had this process in train for the last 2 years

 

CE marking

The CE mark is required for all new products which are subject to one or more of the European product safety Directives.  It is a visible sign that the manufacturer of the product is declaring conformity with all of the Directives relating to that product.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With the exception of some high-risk products, most products can be “self- assessed” by the manufacturer. The meaning of the CE Mark is widely misunderstood, it is not a quality mark” or “certificate of approval”, it is a declaration of the supplier's own responsibility and it allows only for the free movement of the item with the EEA it also enables the withdrawal of non-conforming products to be accomplished more easily.

 

[Grouse]

10 minutes ago, aright said:

Firstly your post referred to SME's which aren't famous for producing complex medical equipment but be that as it may you continue to feed project fear.

Existing products already have a CE mark . New qualifying products would need to  get one but that rule would apply should we be part or apart from the European Union. I am sure British Manufacturers developing category goods would already have had this process in train for the last 2 years

 

CE marking

The CE mark is required for all new products which are subject to one or more of the European product safety Directives.  It is a visible sign that the manufacturer of the product is declaring conformity with all of the Directives relating to that product.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With the exception of some high-risk products, most products can be “self- assessed” by the manufacturer. The meaning of the CE Mark is widely misunderstood, it is not a quality mark” or “certificate of approval”, it is a declaration of the supplier's own responsibility and it allows only for the free movement of the item with the EEA it also enables the withdrawal of non-conforming products to be accomplished more easily.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mittelstand

 

 

[rixalex]

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_Referendum_Act_2015#Origin
 
Look under The Referendum
 
"This act required a referendum to be held on the question of the UK’s continued membership of the European Union before the end of 2017. The bill did not contain any requirement for the UK Government to implement the results of the referendum, nor set a time limit by which a vote to leave the EU should be implemented. Instead, this is a type of referendum known as pre-legislative or consultative, which enables the electorate to voice an opinion which then influences the Government in its policy decisions."
 
Just be told!

Yes I'm aware of all that, as, if you'd read my response, I made clear. Short of printing up flashcards for you, not sure what I can do.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Grouse]

4 hours ago, tomacht8 said:

Understand.

But now, as an EU member, u can kill ur chicken (if you are an autonomous farmer (self-sufficient)) and eat it.

No EU rule prevents you from doing that.

 

if you want to sell your poultry in the domestic UK weekly market you will be subject to random checks by the regional health authorities. 

It is true that health limits and storage regulations exist, partly according to eu law.

Question: Are the limits of the number of Salmonella or the storage regulations of the EU so bad? or too strict?

 

If you want to sell your poultry in big UK supermarket chains, then there are individual, much stiffer regulations that do not come from eu law but are created by the supermarkets themselves.

 

If you want to export your poultry, this is subject to the EU quality and testing requirements. 

 

So after Brexit only the export case changes. What would change then, after brexit, within the uk in this poultry example?
I can not see the added benefit here.

 

 

What about imports or are we self sufficient? I also thought minimum animal husbandry standards are underpinned by EU regs

[rixalex]

Correct! I didn't receive the leaflet (which was erroneous) because I live in Thailand, though I flew back just to vote.
 
https://fullfact.org/europe/was-eu-referendum-advisory/
 
The above explains everything

So you flew back to take part in a survey. Yes of course you did.

What are the odds that had remain won you would be peddling this disingenuous nonsense?

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Grouse]

8 minutes ago, rixalex said:

Yes I'm aware of all that, as, if you'd read my response, I made clear. Short of printing up flashcards for you, not sure what I can do.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

"And how many times does it have to be explained to you that in this case, the MPs, acting in the best interest of the country, their constituents and their party, in their role as representatives of the people, collectively voted in favour of allowing the general public decide. They turned the decision over to us. Nobody put a gun to their heads. THEY made that decision. And they promised they would stick to it."

 

Is the piece to which you refer?

 

Speak up please, my hearing aid needs more nuclear fuel.

 

Where is the act of Parliament that you refer to?

 

The high court also agrees with me.

 

The referendum was in no way binding, it was advisory 

 

The advice received two years ago, was that a small majority favoured leave. Parliament heard you and acted. It now looks like a seriously bad move and I suspect that people who agree with me out number those who hope to bring back coal mining.

[tebee]

https://www.ft.com/content/272457a4-bbef-11e8-8274-55b72926558f

 

 

    The UK is heading towards a form of Brexit that almost nobody really wants, even if they are in favour of it in principle, there is little evidence that the final deal will be advantageous to the UK, and a great deal of evidence to the contrary. All the same, Britain is now locked into leaving the EU, and on terms prescribed by the union.

 

.....

 

    And our future historian will one day offer explanations for how Brexit happened, even though few people at the time wanted it to happen, at least in the form it did, future generations, on the other hand, will perhaps wonder if we were out of our minds.
 

[Grouse]

21 minutes ago, rixalex said:

So you flew back to take part in a survey. Yes of course you did.

What are the odds that had remain won you would be peddling this disingenuous nonsense?

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

No, really I did!

 

Flew on Eva Air to Amsterdam and then flew in to Manchester to vote on the day.

 

OK, I stayed for a while but I mainly I went to vote.

 

There would not have been ANY nonsense if remain had won. Sadly we have to rely upon the small print now. I honestly had no idea that there were so many disgruntled Brits. We should never have allowed things to get so far. Just look at our Gini coefficient 

 

This picture is date stamped 21 June 16. Do you want my boarding card also? The port was Taylor's LBV since you ask 

Edited September 19, 2018 by Grouse

[Esso49]

And if it was not for TATA,  the Indian owned company , Jaquar Land Rover would have gone down the toile t years ago with their outdated designs and it was TATA that pumped in millions to their R & D to bring out models that the public actually wanted to buy.  And don't worry about losing out because of diesels ( you do realise I hope petrol engines figure prominently in their range ? ), they have already started producing an electric vehicle the ipace

[rixalex]

No, really I did!
 
Flew on Eva Air to Amsterdam and then flew in to Manchester to vote on the day.
 
 
Date stamped 21June 2016
 
OK, I stayed for a while but I mainly I went to vote.
 
There would not have been ANY nonsense if remain had won. Sadly we have to rely upon the small print now. I honestly had no idea that there were so many disgruntled Brits. We should never have allowed things to get so far. Just look at our Gini coefficient 

I wasn't disputing that you flew back to vote. I was disputing that you flew back to take part in what you considered at the time to merely be a survey. Why can't you just be honest?

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Grouse]

1 minute ago, rixalex said:

I wasn't disputing that you flew back to vote. I was disputing that you flew back to take part in what you considered at the time to merely be a survey. Why can't you just be honest?

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

OK, that's fair, I didn't consider that it might not be binding

 

Mind you, I've learnt MANY things since then about international trade and thousands of other things. At the time I was 60/40 but with what I know now it's more like 90/10.

[Grouse]

7 minutes ago, Esso49 said:

And if it was not for TATA,  the Indian owned company , Jaquar Land Rover would have gone down the toile t years ago with their outdated designs and it was TATA that pumped in millions to their R & D to bring out models that the public actually wanted to buy.  And don't worry about losing out because of diesels ( you do realise I hope petrol engines figure prominently in their range ? ), they have already started producing an electric vehicle the ipace

As long as Victoria Beckham is not involved I'm relaxed about that. I need to read up more on how to get more torque from electric motors at low speeds. Batteries are the biggest bug bear though. We Brits should excel at this kind of thing. This time, let's develop it and then, for once, market it ourselves.

[CG1 Blue]

22 minutes ago, Esso49 said:

And if it was not for TATA,  the Indian owned company , Jaquar Land Rover would have gone down the toile t years ago with their outdated designs and it was TATA that pumped in millions to their R & D to bring out models that the public actually wanted to buy.  And don't worry about losing out because of diesels ( you do realise I hope petrol engines figure prominently in their range ? ), they have already started producing an electric vehicle the ipace

I'm fully aware of their petrol engines.  When I was considering trading in my RR last year the salespeople spent the whole time trying to convince me NOT to buy a petrol model, and to ignore the diesel "scare stories". I know modern diesels are clean, but that won't stop the value of my diesel car dropping through the floor due to public perception.

 

At JLR they clearly have thousands of diesel vehicles gathering dust, and by trying to push one on to me they lost a customer. This is probably a common occurrence.

[aright]

42 minutes ago, tebee said:

https://www.ft.com/content/272457a4-bbef-11e8-8274-55b72926558f

 

 

    The UK is heading towards a form of Brexit that almost nobody really wants, even if they are in favour of it in principle, there is little evidence that the final deal will be advantageous to the UK, and a great deal of evidence to the contrary. All the same, Britain is now locked into leaving the EU, and on terms prescribed by the union.

 

.....

 

    And our future historian will one day offer explanations for how Brexit happened, even though few people at the time wanted it to happen, at least in the form it did, future generations, on the other hand, will perhaps wonder if we were out of our minds.
 

In light of the feelings of 52% of the population of the UK and the progressive voting feelings of people in the EU perhaps you could outline the advantages of staying in the EU in political and social terms. We have heard what you don't want ad nauseus nauseum, all be it conjecture, we have heard you describe the EU as imperfect but seem to be unable after 40 odd years to tell me who I should vote for, to effect this change. Please tell all.

Edited September 19, 2018 by aright

[rixalex]

OK, that's fair, I didn't consider that it might not be binding
 
Mind you, I've learnt MANY things since then about international trade and thousands of other things. At the time I was 60/40 but with what I know now it's more like 90/10.

Thank you for your honesty.

I think i can safely say that there wasn't a single person who voted on that day that didn't think it was going to be binding. That's not how it was sold by government or any politician.

Is there therefore no part of you that feels even slightly duplicitous and conniving to now be turning around and quoting from the small print that you know goes totally against the spirit of that vote?

And do you not appreciate the precedent you are setting should you get your way, and the impact it will have on every vote that proceeds it?

Remainers like to talk about the damage Brexit will do that the young generation will have to live with, but they seem blind to the damage they are trying to inflict on British democracy that will potentially be far worse. Turning around a downturn in business is far less complicated than turning around a broken democratic system.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[My Thai Life]

48 minutes ago, tebee said:

And our future historian will one day offer explanations for how Brexit happened, even though few people at the time wanted it to happen, at least in the form it did, future generations, on the other hand, will perhaps wonder if we were out of our minds.

It's equally likely that future historians will write about the UK (i) being the catalyst for major redesign of the EU following its departure (ii) presciently exiting the EU prior to the EU's demise - there is already quite a lot of writing on the wall.

 

This kind of pre-writing of history is a game that anyone can play. But attempting to rewrite history is just a game for disgruntled remainers.

[kwilco]

Almost perfect!

 

https://www.google.co.th/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://m.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DdTVkUGV85nY&ved=2ahUKEwjEn67WmcfdAhWMfCsKHf-tDOoQwqsBMAB6BAgKEAU&usg=AOvVaw3w0K0ktDzsDPj5E8P_zHKT

 

[kwilco]

2 minutes ago, My Thai Life said:

It's equally likely that future historians will write about the UK (i) being the catalyst for major redesign of the EU following its departure (ii) presciently exiting the EU prior to the EU's demise - there is already quite a lot of writing on the wall.

 

This kind of pre-writing of history is a game that anyone can play. But attempting to rewrite history is just a game for disgruntled remainers.

Clearly you don't understand what history is.

One of the great things about understanding history is we learn from our mistakes.

Edited September 19, 2018 by kwilco

[Grouse]

10 minutes ago, rixalex said:

Thank you for your honesty.

I think i can safely say that there wasn't a single person who voted on that day that didn't think it was going to be binding. That's not how it was sold by government or any politician.

Is there therefore no part of you that feels even slightly duplicitous and conniving to now be turning around and quoting from the small print that you know goes totally against the spirit of that vote?

And do you not appreciate the precedent you are setting should you get your way, and the impact it will have on every vote that proceeds it?

Remainers like to talk about the damage Brexit will do that the young generation will have to live with, but they seem blind to the damage they are trying to inflict on British democracy that will potentially be far worse. Turning around a downturn in business is far less complicated than turning around a broken democratic system.

Sent from my SM-G610F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I think it's s case of the lesser of two evils. Yes the younger generation get to learn about our political system but at least they get to remain in the EU until a better idea comes up

[kwilco]

12 minutes ago, rixalex said:

Turning around a downturn in business is far less complicated than turning around a broken democratic system. Really?

Really?

 

I get the impression that is an expression you have just dreamed up without actually having a clue what it means or how it pertains to real life.