Brexit bedlam - May's EU divorce deal crushed by 230 votes in parliament

[vogie]

3 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Interesting! So it's all about Germany! In which case you must surely agree that EEC/EU has worked well. Personally, I would be happy to see a German battalion parked on Polands lawn rather than American one. 

????????????????

 

 

[nauseus]

3 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Interesting! So it's all about Germany! In which case you must surely agree that EEC/EU has worked well. Personally, I would be happy to see a German battalion parked on Polands lawn rather than American one. 

I can agree that EEC/EU has worked well for Germany, yes. However, I think that will also change soon.

[nauseus]

2 minutes ago, vogie said:

????????????????

 

 

Damn. Too late. I was saving that one!

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

 

You clearly stated that if Germany was not in the EU the vote to leave would not have won, now would you kindly show some evidence as to this, "probably" doesn't mean a thing, that is in your interpretation only. Please stop making things up.

Are you still of the opinion that our queen is a remainer.????????????

She IS a European!

 

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

 

Go on, Vogie! Knock your self out! You think Brenda would be anti Europe ????

 

[aright]

 

German battalion parked on Polands lawn?

Don't you mean a Company, they don't have enough guns and ammunition for a battalion and don't get me started on missile defense systems and air support.

[7by7]

19 hours ago, nontabury said:

So can you therefore confirm that the U.K subsidiesed Airbus, does NOT source or manufacture their parts outside of the E.U. 

 I understand that Airbus does source some of it's components from outside the EU; so do many other subsidised companies, whether subsidised by the EU or the UK government alone.

 

However, I also understand, unless you can prove different, that those sources are in countries with which the EU has trade agreements; of which there are more than 60.

 

Like CG1 Blue, you are ignoring the fact that Airbus are talking about the effects of a no deal Brexit. That is a Brexit where the UK and EU have no agreements at all, trade or otherwise. Completely different scenario to the deals the EU has with over 60 non EU countries.

 

19 hours ago, nontabury said:

And while your at it, confirm that it’s untrue that the E.u were found guilty of paying billions in illegal subsidies to Airbus.

Well, the USA say so because Airbus is selling more aircraft than Boeing.

 

The EU claims the billions of dollars given in subsides to Boeing by the US government are illegal.

 

During the 13+years this tit for tat row has been raging the WTO have found both the EU and the US guilty of paying illegal subsidies.

 

 

 

[Grouse]

2 minutes ago, aright said:

 

German battalion parked on Polands lawn?

Don't you mean a Company, they don't have enough guns and ammunition for a battalion and don't get me started on missile defense systems and air support.

They have 3x as many main battle tanks (900) as the U.K. 

 

I really dont don't want to get into a conkers game Arighty!

 

I like the way Germany avoids wasting too much money on defence but does manufacture the battle tank main armament for NATO. ????

[CG1 Blue]

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

The government did not aske Airbus to speak about the impact of Brexit per se, they asked Airbus to speak about the effects of a no deal Brexit.

 

I, too, am not aware of any pro Brexit business or industry being asked by the British government to speak in favour of a no deal Brexit. Even if they wanted to, they probably wouldn't find anyone from business or industry willing to do so. Even pro Brexit business and industry people know a no deal Brexit for the disaster it would be.

 

After much research I have found many business and industry spokespeople supporting Brexit; but none supporting a no deal Brexit. 

 

Businesses “watching in horror” as no-deal Brexit risk rises

As that article says, many companies are making plans to relocate out of the UK in the event of a no deal Brexit; some have already done so; and that includes companies whose bosses were pro Brexit!

 

Wealthy Brexiteers like James Dyson are jumping ship. Why might that be?

 

OK, Dyson is going to Singapore. But, as the article asks, is that because the trade deal between Singapore and the EU agreed last October will give his company better access to EU markets than remaining in a post no deal Brexit UK will?

 

His spokespeople say the move is to make the company 'future proofed.' Future proofed against what? A no deal Brexit? If not, why did he decide on this move when a no deal began to look more and more likely and after the Singapore/EU trade deal had been signed?

 

Dyson moved his HQ to Singapore to be closer to his biggest market.  Asia is the growth market, not Europe. I believe only 4% of his sales are in the UK. He's only moving a handful of people there (2 people I believe), and all his R&D will stay in the UK. His timing could have been better though. 

As for Airbus we should note that their CEO didn't say exactly why his company would have to move out of the UK if there was no deal. As I understand it aerospace and aviation parts are zero tariff universally, so the tariffs wouldn't be an issue for them. The EU have confirmed that existing safety certificates will be recognised, and the heads of ports at Dover and Calais have stated that there will be no additional admin checks, EU lorries will be waved through, and they will do everything to ensure traffic flows if there is no deal. 

On top of this, it would take years and cost untold millions of pounds to move thousands of jobs and factories to another EU country - all for no valid reason. 

Airbus are simply bluffing. Shameful. 

[7by7]

19 hours ago, nauseus said:

The usual distorted, inane and false claims and assumptions. Not tonight, Josephine, I have a headache.

One day you may present a reasoned argument against points raised with which you disagree; but I'm not holding my breath.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, nontabury said:

Is it just me, but do you think this Guardian sponsored video, could have been heavily edited.

It's just you who can't accept that a key Brexiter is a cynical oaf who cares not one jot for his workers.

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, aright said:

 

I was in a Special Forces Operations room somewhere in southern Afghanistan watching the situation unfold. A Royal Marines patrol had been hit hard in a follow-up on an IED strike that had severely injured one of their colleagues. They had extracted the casualty at such a pace that his legs were left behind - severed in the blast. The Taliban were dancing, holding the Marine's legs above their heads - a call had come in to launch our Special Forces Task Group to recover them.

The men were angry - they wanted to go on the job. The Squadron Commander was not convinced.

"I cannot lose a lifter (CH47 Chinook) over a pair of f------ legs," he kept saying. "You think the lad would want that?" "I think you're wrong," said one of the lads. "I know you do," he replied.

 

This is Brexit related.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/24/courage-leadership-can-bring-brexit-home/

If you can't get it directly from the Daily Telegraph try

https://snewsi.com/id/19185150201

Before anyone gets the wrong idea, let me state that I am massively proud of our armed forces. EASILY the most professional in the world. That still applies even if we are no longer a superpower.

 

Right.

 

What were we doing in Afghanistan?

 

Why were The Marines in Afghanistan?

 

So, just following orders. Ask the Americans!

 

I would be happier to see a European defence force based around a Franco/UK nuclear deterrent. We produce the "best warheads". I don't trust the Americans, never did but certainly not now. We Europeans should keep close. Please!

[CG1 Blue]

15 minutes ago, Grouse said:

She IS a European!

 

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

 

Go on, Vogie! Knock your self out! You think Brenda would be anti Europe ????

 

Anti Europe and anti EU are two totally different things. 

[CG1 Blue]

10 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

During the 13+years this tit for tat row has been raging the WTO have found both the EU and the US guilty of paying illegal subsidies.

So that's ok then is it?  The EU can use our money to illegally subsidise companies such as Airbus because the US did it for Boeing? 

[vogie]

19 minutes ago, Grouse said:

She IS a European!

 

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

 

Go on, Vogie! Knock your self out! You think Brenda would be anti Europe ????

 

Of course she's anti EU, a friend of a friends friend told me after brexit she would like to get the Duke of Edinburgh deported.

[Grouse]

14 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Anti Europe and anti EU are two totally different things. 

Which of The Queens relatives are in European countries that are not in the EU (spare me the N and CH  exceptions)

[Grouse]

51 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

The government did not aske Airbus to speak about the impact of Brexit per se, they asked Airbus to speak about the effects of a no deal Brexit.

 

I, too, am not aware of any pro Brexit business or industry being asked by the British government to speak in favour of a no deal Brexit. Even if they wanted to, they probably wouldn't find anyone from business or industry willing to do so. Even pro Brexit business and industry people know a no deal Brexit for the disaster it would be.

 

After much research I have found many business and industry spokespeople supporting Brexit; but none supporting a no deal Brexit. 

 

Businesses “watching in horror” as no-deal Brexit risk rises

As that article says, many companies are making plans to relocate out of the UK in the event of a no deal Brexit; some have already done so; and that includes companies whose bosses were pro Brexit!

 

Wealthy Brexiteers like James Dyson are jumping ship. Why might that be?

 

OK, Dyson is going to Singapore. But, as the article asks, is that because the trade deal between Singapore and the EU agreed last October will give his company better access to EU markets than remaining in a post no deal Brexit UK will?

 

His spokespeople say the move is to make the company 'future proofed.' Future proofed against what? A no deal Brexit? If not, why did he decide on this move when a no deal began to look more and more likely and after the Singapore/EU trade deal had been signed?

 

Are you a fifth columnist?

[aright]

19 minutes ago, Grouse said:

They have 3x as many main battle tanks (900) as the U.K. 

 

I really dont don't want to get into a conkers game Arighty!

 

I like the way Germany avoids wasting too much money on defence but does manufacture the battle tank main armament for NATO. ????

Aright lets not play conkers but I must correct you. According to globalfirepower.com Germany ranks 38th in the world (2018 figures) with 432 tanks half the figure you claim. That is twice, not three times, the number the UK has and the reason is we don't have land borders with anyone so don't need more. What we do have however is a significantly larger airforce and Navy than they do because that's were we feel our needs lie. Apologies on a postcard please???? 

[Grouse]

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

 

Why should Airbus help UK?

7 minutes ago, aright said:

Aright lets not play conkers but I must correct you. According to globalfirepower.com Germany ranks 38th in the world (2018 figures) with 432 tanks half the figure you claim. That is twice, not three times, the number the UK has and the reason is we don't have land borders with anyone so don't need more. What we do have however is a significantly larger airforce and Navy than they do because that's were we feel our needs lie. Apologies on a postcard please???? 

Web site show 900 with about 500 mothballed 

 

Are you expecting a war?

[Spidey]

9 minutes ago, aright said:

Aright lets not play conkers but I must correct you. According to globalfirepower.com Germany ranks 38th in the world (2018 figures) with 432 tanks half the figure you claim. That is twice, not three times, the number the UK has and the reason is we don't have land borders with anyone so don't need more. What we do have however is a significantly larger airforce and Navy than they do because that's were we feel our needs lie. Apologies on a postcard please???? 

What sort of tanks are they and which way are they pointed? I'm getting worried now.

[aright]

12 minutes ago, Grouse said:

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

 

Why should Airbus help UK?

Web site show 900 with about 500 mothballed 

 

Are you expecting a war?

Mothballed tanks are 1970s designed leopard 2's, not battlefield ready, so they will need a serious upgrade.

I am expecting a war next Saturday when England play Ireland.

[bomber]

1 hour ago, aright said:

 

I was in a Special Forces Operations room somewhere in southern Afghanistan watching the situation unfold. A Royal Marines patrol had been hit hard in a follow-up on an IED strike that had severely injured one of their colleagues. They had extracted the casualty at such a pace that his legs were left behind - severed in the blast. The Taliban were dancing, holding the Marine's legs above their heads - a call had come in to launch our Special Forces Task Group to recover them.

The men were angry - they wanted to go on the job. The Squadron Commander was not convinced.

"I cannot lose a lifter (CH47 Chinook) over a pair of f------ legs," he kept saying. "You think the lad would want that?" "I think you're wrong," said one of the lads. "I know you do," he replied.

 

This is Brexit related.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/01/24/courage-leadership-can-bring-brexit-home/

If you can't get it directly from the Daily Telegraph try

https://snewsi.com/id/19185150201

sorry but what happens in afghanistan has nothing to do with brexit,other than it sending more refugee's here to claim the generous benefits our soverign govt decide to lavish on them,ones they dont get in the EU,well done those nations

[nauseus]

51 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

One day you may present a reasoned argument against points raised with which you disagree; but I'm not holding my breath.

What a pity. But if you expect reasoned arguments you really need to submit a reasoned post first. 

[Grouse]

22 minutes ago, Grouse said:

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

 

Why should Airbus help UK?

Web site show 900 with about 500 mothballed 

 

Are you expecting a war?

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

 

Maybe The Beano says differently 

 

I don't really know. I am not an expert in military matters.

[bomber]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

I can agree that EEC/EU has worked well for Germany, yes. However, I think that will also change soon.

how soon? there is a world recession coming this is agreed by just about everybody on the planet outside of any spoonies drinking establishment,germany will be affected but it wont be affected as many and certainly a lot less the the UK will be,dont forget they will have a good piece of our car industry within 3-6 years with a no deal outcome,

[nontabury]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

 I understand that Airbus does source some of it's components from outside the EU; so do many other subsidised companies, whether subsidised by the EU or the UK government alone.

 

However, I also understand, unless you can prove different, that those sources are in countries with which the EU has trade agreements; of which there are more than 60.

 

Like CG1 Blue, you are ignoring the fact that Airbus are talking about the effects of a no deal Brexit. That is a Brexit where the UK and EU have no agreements at all, trade or otherwise. Completely different scenario to the deals the EU has with over 60 non EU countries.

 

Well, the USA say so because Airbus is selling more aircraft than Boeing.

 

The EU claims the billions of dollars given in subsides to Boeing by the US government are illegal.

 

During the 13+years this tit for tat row has been raging the WTO have found both the EU and the US guilty of paying illegal subsidies.

 

 

 

  

Airbus has manufacturing factories in China, and at least assembling plants in the USA. Can you please confirm that both of these countries have trade agreements with the E.u.

 Then when you have confirmed these agreements, can I then suggest that you inform for the governments of China and the U.S.A.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-42623081

 

https://www.businessinsider.com/airbus-600-million-alabama-factory-planes-america-2015-9

 

 

 

 

[7by7]

1 minute ago, CG1 Blue said:

Dyson moved his HQ to Singapore to be closer to his biggest market.  Asia is the growth market, not Europe. I believe only 4% of his sales are in the UK. He's only moving a handful of people there (2 people I believe), and all his R&D will stay in the UK. His timing could have been better though. 

There are plenty of other S. E. Asian countries he could have moved his HQ to which are closer to his market and have as good, if not better, tax incentives than Singapore.

 

But they don't have the trade deal with the EU which Singapore has!

 

Oddly enough, I can't find a breakdown anywhere of Dyson's international sales. Where did you get your 4% figure for the UK from, and does it give percentages for other countries and/or regions?

 

33 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

As for Airbus we should note that their CEO didn't say exactly why his company would have to move out of the UK if there was no deal. As I understand it aerospace and aviation parts are zero tariff universally, so the tariffs wouldn't be an issue for them.

Enders didn't say that were there no deal then Airbus would be closing it's factories in the UK on 30th March! He was warning about possible future consequences of a no deal Brexit. 

 

Airbus CEO warns it could move U.K. operations in event of 'no-deal' Brexit (The Japan Times may seem a strange source to use; but all the UK ones I could find, such as the FT, are behind paywalls.)

 

As for tariffs, from Brace for impact? Brexit and the UK aerospace supply chain

Quote

Even though the WTO Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft eliminates tariffs on aircraft and most aircraft components, tariff changes could still affect a significant number of aerospace manufacturers. For example, some electronic components, which have wider use beyond the aerospace industry, are likely to be affected.

 

39 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

The EU have confirmed that existing safety certificates will be recognised

Are you sure; what is your source?

 

The latest I can find on the matter is Prepare to work and operate in the European aviation sector after Brexit 

Quote

Aircraft certification

From 29 March 2019, if there is no EU exit deal, aerospace design, production and maintenance organisations might need to take action to ensure they continue to hold appropriate safety certificates. Actions required would depend on individual circumstances.

 

43 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

and the heads of ports at Dover and Calais have stated that there will be no additional admin checks, EU lorries will be waved through, and they will do everything to ensure traffic flows if there is no deal. 

Do everything they can to ensure traffic flows; of course they will. But that does not mean there will be no customs checks and therefore no resulting delays. The Port of Dover, for example, have said that they have contingency plans to help them prepare for and so deal with such delays if there is a no deal Brexit. They have not said that there will be no delays.

 

Neither have they said that EU lorries will be waved through; because it's not their decision to make. It's the decision of French and UK customs, depending on which way the vehicle was travelling. For any vehicle to be 'waved through will require some sort of deal between the UK and EU. That's Brexit with a deal. not a no deal Brexit!

 

BTW, on the subject of borders, have you found the info on the current Irish border checks you promised two days ago yet?

 

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

On top of this, it would take years and cost untold millions of pounds to move thousands of jobs and factories to another EU country - all for no valid reason. 

Airbus are simply bluffing. Shameful

Of course closing factories and transferring the jobs to other locations costs money; but companies do it all the time because the savings post move outweigh the costs of the move. 

 

Bluffing? No, Enders is outlining possibilities in the event of a no deal Brexit. If closing their UK factories and moving them to another country, whether it's in the EU or a country with whom the EU has trade agreements, saves Airbus money in the long term; then that is what they will do. A no deal Brexit just makes that scenario more likely.

 

 

[7by7]

1 hour ago, CG1 Blue said:

So that's ok then is it?  The EU can use our money to illegally subsidise companies such as Airbus because the US did it for Boeing? 

 Not what I said.

 

The US accuses the EU of illegal funding of Airbus, the EU accuses the US of illegal funding of Boeing.

 

Over the last 13 years the WTO has found against both in roughly equal measure.

 

Of course, by 'illegal' what is meant is they acted against WTO rules; neither country has actually broken any laws, national or international.

 

 

[7by7]

38 minutes ago, nauseus said:

What a pity. But if you expect reasoned arguments you really need to submit a reasoned post first. 

Others, such as @CG1 Blue and @nontabury are able to present reasoned arguments against my posts and engage in reasoned, if sometimes heated, debate.

 

If they can so do, why can't you?

[7by7]

25 minutes ago, nontabury said:

Airbus has manufacturing factories in China, and at least assembling plants in the USA. Can you please confirm that both of these countries have trade agreements with the E.u.

 Then when you have confirmed these agreements, can I then suggest that you inform for the governments of China and the U.S.A.

 Economic barriers between the EU and USA are low, for a number of reasons. See here

Quote

The European Union and the United States have the largest bilateral trade and investment relationship and enjoy the most integrated economic relationship in the world.

Maybe not a formal treaty, but certainly a relationship which has existed for many years.

 

Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership were nearly complete, then Trump came to power and not only halted negotiations but also initiated a trade war of sorts with the EU.

 

He came to his senses, at least on this point, last year and negotiations have recommenced.

 

China?

 

From the EU again:

Quote

The European Union and China are two of the biggest traders in the world. China is now the EU's second-biggest trading partner behind the United States and the EU is China's biggest trading partner.

 

See also the 1985 (yes, 1985) Agreement on Trade and Economic Cooperation between the European Economic Community and the People's Republic of China

[evadgib]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

I don't really know. I am not an expert in military matters.

But you have been known to slag 'em off.