Cont: Brexit: Now What? Part 6. Pick up sticks...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Giordano said:
I am an American so I hesitate to say anything about Brexit no matter how stupid it seems... um never mind about that. But I must ask a question that has repeatedly come to my mind. If a large part of the motivation for Brexit came from a desire of many in the UK to be independent of decisions and control by the EU, doesn't Brexit actually give the EU "the whip hand" right now? It appears to me that Brexit will soon provide to the EU the power to strangle the UK's imports and exports, to cripple its health services, to create food shortages, to mire travel to and from it, to restrict financial market access, etc. Based on spite or logic, can't the EU severely damage the UK economy simply if they decide to do so? Has Brexit provided to the EU the ability to accomplish what the U-boats in WWII could not: the effective isolation of the UK from its critical suppliers and markets?

Sure, one might argue that the EU "needs" the UK and so would never do anything so drastic. But I am less and less certain that the UK does not need the EU much more than the reverse. And countries are capable of making irrational decisions for emotional reasons; the EU already appears poised to "teach the UK a lesson" in response to Brexit that may be based more on anger than a logical assessment of what would be the bet policy for all.

Has Brexit handed the EU the power to arbitrarily punish and control the UK over the next few months to a substantial extent?
Click to expand...

It's not as much that the EU is out to 'punish' the UK, but the UK is not going to get all the advantages to the EU market that a member state gets in much the same way that trade between (for instance) Texas and New Mexico is less taxed than between Texas and Mexico.
At the moment the UK is part of a massive amount of agreements made between EU member states, not just about trade, but also education, research, social security etc. Each of those agreements will need to be re-negotiated with the individual member states, but in none of those agreements the UK is going to get a better deal than they have now, simply because the UK is not powerful or important enough to force such a more profitable deal.

In the same way, the EU was/is able to present itself as a large economic block to China, Russia and the USA and thus get a better deal than a single member state would have gotten. Those deals will also disappear for the UK and it will have to re-negotiate them. But that's ok, because the US president has promised a 'great' deal which will be really 'great' and thus everything will be 'great'.
 
Giordano said:
It appears to me that Brexit will soon provide to the EU the power to strangle the UK's imports and exports, to cripple its health services, to create food shortages, to mire travel to and from it, to restrict financial market access, etc.
Click to expand...
No, it gives the EU the duty under its rules and regulations (which the UK had a large part in creating) to strangle the UK's imports and exports, to cripple its health services, to create food shortages, to mire travel to and from it, to restricts financial markt access, etc.

Based on spite or logic, can't the EU severely damage the UK economy simply if they decide to do so?
Click to expand...
They can't simply decide not to. If in case of a No Deal Brexit, if they wanted to cut the UK some slack, it would require the EU to massively restructure itself and completely violate its core principles.
 
Earthborn said:
No, it gives the EU the duty under its rules and regulations (which the UK had a large part in creating) to strangle the UK's imports and exports, to cripple its health services, to create food shortages, to mire travel to and from it, to restricts financial markt access, etc.

They can't simply decide not to. If in case of a No Deal Brexit, if they wanted to cut the UK some slack, it would require the EU to massively restructure itself and completely violate its core principles.
Click to expand...

Well they are doing some of that, they will let british planes still have flights and such when really all flights should end on a no deal brexit.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
He says



It seems he doesn't know how the WTO works.
Click to expand...


I don't think his sycophants do either, the comments are ridiculous.


"Brilliant piece. We’re being Partitioned, Punished and Penalised. The 3 “P’s”. We need to spread this message to the country, URGENTLY!!"

Just wow.
 
RolandRat said:
Is this guy really that deluded or is he pulling a Rees-Mogg?

http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2018/1...fits-of-leaving-with-no-withdrawal-agreement/
Click to expand...

He seems to believe that paying the over 39 billion GBP the UK owes the EU is somehow contingent on this agreement and that if no deal was made the UK wouldn't pay, that it's somehow a cost for making a deal. In reality the money is going to be paid regardless.

The notion that the money was somehow a part of the deal was supposed to help justify spending that money but now it seems that it is instead undermining any deal.
 
Captain_Swoop said:
A firm awarded a government contract to provide extra ferry services has used website terms and conditions apparently intended for a takeaway food firm.
Its original terms and conditions advised customers to check goods before "agreeing to pay for any meal/order".

The government said the section was "put up in error" and was now correct.
Click to expand...

That inspires confidence.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46748193
Click to expand...
Have I missed something, but since when is the contents of a private company's website the responsibility of a government department? Even if said company is a government contractor, as I can't imagine a DfT spokesperson commenting on the corporate websites of the likes of Arriva, FirstGroup, or GoAhead.
 
KDLarsen said:
Have I missed something, but since when is the contents of a private company's website the responsibility of a government department? Even if said company is a government contractor, as I can't imagine a DfT spokesperson commenting on the corporate websites of the likes of Arriva, FirstGroup, or GoAhead.
Click to expand...

If you have a shipping company with no vessels and no berthing agreements and a market capitalisation of £66.25 awarded a contract with no tendering process, then its professionalism is of valid concern.

At least the director has experience of running a shipping company - although it did collapse with unpaid debts.
 
jimbob said:
If you have a shipping company with no vessels and no berthing agreements and a market capitalisation of £66.25 awarded a contract with no tendering process, then its professionalism is of valid concern.

At least the director has experience of running a shipping company - although it did collapse with unpaid debts.
Click to expand...
I think you're misunderstanding me, I'm questioning why it's a goverment spokesperson is defending the contents of the website of a private company.

I suppose it's down to Seaborne not having any staff whatsoever (although they apparently have some IT staff onboard, as the leak of admin credentials was fixed). Which further begs the question on how the **** they managed to get this contract in the first place.

Edit: On a re-reading of my previous post, I see I could have made my point more clear.
 
Last edited:
KDLarsen said:
I think you're misunderstanding me, I'm questioning why it's a goverment spokesperson is defending the contents of the website of a private company.

I suppose it's down to Seaborne not having any staff whatsoever (although they apparently have some IT staff onboard, as the leak of admin credentials was fixed). Which further begs the question on how the **** they managed to get this contract in the first place.

Edit: On a re-reading of my previous post, I see I could have made my point more clear.
Click to expand...

Fair enough - I wasn't sure how well you'd been following this particular fiasco, as opposed to all the rest of the Brexit related ones.

As an aside my dad (in Kent) told me that there's a rehearsal for Operation Stack at Manston International Airport, with about a hundred lorries parked up overnight and setting off to Dover at rush hour. The locals are predicting another mess, as the route apparently has 18 roundabouts including several mini-roundabouts.
 
KDLarsen said:
I think you're misunderstanding me, I'm questioning why it's a goverment spokesperson is defending the contents of the website of a private company.

I suppose it's down to Seaborne not having any staff whatsoever (although they apparently have some IT staff onboard, as the leak of admin credentials was fixed). Which further begs the question on how the **** they managed to get this contract in the first place.

Edit: On a re-reading of my previous post, I see I could have made my point more clear.
Click to expand...

I think jimbob's point might have been that the government was defending their website because they're trying to cover up that they've given the contract to a company that most people wouldn't have trusted with rowing boats on a pond in a park because they're a bunch of useless bastards who couldn't find their own arses with both hands, a flash light and a copy of "Proctology for Dummies", large print edition.

If that wasn't jimbob's point, my apologies for putting words in his mouth, in which case take it as my answer to your question.
 
jimbob said:
As an aside my dad (in Kent) told me that there's a rehearsal for Operation Stack at Manston International Airport, with about a hundred lorries parked up overnight and setting off to Dover at rush hour. The locals are predicting another mess, as the route apparently has 18 roundabouts including several mini-roundabouts.
Click to expand...

Apparently results as you'd expect. Tom Peck
https://twitter.com/tompeck/status/1082146978308476928
 
Explorer said:
...but only for a limited period to suit EU countries, not the UK.
Click to expand...

Well get working on a proper agreement that allows things like adding new flights and such. They are not going to let just any random foreign planes in their sovereign airspace after all, they have control of that. It is one of those borders that the UK was so keen on retaking. And loss of air flights is a minor concern compared to the Majesty of having control of your airspace again!

You get to keep all those foreign flights out. A win for brexit!
 
Frankly, the whole Seaborne website is a bit of a shambles. It's clearly intended to imply that the company is an operating freight business. Not sure of the legality of that. FOr instance.

Seaborne Freight serves the needs of cross channel freight traffic.
Click to expand...
As long as those needs don't include actually crossing the channel.

Seaborne Freight (UK) Limited operate a bookable scheduled service offering all drivers a predictable and reliable crossing.
Click to expand...

Not yet they don't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom