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

Status
Not open for further replies.
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...
This seems pointless. They are adding 1% to the normal daily traffic flow leaving systems otherwise unchanged. What they should do instead is start protecting our border, undertaking the necessary checks on vehicles ensuring the goods have been declared correctly. The tail backs will occur because traffic is slow to get through the additional border processes. It is not about a tiny increase in the number of lorries.
 
Last edited:
Lothian said:
This seems pointless. They are adding 1% to the normal daily traffic flow leaving systems otherwise unchanged. What they should do instead is start protecting our border, undertaking the necessary checks on vehicles ensuring the goods have been declared correctly. The tail backs will occur because traffic is slow to get through the additional border processes. It is not about a tiny increase in the number of lorries.
Click to expand...

But that is sensible, and one thing is sure with brexit is that the sensible realistic decisions will never get made.
 
Worm said:
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.


As long as those needs don't include actually crossing the channel.



Not yet they don't.
Click to expand...

Could probably refer them to the ASA.
 
Just had my annual tax statement which outlines just how much I am contributing to the EU. Of course many brexit voters won't pay tax so won't get a statement to see how pathetically small our contribution is.

4475c339cb00392e.jpg
 
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.



That inspires confidence.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46748193
Click to expand...

That is concerning. A bona fide company gets its T&C's drawn up by a lawyer.

Copying and pasting someone else's T&C's is not only unethical, it could be seen to be fraudulent if there is monetary gain involved.

Anyway, contract law holds that having just one contradictory term or condition has the legal effect of repudiating the entire contract.

The government clearly did not get its legal department to look at the contract before signing it.
 
Wudang said:
If that had posted here I would nominate that. Brilliant
Click to expand...

And some serious analysis demonstrating how lame this Ptomekin traffic jam was in context, from the same thread.

PeteB said:
woodchopper1 said:
PeteB said:
No it's total fantasy,

Dover Port claimed to have handled 2,601,162 lorries in 2017. The Tunnel handled 1,637,280, making a combined total of 4,238,442 lorry movements in the year*

There is no way of mitigating those sort of volumes in the time available,

*From eureferendum.com .
Click to expand...

No they can’t.

But the specially chartered ferries might be able to provide a fast track service for high importance goods like pharmaceuticals or vital industrial components.
Click to expand...

yes, sounds like ministers have been advised it is much worse than they are letting on

...If that is the case, then it would be helpful if Mr Grayling would say so. For the very limited capacity afforded to be actually put into use, it would suggest that the Dover corridor had come almost to a complete halt, and there was a real danger of food and other essential supplies, such as medicines, running out.

Putting a little meat on the bone, we now have some UK academic research which is endeavouring to model more accurately the effect of delays at the ports. This is the UCL, which is assessing the impact of different processing times for outbound journeys using Dover's existing layout and traffic flows. It anticipates that extra customs checks of up to 40 seconds per vehicle would have no impact on the queuing time for outward journeys through Dover.

However, if delays reach 70 seconds per truck, a queue of between 1,200 and 2,724 heavy goods vehicles is expected, leading to tailbacks taking six days to clear. "[The queue] starts Monday evening and ends by Saturday noon", the UCL estimates. However, if the processing time goes up to 80 seconds the result would simply be "no recovery". The whole country would be gridlocked in a massive traffic jam.

This research was actually commissioned by the DfT, and if it is giving the right picture, the traffic from Ramsgate won't be able to get clear of the port, as it will be caught up in the Dover congestion.

This is especially the case if separate research by Imperial College London has got it right. It predicts "paralysis" on the M20 motorway and A20 trunk road if new customs delays are introduced. Nearly five hours of traffic delays in Kent is predicted at peak times, with an extra two minutes spent on each vehicle at the border tripling existing queues on the M20/A20 to 29 miles. ...
Click to expand...
 
And PeteB is quoting from a Eurosceptic blog. But a sane Eurosceptic, who has been pointing out the problems with HMG's approach for about two years
 
Vixen said:
Anyway, contract law holds that having just one contradictory term or condition has the legal effect of repudiating the entire contract.
Click to expand...

Which is why any serious contract has a clause specifically disapplying this. :rolleyes:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom