|
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 00:17:33 +0100, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 17:18:38 +0100, Optimist wrote: On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 15:01:25 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: Optimist wrote: On 15 Jul 2016 18:20:48 GMT, Jeremy Double wrote: Also, remember that companies, as well as universities, are partners in collaborative projects funded by the EU. I have been involved in projects where UK companies have benefitted from the expertise of partners (companies and universities) from other EU countries. The UK will lose out if it doesn't remain part of the European research funding system (as non-EU-member Switzerland is). Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are precedents for exclusion. According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Norway & Turkey. And there's no reason why the UK won't follow Switzerland's example. Leaving the EU will save £10 billion a year net so lack of money need not be an issue. I thought all of that was going to be spent on the NHS? ;) That will be the decision of the elected government So the Brexiteers lied ? The campaign was on the question Leave or Remain, it was not a general election which decides the government. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:23:19 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 17:57:23 on Sun, 17 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Countries outside the "single market" sell into it all the time. Of course they do, but have to deal with tariffs and quotas. Unless they sign a free trade agreement. The EU has FTAs with many countries which do not involve adhering to the EU's single market rules. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London
Optimist wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:23:19 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 17:57:23 on Sun, 17 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Countries outside the "single market" sell into it all the time. Of course they do, but have to deal with tariffs and quotas. Unless they sign a free trade agreement. The EU has FTAs with many countries which do not involve adhering to the EU's single market rules. But that trade involves a lot more paperwork than trade within the single market. So, although there aren't tariffs, the trade isn't frictionless. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36083664 |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London Orange?
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message ... On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 11:22:57 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Wolfgang Schwanke" wrote in message ... I want us to be able to trade with our European neighbours. But I also want us to have absolute control of our borders so we can limit the numbers of non-UK people that we allow in The UK is not in Schengen, so it has control over its borders already. No we don't in Schengen or otherwise, EU rules EEA rules. forbid us from excluding entry for another EU citizen except in very exceptional circumstances. If someone has an EU passport, Valid EEA ID card or passport. they are in, end of. The (usual) reasons for wanting to exclude someone: Failing to produce the above. Actually, failure to produce the relevant ID document is not a "usual" reason for waning to exclude someone. Whilst it is true that border control go to great lengths to ensure that people without documentation don't actually turn up on their doorstep (because it is expensive to deal with), if someone does manage it, then that is not a prima facia reason to exclude them. There are a (large) set of individuals who do have a, de facto, right to enter the UK and if you can satisfy border control that you are such a person they will let you in, lack of documentation notwithstanding. tim |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
On 2016-07-17 08:45:12 +0000, Recliner said:
Many of the woes of the Club Med EU members are because of their membership of the euro at unrealistic exchange rates, not the EU. The EU has probably been widened a bit too much, but it is the Eurozone that has been extended to far too many countries. If the rules for entry were more stringent, and extremely strict, Italy, Spain and Greece, and maybe even France, would not have been allowed, let alone forced, to join. So a Eurozone with perhaps half a dozen Northern European members would probably have worked well, and a few more EU countries might have been motivated to run their economies better with the motivation to join. But there would never be 18 members. TBH I think the Euro has run its course - cards are widely accepted and money is easily converted - and I'm fairly strongly of the view that the ability to devalue the Pound has saved us going the same way as Greece on a number of occasions. I'm surprised it did survive the Greek issue - but I doubt it will survive all that much longer, and nor really should it. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning SouthLondon
|
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
|
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
On 2016-07-18 07:42:41 +0000, Optimist said:
The campaign was on the question Leave or Remain, it was not a general election which decides the government. Doesn't really answer the question. There were many, many lies on both sides. The entire campaign was utterly filthy - worse than a typical General Election one - and everyone on both sides should be utterly ashamed of themselves for it. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London
Neil Williams wrote:
On 2016-07-17 08:45:12 +0000, Recliner said: Many of the woes of the Club Med EU members are because of their membership of the euro at unrealistic exchange rates, not the EU. The EU has probably been widened a bit too much, but it is the Eurozone that has been extended to far too many countries. If the rules for entry were more stringent, and extremely strict, Italy, Spain and Greece, and maybe even France, would not have been allowed, let alone forced, to join. So a Eurozone with perhaps half a dozen Northern European members would probably have worked well, and a few more EU countries might have been motivated to run their economies better with the motivation to join. But there would never be 18 members. TBH I think the Euro has run its course - cards are widely accepted and money is easily converted - and I'm fairly strongly of the view that the ability to devalue the Pound has saved us going the same way as Greece on a number of occasions. I'm surprised it did survive the Greek issue - but I doubt it will survive all that much longer, and nor really should it. The euro won't fade away just because of cashless retail activities. The point of it is to lock countries into fixed exchange rates, which is inherently unstable if they don't have converged economies. So a currency zone with just Germany and its immediate neighbours might be stable in the long term; one that combines Germany, Italy and Greece was obviously unstable from the beginning, but the euro idealists forced it through anyway. There were quite a few such idealists in the UK, but luckily they were frustrated in their moves to include us in the eurozone. So we, uniquely, had the perfect form of EU membership, now discarded: - Permanently out of the eurozone, with our interests safeguarded - Permanently out of Schengen - Reduced (rebated) membership fees - But full membership of the single market nevertheless. From http://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Who-pays-for-the-EU-and-how-much-does-it-cost-the-UK-Disentangling-fact-from-fiction-in-the-EU-Budget-Professor-Iain-Begg.pdf - Spending by the EU in 2014 was around 1% of the Gross National Income (GNI) of the Union. In the same year, the US federal government spent some twenty times as much. - The UK is a major contributor to the EU budget because it is one of the four largest economies in the EU, but has consistently paid less than France (since 1985) and (latterly) Italy, let alone Germany. - As a share of gross national income, the UK pays the least of all Member States into the EU budget,principally because of the UK rebate, implemented since 1985. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning SouthLondon Orange?
"Robin9" wrote in message ... tim...;156926 Wrote: "Robin9" wrote in message ...- Neil Williams;156835 Wrote:- On 2016-07-15 08:29:59 +0000, Robin9 said: - Her choices are limited. As the SNP will try to block Brexit in Parliament, and will receive much support from the Liberal Democrats and many Labour MPs, at some stage Mrs. May will have to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act and call a general election. She will then have a commanding majority in The House but most of her back-benchers will be strongly opposed to free movement.- Whyever do you think that? Parliament is quite heavily pro-European. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply.- Because, with the Labour Party is its present state, the Tories would win with a huge majority. Tory Party activists will make quite sure that most new Members will be opposed to free movement.- If there is a snap election "tomorrow" I doubt that Tory members will have any influence at all over the chosen candidates, there simply isn't the time - The balance of power in Parliament will be changed enormously.- You may be right. Personally I can't see too many of these seats that Labour are likely to lose changing hands to the Tories. UKIP are going to sweep them up. Though I suspect my prediction is not going to be tested (it's only for valid now, don't extrapolate it to 2020 - yet. A week is a long time in politics a lot will change by then, for good or bad). tim There is no reason to expect an snap election in the next few weeks. In my earlier post I said "at some stage." First, the Fixed Term Parliament Act will have to be repealed. ISTM there is a small window of opportunity (in terms of the justification) either she calls one "now", on the basis that she is the new broom and needs a new mandate or she waits until the parliament naturally ends there is no "moral" justification for calling on in 2 years time. The need to for Mrs. May to call an election will eventually dawn on political commentators and soon the idea will become common political currency. It already is. It will dies down once the window of opportunity has closed When that happens, Tory activists will concentrate their minds on what they need to do to make sure their Government can shrug off the SNP and the LD and work towards the result most of us want. A new collation :-) tim |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning SouthLondon Orange?
"Recliner" wrote in message ... Robin9 wrote: tim...;156926 Wrote: "Robin9" wrote in message ...- Neil Williams;156835 Wrote:- On 2016-07-15 08:29:59 +0000, Robin9 said: - Her choices are limited. As the SNP will try to block Brexit in Parliament, and will receive much support from the Liberal Democrats and many Labour MPs, at some stage Mrs. May will have to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act and call a general election. She will then have a commanding majority in The House but most of her back-benchers will be strongly opposed to free movement.- Whyever do you think that? Parliament is quite heavily pro-European. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply.- Because, with the Labour Party is its present state, the Tories would win with a huge majority. Tory Party activists will make quite sure that most new Members will be opposed to free movement.- If there is a snap election "tomorrow" I doubt that Tory members will have any influence at all over the chosen candidates, there simply isn't the time - The balance of power in Parliament will be changed enormously.- You may be right. Personally I can't see too many of these seats that Labour are likely to lose changing hands to the Tories. UKIP are going to sweep them up. Though I suspect my prediction is not going to be tested (it's only for valid now, don't extrapolate it to 2020 - yet. A week is a long time in politics a lot will change by then, for good or bad). tim There is no reason to expect an snap election in the next few weeks. In my earlier post I said "at some stage." First, the Fixed Term Parliament Act will have to be repealed. The need to for Mrs. May to call an election will eventually dawn on political commentators and soon the idea will become common political currency. When that happens, Tory activists will concentrate their minds on what they need to do to make sure their Government can shrug off the SNP and the LD and work towards the result most of us want. There's no need to repeal the act to hold an election before 2020. There can be either a vote of no confidence or the House of Commons, with the support of two-thirds of its total membership (including vacant seats), resolves "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election". The SNP and LDs would presumably support the motion, why? neither are in any state to afford to fight another election The LD's are broke generally and the SNP have just had to pay for three. but some Labour members would also have to do so to get 434 votes. With the deep split in Labour, one or other of the parliamentary Labour parties would probably be happy to do so. why, what's in it for them? tim |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message ... On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 17:18:38 +0100, Optimist wrote: On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 15:01:25 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: Optimist wrote: On 15 Jul 2016 18:20:48 GMT, Jeremy Double wrote: Also, remember that companies, as well as universities, are partners in collaborative projects funded by the EU. I have been involved in projects where UK companies have benefitted from the expertise of partners (companies and universities) from other EU countries. The UK will lose out if it doesn't remain part of the European research funding system (as non-EU-member Switzerland is). Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are precedents for exclusion. According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Norway & Turkey. And there's no reason why the UK won't follow Switzerland's example. Leaving the EU will save £10 billion a year net so lack of money need not be an issue. I thought all of that was going to be spent on the NHS? ;) That will be the decision of the elected government So the Brexiteers lied ? They were optimistic. The campaign didn't make any promises, just suggestions That you were supposed to (and did) take them as promises is another matter tim |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 17:18:38 on Sun, 17 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are precedents for exclusion. According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Norway & Turkey. EEA and accession states. where's Bosnia, Montenegro and Serbia (and possibly Albania) then? tim |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:30:57 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 17:18:38 on Sun, 17 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are precedents for exclusion. According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Norway & Turkey. EEA and accession states. Yes, Turkey, due to accede in 1,000 years or 10 years, depending on whether you listen to Cameron or Major. In any case, why limit it to Europe, why not a scheme for the whole the world? |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message ... On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 11:27:13 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Graham Murray" wrote in message ... bob writes: The difficulty is both EEA and EFTA involve paying money to the EU and accepting free movement of people. An awful lot of people who voted "leave" we're under the impression these were the things they were voting to get rid of, and will be pretty miffed if they are retained. But all we voted for was in/out. It was well known before the referendum vote that should the vote be out, that the terms under which we leave the EU and any subsequent negotiations with both the EU and the rest of the world were unknown. As was the vote to remain Basically the vote to leave was a leap into the unknown. As a vote to remain would be The status quo is unknown ? why is that a question? The status quo is most definitely unknown, that's the problem with Remain. Obviously it's not unknown in the grammatical sense, but in referendum terms, it is - no one knows what rules the EU is going to impose on us next, or indeed what the next Euro crisis is going to inflict upon members. But history suggests that whatever these new rules are they will not, in the main, be ones that benefit the UK. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning SouthLondon
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:19:02 +0100
Neil Williams wrote: On 2016-07-16 20:45:50 +0000, said: Unlike the SNP, it seems that UKIP is in no shape on the ground to pick up the Labour seats. Look at the pattern of local government byelection results I post each week in uk.politics.electoral. UKIP's vote has been falling with Labour winning their safe seats by default, even though they are losing a few more marginal seats to the Tories. UKIP often can't find candidates to defend their seats. One of this week's four Lib Dem gains was a gain in such a seat. I wonder if UKIP will now slowly die off - it was still really a single-issue party, and their main matter of campaign has been set in motion. Also now that Farage has gone they don't have anyone high profile left to campaign. They said he quit because of threats but politicians get them all the time anyway. He's a smart cookie and I suspect he knew that once they got the referendum result UKIP raison d'etre pretty much vanished overnight. However if for whatever reason Article 50 doesn't get enacted I expect to see him pop up again. -- Spud |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message ... On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 10:39:37 +0100, Optimist wrote: On 17 Jul 2016 09:11:23 GMT, Jeremy Double wrote: Optimist wrote: On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 08:27:24 -0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote: Optimist wrote: On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 00:07:48 -0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote: Optimist wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 08:20:54 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 15:49:33 on Fri, 15 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Then the shortfall should be paid by the UK treasury, and deducted from the amount paid to Brussels. It's not so simple. Countries are not rewarded with research participation based on their EU contributions. They are included because their universities are appropriate participants. We have the best EU universities and so were included disproportionately; now, knowing we will soon be gone, our universities are not considered for inclusion in new EU-funded projects, as their work may not be funded after 2018. Same answer - fund our OWN universities from the amount we pay in EU contributions. But the whole £350m(sic) has already been promised to the NHS, or was it Cornwall, or perhaps Wales. Our universities are world-class, so it would be foolish of the EU not to co-operate with us as they do with other non-EU countries. If they decide not to, well, we can co-operate with other countries instead, their loss not ours. https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/jul/16/research-funding-hit-by-brexit-vote The fact is the hundreds of millions of pounds supposedly from the EU are provided by UK taxpayers in the first place. This is one of the areas where we got back more than we put in. So Brexit means we'll have to pay more for a lower quality of cooperation in future. So, if they axe a grant, UK can pay it directly instead and deduct the amount from what is given to Brussels. Typical Brexiter lie. UK's total receipts from EU is £10billion a year less than our contributions. No amount of lying by Euro-fanatics can change that fact. £8.5 billion actually. According to ONS, the figure was £9.872 billion for 2014 and £11.271 billion for 2013. But this money is not necessarily available for the government to use after Brexit. Some areas of the civil service will need to be expanded to cover activities where we currently share the resources of the EU (the UK currently has NO trade negotiators, for instance, because currently all UK trade deals are done on an EU-wide basis). It is highly likely that UK GDP will drop as a result of Brexit, thus there will be less tax receipts available to make payments from. I do not accept that view, trade deals with the rest of the world The RotW that already has established trade deals with others which are going to be dropped to trade with part of an insignificant island group off the coast of Europe ? The UK is the 5th (6th) largest economy in the world. If that is not large enough for County X to make a trade deal with, why has Country X has already established trade deals with others who are almost certainly going to be smaller? This "we are too small" mantra is patent nonsense, proved by your own claim tim |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:21:57 +0100
Neil Williams wrote: On 2016-07-17 16:31:52 +0000, said: It's not bullying to say that if you want the benefits of the single market you can't choose to exclude part of it because of your xenophobia. Freedom of movement is a bit inevitable for Switzerland with its land frontiers and not being a police state. Not believing that uncontrolled immigration is viable (for financial reasons, say) is not "xenophobia", nor is a reciprocal freedom of trade Ignore Rosenstiel. He's just another hysterical Guardianista and paid up member of the Liberal Authoritarian Religion who likes to equate any controls on immigration with that of a fascist state. The irony of course being that the ruthless stamping down on discussing the issue of immigration and the vilification of those who did (or frankly anyone who disagreed with their orthodoxy in any way) over the last few decades by so called "liberals" has all the hallmarks of a repressive regime. Sadly most of them them are too blind and/or stupid to realise it. -- Spud |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:24:31 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2016-07-18 07:42:41 +0000, Optimist said: The campaign was on the question Leave or Remain, it was not a general election which decides the government. Doesn't really answer the question. There were many, many lies on both sides. The entire campaign was utterly filthy - worse than a typical General Election one - and everyone on both sides should be utterly ashamed of themselves for it. Neil Point is that the Leave side were not in a position to say how the money WOULD be spent, just how it COULD be spent. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 07:57:02 -0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote:
Optimist wrote: On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:23:19 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 17:57:23 on Sun, 17 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Countries outside the "single market" sell into it all the time. Of course they do, but have to deal with tariffs and quotas. Unless they sign a free trade agreement. The EU has FTAs with many countries which do not involve adhering to the EU's single market rules. But that trade involves a lot more paperwork than trade within the single market. So, although there aren't tariffs, the trade isn't frictionless. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36083664 That would affect EU states more than the UK, as we import more from EU than we export. Another advantage of being outside the EU is that we no longer have to apply tariffs against non-EU imports, hence so many countries are keen to get FTAs with the UK. I view the single market as being like a lavatory. We need access to it, but not to be locked into it. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
wrote in message ... In article , (Optimist) wrote: *Subject:* Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 On Fri, 15 Jul 2016 07:50:43 -0500, wrote: In article e.net, (Mark Goodge) wrote: On Thu, 14 Jul 2016 20:20:09 -0000 (UTC), bob put finger to keyboard and typed: Mark Goodge wrote: In real life, I think it's likely we will end up as members of EFTA. The benefits are useful, and the downsides of belonging are minimal (membership carries far fewer obligations than EU membership). Whether we then go for EEA membership will depend, I think, on whether or not we can negotiate a suitable set of Swiss-style bilateral treaties with the EU or whether the only way to get what we want is to join the EEA. The difficulty is both EEA and EFTA involve paying money to the EU and accepting free movement of people. An awful lot of people who voted "leave" we're under the impression these were the things they were voting to get rid of, and will be pretty miffed if they are retained. EEA membership requires acceptance of the "four freedoms", including freedom of movement, across the whole of EFTA and the EU. EFTA membership alone doesn't. Switzerland has a bilateral treaty with the EU which includes freedom of movement, but it would be possible not to have it. Not to have what? As the Swiss are currently finding out not having freedom of movement is not an option. So Switzerland has found that the EU is a bully. No surprise there. But UK is significantly larger than the Alpine state and not landlocked. It's not bullying to say that if you want the benefits of the single market you can't choose to exclude part of it because of your xenophobia. Freedom of movement is a bit inevitable for Switzerland with its land frontiers and not being a police state. "Passport Free" travel and Freedom of Movement are not the same thing. The fact that people need (and are given the right) to freely drive across a country (CH in this case) to reach a country on the other side has absolutely nothing at all to do with the right to live/work there. They are completely separate entities within the EU "charter". Why do people persist in trying to make this linkage that doesn't exist? tim |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
"Recliner" wrote in message ... Optimist wrote: On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:23:19 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 17:57:23 on Sun, 17 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Countries outside the "single market" sell into it all the time. Of course they do, but have to deal with tariffs and quotas. Unless they sign a free trade agreement. The EU has FTAs with many countries which do not involve adhering to the EU's single market rules. But that trade involves a lot more paperwork than trade within the single market. So, although there aren't tariffs, the trade isn't frictionless. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36083664 Though the argument is, that that friction is a price worth paying in order to simplify our trade with ROW (and even intra-UK, for that matter) Fully analysed, that pov might not be right, but Remainers can't simply dismiss it as not existing (which is the generally the approach used so far) tim |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
On 2016-07-18 08:53:10 +0000, Optimist said:
Point is that the Leave side were not in a position to say how the money WOULD be spent, just how it COULD be spent. Correct, but that was not how they portrayed it. You could call it twisting the truth, but whatever you call it it was dishonest. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
wrote in message ... In article , (Optimist) wrote: On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 14:23:08 -0500, wrote: In article , (tim...) wrote: as the 5th largest economy in the world, with the second best range of universities in the world (and the best in Europe) with one of the top 5 destinations in the world that "elites" want to live in, why do you think that we wont easily be able to employ the world's best I'm sorry to tell you that, following the Brexit vote and fall in the value of sterling, the British economy fell to 6th largest economy in the world. Do you really think that was because of the Brexit vote? So nothing to do with fact that Osborne's creature at the Bank of England signalled even lower interest rates and more money-printing (reminiscent of Weimar Germany)? The truth hurts the Brexiters I see. The problem was that there was too much made up rubbish for the average person to work out what was the truth and what was the reality, so they (quite reasonably) ignored it all. If everything that the treasury told us was true, where's the punishment budget? I assume that I don't need to explain the story of Peter and the Wolf to you? tim |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London Orange?
tim... wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message ... On Sat, 16 Jul 2016 11:27:13 +0100, "tim..." wrote: "Graham Murray" wrote in message ... bob writes: The difficulty is both EEA and EFTA involve paying money to the EU and accepting free movement of people. An awful lot of people who voted "leave" we're under the impression these were the things they were voting to get rid of, and will be pretty miffed if they are retained. But all we voted for was in/out. It was well known before the referendum vote that should the vote be out, that the terms under which we leave the EU and any subsequent negotiations with both the EU and the rest of the world were unknown. As was the vote to remain Basically the vote to leave was a leap into the unknown. As a vote to remain would be The status quo is unknown ? why is that a question? The status quo is most definitely unknown, that's the problem with Remain. Obviously it's not unknown in the grammatical sense, but in referendum terms, it is - no one knows what rules the EU is going to impose on us next, or indeed what the next Euro crisis is going to inflict upon members. But history suggests that whatever these new rules are they will not, in the main, be ones that benefit the UK. In fact, history suggests that most of the new EU rules wouldn't affect the UK at all. Most of the EU rule changes are to try and make the struggling eurozone and Schengen zone work better, and so didn't affect us. And at least we had a significant say, and sometimes a veto, over other rules that did affect us. They'll probably still affect us when we're outside the EU, but now we have no say, and certainly no veto. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
In message , at 08:48:05 on
Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Countries outside the "single market" sell into it all the time. Of course they do, but have to deal with tariffs and quotas. Unless they sign a free trade agreement. The EU has FTAs with many countries which do not involve adhering to the EU's single market rules. That sounds a bit contradictory. -- Roland Perry |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning SouthLondon Orange?
tim... wrote:
"Recliner" wrote in message ... Robin9 wrote: tim...;156926 Wrote: "Robin9" wrote in message ...- Neil Williams;156835 Wrote:- On 2016-07-15 08:29:59 +0000, Robin9 said: - Her choices are limited. As the SNP will try to block Brexit in Parliament, and will receive much support from the Liberal Democrats and many Labour MPs, at some stage Mrs. May will have to repeal the Fixed Term Parliament Act and call a general election. She will then have a commanding majority in The House but most of her back-benchers will be strongly opposed to free movement.- Whyever do you think that? Parliament is quite heavily pro-European. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply.- Because, with the Labour Party is its present state, the Tories would win with a huge majority. Tory Party activists will make quite sure that most new Members will be opposed to free movement.- If there is a snap election "tomorrow" I doubt that Tory members will have any influence at all over the chosen candidates, there simply isn't the time - The balance of power in Parliament will be changed enormously.- You may be right. Personally I can't see too many of these seats that Labour are likely to lose changing hands to the Tories. UKIP are going to sweep them up. Though I suspect my prediction is not going to be tested (it's only for valid now, don't extrapolate it to 2020 - yet. A week is a long time in politics a lot will change by then, for good or bad). tim There is no reason to expect an snap election in the next few weeks. In my earlier post I said "at some stage." First, the Fixed Term Parliament Act will have to be repealed. The need to for Mrs. May to call an election will eventually dawn on political commentators and soon the idea will become common political currency. When that happens, Tory activists will concentrate their minds on what they need to do to make sure their Government can shrug off the SNP and the LD and work towards the result most of us want. There's no need to repeal the act to hold an election before 2020. There can be either a vote of no confidence or the House of Commons, with the support of two-thirds of its total membership (including vacant seats), resolves "That there shall be an early parliamentary general election". The SNP and LDs would presumably support the motion, why? neither are in any state to afford to fight another election The LD's are broke generally and the SNP have just had to pay for three. The LDs think they'd win back some seats in pro-EU areas, and they're probably right. The SNP would make a new independence referendum to stay in the EU their main theme. And they'd win without spending very much. but some Labour members would also have to do so to get 434 votes. With the deep split in Labour, one or other of the parliamentary Labour parties would probably be happy to do so. why, what's in it for them? The Corbynistas would see it as a way of dislodging the hated 'Blairite' anti-Corbyn MPs. And they think they'd win, too. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London Orange?
Optimist wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 00:17:33 +0100, Charles Ellson wrote: On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 17:18:38 +0100, Optimist wrote: On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 15:01:25 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote: Optimist wrote: On 15 Jul 2016 18:20:48 GMT, Jeremy Double wrote: Also, remember that companies, as well as universities, are partners in collaborative projects funded by the EU. I have been involved in projects where UK companies have benefitted from the expertise of partners (companies and universities) from other EU countries. The UK will lose out if it doesn't remain part of the European research funding system (as non-EU-member Switzerland is). Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are precedents for exclusion. According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Norway & Turkey. And there's no reason why the UK won't follow Switzerland's example. Leaving the EU will save £10 billion a year net so lack of money need not be an issue. I thought all of that was going to be spent on the NHS? ;) That will be the decision of the elected government So the Brexiteers lied ? The campaign was on the question Leave or Remain, it was not a general election which decides the government. Although, funnily enough, with or without a general election, it has completely changed the government. More cabinet ministers have changed following the referendum than did after the election of the new Tory government replacing the coalition last year. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
In message , at 09:41:18 on Mon, 18 Jul
2016, tim... remarked: Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are precedents for exclusion. According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Norway & Turkey. EEA and accession states. where's Bosnia, Montenegro and Serbia (and possibly Albania) then? In what context? Erasmus, or something else. -- Roland Perry |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
In message , at 09:42:13 on
Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are precedents for exclusion. According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Norway & Turkey. EEA and accession states. Yes, Turkey, due to accede in 1,000 years or 10 years, depending on whether you listen to Cameron or Major. In any case, why limit it to Europe, why not a scheme for the whole the world? I'm not sufficiently familiar with Erasmus to be able to answer that. -- Roland Perry |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London
Optimist wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 07:57:02 -0000 (UTC), Recliner wrote: Optimist wrote: On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:23:19 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 17:57:23 on Sun, 17 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Countries outside the "single market" sell into it all the time. Of course they do, but have to deal with tariffs and quotas. Unless they sign a free trade agreement. The EU has FTAs with many countries which do not involve adhering to the EU's single market rules. But that trade involves a lot more paperwork than trade within the single market. So, although there aren't tariffs, the trade isn't frictionless. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36083664 That would affect EU states more than the UK, as we import more from EU than we export. Another advantage of being outside the EU is that we no longer have to apply tariffs against non-EU imports, hence so many countries are keen to get FTAs with the UK. I view the single market as being like a lavatory. We need access to it, but not to be locked into it. On that analogy, it's a public lavatory that you have to pay to use, as we'll lose our Radar key. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:13:18 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:
On 2016-07-18 08:53:10 +0000, Optimist said: Point is that the Leave side were not in a position to say how the money WOULD be spent, just how it COULD be spent. Correct, but that was not how they portrayed it. You could call it twisting the truth, but whatever you call it it was dishonest. Neil The taxpayer-funded booklet sent to every household at the start of the campaign stated quite clearly that this was a referendum on whether to stay in or leave the EU. It said "This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide." It was not a consultation on what the alternatives could be. In a general election the parties will set out their stalls. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning SouthLondon
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:46:08 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:19:02 +0100 Neil Williams wrote: On 2016-07-16 20:45:50 +0000, said: Unlike the SNP, it seems that UKIP is in no shape on the ground to pick up the Labour seats. Look at the pattern of local government byelection results I post each week in uk.politics.electoral. UKIP's vote has been falling with Labour winning their safe seats by default, even though they are losing a few more marginal seats to the Tories. UKIP often can't find candidates to defend their seats. One of this week's four Lib Dem gains was a gain in such a seat. I wonder if UKIP will now slowly die off - it was still really a single-issue party, and their main matter of campaign has been set in motion. Also now that Farage has gone they don't have anyone high profile left to campaign. They said he quit because of threats but politicians get them all the time anyway. He's a smart cookie and I suspect he knew that once they got the referendum result UKIP raison d'etre pretty much vanished overnight. However if for whatever reason Article 50 doesn't get enacted I expect to see him pop up again. Farage is going to see his term out in the European parliament. If the government haven't got us out of the EU by 2019 you never know he might stand again! |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:02:14 +0100, "tim..." wrote:
"Recliner" wrote in message ... Optimist wrote: On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:23:19 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 17:57:23 on Sun, 17 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Countries outside the "single market" sell into it all the time. Of course they do, but have to deal with tariffs and quotas. Unless they sign a free trade agreement. The EU has FTAs with many countries which do not involve adhering to the EU's single market rules. But that trade involves a lot more paperwork than trade within the single market. So, although there aren't tariffs, the trade isn't frictionless. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36083664 Though the argument is, that that friction is a price worth paying in order to simplify our trade with ROW (and even intra-UK, for that matter) Fully analysed, that pov might not be right, but Remainers can't simply dismiss it as not existing (which is the generally the approach used so far) tim The rules apply both ways. It will cost EU countries also to sell to the UK, and they sell to us far more than we buy from them. So in my view they will want to do a deal. The Germans already do. |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:24:32 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:48:05 on Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Countries outside the "single market" sell into it all the time. Of course they do, but have to deal with tariffs and quotas. Unless they sign a free trade agreement. The EU has FTAs with many countries which do not involve adhering to the EU's single market rules. That sounds a bit contradictory. The EU has a free trade deal with Mexico. Does that mean Mexicans have freedom to live and work in the EU? |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 08:50:37 +0000 (UTC), d wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:21:57 +0100 Neil Williams wrote: On 2016-07-17 16:31:52 +0000, said: It's not bullying to say that if you want the benefits of the single market you can't choose to exclude part of it because of your xenophobia. Freedom of movement is a bit inevitable for Switzerland with its land frontiers and not being a police state. Not believing that uncontrolled immigration is viable (for financial reasons, say) is not "xenophobia", nor is a reciprocal freedom of trade Ignore Rosenstiel. He's just another hysterical Guardianista and paid up member of the Liberal Authoritarian Religion who likes to equate any controls on immigration with that of a fascist state. The irony of course being that the ruthless stamping down on discussing the issue of immigration and the vilification of those who did (or frankly anyone who disagreed with their orthodoxy in any way) over the last few decades by so called "liberals" has all the hallmarks of a repressive regime. Sadly most of them them are too blind and/or stupid to realise it. +1 |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
|
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 09:41:18 on Mon, 18 Jul 2016, tim... remarked: Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are precedents for exclusion. According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Norway & Turkey. EEA and accession states. where's Bosnia, Montenegro and Serbia (and possibly Albania) then? In what context? Erasmus, or something else. accession states (You introduced the term, no-one else did) tim |
Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ... In message , at 09:42:13 on Mon, 18 Jul 2016, Optimist remarked: Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are precedents for exclusion. According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Norway & Turkey. EEA and accession states. Yes, Turkey, due to accede in 1,000 years or 10 years, depending on whether you listen to Cameron or Major. In any case, why limit it to Europe, why not a scheme for the whole the world? I'm not sufficiently familiar with Erasmus to be able to answer that. -- Roland Perry quote from wonkypedia: "There are currently more than 4,000 higher institutions participating in Erasmus across the 33 countries involved in the Erasmus programme and by 2013..." as 33 is 5 more than the number of countries in the EU, it is clear that being a member of the EU is not a pre-requisite to being within Erasmus, so all those claiming that it is, are lying tim |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk