Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
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.

Oh so the company that refurbishes antique mercury-based scientific
instruments didn't have to close its operation because the EU banned the
sale of these instruments, then?

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London
 

Optimist wrote:
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.

Yes, business people in industries that sell a lot to us will certainly
want a free trade deal (eg, cars, trains, wine, food, etc). Of courses,
lobbyists representing their industries where we have a surplus will be
against a free trade deal (eg, banking, insurance, TV programmes, music,
etc). Making sure we get free trade in the areas where we have a surplus in
return for them having free trade in their strong areas will take a lot of
negotiation.

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 05:29:11 -0500, wrote:

In article ,
(Optimist) wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 23:55:32 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:

The money won't be spent on health in England, it will go into
supporting further privatisation of the NHS.

TTIP, which the EU wants to push through, will do that.

The EU TTIP negotiators keep telling us that TTIP will NOT allow public
services to be privatised if EU countries don't want that to happen. Are you
accusing them of lying?

If TTIP is do marvellous why are the details of it kept secret? See the Youtube video by Irish
independent MEP Luke "Ming" Flanagan which the EU want taken down.

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

In message , at 11:02:51 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?

Who mentioned freedom to live and work?
--
Roland Perry

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

In message , at 11:41:26 on Mon, 18 Jul
2016, tim... remarked:
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.

Oh so the company that refurbishes antique mercury-based scientific
instruments didn't have to close its operation because the EU banned
the sale of these instruments, then?

Do you approve of scrapping the ban on trading in ivory too?
--
Roland Perry

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

In message , at 11:34:42 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)

Yes, as a reason why *some* (not all) of them might be in the Erasmus
programme.
--
Roland Perry

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

In message , at 11:38:46 on Mon, 18 Jul
2016, tim... remarked:
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

Who are these "people" who are "all claiming" that? Iceland is EEA, not
EU.
--
Roland Perry

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London Orange?
 

tim... wrote:

"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


I said it was about free movement of people, not about EU membership.
Anyhow, I've done a few seconds of research rather than relying on
remembering news reports from two years ago, and found this:

http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/erasmus-plus/updates/20140128-participation-switzerland-erasmus-plus_en


Anna Noyd-Dryver

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:41:26 on Mon, 18 Jul 2016,
tim... remarked:
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.

Oh so the company that refurbishes antique mercury-based scientific
instruments didn't have to close its operation because the EU banned the
sale of these instruments, then?

Do you approve of scrapping the ban on trading in ivory too?

That's completely different though, isn't

(It's a ridiculous comparison and you ought to fell ashamed making it)

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:38:46 on Mon, 18 Jul 2016,
tim... remarked:
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

Who are these "people" who are "all claiming" that? Iceland is EEA, not
EU.

I've seen it at least three times

perhaps not in this thread

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

In article ,
(Optimist) wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:02:14 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:

"Recliner" wrote in message

nal-september.org...
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)

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.

Ah! The old British Imperial arrogance! The EU has plenty of trading
opportunities without the UK and can afford to be hard bon us as we can
afford to be hard on them, nearly 10 times the size.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
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.

+1

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Optimist wrote:
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.

Yes, business people in industries that sell a lot to us will certainly
want a free trade deal (eg, cars, trains, wine, food, etc). Of courses,
lobbyists representing their industries where we have a surplus will be
against a free trade deal (eg, banking, insurance, TV programmes, music,
etc). Making sure we get free trade in the areas where we have a surplus
in
return for them having free trade in their strong areas will take a lot of
negotiation.

doesn't mean that it will be impossible to achieve (which is the claim)

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

"Optimist" wrote in message
...
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?

Roland's picking up on a different claim by the PP (one which they probably
made in error)

(You have to be really careful here, too many people interpret freedom of
movement to mean freedom of movement and answer accordingly, when it is
clear from the context that the poster means Freedom of Movement! - and
that's a simple mistake)

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
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

at a 3% mark up

(YMMV - happy to be told where I, someone with irregular income, can get one
that doesn't)

and money is easily converted

At margins of up to 30% - yes I really did see people charging that much on
holiday last week

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning SouthLondon
 

wrote in message ...
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.

I don't think he will be quiet over the next 5 years whatever happens

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

On 2016-07-18 11:32:04 +0000, said:

Ah! The old British Imperial arrogance! The EU has plenty of trading
opportunities without the UK and can afford to be hard bon us as we can
afford to be hard on them, nearly 10 times the size.

I voted Remain, but even given that, if they impose *punitive* tariffs
they are selfish idiots barely worse than a child throwing toys out of
their pram.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

On 2016-07-18 11:57:12 +0000, tim... said:

at a 3% mark up

(YMMV - happy to be told where I, someone with irregular income, can
get one that doesn't)

Banks in "profitable business" shocker :)

At margins of up to 30% - yes I really did see people charging that
much on holiday last week

Only gullible people pay that. The best deal can usually be had by
either buying in advance or using your card in a cash dispenser.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2andTurning South London Orange?
 

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 15:01:24 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
put finger to keyboard and typed:

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.


The Swiss voted to restrict freedom of movement two years ago but haven't
yet found a way to implement it.

Indeed; they can't do that without renegotiating the treaties which include
it, because if they simply impose it then the treaties become invalid. That
doesn't mean it's impossible, simply that the other benefits of the treties
that would be lost are too important to simply give up on.

If we want the same benefits then we, too, would almost certainly need to
accept freedom of movement, either via EEA membership or a bilateral
treaty. But it's not entirely implausible that the UK, being a considerably
larger, richer and more populous country than Switzerland, can either do
without if that's what it takes, or negotiate a better deal to begin with.

Mark
--
Insert random witticism here
http://www.markgoodge.com

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

In message , at 12:21:02 on Mon, 18 Jul
2016, tim... remarked:
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.

Oh so the company that refurbishes antique mercury-based scientific
instruments didn't have to close its operation because the EU banned
the sale of these instruments, then?

Do you approve of scrapping the ban on trading in ivory too?

That's completely different though, isn't

(It's a ridiculous comparison and you ought to fell ashamed making it)

It's every much the same sort of thing: banning a commodity because it's
harmful/unethical or whatever.

The reason I mentioned that one example (rather than say a pesticide) is
that sufficiently old examples have grandfather rights. Which you might
be suggesting doesn't apply to mercury instruments??

--
Roland Perry

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 13:43:42 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 12:21:02 on Mon, 18 Jul
2016, tim... remarked:
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.

Oh so the company that refurbishes antique mercury-based scientific
instruments didn't have to close its operation because the EU banned
the sale of these instruments, then?

Do you approve of scrapping the ban on trading in ivory too?

That's completely different though, isn't

(It's a ridiculous comparison and you ought to fell ashamed making it)

It's every much the same sort of thing: banning a commodity because it's
harmful/unethical or whatever.

The reason I mentioned that one example (rather than say a pesticide) is
that sufficiently old examples have grandfather rights. Which you might
be suggesting doesn't apply to mercury instruments??

Yet at the same time the EU was banning incandescent lightbulbs to promote compact fluorescent bulbs
which contain ..er.. toxic mercury!

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and TurningSouth London Orange?
 

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:41:26 +0100, tim... wrote:
Oh so the company that refurbishes antique mercury-based scientific
instruments didn't have to close its operation because the EU banned the
sale of these instruments, then?

Do you have a source for that? The 2007 press
release I've found says antiques are exmpted:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/...070706IPR08897

Is there a more recent ban?

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:56:24 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 11:02:51 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?

Who mentioned freedom to live and work?

That's the whole point of freedom of movement rules within the single market - anyone from an EU
country can go to another in order to work even if this undermines local wage agreements.

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

On 2016-07-18 13:18:09 +0000, Optimist said:

That's the whole point of freedom of movement rules within the single
market - anyone from an EU
country can go to another in order to work even if this undermines
local wage agreements.

Only for a short period. I think it's something like 90 working days
in any calendar year.

It then reverts to local arrangements, though there is not allowed to
be a quota of EU workers. Switzerland[1] requires a work permit to be
obtained, and there are wage controls - you aren't allowed to undercut
a Swiss worker.

I have personal experience of this.

[1] non EU, but does follow the "freedom of movement" stuff.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 14:23:39 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:

On 2016-07-18 13:18:09 +0000, Optimist said:

That's the whole point of freedom of movement rules within the single
market - anyone from an EU
country can go to another in order to work even if this undermines
local wage agreements.

Only for a short period. I think it's something like 90 working days
in any calendar year.

It then reverts to local arrangements, though there is not allowed to
be a quota of EU workers. Switzerland[1] requires a work permit to be
obtained, and there are wage controls - you aren't allowed to undercut
a Swiss worker.

I have personal experience of this.

[1] non EU, but does follow the "freedom of movement" stuff.

Neil

Look up the Laval case in Sweden.

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

On 2016-07-18 13:41:18 +0000, Optimist said:

Look up the Laval case in Sweden.

What, this?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laval_...arefo rbundet


That appears to relate to whether a union could obstruct people being
brought in for less money, not whether the law could restrict it.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and TurningSouth London Orange?
 

On 18/07/2016 09:50, tim... wrote:

"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



Maybe this answers the naysayers?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36818055

Colin

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

In article ,
(Optimist) wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 05:29:11 -0500,
wrote:

In article ,
(Optimist) wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 23:55:32 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:

The money won't be spent on health in England, it will go into
supporting further privatisation of the NHS.

TTIP, which the EU wants to push through, will do that.

The EU TTIP negotiators keep telling us that TTIP will NOT allow public
services to be privatised if EU countries don't want that to happen. Are
you accusing them of lying?

If TTIP is do marvellous why are the details of it kept secret? See
the Youtube video by Irish
independent MEP Luke "Ming" Flanagan which the EU want taken down.

And why have the EU Commission published more about the TTIP deal being
negotiated than about any previous trade deal? Paranoia is a thing.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 12:21:02 on Mon, 18 Jul 2016,
tim... remarked:
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.

Oh so the company that refurbishes antique mercury-based scientific
instruments didn't have to close its operation because the EU banned the
sale of these instruments, then?

Do you approve of scrapping the ban on trading in ivory too?

That's completely different though, isn't

(It's a ridiculous comparison and you ought to fell ashamed making it)

It's every much the same sort of thing: banning a commodity because it's
harmful/unethical or whatever.

There is a mile of difference between unethical and harmful, especially when
in normal use the item isn't harmful at all, it's only harmful if it's
abused.

The reason I mentioned that one example (rather than say a pesticide) is
that sufficiently old examples have grandfather rights. Which you might be
suggesting doesn't apply to mercury instruments??

The grandfather rights to antique mercury based instruments apply to
unrepaired ones (whether still working or otherwise).

as soon as they (the mechanism) is newly repaired they have to follow the
same rules as newly made, which means that their sale is banned.

It's a nonsense

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

"David Walters" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:41:26 +0100, tim...
wrote:
Oh so the company that refurbishes antique mercury-based scientific
instruments didn't have to close its operation because the EU banned the
sale of these instruments, then?

Do you have a source for that? The 2007 press
release I've found says antiques are exmpted:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/...070706IPR08897

Is there a more recent ban?

No, there isn't

the exception applies to items sold in their current state of working-ness
(sorry can't find a real word for that)

once they go wrong the rules forbid the mechanise from being repaired using
historic components, they have to be left not working or repaired with a
non-mercury based device.

who the hell wants the latter in an antique device?

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On 2016-07-18 11:57:12 +0000, tim... said:

at a 3% mark up

(YMMV - happy to be told where I, someone with irregular income, can get
one that doesn't)

Banks in "profitable business" shocker :)

At margins of up to 30% - yes I really did see people charging that much
on holiday last week

Only gullible people pay that.

But there are still people who use the dodgy exchanges (the obvious answer
is, otherwise they wouldn't be there, but I can further, I actually watched
them)

The best deal can usually be had by either buying in advance

That cannot work for the whole of your spending, it is impossible to
estimate accurately how much cash you need and you will always need to top
up whilst you are there (or come home with a large under-spend)

in any case pre-booking doesn't get you a good rate for "exotic" currencies
(which in reality means anything except the top dozen currencies, and lots
of currencies not exotic at all)

or using your card in a cash dispenser.

see my previous comment

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2andTurning South London Orange?
 

"Mark Goodge" wrote in message
house.net...
On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 15:01:24 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
put finger to keyboard and typed:

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.


The Swiss voted to restrict freedom of movement two years ago but haven't
yet found a way to implement it.

Indeed; they can't do that without renegotiating the treaties which
include
it, because if they simply impose it then the treaties become invalid.
That
doesn't mean it's impossible, simply that the other benefits of the
treties
that would be lost are too important to simply give up on.

If we want the same benefits then we, too, would almost certainly need to
accept freedom of movement, either via EEA membership or a bilateral
treaty. But it's not entirely implausible that the UK, being a
considerably
larger, richer and more populous country than Switzerland, can either do
without if that's what it takes, or negotiate a better deal to begin with.

Precisely :-)

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Optimist) wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 05:29:11 -0500,
wrote:

In article ,
(Optimist) wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 23:55:32 +0100, Charles Ellson
wrote:

The money won't be spent on health in England, it will go into
supporting further privatisation of the NHS.

TTIP, which the EU wants to push through, will do that.

The EU TTIP negotiators keep telling us that TTIP will NOT allow public
services to be privatised if EU countries don't want that to happen. Are
you accusing them of lying?

If TTIP is do marvellous why are the details of it kept secret? See
the Youtube video by Irish
independent MEP Luke "Ming" Flanagan which the EU want taken down.

And why have the EU Commission published more about the TTIP deal being
negotiated than about any previous trade deal?

Because it's the only deal that anybody cares about.

Most of the countries that the EU has deals with are the piddly little
countries that no-one has much interest in

AKA the piddly little countries the size of the UK that are too small to
even be bothering to make a deal with, but in fact, they did.

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London Orange?
 

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:16:20 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"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.

You had better tell the chap/ess who wrote the Border Force's
instruction book. Various reasons for refusal are clearly stated and
are reasonably expected events of which failure to prooduce suitably
ID is a rather basic reason although there is discretion allowed
unlike when a person is subject to a current deportation order or has
convicted of an offence for the punishment has exceeded specified
minimum periods
[https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigrat...s-for-refusal]

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.

"Grounds on which entry clearance or leave to enter the United Kingdom
should normally be refused
(8) failure by a person arriving in the United Kingdom to furnish the
Immigration Officer with such information as may be required for the
purpose of deciding whether he requires leave to enter and, if so,
whether and on what terms leave should be given;"

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 Orange?
 

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 18:34:45 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"David Walters" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:41:26 +0100, tim...
wrote:
Oh so the company that refurbishes antique mercury-based scientific
instruments didn't have to close its operation because the EU banned the
sale of these instruments, then?

Do you have a source for that? The 2007 press
release I've found says antiques are exmpted:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/...070706IPR08897

Is there a more recent ban?

No, there isn't

the exception applies to items sold in their current state of working-ness
(sorry can't find a real word for that)

once they go wrong the rules forbid the mechanise from being repaired using
historic components, they have to be left not working or repaired with a
non-mercury based device.

who the hell wants the latter in an antique device?

There are plenty of antique items which collectors are happy to
possess without using them for their original purpose. Do ****pot
collectors usually insist on using their treasures ? Do collectors of
Maori warclubs moan because they can't go down the high street and
**** the locals with them ?

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London Orange?
 

tim... wrote:

"David Walters" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 11:41:26 +0100, tim...
wrote:
Oh so the company that refurbishes antique mercury-based scientific
instruments didn't have to close its operation because the EU banned the
sale of these instruments, then?

Do you have a source for that? The 2007 press
release I've found says antiques are exmpted:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/...070706IPR08897

Is there a more recent ban?

No, there isn't

the exception applies to items sold in their current state of working-ness
(sorry can't find a real word for that)

once they go wrong the rules forbid the mechanise from being repaired using
historic components, they have to be left not working or repaired with a
non-mercury based device.

who the hell wants the latter in an antique device?


"The ban covers only the sale of new devices. Existing instruments can
still be repaired or bought and sold second-hand."

[...]

"Another Parliament amendment accepted by Council lays down that mercury
measuring devices may be traded if they are more than 50 years old, since
they are to be classified as antiques or cultural goods. "


Anna Noyd-Dryver

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 andTurning South London Orange?
 

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:16:20 +0100, "tim..."
wrote:


"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.

You had better tell the chap/ess who wrote the Border Force's
instruction book. Various reasons for refusal are clearly stated and
are reasonably expected events of which failure to prooduce suitably
ID is a rather basic reason although there is discretion allowed

Think about how that works in practice

you have a person in front of you who has "lost" his ID

you refuse him entry and insist that the carrier return him to his point of
origin

he gets the

stands in front of border control tells them that he has lost his ID, they
refuse him entry and insist that the carrier return him to his point of
origin

He gets there, stands in front of border control, tells them he has lost his
ID

......

tim

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

In message , at 18:30:37 on Mon, 18 Jul
2016, tim... remarked:
It's every much the same sort of thing: banning a commodity because
it's harmful/unethical or whatever.

There is a mile of difference between unethical and harmful, especially
when in normal use the item isn't harmful at all, it's only harmful if
it's abused.

Ivory hunting is harmful to elephants.

The reason I mentioned that one example (rather than say a pesticide)
is that sufficiently old examples have grandfather rights. Which you
might be suggesting doesn't apply to mercury instruments??

The grandfather rights to antique mercury based instruments apply to
unrepaired ones (whether still working or otherwise).

as soon as they (the mechanism) is newly repaired they have to follow
the same rules as newly made, which means that their sale is banned.

Cite? If true, I agree; but I've never come across a situation that a
repaired grandfathered item is suddenly ungrandfathered.
--
Roland Perry

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London Orange?
 

In message , at 18:29:03 on Mon, 18 Jul
2016, Anna Noyd-Dryver remarked:
"Another Parliament amendment accepted by Council lays down that mercury
measuring devices may be traded if they are more than 50 years old, since
they are to be classified as antiques or cultural goods. "

Exactly like ivory then.
--
Roland Perry

Will Brexit lead to the abandonment of Crossrail2 and Turning South London
 

In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On 2016-07-18 11:32:04 +0000, said:

Ah! The old British Imperial arrogance! The EU has plenty of trading
opportunities without the UK and can afford to be hard bon us as we can
afford to be hard on them, nearly 10 times the size.

I voted Remain, but even given that, if they impose *punitive*
tariffs they are selfish idiots barely worse than a child throwing
toys out of their pram.

They won't impose tariffs. They will just refuse to accept British demands
if they are as diplomatic as Boris Johnson and David Davis.

--
Colin Rosenstiel