PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   BREXIT (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/619673-brexit.html)

Fly Aiprt 13th Sep 2019 19:49


Originally Posted by B Fraser (Post 10569297)
Here's an answer from the chap who until recently, ran the port of Dover.

I searched the internet to check what the minister said.
Here's some official info on the French official Customs website
https://brexit.gouv.fr/sites/brexit/accueil.html
https://brexit.gouv.fr/sites/brexit/...ouanieres.html

They seem to be ready, 600 new customs officers have been hired and trained, additional buildings and control areas have been built on the right side of the Channel.
Just waiting for the final arrangements on the wrong side in case of No-Deal.

Anybody so kind as to point me to official info so I can verify what this...voice-over was telling on the telephone ?
Thx

Curious Pax 13th Sep 2019 21:34


Originally Posted by ORAC (Post 10569181)
https://order-order.com/2019/09/13/p...16-referendum/

The Metropolitan Police have today announced there will be no further action against the Leave.EU campaign. The police said that there is insufficient evidence to justify any further criminal investigation. Campaign founder Arron Banks has demanded a public inquiry into Remainer MPs’ abuse of public office in response…

Not quite as squeaky clean as you would have us believe:

Scotland Yard said that - even though there had been "technical breaches" of electoral law by Leave.EU - it had taken the decision to drop its investigation after consulting the Crown Prosecution Service in early August.

Commander Alex Murray said: "Following detailed enquiries it became apparent that the nature of potential breaches of the regulations, the criminal standard of proof required in court and the actions taken by Leave.EU to adhere to the regulations, mean that it is now appropriate to take no further action."



ORAC 13th Sep 2019 21:49

No, it means innocent - and they couldn’t even, for all their trying, even dig up enough to get into into court.

Unless, of course, you’re using the system of if you throw enough mud, if you’re lucky perhaps some might stick....

wiggy 14th Sep 2019 08:07


Originally Posted by B Fraser (Post 10569297)
Here's an answer from the chap who until recently, ran the port of Dover.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YggHsc0LvyI

Problem is he's (supposedly) an expert, I thought "we'd" had enough of those.



dr dre 14th Sep 2019 09:14


Originally Posted by wiggy (Post 10569601)
Problem is he's (supposedly) an expert, I thought "we'd" had enough of those.

He’s also an anonymous caller who only gave his first name and stated he didn’t work at the port anymore.

So unverified and hardly an authority. I’d rather stick to the currently employed experts who are willing to put their name to what they are stating.

Alsacienne 14th Sep 2019 09:17


So unverified and hardly an authority. I’d rather stick to the currently employed experts who are willing to put their name to what they are stating.
As in the Members of the House of Commons?

Aihkio 14th Sep 2019 09:25

Not having followed UK politics that closely I just came to wonder one day if any british prime minister ever tried to take the other approach to the EU. Kick Germany or France or Italy to the side and take hold of the beast. As far as I can remember no but not really certain?

TURIN 14th Sep 2019 10:08

I didn't write this, and I haven't fact checked all the claims.
If it's been posted before then I've missed it. Apologies.

Right, let's tackle this WTO thing.


1/ If we end up solely on WTO rules, then we need a hard border in Ireland. That risks peace, stability, and the Union. Plus we don't have any time to build the infrastructure required. Like, nowhere NEAR enough time. And there aren't any "alternative arrangements", I promise. They don't exist. There isn't a single border in the world that has any. And that means a hard border.


2/ If we rely on WTO rules for trade, then we need to apply tariffs to imports. And expect that other countries will apply tariffs to our exports. That makes things more expensive for us to buy, and makes our businesses less able to compete. Not really sure how this is a win.


3/ If we decide we're not going to apply tariffs to imports at all, then we lose all leverage for negotiating future trade deals. What on earth would we offer them?? We've already given them free access to our market.


4/ If we decide we're not going to apply tariffs to imports at all, then we destroy our own producers - why would you carry on trying to run a farm produce business when the market is flooded with much cheaper products from abroad?


5/ If we decide to only reduce tariffs on products from the EU, then the Most Favoured Nation clause (WTO rules) kicks in - this says that you can't offer more favourable terms to one bloc, and not everyone else. So - no tariffs from the EU, means no tariffs from anyone. See points 3 and 4.


6/ If you were looking forward to getting your bendy bananas back, then tough shit; this rule didn't come from the EU (no matter what Boris told you), it came from the WTO - specifically, the Codex Alimentarius. So, no change there. Except now bananas are extortionately expensive, because, well, tariffs.


7/ If you're relying on the idea that there's an obscure WTO rule that says we can just carry on trading with the EU on the same terms we have now for 10 years, then tough shit again - this isn't correct. The "rule" is Article XXIV of the GATT, and is specifically an allowance for deviating from the MFN (see 5) because you and another bloc are working towards implementing your bilateral trade deal. It requires an end point - a fully thrashed out trade agreement. It is specifically NOT a clause that comes into play when you decide to drop out of a trading arrangement.


8/ If one of the benefits of "going WTO" is that we can make our own rules, then I can understand that. We could decide, unilaterally, that it's too expensive for us to produce electronics with an earthing wire, so we're not going to insist on that anymore. Cool. But then we can't sell our products to our closest trading neighbours. We want to sell stuff to the EU, we need to follow their rules. Except now we don't get a say in what they are.


9/ Having a "world trade deal" sounds quite attractive - quite romantic. The idea of Britain going out on her own, bravely forging links with faraway lands - it's quite appealing. Except trade doesn't work like that. There's a gravity towards your closest neighbours - proximity is important. I'm more likely to sell something to France than I am to Australia - I can get it there quicker, for example, and for a much lower cost. There is no nation on earth - none - that have prioritised trading with distant countries instead of those geographically closest. We're about to be the first - which will involve a pretty brutal lesson in the realities of logistics.


10/ If we go WTO, then we need to check goods coming into our internal market - including those from the EU. We don't have the infrastructure to do this. Nor do we have the staff. Nor the time. Plus - and this is deeply ironic - once we leave the EU, the pool of people from which we can recruit to do this essential work becomes much, much smaller. Do we have enough vets to perform the necessary checks on livestock coming into the country, for example? No. Where do we normally recruit them from? The EU. Ah, shit.


11/ A No Deal exit was never on the cards during the campaign. It is simply all that is left, once logic and reality strip away all the lies that we were told about Brexit. No, German car manufacturers haven't been knocking on Merkel's door demanding a trade deal with the UK. No, the EU doesn't need us more than we need them. No, we don't hold all the cards. None of that was true. It was never going to be true. But rather than facing up to reality, the rhetoric has just become more and more extreme. If you're dealt a bad hand in a game of poker - if the river turns against you - you don't HAVE to go all in. There are other options. You don't need to claim that was what you intended to do all along.


All of this - all of the above. That's what Donald Tusk was talking about. People who either ignored the above, or didn't even bother to find out about it - but sold us Brexit anyway. The people who - even now - print banners that say "LET'S GO WTO!" as if it's the easiest thing in the world, and without consequence.


Fortyeight days to go.


Just forty eight!

Fareastdriver 14th Sep 2019 10:44

After that lecture I don't understand why every country in the World apart from those in the EU has not collapsed.

OilCan 14th Sep 2019 10:46


Originally Posted by Aihkio (Post 10569665)
Not having followed UK politics that closely I just came to wonder one day if any british prime minister ever tried to take the other approach to the EU. Kick Germany or France or Italy to the side and take hold of the beast. As far as I can remember no but not really certain?

Love her or hate her, at least Thatcher had a good go at kicking them into line, and with a fair degree of success.

Less Hair 14th Sep 2019 10:53

That's because she negotiated and remained in. This time the UK announced to finally leave from the beginning and was surprised that no room for negotiations was left.

OilCan 14th Sep 2019 10:55


Originally Posted by Fareastdriver (Post 10569728)
After that lecture I don't understand why every country in the World apart from those in the EU has not collapsed.

Try this; Who actually trades solely under WTO rules? - James Hardy - Medium

TURIN 14th Sep 2019 11:07


Originally Posted by OilCan (Post 10569741)



MAURITANIAFor those of you not familiar with Mauritania, it’s GDP is $4,714million (0.2% of the UK’s), 50% of its exports consist of Iron Ore, and between 1% and 17% of the population still live in slavery.

It appears that this is the country that Leave.UK wish to emulate. I am afraid that this is not a vision for Britain’s future that I can share.

WOW! I had a feeling that there wouldn't be many, but just one! Still, blue passports and bent bananas eh? Win Win!

ORAC 14th Sep 2019 11:19

You don’t have to have tariffs, they are after all a tax on your citizens. There are, as the EU employs, alternatives, for example phytosanitary measures.

Preferential tariff agreements can be signed. Quite why the EU would wish to ensure high tariffs be charged on goods to a market where they currently enjoy a trade surplus of nearly £90B and see the trade go elsewhere, I am not sure.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.o...ariff-barriers



Islandlad 14th Sep 2019 11:28

This is a reminder what Nigel Farage said on tge morning of 9th September. Reposted for those who missed it.

Even he, at this late hour, wants a Deal; but he wants to leave first/negotiate later. From a position of utter weakness. The man and his followers are mad, quite mad!

Clean Break Brexit – No Deal and Nigel Farage

Nigel now wants a deal with the EU! outlined below in his own words.

A WTO Rules Base Line – GAT and NF is advocating a freeze on the current basis to keep things going – on Good Morning Britain 0740 9 September 2019 he talks about 'project fear' and scare mongering then says this:

‘the WTO sets a base line how businesses continue, but if we were deadly serious, if Brussels really thought we were leaving, in 50 days time, quite possibly, we could negotiate; I don’t want to get too technical, we could negotiate under GAT, a freeze, whereby, we carried on everything as it was with Europe for the next 2 years. We’d have left the European Union, so there are plenty of ways of sorting this out.’

Unfortunately the devil is in the detail as described above. Nigel Farage does not have a meaningful way of leaving the EU, but still wants to be OUT!

But then the best bit:

‘I tell you what people do want: they want this over, they want it done, they want us to get on with the rest of our lives and I think. Who wants this to dominate our politics, our country, for the next five years, ten years?’

He just advocated a further 2 years discussion under EU terms while trying to get out of the EU!

I was very careful to transcribe EXACTLY what he said because I could not believe what i was hearing.

Islandlad 14th Sep 2019 11:40


Originally Posted by ORAC (Post 10569763)
You don’t have to have tariffs, they are after all a tax on your citizens. There are, as the EU employs, alternatives, for example phytosanitary measures.

Preferential tariff agreements can be signed. Quite why the EU would wish to ensure high tariffs be charged on goods to a market where they currently enjoy a trade surplus of nearly £90B and see the trade go elsewhere, I am not sure.

That is the whole point of the single market!

Do we have to go back to 'Leaving the EU 101' so late in the game.

Shame on David Cameron for NOT negotiation with the EU with any backbone. Did he learn nothing while working for Margaret Thatcher.

Shame on David Cameron for failing to explain how the EU works.

Shame on David Cameron for calling an undefined referendum.

Shame on David Cameron for committing to Article 50 before the ground work was done.

Shame on David Cameron for using the electorate to resolve the internal squabbling of the Tory Party

Shame on David Cameron for walking away leaving others to sort out his mess!

​​​​​​

WingNut60 14th Sep 2019 11:58


Originally Posted by TURIN (Post 10569704)
I didn't write this, and I haven't fact checked all the claims.
If it's been posted before then I've missed it. Apologies.

Right, let's tackle this WTO thing.

Points 1) thru 13)

..................................
All of this - all of the above. That's what Donald Tusk was talking about. People who either ignored the above, or didn't even bother to find out about it - but sold us Brexit anyway. The people who - even now - print banners that say "LET'S GO WTO!" as if it's the easiest thing in the world, and without consequence.


Fortyeight days to go.


Just forty eight!

A reasoned argument. The first that I have seen.
I am unsure of its merits on balance but informative nevertheless.

Re "Just forty eight!" - yes precisely, or it was a while ago.

But that's 48 up ahead, with 1177 behind.
Me? I'd be looking to severely castigate those responsible for wasting those 1177 days.
But in the true British tradition, I'm sure most of 'em will end up with titles and a comfy seat in the sleeping chamber.

Fly Aiprt 14th Sep 2019 12:31


Originally Posted by OilCan (Post 10569730)
Love her or hate her, at least Thatcher had a good go at kicking them into line, and with a fair degree of success.

For those interested :
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-11598879

Taking the lead in a Union involves a spine and a brain - collectively speaking. Not sure Britain is well equiped at the moment...
Not even sure the kingdom will remain united for long...

Fly Aiprt 14th Sep 2019 12:46


Originally Posted by TURIN (Post 10569704)
All of this - all of the above. That's what Donald Tusk was talking about. People who either ignored the above, or didn't even bother to find out about it - but sold us Brexit anyway. The people who - even now - print banners that say "LET'S GO WTO!" as if it's the easiest thing in the world, and without consequence.


Fortyeight days to go.


Just forty eight!

Thank you for this excellent detailed information.
Might be an eye opener for some people here.
Of course some will accuse the EU for not having told that before...

What strikes me are the questions from some here as to "why don't we go WTO only", "How are nations outside the EU doing", "What if..", "How about..".
They appear to be 3-4 years behind. Think first, and only then discuss and vote...

Una Due Tfc 14th Sep 2019 14:01

Turin, your WTO post is probably the best one I've ever read on this site. Why on earth you would want to join the likes of North Korea in the WTO pot is beyond me.


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:04.


Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.