Brexit - Post Match Reaction

None from me (as long as we are not a part of it), it would be appalling.

 

However, just find it amusing that the idea was ridiculed, laughed at and dismissed out of hand as anything to be taken remotely seriously pretty recently.

 

Now it is...... ‘what is the problem with an EU Army’?

 

It is the direction of travel, it will happen.

Why would it be appalling, out of interest?

Which part of his plans were you referring to?

Morning Les.

I don’t follow your question. Then again I don’t think you do either pal. Just pointing out that your boy soldier Stevie is planning -some would say grandstanding- again. This was the mastermind behind the botched the leadership coup among other hopelessly amateurish ERG stunts. By now, you’d think he’d know that actions speak louder than words.

Morning Les.

 

I don’t follow your question. Then again I don’t think you do either pal. Just pointing out that your boy soldier Stevie is planning -some would say grandstanding- again. This was the mastermind behind the botched the leadership coup among other hopelessly amateurish ERG stunts. By now, you’d think he’d know that actions speak louder than words.

So he is planning some "grandstanding" in your words, which is "proper hard", and yet you have not the slightest idea what that grandstanding entails, because neither you nor the Guardian know what those plans are.

It isn't like you to make assertions without concrete grounds for them.

So he is planning some "grandstanding" in your words, which is "proper hard", and yet you have not the slightest idea what that grandstanding entails, because neither you nor the Guardian know what those plans are.

 

It isn't like you to make assertions without concrete grounds for them.

That’s precisely the point Les

Stevie says that he’s very clear what should be done and how to rescue the negotiations for the country, the government, the Conservative party and indeed the EU.

Real fighting talk though obviously he can’t disclose his magic solution just yet

I know you’re not the sharpest tool in the shed Les but at one point, even you, will come to accept that your little band of coffin-dodging misfits is led by some proper cretins.

Well, will need an armed force to patrol stuff such as this, perhaps

 

Here's a photo of the first recruit. Ex-stasi so should be perfect for the job:

Meanwhile, the Daily Telegraph catches up with me, here and exposes how the lefties on this thread are being done like kippers by a large Indian corporate bul$h!tter:

Jaguar Land Rover: How EU rules left Slovakia free to entice car maker from UK with £110m state aid sweetener

Brexit, innit...

Meanwhile, the Daily Telegraph catches up with me, here and exposes how the lefties on this thread are being done like kippers by a large Indian corporate bul$h!tter:

 

 

 

Brexit, innit...

What’s your point re. JLR, JJ? Think this one over pal.

What’s your point re. JLR, JJ? Think this one over pal.

Quite. I think we've just witnessed the launch of a boomerang torpedo.

Meanwhile, the Daily Telegraph catches up with me, here and exposes how the lefties on this thread are being done like kippers by a large Indian corporate bul$h!tter:

 

 

 

Brexit, innit...

Am I missing something here - are you arguing against yourself?

That’s precisely the point Les

 

Stevie says that he’s very clear what should be done and how to rescue the negotiations for the country, the government, the Conservative party and indeed the EU.

 

Real fighting talk though obviously he can’t disclose his magic solution just yet

 

I know you’re not the sharpest tool in the shed Les but at one point, even you, will come to accept that your little band of coffin-dodging misfits is led by some proper cretins.

The usual MO we've come to expect from you, Shurlock. Get caught out for spouting rubbish and lash out with insults. Make out that anybody who disagrees with you must be a bit thick, thus massaging your ego and implying that you're the only one who knows what he's talking about. Your area of expertise might be economics, but it certainly isn't the machinations of political wrangling.

What you failed to recognise from him not disclosing his plans just yet, is that the right time will be after the defeat of May's "plan" next Tuesday. When those solutions he will propose are known, that will be the time for you to comment on them, not when you know diddly squat about what they are.

What’s your point re. JLR, JJ? Think this one over pal.

His point seems perfectly clear to me and probably everybody else who is not a hard remoaner.

https://brexitcentral.com/dont-fooled-brexit-deal-creates-triple-lock-shackle-uk-brussels-forever/

Yet another anonymous Civil Servant confirming what a lousy deal the incompetent May has cobbled together with the aid of Olly Robbins, Barnier and Weyand

What is the takeaway point from that story we’d? Tell us

His point seems perfectly clear to me and probably everybody else who is not a hard remoaner.

And what is that point?

Has anyone actually learnt anything from this thread?

Has anyone actually learnt anything from this thread?

I’ve learnt that some people are better off being put on ignore and that Brexit has turned Verbal mad.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I’ve learnt that some people are better off being put on ignore and that Brexit has turned Verbal mad.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

And what is that point?

As I said, the point might not be as clear to hard remoaners like you. Essentially it is that some companies, especially those in manufacturing industry, will use Brexit as an excuse to shift production into countries with low wage work forces. Just as happened with Ford production at Southampton.

The usual MO we've come to expect from you, Shurlock. Get caught out for spouting rubbish and lash out with insults. Make out that anybody who disagrees with you must be a bit thick, thus massaging your ego and implying that you're the only one who knows what he's talking about. Your area of expertise might be economics, but it certainly isn't the machinations of political wrangling.

 

What you failed to recognise from him not disclosing his plans just yet, is that the right time will be after the defeat of May's "plan" next Tuesday. When those solutions he will propose are known, that will be the time for you to comment on them, not when you know diddly squat about what they are.

Caught out for what Les - for laughing at the preening blowhard Steve Baker's claims that he's going to take a tougher line with Brussels and rescue negotiations for the country

Baker and the ERG have had two years to come up with a plan. This was the time to influence negotiations and explain how to reconcile its red lines, the Irish border question and the promises of the referendum campaign. Yet there has been nothing, nada, ne rien. The ERG was embarrassingly forced to shelve it’s own alternative plan to Chequers when it discovered its own members couldn't agree among themselves. It spluttered vaguely about max facs and technology only for HMRC to point out that its costs would dwarf the UK's annual contribution to the EU while doing nothing to obviate the need for regulatory checks. Baker boasted about having the numbers to trigger a confidence vote -only to get his sums badly wrong. And when the ERG did finally scrape together the numbers, it lost the vote and surrendered its most potent weapon against May yet still found a way to have a temper tantrum.

Despite all this, Baker and his merry band of fantasists believe they're going to go all Churchillian and rescue negotiations for the country at the eleventh hour

Les you may have had your pants pulled down but the rest of us aren't so credulous.

Brexit to be delayed beyond march 29 cabinet ministers reveal

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-to-be-delayed-beyond-march-29-cabinet-ministers-reveal-a4036326.html

Don't worry Steve Baker's plan is going to save the day.

Great, more months of uncertainty ruining the economy.

As I said, the point might not be as clear to hard remoaners like you. Essentially it is that some companies, especially those in manufacturing industry, will use Brexit as an excuse to shift production into countries with low wage work forces. Just as happened with Ford production at Southampton.

Well, yes, Brexit has caused companies to move their manufacturing into Europe. The way try to counter that, is to not leave the EU, hence they don't have that excuse.

Has anyone actually learnt anything from this thread?

From the thread, perhaps not, but from the mess itself we've learnt that public consultations over anything really, really important are unwise. Especially if those originating them then pîss off the instant that said consultations don't go as expected.

https://brexitcentral.com/dont-fooled-brexit-deal-creates-triple-lock-shackle-uk-brussels-forever/

 

Yet another anonymous Civil Servant confirming what a lousy deal the incompetent May has cobbled together with the aid of Olly Robbins, Barnier and Weyand

Les, happy to wager the author is a SpAd -that is a political appointee, not a permanent, nonpolitical 'civil servant'.

You are a bit naive in how the world works, aren't you pal?

Caught out for what Les - for laughing at the preening blowhard Steve Baker's claims that he's going to take a tougher line with Brussels and rescue negotiations for the country

 

Baker and the ERG have had two years to come up with a plan. This was the time to influence negotiations and explain how to reconcile its red lines, the Irish border question and the promises of the referendum campaign. Yet there has been nothing, nada, ne rien. The ERG was embarrassingly forced to shelve it’s own alternative plan to Chequers when it discovered its own members couldn't agree among themselves. It spluttered vaguely about max facs and technology only for HMRC to point out that its costs would dwarf the UK's annual contribution to the EU while doing nothing to obviate the need for regulatory checks. Baker boasted about having the numbers to trigger a confidence vote -only to get his sums badly wrong. And when the ERG did finally scrape together the numbers, it lost the vote and surrendered its most potent weapon against May yet still found a way to have a temper tantrum.

 

Despite all this, Baker and his merry band of fantasists believe they're going to go all Churchillian and rescue negotiations for the country at the eleventh hour

 

Les you may have had your pants pulled down but the rest of us aren't so credulous.

Caught out spouting rubbish denigrating Baker's plans without the faintest idea of what they are, is what I said.

And it is disingenuous claiming that the ERG have had two years to come up with a plan. The timescale for this planning for an alternative to the Chequers deal began only when it became clear with the launch of that deal that the devious May had stabbed David Davis in the back when he had spent his time since the referendum preparing a Canada +++ deal, while all that time May had been plotting with Ollie Robbins to come up with that awful Chequers deal

May had always stated that no deal was better than a bad deal, and then came up with the worst deal possible, to the extent that many Brexiteers even considered that staying in the EU was a better option than becoming a vassal colony of the EU. Now, it could be that this was always the plan, that Commie Ollie had advised Remainer May that if they made the deal so bad, they could say to the country that they had tried their best to get a better deal, but it was not possible, that there should be another referendum with the choice of this awful deal, leaving with EU with no deal (or more correctly leaving on WTO terms) or staying in the EU.

The ERG's time and efforts were not wasted in their vote of no confidence in her. It made clear that the Party outside of those in the Government's pay was unified against her, so her authority was considerably weakened. It is weakened because a majority of Party members oppose her deal and would prefer WTO terms by two to one. She has a very poor standing as leader of the party too. It was weakened further by the Labour vote of no confidence in her. On Tuesday, her plan will suffer potentially the biggest defeat in political history, and then her position will have become untenable. There is still time for her to be replaced by somebody who is a Brexit supporter, who will fill the cabinet with fellow Brexiteers and take an altogether tougher line than May has done. That will not be difficult, as May's negotiation strategy is an object lesson in how NOT to succeed. The most stupid part of the strategy is to offer £39 billion just to begin talks on a decent trade deal, rather than stipulating that the £39 billion is only payable following an acceptable deal.

Despite all this febrile conjecture about a series of votes in the Commons to establish a majority preference, talk about forcing a GE, extending the Article 50 deadline, second (third) referendum on our membership, the default position is still that we leave the EU at 11pm on WTO terms if no deal is arranged with the EU. Currently, that is now the best option for us, unless a Canada +++ deal can be rushed through as an alternative. May is in the unfortunate position that she has shot her bolt on that outcome,what with her stupid talk about no other options on the table and that she had also bad-mouthed WTO terms. She can hardly come out now and talk about the advantages of either. May is making herself look increasingly ridiculous by begging the Union barons to give their support for her deal in return for concessions on workers' rights and conditions. The previous Tory female PM would be turning over in her grave.

As the Commons has a substantial majority of Remoaners increasingly intent on thwarting the democratically expressed will of their electorate, it is hard to see how the situation can be resolved except by leaving on WTO terms. If MPs decide that by thwarting Brexit because they think that they know better than their constituents what is best for them, then they have a very rude awakening awaiting them come the next election.

Les, happy to wager the author is a SpAd -that is a political appointee, not a permanent, nonpolitical 'civil servant'.

 

You are a bit naive in how the world works, aren't you pal?

How can you bet on something like this when the identity of the person is anonymous?

How can you bet on something like this when the identity of the person is anonymous?

???

The author is anonymous but I bet he or she is a SpAd.

Well, yes, Brexit has caused companies to move their manufacturing into Europe. The way try to counter that, is to not leave the EU, hence they don't have that excuse.

Really naive if you believe that companies will not relocate to places where there is a low paid work force, just because we remain in the EU.

Really naive if you believe that companies will not relocate to places where there is a low paid work force, just because we remain in the EU.

They probably would do eventually, yes, that's globalisation for you. But the reason they've been able to push this through quicker is due to Brexit. The excuse has made this possible, at this time.

???

 

The author is anonymous but I bet he or she is a SpAd.

So you call me naive on the basis that you bet that the individual is a SpAd, but you cannot possibly know because they are anonymous? Right.

Really naive if you believe that companies will not relocate to places where there is a low paid work force, just because we remain in the EU.

Low paid workforce Les? Location decisions and cost competiveness are a bit more complicated than paying the workforce peanuts pal.

They probably would do eventually, yes, that's globalisation for you. But the reason they've been able to push this through quicker is due to Brexit. The excuse has made this possible, at this time.

No. The reason that they have been able to push this through is because they have been looking into the economic benefits and the grants for some time and having concluded that it is an astute move on their part, the longer they wait, they lower those benefits will be. How can't you see that Brexit is the excuse, not the reason?

Low paid workforce Les? Location decisions and cost competiveness are a bit more complicated than paying the workforce peanuts pal.

Of course. You've somehow overlooked the financial incentives of cheap loans or grants as a major incentive. And naturally there are considerations of the skill capabilities of the workforce, the saleability of that product in the local marketplace, the quick availability of parts, shipping costs, the political and religious structure in that country, etc.

No. The reason that they have been able to push this through is because they have been looking into the economic benefits and the grants for some time and having concluded that it is an astute move on their part, the longer they wait, they lower those benefits will be. How can't you see that Brexit is the excuse, not the reason?

I've agreed Brexit is the excuse - however without that excuse they wouldn't have been able to push it through that quickly.

Have you also thought about the fact that the EU is a much bigger market for JLR than the UK (and with the economic problems we're going to encounter the UK will further reduce), and that the complexity around movement of goods has a knock on effect? Or the fact that it has an easier trip to other markets (middle east) by road?

The UK Government would have offered further subsidies - as they do to nearly all car manufacturing plants in the UK - but the issues above means there is no real negotiating tactics for it.

Of course. You've somehow overlooked the financial incentives of cheap loans or grants. And naturally there are considerations of the skill capabilities of the workforce, the saleability of that product in the local marketplace, the quick availability of parts, shipping costs, the political and religious structure in that country, etc.

I’ve not overlooked anything Les. I simply said that there’s more to location decisions than labour costs. If anything, you’re arguing with yourself and correcting/qualifying your original simplistic post. Good lad.

Alas you’re missing large parts of Jihadi John’s argument Les. He’s a bit more conspiratorial see - he thinks this is a massive ruse by a European Commission bent on politicising state aid rules, interpreting them as it sees fit to screw the UK. Of course he’s also sick in the head.

I've agreed Brexit is the excuse - however without that excuse they wouldn't have been able to push it through that quickly.

 

Have you also thought about the fact that the EU is a much bigger market for JLR than the UK (and with the economic problems we're going to encounter the UK will further reduce), and that the complexity around movement of goods has a knock on effect? Or the fact that it has an easier trip to other markets (middle east) by road?

 

The UK Government would have offered further subsidies - as they do to nearly all car manufacturing plants in the UK - but the issues above means there is no real negotiating tactics for it.

Have you also thought about the natural market place for Jaguar Land Rover vehicles is the UK? That other EU countries predominantly buy the vehicles manufactured in their own Country by their own vehicle manufacturers to a far greater extent than we do? JLR will considerably weaken their UK customer loyalty by moving out of the UK. So closer to the Middle East but further away from us in Western Europe and by road, loading around 9 cars onto a transporter trailer against by sea, a ship carrying 8000? I wonder which would be the more economic and practical option.

I haven't been on this thread for days and just had a look at this. A lot of you should have a look at yourselves as the posts are pathetic. Why cany you just debate like decent people without the vitriol? Ok you all have diffierent views but you dont need to show such bile

Have you also thought about the natural market place for Jaguar Land Rover vehicles is the UK? That other EU countries predominantly buy the vehicles manufactured in their own Country by their own vehicle manufacturers to a far greater extent than we do? JLR will considerably weaken their UK customer loyalty by moving out of the UK. So closer to the Middle East but further away from us in Western Europe and by road, loading around 9 cars onto a transporter trailer against by sea, a ship carrying 8000? I wonder which would be the more economic and practical option.

JLR biggest market/buyers is China, Then the US, Then Europe. Think UK is 4th............probably why they are shipping out.

JLR biggest market/buyers is China, Then the US, Then Europe. Think UK is 4th............probably why they are shipping out.

Exactly Cabbage Face. See page 70 of the latest Annual Report for a breakdown of retail sales by region. Natural market place? Loyalty? What kind of sentimental, weak-chinned gibberish is Les talking about?

Les is crashing out again.

Exactly Cabbage Face. Natural market place? Loyalty? What kind of sentimental, weak-chinned gibberish is Les talking about. Les is crashing out again.

Dunno m8. Thing is most UK car buyers don't care about where their car is made, just it's quality etc..... If UK Labour was cheaper we wouldn't have these issues.

JLR biggest market/buyers is China, Then the US, Then Europe. Think UK is 4th............probably why they are shipping out.

But I didn't say that the UK was the biggest market for the JLR product. I said that it was a natural market as the home market. I accepted that other EU countries were more prone to buy the vehicles made in their own countries than we were. The French, Germans, Italians, Spanish are unlikely to buy more JLRs than they do now, regardless of whether they are made in Slovakia, Austria, China or elsewhere.

The debate on JLR was whether their decision was because of Brexit, or whether that was just a convenient excuse.

Have you also thought about the natural market place for Jaguar Land Rover vehicles is the UK? That other EU countries predominantly buy the vehicles manufactured in their own Country by their own vehicle manufacturers to a far greater extent than we do? JLR will considerably weaken their UK customer loyalty by moving out of the UK. So closer to the Middle East but further away from us in Western Europe and by road, loading around 9 cars onto a transporter trailer against by sea, a ship carrying 8000? I wonder which would be the more economic and practical option.

Time to market is important which would be around 6 days for a truck to Abu Dhabi (for instance) and around 6 weeks for a container ship, and don't forget the fact that container ships don't ship to door.

Why will UK customer loyalty be changed? They've been owned by Tata for years and it hasn't made any difference. And why would they care - they've got bigger markets to fry.

But I didn't say that the UK was the biggest market for the JLR product. I said that it was a natural market as the home market. I accepted that other EU countries were more prone to buy the vehicles made in their own countries than we were. The French, Germans, Italians, Spanish are unlikely to buy more JLRs than they do now, regardless of whether they are made in Slovakia, Austria, China or elsewhere.

 

The debate on JLR was whether their decision was because of Brexit, or whether that was just a convenient excuse.

Why is it the natural market? Ford is the UK's car of choice. JLR is now owned by TATA, so technically its "home" market is India.

JLR will use Brexit as a reason, it's one of numerous. Same for many businesses out there. The industry I work in is suffering due to Brexit, no doubt about it.

What’s your point re. JLR, JJ? Think this one over pal.

To recap, Herbert...

You must approve of the European Commission’s actions, JJ. Investigating potentially distortionary subsidies that create an uneven playing field.

Herbert the champagne socialist demonstrates clueless subservience to a corporate led EU.

 

 

European Commission investigation??? Read their attempt at justifying the Ford EU grant, for moving the Southampton Transit manufacturing outside the EU. I've highlighted the parts of their crock of sh!t, that helped Ford sell the layoff's to the unions, when questioned by Daniel Hannan, MEP:

 

 

Question for written answer to the Commission

Rule 117

Daniel Hannan (ECR)

Subject: EIB loan to Ford in Turkey Ford has announced its intention to close its last UK assembly plant, in Swaythling, Southampton, with the loss of 1 400 jobs. Production of Ford’s Transit Van will switch from Swaythling to Turkey, having been based in Southampton — the company’s last UK vehicle assembly plant — for 40 years. It has emerged that the European Investment Bank (EIB) has loaned Ford GBP 80 million to invest in its Turkish plant, as part of its moves to prepare the country’s economy for possible European Union membership. Has the Commission considered that certain EIB loans may have a negative impact on firms registered within the EU, especially where the EIB’s very favourable loans could offer an unfair advantage to non-EU firms?

Parliamentary questions

5 February 2013

E-011072/2012

Answer given by Mr Rehn on behalf of the Commission

The Commission invites the Honourable Member to refer to the Commission joint answer to written questions P‐10070/2012 by Mrs Van Brempt, P-10100/2012 by Mr Belet and E-10134/2012 by Mrs Stassen(1) as regards the EIB loan to Ford in Turkey.

The main objective of the EIB is to support growth and jobs in the EU through long-term, sustainable and economically sound investment in infrastructure, private sector companies and small businesses, including in the automotive sector where EIB has financed several projects over the last number of years notably to promote cleaner transport solutions.

At the same time, an objective of EIB activity outside the Union, in particular in Pre-Accession countries, is the promotion of local private sector development. This applies to both EIB own risk activities, under which the EIB loan to Ford in Turkey was carried out, and EIB activities under the external mandate, as provided for in Decision No 1080/2011/EU of the Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2011 granting an EU guarantee to the EIB against losses under loans and loan guarantees for projects outside the Union(2).

The legislative proposal for the EIB external mandate covering the period 2014-2020 will soon be submitted by the Commission to the Parliament and Council. In this context, the external lending framework and objectives of the EIB will be discussed by the co-legislators.

I've highlighted the turds in the answer the European Commission gave to help you (Turkey, Pre-Accession country???). I can also provide the reason for the layoffs by Ford and JLR, both announced prior to Brexit, which you should be able to understand, below, :

 

My point, you clueless cum stain on the fabric of society, is that Brexit is not the reason that JLR are laying of staff or moving to Slovenia. It because they need to cut costs to satisfy their shareholders, helped by EU state aid that has been provided to Slovakia and is legal under EU rules because it is a poor country and the UK is too rich to qualify for such state aid. It's meant to distort the market so JLR move there. It is also why the British workers, who are displaced by such state aid, voted in their millions to leave the EU.

Now, get back to counting your bunse for your recommendation to the government that they should spend £100m on alternatives to Dover...

Time to market is important which would be around 6 days for a truck to Abu Dhabi (for instance) and around 6 weeks for a container ship, and don't forget the fact that container ships don't ship to door.

 

26 days from Southampton on a RoRo Car transporting ship, surely?

My point, you clueless cum stain on the fabric of society, is that Brexit is not the reason that JLR are laying of staff or moving to Slovenia. It because they need to cut costs to satisfy their shareholders, helped by EU state aid that has been provided to Slovenia and is legal under EU rules because it is a poor country and the UK is too rich to qualify for such state aid. It's meant to distort the market so JLR move there. It is also why the British workers, who are displaced by such state aid, voted in their millions to leave the EU.

 

EU state aid provided to Slovakia? You what? Its pretty clear you don't have a clue what you're talking about JJ.

Happy to provide you a quote if you need some basic education on the subject pal

This is going to get embarrassing...

EU state aid provided to Slovenia? You what? Its pretty clear you don't have a clue what you're talking about JJ.

 

Happy to provide you a quote if you need some basic education on the subject pal

 

This is going to get embarrassing...

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-6023_en.htm

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-18-6023_en.htm

I can also read and use google pal.

As JJ is struggling, perhaps you can help him and explain what EU state aid provided to Slovakia means?

I can also read and use google pal.

 

As JJ is struggling, perhaps you can help him and explain what EU state aid provided to Slovenia means?

• The aid must not directly cause the relocation of existing or closed down activities from elsewhere in the EU to the aided establishment; and
  
• The aid must not divert investment away from another region in the EU which has the same, or lower, level of economic development than the region where the aided investment takes place.
  

• The aid must not directly cause the relocation of existing or closed down activities from elsewhere in the EU to the aided establishment; and
  
• The aid must not divert investment away from another region in the EU which has the same, or lower, level of economic development than the region where the aided investment takes place.
  

I can read too. I'm asking what EU state aid provided to Slovakia means? Who provided the state aid?