EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

fowler9 · 1 Aug 2019

Killingworth said:
Queen Elizabeth ordered 2008, commissioned December 2017 and currently undergoing training to enter service in 2020. As part of trials aircraft have landed but won't be deployed until this autumn.

HMS Prince of Wales may be operational by 2023. We will only be able to operate one at a time and the cost is enormous, £3 billion each and some . However, they'll look good at reviews but where we'll be able to deploy them safely to be effective is a very interesting debate. Not really for a rail related forum, but we could easily have electrified the Midland mainline for the cost of those two ships.

Off topic now as that's not the Brexit debate although it's part of the aftermath.

Yeah, and the F-35's (as capable as they are) replacing a much larger force of Harriers and Tornados. If we want to deploy the carriers safely as part of a battle group like the US do we'll have to send them out with about a third of our ships unless we collaborate with other countries and we are currently being as arsey as possible with our closest neighbours.

We could have fitted them out with traps and cats and collaborated with the French Navy but noooo. Instead we have the equivalent of America's second tier carriers that the Marines use. Talking to the Americans will become harder if we have a hard border with Ireland and our glorious leader has told the EU no backstop or no talks. So it is hard border with Ireland or no Brexit. The carriers and the Trident replacement are both pointless.

Personally for a country of our size I would rather have had a shed load of F-18's than a tiny number of F-35's.

RailUK Forums

Puffing Devil · 1 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
I wonder if a comparison could be drawn to your most eloquently wording posting above:-

Which is why we have the major opposition party led by an extreme left-wing socialist, a shadow cabinet stuffed with extreme left wing socialists none of which display any competence or concern for others who do not espouse their viewpoint, who continue to be beholden to the even more extreme socialist Momentum puppet-masters in their party organisation and preparing to stand up to larger countries who will think their party's views are not of the 21st century.

Certainly - a plague on both their houses!

Enthusiast · 1 Aug 2019

fowler9 said:
...and we are currently being as arsey as possible with our closest neighbours.
.

Or possibly vice-versa. Where were the Italian, Spanish and French fleets when the (EU) sanction busting tanker was seized off Gibraltar?

EM2 · 1 Aug 2019

So apparently, it's not actually the backstop that's the problem.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politic....mc_id=tmg_share_tw&__twitter_impression=true

Dozens of hardline Brexiteer MPs are vowing to vote down the Withdrawal Agreement even if it does not include the backstop, after Boris Johnson suggests there will be a transition period.

Mark Francois, the vice chairman of the European Research Group, warned of a "running Parliamentary war probably for at least a month" if Mr Johnson tries to force the agreement through the Commons.

The rest of the article is paywalled.

Enthusiast · 1 Aug 2019

EM2 said:
So apparently, it's not actually the backstop that's the problem.

No it's not. The entire "agreement" is the problem. The backstop was highlighted as the very worst aspect of a very bad deal. I read about half to two thirds of the 568 pages. I stopped when I recognised it for what it was - a list of demands from the EU (together with a bill for £39bn) which they laid out as their requirements in order to not cause us too much trouble when we left. It was, effectively, a replacement for the Lisbon Treaty and arguably a worse version than the original. If Parliament acquiesces to it or anything like it the Brexit that the electorate voted for will not have been achieved.

Struner · 1 Aug 2019

Ach well, detain an Iranian tanker on the behest of the Donald. But when Iran detains a UK reglstered tanker in retaliation, go & beg the EU to support you...
The aftermath indeed.

EM2 · 1 Aug 2019

Enthusiast said:
If Parliament acquiesces to it or anything like it the Brexit that the electorate voted for will not have been achieved.

So everyone that voted Leave voted for the same thing, did they?
But also, bearing in mind everything that the UK Government would not accept, what would you expect the EU to do?
It's our Government that have stated their ridiculous 'red lines', which cannot and will not work.

No ECJ jurisdiction
No free movement
No substantial financial contribution
Regulatory autonomy
Independent trade policy
No hard border in Ireland

That rules out a Norwegian/Icelandic/Leichtensteinian model
1-3 rule out a Swiss model
1-2 rule out a Ukrainian model
5 rules out a Turkish model
6 rules out a Canadian model

Which leaves...what?

Struner · 1 Aug 2019

Enthusiast said:
Or possibly vice-versa. Where were the Italian, Spanish and French fleets when the (EU) sanction busting tanker was seized off Gibraltar?

It's the Donald's sanction, not the EU's.

edwin_m · 1 Aug 2019

Struner said:
It's the Donald's sanction, not the EU's.

US but not EU is santioning Iran. The story given was that the tanker was headed for Syria, which is under sanction by the EU.

furnessvale · 1 Aug 2019

Struner said:
It's the Donald's sanction, not the EU's.

Wrong. It was an EU sanction.

Struner said:
Ach well, detain an Iranian tanker on the behest of the Donald. But when Iran detains a UK reglstered tanker in retaliation, go & beg the EU to support you...
The aftermath indeed.

Given that the EU does not have its own armed forces, and according to remainers never will have, just how could the EU help with escorting shipping through the Gulf? However, I understand that discussions are underway with European countries that have the ability to assist each other with mutual co-operation.

Struner · 1 Aug 2019

& who said she was going to Syria? It’s a supposition.

Esker-pades · 1 Aug 2019

Struner said:
Ach well, detain an Iranian tanker on the behest of the Donald. But when Iran detains a UK reglstered tanker in retaliation, go & beg the EU to support you...
The aftermath indeed.

The Iranian Oil tanker was not detained by orders from the US. It was detained because it was under suspicion of providing oil to Syria, against EU sanctions.

We didn't "beg" the EU to support us. We requested assistance from allies, a lot of whom are in the EU. Further, we detained the tanker on behalf of the EU (ish - see the EU sanctions point).

Secondly, the US said that the Iranian capture of a UK registered tanker was a "UK matter" and not something for the US to deal with. If we can't trust the biggest NATO ally to support us, where else do we go?

Struner said:
& who said she was going to Syria? It’s a supposition.

Shock horror, not all military intelligence is released to the public. Given the very tense situation between the US and Iran at the time, it was in nobody's interest to add another diplomatic crisis to the mix.

DerekC · 1 Aug 2019

EM2 said:
So everyone that voted Leave voted for the same thing, did they?
But also, bearing in mind everything that the UK Government would not accept, what would you expect the EU to do?
It's our Government that have stated their ridiculous 'red lines', which cannot and will not work.

No ECJ jurisdiction

No free movement

No substantial financial contribution

Regulatory autonomy

Independent trade policy

No hard border in Ireland

That rules out a Norwegian/Icelandic/Leichtensteinian model
1-3 rule out a Swiss model
1-2 rule out a Ukrainian model
5 rules out a Turkish model
6 rules out a Canadian model

Which leaves...what?

Well put. In the end, if the Brexit insanity goes through, the answer seems likely to be a reunited Ireland and a Canadian-style deal. the question with that is .. will the Unionists start a new version of the Troubles?

AM9 · 1 Aug 2019

DerekC said:
Well put. In the end, if the Brexit insanity goes through, the answer seems likely to be a reunited Ireland and a Canadian-style deal. the question with that is .. will the Unionists start a new version of the Troubles?

I suppose England will lumbered with the worst union flag waving Europhobes coming here to disrupt things for a while. Once those left in the 6 counties realise that they can have a stable existence in with the other 26, the problems will go away, and they will have the benefit of being in the EU.

fowler9 · 2 Aug 2019

Hilarious. The tanker was taken by the Royal Navy because the UK decided to do so as part of the EU. The EU didn't force us to do it.

Bantamzen · 2 Aug 2019

Enthusiast said:
No it's not. The entire "agreement" is the problem. The backstop was highlighted as the very worst aspect of a very bad deal. I read about half to two thirds of the 568 pages. I stopped when I recognised it for what it was - a list of demands from the EU (together with a bill for £39bn) which they laid out as their requirements in order to not cause us too much trouble when we left. It was, effectively, a replacement for the Lisbon Treaty and arguably a worse version than the original. If Parliament acquiesces to it or anything like it the Brexit that the electorate voted for will not have been achieved.

Remind us as it has been a while, what exactly was it that you voted for (hint, it was written on your voting slip)?

This is what annoys me most about all this "we voted for" narrative. If you took a thousand leavers and asked them independently what they voted for, you would get at least a hundred different responses. The wording on the referendum voted slip amounted to no more than a request to the government to invoke Article 50, and thus seek an exit from our EU membership. It did not mean no to an EEA style deal, it did not mean leaving with no deal, it did not define Brexit in any way shape or form. That is fact, indeed it is legal fact according to the laws of this country built over centuries of democratic processes.

And it is for this reason that the vanity project that is now Brexit must at the very least be reset, and a new referendum proposed where the electorate vote on a number of proposed options where a leave vote be returned. Then all political parties must sign up for a full, frank, and honest (I know, I know) debate on the options to at least give the people a real choice, not the Hobson's choice that was the 2016 referendum. And frankly it is the only way to gain any kind of consensus, Parliament will not pass any renegotiated deal, it will not pass a no deal scenario (even without the threatened legal action), and this current government is no position to change any of this without a new referendum. Like it or not, that is where we are, possibly even more so given the government supporting House majority is now just one given the by-result in Brecon & Radnorshire.

Xenophon PCDGS · 2 Aug 2019

The election result at Brecon is one that both the Conservatives who lost the seat and Labour who came fourth cannot take any positives from.

Doppelganger · 2 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
The election result at Brecon is one that both the Conservatives who lost the seat and Labour who came fourth cannot take any positives from.

But this seat was never about Labour. It is very telling how Labour, and in particular Corbyn, are continually referred to as the losers when this seat was always about the Tories and Lib Dems.

No doubt we'll be seeing headlines claiming: "Corbyn's Labour fails to take Brecon seat in by-election"

The public have been so brainwashed that they almost accept anything and this is why I fear a no deal Brexit will happen. If you tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth...

433N · 2 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
The election result at Brecon is one that both the Conservatives who lost the seat and Labour who came fourth cannot take any positives from.

I don't know about that. The Conservatives can't be too unhappy with coming second ; particularly given that they put up someone who (allegedly) fiddles their expenses at our expense.

Bantamzen said:
The wording on the referendum voted slip amounted to no more than a request to the government to invoke Article 50

Not even sure it amounted to that. Let's remember, few people had heard of 'Article 50' before the referendum.

Bantamzen said:
...Parliament will not pass any renegotiated deal, it will not pass a no deal scenario (even without the threatened legal action) ...

Such is the current zeitgeist of grooming us for a 'No Deal' Brexit (Project Grooming), I am not sure that we can be sure that any absurdity won't get through. If Tories like Amber Rudd can do such an about turn, nothing can be assured. It seems to me a sign that Tories will now fall in line with whatever Boris Johnson says because (a) they fear for the future of their party and (b) they fear for their jobs with the blue-rinse kingmakers ready to deselect. Coupled with that, the growing reticence of MPs from other parties to stand in the way of any form of Brexit for fear of losing their jobs/votes and the whole system is starting to look exceedingly toxic. Nothing should be taken as a given.

I'm fully expecting Wally to go to Wally Bridge so he can give tea, sympathy and rousing speeches on positivity and triumph in the face of adversity rather than going to Brussels today.

Bantamzen · 2 Aug 2019

Xenophon PCDGS said:
The election result at Brecon is one that both the Conservatives who lost the seat and Labour who came fourth cannot take any positives from.

It was far more damaging to the Conservatives, they are just one defection away from losing their working majority. If only there was a former candidate, and former Cabinet member that is unhappy with the notion of a no deal scenario, and was talking to the opposition....

433N said:
Such is the current zeitgeist of grooming us for a 'No Deal' Brexit (Project Grooming), I am not sure that we can be sure that any absurdity won't get through. If Tories like Amber Rudd can do such an about turn, nothing can be assured. It seems to me a sign that Tories will now fall in line with whatever Boris Johnson says because (a) they fear for the future of their party and (b) they fear for their jobs with the blue-rinse kingmakers ready to deselect. Coupled with that, the growing reticence of MPs from other parties to stand in the way of any form of Brexit for fear of losing their jobs/votes and the whole system is starting to look exceedingly toxic. Nothing should be taken as a given.

I'm fully expecting Wally to go to Wally Bridge so he can give tea, sympathy and rousing speeches on positivity and triumph in the face of adversity rather than going to Brussels today.

A general election moved one step closer last night, see my response above.

433N · 2 Aug 2019

433N said:
I'm fully expecting Wally to go to Wally Bridge so he can give tea, sympathy and rousing speeches on positivity and triumph in the face of adversity rather than going to Brussels today.

Sorry ... forgot ... there's probably cricket on the telly. The people of Wally Bridge will have to cope without the rousing speeches.

NSEFAN · 2 Aug 2019

Enthusiast said:
No it's not. The entire "agreement" is the problem. The backstop was highlighted as the very worst aspect of a very bad deal. I read about half to two thirds of the 568 pages. I stopped when I recognised it for what it was - a list of demands from the EU (together with a bill for £39bn) which they laid out as their requirements in order to not cause us too much trouble when we left. It was, effectively, a replacement for the Lisbon Treaty and arguably a worse version than the original. If Parliament acquiesces to it or anything like it the Brexit that the electorate voted for will not have been achieved.

There was never going to be any chance of us leaving the EU with a full set of new terms barely a couple of years after the referendum. The only options are to cease all relations (a monumentally stupid idea), or keep the status quo and slowly but surely unpick the legal relationship between the UK and EU (this will take decades to do, but is more pragmatic and less damaging). This will essentially mean agreeing to what we already currently do, with some changes, and renegotiating each bit as and when it is appropriate to do so.

The idea of a "hard leaving date to deliver what the people voted for", where we will suddenly make a huge leap to a whole new set of rules and laws is ridiculous. Our relationship with the EU is complicated and needs time to be unwound. It's not like a giant switch waiting for someone to flick it. :lol:

Killingworth · 2 Aug 2019

433N said:
Sorry ... forgot ... there's probably cricket on the telly. The people of Wally Bridge will have to cope without the rousing speeches.

Please can we leave the situation at Whaley Bridge out of this. Some of us know the town and the railway that runs just below the dam. It is not one to be joked about. The threat was very real yesterday and the residents would appreciate spelling their town's name right.

433N · 2 Aug 2019

Killingworth said:
Please can we leave the situation at Whaley Bridge out of this. Some of us know the town and the railway that runs just below the dam. It is not one to be joked about. The threat was very real yesterday and the residents would appreciate spelling their town's name right.

My apologies for any offence caused.

SteveP29 · 2 Aug 2019

berneyarms said:
In terms of people, the UK/Ireland land border will remain open and only random spot checks will stop people from entering illegally.

What percentage of illegal entrants will those pick up then?
Not many I'd guess

SteveP29 · 2 Aug 2019

Enthusiast said:
(together with a bill for £39bn)

https://twitter.com/13sarahmurphy/status/1156895713822949376

Brexit facts:
• No-deal has NO mandate
• No-deal is failure
• The Backstop was created by OUR red lines and agreed by OUR govt
• £39BN is NOT a downpayment for a deal. It is OUR debt
• The EU is NOT stopping us leaving. WE just don’t like the consequences.
• Brexit is S***.

Bolding is mine for context.

Esker-pades · 2 Aug 2019

Enthusiast said:
No it's not. The entire "agreement" is the problem. The backstop was highlighted as the very worst aspect of a very bad deal. I read about half to two thirds of the 568 pages. I stopped when I recognised it for what it was - a list of demands from the EU (together with a bill for £39bn) which they laid out as their requirements in order to not cause us too much trouble when we left. It was, effectively, a replacement for the Lisbon Treaty and arguably a worse version than the original. If Parliament acquiesces to it or anything like it the Brexit that the electorate voted for will not have been achieved.

https://fullfact.org/europe/eu-divorce-bill/

The latest estimate for the size of the UK’s ‘divorce bill’ upon leaving the EU is £33 billion (€36 billion), assuming the UK departs on 31 October this year.

This is based on calculations the UK and EU have agreed, although the final value may still change.

The often-quoted figure of £39 billion is what the bill used to be when the UK and EU first agreed on the payments. Since then it’s been revised down, not least because the UK’s exit from the EU has been delayed, at least until the 31 October.

To summarise:

It's gone down (£33bn not £39bn)
It's what the UK already owes the EU for things we have already signed up for

I mean, I agree that the withdrawal agreement is worse than remaining in the EU. So, what are the alternatives? No deal? That's already cost the country £2.1bn, and it's still going to be seriously damaging according to the government's own evidence, and the rest. I'd love to see some evidence that no deal won't be awful. That way, I don't have to worry.

Unless we completely rip up the withdrawal agreement and start again, the only 3 options are: remain; leave with the withdrawal agreemen; or leave with no deal. Remain is the best of the 3 available options. The 4th (re-start the negotiations) will take years, even if the EU agrees to do it (remember, they've stuck to the line that they've already finished the negotiation since it was signed off last year).

Enthusiast · 2 Aug 2019

Struner said:
It's the Donald's sanction, not the EU's.

I beg to differ. Have a read of this from The Grauniad:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/20/gulf-crisis-tanker-retaliation-iran-hormuz

Plenty of other sources are available. To save you time, here's the salient passage:

The British insist that they only impounded Grace 1 due its suspected destination – a port in Syria – not due to the fact that the ship was carrying Iranian oil. European Union sanctions [my emphasis] against the regime of Bashir al Assad regime were there to be enforced and international law upheld, the British argued. There seemed little doubt, given its circuitous route, that the ship was bound for Syria.

And I wasn't asking where the Italian, French and Spanish fleets were to assist the captured British-flagged tanker in the Gulf. was. I was asking where they were to assist in capturing the Syria-bound tanker - a task left to the Royal Navy/Marines to undertake on behalf of the EU.

furnessvale · 2 Aug 2019

SteveP29 said:
What percentage of illegal entrants will those pick up then?
Not many I'd guess

What percentage do they pick up now? It must surely be easier than camping at Calais?

ainsworth74 · 2 Aug 2019

furnessvale said:
What percentage do they pick up now? It must surely be easier than camping at Calais?

How so? To get to Ireland (to then get across the border into NI) they'd either need to get onto a ferry or a flight both of which will be subject to full immigration checks requiring ID and travel documents. Failing that it would require stowing away on a flight or ship which is certainly not impossible but neither is it particularly easy. I'd suggest that this is not a particularly easy way of sneaking into the country!!

EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Guest

Established Member

Guest

Established Member

Established Member

Guest

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Forum Staff