• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

Status
Not open for further replies.

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,647
David Cameron in holding the referendum to (In some peoples minds) take the country back has managed to split the entire union in quite an impressive way. Well done you selfish git.

It was actually in the Party Election Manifesto to hold a referendum......so voting in the Tories at that point gave them a mandate. So when you consider just how devisive this issue has been for years, it was ineveitable that there would be a split in the union......which has been exacerbated by the outside bet coming in so to speak of a leave vote. I will agree with your sentiment though......as it stands right now, its very messy.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
It was actually in the Party Election Manifesto to hold a referendum......so voting in the Tories at that point gave them a mandate.

Correct. However, I recall Robert Peston saying when Theresa May called the 2017 election that there still 80 pages of unfulfilled promises in their 2015 manifesto. It seems holding the referendum was one of the few in their 2015 manifesto that actually got delivered.
 

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,647
Correct. However, I recall Robert Peston saying when Theresa May called the 2017 election that there still 80 pages of unfulfilled promises in their 2015 manifesto. It seems holding the referendum was one of the few in their 2015 manifesto that actually got delivered.

Of course manifestos cover what parties intend to do over the following 5 years......I daresay a snap election in 2017 wasnt actually planned for in 2015
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
30,697
Location
Scotland
Of course manifestos cover what parties intend to do over the following 5 years......I daresay a snap election in 2017 wasnt actually planned for in 2015
Given that the manifesto only had 84 pages, signs are that they weren't making good progress.
 

fowler9

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2013
Messages
8,367
Location
Liverpool
Of course manifestos cover what parties intend to do over the following 5 years......I daresay a snap election in 2017 wasnt actually planned for in 2015
It doesn't really seem like they had anything planned ever.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Given that the manifesto only had 84 pages, signs are that they weren't making good progress.

Indeed. They made too much fuss about the EU referendum and 'English votes for English laws' (after the SNP threatened to prevent them overturning a fox hunting ban in England) to do anything else.
 

Tim R-T-C

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2011
Messages
2,143
I'd be interested to know how the regulatory alignment would work. Presumably it means any goods made in or sold in NI, would have to meet EU standards, so that goods could be freely traded across RoI and NI.

How much trade is there between GB and NI?

Presumably if the UK increased standards above those of the UK, all goods coming across from NI would have to be inspected, less they be from RoI and not to our new standards. The cost of which would fall on the taxpayers.

Similarly if UK wanted to cut regulatory requirements (for all that precious chlorine-wash chicken) then it couldn't find its way to NI, otherwise the government would be forced to put up checks at ports and companies would have to amend their supply chains to provide different sources for products heading to NI compared to rest of the UK. The cost of which would fall on the consumers.
 

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,647
I'd be interested to know how the regulatory alignment would work. Presumably it means any goods made in or sold in NI, would have to meet EU standards, so that goods could be freely traded across RoI and NI.

How much trade is there between GB and NI?

Presumably if the UK increased standards above those of the UK, all goods coming across from NI would have to be inspected, less they be from RoI and not to our new standards. The cost of which would fall on the taxpayers.

Similarly if UK wanted to cut regulatory requirements (for all that precious chlorine-wash chicken) then it couldn't find its way to NI, otherwise the government would be forced to put up checks at ports and companies would have to amend their supply chains to provide different sources for products heading to NI compared to rest of the UK. The cost of which would fall on the consumers.

Possibly ....but of course the devil really will be in the detail.

I was just going back over the actual result of the referendum and looking at both the age profile of leave voters and also the educational attainment of leave voters. Its rather striking......I suspect that this has been mentioned somewhere in this thread though, but it appears the majority of leave voters were older and also poorly educated.
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,523
Location
The home of the concrete cow
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...s-dublin-says-it-wont-back-down-politics-live
David Davis suggests regulatory alignment plan to apply to whole of UK, not just NI

  • Davis, the Brexit secretary, said that the government wanted the whole of the UK to have “regulatory alignment” with the EU after Brexit. Effectively he was conceded something that Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader, proposed only this morning. Davis made the point most explicitly in response to a question from the pro-remain Conservative MP Antoinette Sandbach, who asked for the “regulatory alignment” condition in the Brexit deal almost signed yesterday to apply to the whole of the UK. Davis replied:
The presumption of the discussion was that everything we talked about applied to the whole United Kingdom. I re-iterate: alignment isn’t harmonisation, it isn’t having exactly the same rules. It is sometimes having mutually recognised rules, mutually recognised inspection, all of that sort of thing as well. And that is what we are aiming for.

Davis repeatedly said that regulatory alignment would not involve the UK harmonising its rules with the EU. And he claimed that what he was saying about regulatory alignment had been set out by Theresa May in her Florence speech (see 1pm), although his words today seemed to go much further.

Later, in response to a question from Labour’s Stephen Timms, Davis said the UK would only be seeking “regulatory alignment” with the UK in the event of a trade deal. He implied that, if there were no trade deal, the UK would consider itself free to diverge.

This is an area where there does seem to be a difference between what is proposed for Northern Ireland and for the rest of the UK because the key sentence in the draft that emerged yesterday talked about Northern Ireland maintaining regulatory alignment with the UK “in the absence of agreed solutions” - ie, in the event of no trade deal. It was a safety net clause, and that safety net only applied to Northern Ireland.

Now, EU directives *already* provide that it is entirely a matter for a member state how to achieve the outcome of a regulation, or in other words, regulatory discretion in implementation is already part of the EU framework. So in this way Brexit will make no difference - other than the UK not being part of the making of Directives it will be aligning with
 

Howardh

Established Member
Joined
17 May 2011
Messages
8,121
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...s-dublin-says-it-wont-back-down-politics-live
David Davis suggests regulatory alignment plan to apply to whole of UK, not just NI



Now, EU directives *already* provide that it is entirely a matter for a member state how to achieve the outcome of a regulation, or in other words, regulatory discretion in implementation is already part of the EU framework. So in this way Brexit will make no difference - other than the UK not being part of the making of Directives it will be aligning with
...and paying not to be a part of it either.
I've read, and re-read the statements in the press and haven't got a bloody clue what anyone means. It's absolute perfect Yes Minister gobbledegook. At the end of Davis's statements one would ask "but are we in or out??"
"Something in the middle".
"Is that what we voted for?"
"Dunno, we never asked...."
 

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,647
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...s-dublin-says-it-wont-back-down-politics-live
David Davis suggests regulatory alignment plan to apply to whole of UK, not just NI



Now, EU directives *already* provide that it is entirely a matter for a member state how to achieve the outcome of a regulation, or in other words, regulatory discretion in implementation is already part of the EU framework. So in this way Brexit will make no difference - other than the UK not being part of the making of Directives it will be aligning with

So in plain English, it sounds like that in a post brexit economy , if we want to sell UK made cars in Europe, those cars would have to meet the EU regs of which we would have had no say in defining them ?
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
4,923
So in plain English, it sounds like that in a post brexit economy , if we want to sell UK made cars in Europe, those cars would have to meet the EU regs of which we would have had no say in defining them ?

Of course, that has always been the case with Brexit. Nothing new there at all.
 

Tim R-T-C

Established Member
Joined
23 May 2011
Messages
2,143
So in plain English, it sounds like that in a post brexit economy , if we want to sell UK made cars in Europe, those cars would have to meet the EU regs of which we would have had no say in defining them ?

Yes, but that would just be a normal trade requirement even if we had a no deal Brexit. You can't sell to a country a product that does not meet their trade laws.

What it apparently means is that all of our standards would have to be aligned with those of the EU, so cars made in the UK for UK use would still have to meet EU standards.

Similarly we could presumably not import products from outside trade partners (think US chlorine chicken) that did not meet the current EU standards. So any trade negotiations we might have with new countries, will be reliant on the products they sell us, fitting laws that we do not have any influence or control over.
 

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,647
Of course, that has always been the case with Brexit. Nothing new there at all.

Ok ....so all those working for Nissan in the North East will still be making cars under EU regs post brexit.....assuming they would actually sell in the EU market with a price hike invoked by a new tariff.
 

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,647
Yes, but that would just be a normal trade requirement even if we had a no deal Brexit. You can't sell to a country a product that does not meet their trade laws.

What it apparently means is that all of our standards would have to be aligned with those of the EU, so cars made in the UK for UK use would still have to meet EU standards.

Similarly we could presumably not import products from outside trade partners (think US chlorine chicken) that did not meet the current EU standards. So any trade negotiations we might have with new countries, will be reliant on the products they sell us, fitting laws that we do not have any influence or control over.

Nice post Tim.....you would have to wonder just how many leave voters actually realise this.
 

tony_mac

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2009
Messages
3,626
Location
Liverpool
What it apparently means is that all of our standards would have to be aligned with those of the EU, so cars made in the UK for UK use would still have to meet EU standards.
aligned - but not harmonised.
Which apparently means mutually compatible but not necessarily the same.
alignment isn’t harmonisation, it isn’t having exactly the same rules. It is sometimes having mutually recognised rules, mutually recognised inspection, all of that sort of thing as well.
I'm not sure that there is any practical difference, but it sounds like it will keep the lawyers busy arguing about whether two sets of rules actually mean the same thing or not.
 

EM2

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
7,523
Location
The home of the concrete cow
aligned - but not harmonised.
Which apparently means mutually compatible but not necessarily the same.

I'm not sure that there is any practical difference, but it sounds like it will keep the lawyers busy arguing about whether two sets of rules actually mean the same thing or not.
It means that the output must be the same (e.g. that the car meets the emissions regulation) but how you achieve it doesn't have to be.
 

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,647
It means that the output must be the same (e.g. that the car meets the emissions regulation) but how you achieve it doesn't have to be.

Which actually begs the question of just how many ways there are to achieve an emissions regulation.
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,559
Having the EU is a good thing in that respect. Without it the German government could have tried to cover up the findings to protect German business.
Yes, I'm sure the outcome the USA achieved makes them pleased they are members of the EU.
 

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,647
Having the EU is a good thing in that respect. Without it the German government could have tried to cover up the findings to protect German business.

indeed....so is it true that despite all the negative publicity that EU regs get, isnt it true that the overwhelming majority of them actually benefit the UK anyway? Clearly emissions regs would have a positive effect in the Knutsford enviroment as an example
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,559
I thought some Brexiteers didn't want us to stay in the EU because they feared it would eventually become like the USA. ;)

The USA found the emissions scandal and forced the action. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that the EU and/or the German government knew of the scandal and mounted a cover up but somehow, once again, an attempt is made by EU sycophants to claim an EU victory.
What your response has to do with any of that I do not know.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
The USA found the emissions scandal and forced the action. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that the EU and/or the German government knew of the scandal and mounted a cover up but somehow, once again, an attempt is made by EU sycophants to claim an EU victory.
What your response has to do with any of that I do not know.

The USA found cars built and sold in America didn't meet USA emission standards. As European cars were built in a different country to a different specification to meet different emission standards, the USA findings didn't directly affect any VW owners in Europe.
 

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
20,041
Location
No longer here
The USA found cars built and sold in America didn't meet USA emission standards. As European cars were built in a different country to a different specification to meet different emission standards, the USA findings didn't directly affect any VW owners in Europe.

Then why did my Mrs’ dad’s VW get recalled in Britain if it didn’t affect them? The USA discovered the scandal.
 

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
Then why did my Mrs’ dad’s VW get recalled in Britain if it didn’t affect them? The USA discovered the scandal.

I said directly. There were separate tests done in the EU afterwards. The fact that VW plants in USA had done something didn't automatically mean the same applied in the UK.
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,559
The USA found cars built and sold in America didn't meet USA emission standards. As European cars were built in a different country to a different specification to meet different emission standards, the USA findings didn't directly affect any VW owners in Europe.

Your comment simply reinforces my comments about "possible" EU/German prior knowledge.

At the very least, none of this can be spun into some sort of success for the EU.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top