Guest Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 34 minutes ago, Webbo said: If thats true that's a really good deal. We always wanted to stay in Europol ,Erasmus and similar schemes anyway. I was certainly happier reading about it. The closer to the EU we are the better imo.
Carl the Llama Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 13 hours ago, Strokes said: Not even close, I’ll want blood. We don’t owe anything I thought £20bil was too much but thought if it came as part of a transition you could half pass it off as extended membership and wash the bad taste away. Someone needs to take May out before she gets the top off her biro. I feel this needs a bit of elaboration tbh, what's your reasoning and how do you square it with for instance the existence of EU civil servants (including many from the UK) who have been working in part for the UK as one of the 9*, 10*, 12*, 15, 25, 27, and eventually 28 members of the Union during our membership? *EEC years.
Strokes Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said: I feel this needs a bit of elaboration tbh, what's your reasoning and how do you square it with for instance the existence of EU civil servants (including many from the UK) who have been working in part for the UK as one of the 9*, 10*, 12*, 15, 25, 27, and eventually 28 members of the Union during our membership? *EEC years. Legally we don’t owe anything sorry, I accept there are definitely going to be some moral obligations and we have to amicably talk through things were we are jointly entwined. I’d like us to maintain a decent relationship, if possible but the figure being banded around to start trade talks are beyond crazy and I hope Parliament rejects it.
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 To be honest for me if it secures a good deal in terms of trade any amount less than 100 billion is a good deal. If this keeps jobs and business in the UK for me it has to be worth it. Any decision that is a risk to jobs and business in the short or long terms is bad in my eyes.
Guest Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 5 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: To be honest for me if it secures a good deal in terms of trade any amount less than 100 billion is a good deal. If this keeps jobs and business in the UK for me it has to be worth it. Any decision that is a risk to jobs and business in the short or long terms is bad in my eyes. I agree with you wholeheartedly but this seems to be a rather different argument to the one you've been making for the last few months?
Guest Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 (edited) Interesting. NHS England have formally declared that the waiting list target won't be met going forward. The NHS constitution makes meeting this target a legal obligation. Jeremy Hunt will either need to legislate to end the target (which would be extremely bad politically when it is due to underfunding) or risks lawsuits as a, result of a failure to meet a target that is enshrined in law. Stevens clearly has decided it's time to just tell it as it is even if he loses his job by doing so. Edited 30 November 2017 by Guest
leicsmac Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 Anyone know where we stand on such things as Eurotom, the ESA and Galileo going forward? Or is scientific collaboration still a mess like everything else?
David Guiza Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 23 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: To be honest for me if it secures a good deal in terms of trade any amount less than 100 billion is a good deal. If this keeps jobs and business in the UK for me it has to be worth it. Any decision that is a risk to jobs and business in the short or long terms is bad in my eyes. That would equate to just over £1500 per every person in the UK. I of course agree obtaining a good deal in terms of trade is fundamental, but the lack of clarity and forward planning by the leave campaign is astonishing. It basically seems as though it was all about triggering Article 50 and then winging it from then on.
Guest Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 10 minutes ago, leicsmac said: Anyone know where we stand on such things as Eurotom, the ESA and Galileo going forward? Or is scientific collaboration still a mess like everything else? These are some of the things chucked into the mix for the £100b according to the sun (not exactly the best source, I admit).
leicsmac Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 13 minutes ago, toddybad said: These are some of the things chucked into the mix for the £100b according to the sun (not exactly the best source, I admit). Hmmm...well that's something at least - our ESA contributions being laughably inadequate before all this started anyway.
Guest Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 19 minutes ago, leicsmac said: Hmmm...well that's something at least - our ESA contributions being laughably inadequate before all this started anyway. We could take back control and have our own world leading space agency
Innovindil Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 8 minutes ago, toddybad said: We could take back control and have our own world leading space agency I'd love to build parts for spaceships. Bet that's proper satisfying work.
Guest Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 1 minute ago, Innovindil said: I'd love to build parts for spaceships. Bet that's proper satisfying work. Interesting environment too. I've been into spacecraft assembly units before (don't ask) and they're ultra clean rooms. Weird seeing satellites foiled up next to you.
leicsmac Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 14 minutes ago, Innovindil said: I'd love to build parts for spaceships. Bet that's proper satisfying work. 11 minutes ago, toddybad said: Interesting environment too. I've been into spacecraft assembly units before (don't ask) and they're ultra clean rooms. Weird seeing satellites foiled up next to you. Got to look around a couple of places (Astrium and Surrey Satellites) a little while back and it is hugely interesting stuff. It is very satisfying work. But in any case, the small bespoke sat tech can be handled by single smaller companies but if we're really serious about getting big stuff out there again it's got to be a collaborative effort.
Buce Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 32 minutes ago, toddybad said: We could take back control and have our own world leading space agency Sure, why not? We could use what's left over from the £350 m per week going to the NHS, to fund it... or the same Magic Money Tree that's funding the DUP bribes.
Guest Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Buce said: Sure, why not? We could use what's left over from the £350 m per week going to the NHS, to fund it... or the same Magic Money Tree that's funding the DUP bribes. Don't think we can't sense the sarcasm. There you go again, talking down Britain's chances of winning the race to reach mars. Some of us believe in Britain's future as a solar leader in Martian exploration.... Edited 30 November 2017 by Guest
Bellend Sebastian Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 48 minutes ago, Innovindil said: I'd love to build parts for spaceships. Bet that's proper satisfying work. My mate does this. It does sound interesting, but like anything it just becomes a job eventually
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 2 hours ago, toddybad said: I agree with you wholeheartedly but this seems to be a rather different argument to the one you've been making for the last few months? I have always been a remainer. What I have said is that the EU does need reform and they are incredibly inflexible at the negotiation table, which I stand by both sides at times have been a little childish. I am happy for us to pay the money IF the EU are willing to negotiate a trade deal with the UK which will have minimum impact on jobs and trade across UK/Europe and the wider globe. Now the matter is the UK voted out we have to deal with that in the best way possible now, the EU needs to take that on board and learn from it, punishing the UK and themselves wont help anyone.
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, David Guiza said: That would equate to just over £1500 per every person in the UK. I of course agree obtaining a good deal in terms of trade is fundamental, but the lack of clarity and forward planning by the leave campaign is astonishing. It basically seems as though it was all about triggering Article 50 and then winging it from then on. Pretty much I agree. Both sides ran an absolutely catastrophic campaign filed with very little substance. This is why I think we just need to wait and see what happens. I am not going to get all party political but apart from the Lib Dems there was not one party with a clear vision on Brexit, Single Market and Customs Union. There position remains not to leave but they are still polling terribly. They always set out their position fairly clearly but it seems the electorate would rather fall for the lies of the 2 main parties for whatever reason. Remain was all about the doom and gloom of leaving instead of the good impact the EU have and leave used some rather questionable claims. The EU of course played its part, It could have agree to Cameron's pretty lame inconsequential requests, he could have claimed a victory which would have looked much better for the electorate. Edited 30 November 2017 by Foxin_mad
Guest Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 5 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: I have always been a remainer. What I have said is that the EU does need reform and they are incredibly inflexible at the negotiation table, which I stand by both sides at times have been a little childish. I am happy for us to pay the money IF the EU are willing to negotiate a trade deal with the UK which will have minimum impact on jobs and trade across UK/Europe and the wider globe. Now the matter is the UK voted out we have to deal with that in the best way possible now, the EU needs to take that on board and learn from it, punishing the UK and themselves wont help anyone. Must've got you lumped in with webbo on Brexit
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 8 minutes ago, toddybad said: Must've got you lumped in with webbo on Brexit On many areas yes but not on Brexit! I am have always been optimistic because I feel it would be stupidity from both sides not to make a deal. However there would be no point in us agreeing to pay 100 billion if we are getting nothing else out of the deal. This way the EU continue to secure some significant funding and we hopefully will continue to get some of the benefits. Of course I would rather stay in the EU and work with them to help them reform but there doesn't seem to be political appetite for that. If there is I suggest every single remain person gets out and shouts about their voting intentions being Lib Dem as that is the only hope we have of no Brexit now.
Guest Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 2 hours ago, Foxin_mad said: Pretty much I agree. Both sides ran an absolutely catastrophic campaign filed with very little substance. This is why I think we just need to wait and see what happens. I am not going to get all party political but apart from the Lib Dems there was not one party with a clear vision on Brexit, Single Market and Customs Union. There position remains not to leave but they are still polling terribly. They always set out their position fairly clearly but it seems the electorate would rather fall for the lies of the 2 main parties for whatever reason. Remain was all about the doom and gloom of leaving instead of the good impact the EU have and leave used some rather questionable claims. The EU of course played its part, It could have agree to Cameron's pretty lame inconsequential requests, he could have claimed a victory which would have looked much better for the electorate. As pretty much the only right winger on here who is also a remainer, do you think the impact assessments should be made public if we are in danger of a no deal? Tbh that should have been made public before the bloody vote imo.
foxinexile Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, leicsmac said: Anyone know where we stand on such things as Eurotom, the ESA and Galileo going forward? Or is scientific collaboration still a mess like everything else? I contacted the Department for Exiting the EU (sad I know!) to ask why we were withdrawing from Euratom and what plans there were for the day we officially left the EU. Below are two responses I received from the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy. It might not be quite what I wanted to hear, however I can't fault what I feel were quite transparent and open responses. Fair play to this particular government department, they answered my questions pretty directly without much of the usual politico-speak as such: 'Thank you for your email dated 11th October to DExEU, regarding the UK withdrawal from Euratom as part of Brexit. Your email has been forwarded to this Department for reply. You ask why the Government is withdrawing the UK from Euratom, as part of the Brexit process. Although Euratom is a separate legal entity, it shares a common institutional framework with the EU, making the EU and Euratom uniquely legally joined. So when we formally notified our intention to leave the EU, we also commenced the process for leaving Euratom. Our aim is clear: we want to maintain continuity of our mutually successful civil nuclear cooperation with Euratom and international partners. So the UK will remain a strong and active member of the International Atomic Energy Agency, as it has been since 1957, and we will continue to meet international standards for nuclear safeguards and nuclear non-proliferation. Our withdrawal will bring benefits, including the negotiation of new Nuclear Cooperation Agreements (NCAs) with key international partners such as the US, Canada, Japan and Australia. NCAs are legally-binding, bilateral agreements negotiated between two states, setting out their intention to increase cooperation and trade related to the civil nuclear sector. The UK will also put in place a domestic regime, which will be as robust and comprehensive as the current Euratom arrangements, exceeding the safeguards standards that the international community would expect from the UK, as a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Our existing nuclear safety and security regulator, the Office for Nuclear Regulation, will take on the role and responsibilities required to meet our international safeguards and nuclear nonproliferation obligations, alongside its existing responsibilities for regulating nuclear safety and security, meaning that a single regulator will be responsible for all our nuclear regulation. Safeguards will continue to be externally verified by International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors, as now.' ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thank you for your follow-up email dated 1 November 2017, regarding the UK’s withdrawal from Euratom. The Government has a clear plan for putting in place necessary Nuclear Cooperation Agreements (NCAs) to ensure uninterrupted cooperation and trade in the civil nuclear sector. The UK has already started engaging with key international partners including the US, Canada, Japan and Australia to put in place essential NCA’s from the day of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. Regarding nuclear safeguards arrangements, the UK will continue to meet international standards for nuclear safeguards and nuclear non-proliferation. We will ensure that the Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) will be in a position to take on the role and responsibilities required to meet our international safeguards, and nuclear non-proliferation, obligations. The Government is in close discussion with the ONR and will remain closely engaged with industry and our international partners including Euratom, as this work is taken forward. The UK Government has been clear that we want to maintain a close and effective relationship with the Euratom Community and we will be seeking a close future association as part of the exit negotiations. In terms of what might be included in such an agreement, and what form it may take, at this stage, will be determined as part of negotiations between the UK and the European Commission on our future relationship. These discussions have not yet started. I hope this provides you with reassurance about UK’s plans for putting in place necessary arrangements following UK’s withdrawal from Euratom. Edited 30 November 2017 by foxinexile 1
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 A hard Brexit is what is needed, where we don't pay the German led Euro bullies a single penny. Don't forget they will be hit harder than us by doing this. It seems to me that we are watering Brexit down, to pander to the EEU. Massive mistake
Guest Posted 30 November 2017 Posted 30 November 2017 8 minutes ago, DANGEROUS TIGER said: A hard Brexit is what is needed, where we don't pay the German led Euro bullies a single penny. Don't forget they will be hit harder than us by doing this. It seems to me that we are watering Brexit down, to pander to the EEU. Massive mistake "They will be hit harder than us"
Recommended Posts