Alf Bentley Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 21 minutes ago, MattP said: How many of the Labour MP's protesting the anti-semitism do you think are Jewish Trump supporters? There isn't even one of them in the PLP. The bloke sounds to be a loudmouth bigot - particularly if, after recent months, he still believes there is NO anti-semitism in the Labour Party. Some are overstating it for their own sectarian purposes, but anti-Israel feeling blending into anti-Jewish feeling is clearly a problem among some members/representatives. However, I think you're misinterpreting his comments. I don't think he's referring to Jewish Trump supporters in the Labour Party. In the recording he rants about "some of these people in the Jewish community" and "the rabbis". He's talking about right-wing, uncritically pro-Israel leaders/activists from the Jewish community - and, to be fair, many of them probably ARE pro-Trump after he shifted US policy in favour of Israel, moved the US Embassy to Jerusalem, threatened Iran etc. If he thinks that everyone complaining holds those views, though, he's severely mistaken.
Guest Foxin_mad Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 11 minutes ago, Buce said: Why? Listening to the party is democratic, not a resignation matter. He has voted against the EU all his life, his probably a more ardent leaver than Farage. Much of his policy would struggle to be implemented under EU state aid laws anyway. If he is as principled as people claim he is he should really make a stand and go. He probably wont because he is a power hungry loon. Personally I hope the cretin does go, a more centre ground pro-remain Labour party with a decent leader would be extremely electable for me personally.
Alf Bentley Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 21 minutes ago, davieG said: You vote on the issue/issues that are the most important to you, hopefully you'd get a choice at local level with the candidates offering alternatives But Labour is no more remain than the Tories are Brexit, I just don't see it as a party political issue which i guess makes it a difficult to decide with an election but then the referendum has hardly been a roaring success. The fundamental problem is a majority of the people have not got the EU they would like, it's gone to far too soon and is too politically driven rather than the original concept,at least according to the public statements of a standardisation to help with the exchange of goods and services on a level playing field. It's turned out great for politicians and global businesses but left so many ordinary people behind. I fundamentally disagree with that. There might have only been a small difference between Tory & Lab leadership positions so far, but there is a chasm elsewhere: - Even at the referendum, about 65% of Lab voters were Remainers (probably more now), whereas Tory voters were 61% for Leave - Among members, the divide is much starker: I'd guess that 95%+ of Labour members are Remainers - and a large majority of Tory members Brexiteers, many wanting an ultra-Hard or No Deal Brexit - Among MPs, the confirmed Labour Brexiteers are literally a handful (4 voted with May on the Chequers proposals), even if many accept a Soft Brexit if public opinion doesn't change. Among Tory MPs, the strongly pro-Brexit ERG (Rees-Mogg's lot) alone has 80 members. 14 minutes ago, davieG said: Surely if Labour adopt a remain policy then Corbyn would need to resign? Not at all. Throughout recent months, Labour has been careful not to rule out a second referendum. It has merely supported implementing the referendum vote ("the will of the people") via a somewhat Softer Brexit than the Tories. If "the will of the people" changed to clearly supporting Remain, via a referendum or otherwise, a shift in policy would be no problem. Buce has made the democratic argument - and Corbyn is big on the grassroots, not the leadership controlling the party....in theory. Being cynical, though, if it doesn't suit the leadership to debate Brexit at conference, they'll find a means of ensuring that a meaningful vote is avoided! The Hard Left has waited decades for an opportunity to form a govt and implement their policies. I really don't think they'd want to risk losing a real opportunity, just to fight most of their own members, voters and MPs over Brexit.
Buce Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 16 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said: I fundamentally disagree with that. There might have only been a small difference between Tory & Lab leadership positions so far, but there is a chasm elsewhere: - Even at the referendum, about 65% of Lab voters were Remainers (probably more now), whereas Tory voters were 61% for Leave - Among members, the divide is much starker: I'd guess that 95%+ of Labour members are Remainers - and a large majority of Tory members Brexiteers, many wanting an ultra-Hard or No Deal Brexit - Among MPs, the confirmed Labour Brexiteers are literally a handful (4 voted with May on the Chequers proposals), even if many accept a Soft Brexit if public opinion doesn't change. Among Tory MPs, the strongly pro-Brexit ERG (Rees-Mogg's lot) alone has 80 members. Not at all. Throughout recent months, Labour has been careful not to rule out a second referendum. It has merely supported implementing the referendum vote ("the will of the people") via a somewhat Softer Brexit than the Tories. If "the will of the people" changed to clearly supporting Remain, via a referendum or otherwise, a shift in policy would be no problem. Buce has made the democratic argument - and Corbyn is big on the grassroots, not the leadership controlling the party....in theory. Being cynical, though, if it doesn't suit the leadership to debate Brexit at conference, they'll find a means of ensuring that a meaningful vote is avoided! The Hard Left has waited decades for an opportunity to form a govt and implement their policies. I really don't think they'd want to risk losing a real opportunity, just to fight most of their own members, voters and MPs over Brexit. 3 Significantly, it seems Momentum would no longer facilitate that: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/31/corbyn-brexit-policy-likely-to-be-challenged-at-labour-conference 1
Alf Bentley Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 55 minutes ago, Foxin_mad said: What do you do? Its unlikely but a genuine question is if there was a choice between a brave new socialist world with a hard Corbyn Brexit or a Tory remainer? 35 minutes ago, MattP said: Surely Corbyn would have to resign if that were to happen? You can't really implement his policy if you were inside the EU anyway. I think some people are misunderstanding the nature of Hard Left Euroscepticism, as espoused by the likes of Corbyn. It's quite a different beast to the Euroscepticism of the Right. There's no desire for an arm's-length relationship with the EU. Even the Hard Left support close trading relations with the EU - and they're very keen on maintaining EU regulations protecting employment, environment etc. Their main fear is that the EU, through EMU or competition policy, would limit a left-wing govt's room for economic manoeuvre - penalising "excessive public spending" that increased deficit/debt as % of GDP, outlawing nationalizations or govt subsidies etc. What would a Corbyn govt do about that if the UK stayed in the EU? The reality is that, with a bit of cunning, it could implement a fair amount of its manifesto without breaching EU rules (e.g. tax/spend or fruits of growth from investment, not excessive deficits). Other EU nations have part or fully state-owned utilities; the French govt even has a stake in firms in the car industry and other sectors, I think. The larger EU nations also seem to get away with breaching EMU rules on deficit/debt as a % of GDP, in a way that the likes of Greece do not. There's also the issue of whether the EU would want to pick another big fight with the UK if we stayed in the EU and a Corbyn govt broke a few minor rules. So long as it wasn't absolutely flagrant abuse that would cause problems among other member states, I can imagine them playing it down with the odd warning or fine. Anyway, if they've any sense (not sure about that ), they won't be taking a hard line on ANY EU nation given the current volatile, Eurosceptic public mood. If they did take punitive action against a Corbyn govt, that could even cause the public to rally behind Corbyn and against the EU if it was over spending or a nationalisation that the public supported. A Corbyn govt could even push reform of EMU within the EU - which could gain support from other EU nations. As for Foxin's dilemma.... At the moment, I'd have no problem voting for the likes of Ken Clarke, Dominic Grieve or Anna Soubry against Kate Hoey or Frank Field or even against the likes of Skinner, if I thought he'd support No Deal. 1
Strokes Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 The best thing about a second referendum, is non of these brexit in name only options would make it past the public. It’d be stay in full membership or out hard brexit/no deal. 1
Guest MattP Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 57 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said: I think some people are misunderstanding the nature of Hard Left Euroscepticism, as espoused by the likes of Corbyn. It's quite a different beast to the Euroscepticism of the Right. There's no desire for an arm's-length relationship with the EU. Even the Hard Left support close trading relations with the EU - and they're very keen on maintaining EU regulations protecting employment, environment etc. Their main fear is that the EU, through EMU or competition policy, would limit a left-wing govt's room for economic manoeuvre - penalising "excessive public spending" that increased deficit/debt as % of GDP, outlawing nationalizations or govt subsidies etc. What would a Corbyn govt do about that if the UK stayed in the EU? The reality is that, with a bit of cunning, it could implement a fair amount of its manifesto without breaching EU rules (e.g. tax/spend or fruits of growth from investment, not excessive deficits). Other EU nations have part or fully state-owned utilities; the French govt even has a stake in firms in the car industry and other sectors, I think. The larger EU nations also seem to get away with breaching EMU rules on deficit/debt as a % of GDP, in a way that the likes of Greece do not. There's also the issue of whether the EU would want to pick another big fight with the UK if we stayed in the EU and a Corbyn govt broke a few minor rules. So long as it wasn't absolutely flagrant abuse that would cause problems among other member states, I can imagine them playing it down with the odd warning or fine. Anyway, if they've any sense (not sure about that ), they won't be taking a hard line on ANY EU nation given the current volatile, Eurosceptic public mood. If they did take punitive action against a Corbyn govt, that could even cause the public to rally behind Corbyn and against the EU if it was over spending or a nationalisation that the public supported. A Corbyn govt could even push reform of EMU within the EU - which could gain support from other EU nations. As for Foxin's dilemma.... At the moment, I'd have no problem voting for the likes of Ken Clarke, Dominic Grieve or Anna Soubry against Kate Hoey or Frank Field or even against the likes of Skinner, if I thought he'd support No Deal. The right don't want an arms length relationship with Europe either, vast majority want a sensible trade deal and relationship that has that without having to then take rules for access to it. I'd certainly be happy to back Corbyn if he decided to take on the body and I'm sure he would, I doubt he'd win as he'd again be on the end of the brutal punishment the organisation can inflict if you do try and fight it but I think he's put up a better fight than the left of other countries like Greece. I've long give up on EU reform in any way, if we couldn't get that threatening to leave we aren't going to get it promising to stay, the European elections should certainly be taken more seriously though, next May could see extremes become two of the biggest groups in the place from the left and right and then it could be a fight for the commission. Paul Mason did actually lay out the case for this and given polling now leads towards a potential Labour government there shouldn't really seem to be any fear from the left of it, it's the chance to take control of the country and take it to whatever you want it to be without any interference from others. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/16/brexit-eu-referendum-boris-johnson-greece-tory
Alf Bentley Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 9 minutes ago, MattP said: The right don't want an arms length relationship with Europe either, vast majority want a sensible trade deal and relationship that has that without having to then take rules for access to it. I'd certainly be happy to back Corbyn if he decided to take on the body and I'm sure he would, I doubt he'd win as he'd again be on the end of the brutal punishment the organisation can inflict if you do try and fight it but I think he's put up a better fight than the left of other countries like Greece. I've long give up on EU reform in any way, if we couldn't get that threatening to leave we aren't going to get it promising to stay, the European elections should certainly be taken more seriously though, next May could see extremes become two of the biggest groups in the place from the left and right and then it could be a fight for the commission. Paul Mason did actually lay out the case for this and given polling now leads towards a potential Labour government there shouldn't really seem to be any fear from the left of it, it's the chance to take control of the country and take it to whatever you want it to be without any interference from others. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/may/16/brexit-eu-referendum-boris-johnson-greece-tory When I referred to the Right wanting an "arm's-length relationship" with the EU, I meant politically, not economically. I don't see the Hard Brexiteer politicians as insular protectionists (even if some of their voters are). I see them more as Thatcherite, neo-liberal laissez-faire free-traders. I'm sure they're serious about wanting to see a new "Global Britain" expanding its trade worldwide, again even if some of their voters imagine a British Empire 2.0. I don't have a problem with that - only that I think it will be a much harder task than they would have us believe, and one that they could probably only achieve by shafting the people of this country through low pay, deregulation, low tax/spend etc. Likewise, I assume that Hard Brexit politicians would like trade deals with the EU - but only if there was little or no pooling of sovereignty or "taking rules for access", as you put it. I'd see that as an arm's-length relationship. Again, bar an unprecedented upsurge of innovative brilliance at British firms, the only way that I can see the UK competing successfully under such a trading relationship (which would entail tariff and non-tariff barriers) would be through shafting its own people. Whether though intention or through inevitable outcome, I've always assumed that is where the Brexit agenda of the Right leads us. Who knows how a Corbyn Govt would get on if it got tried to fight or reform EU rules. Too many factors to even make a judgment - though the environment of increased Euroscepticism on the continent and a Brexit avoided at the last moment could be two factors that would work in their favour, encouraging the EU to give more ground than they gave to Cameron. Plenty of other factors that could work against them, I know. I remember posting that Paul Mason article myself during the referendum campaign, when I was unsure which way to vote. At the time, despite his strong criticism of the EU, Mason favoured staying in the EU - and maybe leaving in the future (whereas Larry Elliott argued for Brexit from a Left perspective). Funny to think that Mason's alternative scenario could conceivably happen - he talks about fighting the EU if it didn't reform but only if we had a left-wing UK govt that was being obstructed by the EU. Lots of other things could happen, but that outcome seems a bit more likely now than it did 2 years ago...
Alf Bentley Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 3 hours ago, Countryfox said: But, has anyone ever thought that maybe, just maybe, even though they have based their decisions on a few incendiary comments in The Sun and pub talk of immigrants arriving by the bus load, they have inadvertently made the RIGHT decision ... and all the so called 'experts' are actually WRONG ... It would be refreshingly nice just to actually get on with it, and, after armageddon does not materialise, sit back and watch the Federation crumble and fall apart ... just a thought. But, has anyone ever thought that maybe, just maybe, it would be the RIGHT decision for LCFC to sack all our 1st team and play the youth team in the PL ... and all the so called 'experts' are actually WRONG ... It would be refreshingly nice just to actually get on with it, and, after relegation does not materialise, sit back and watch the Premier League crumble and fall apart ... just a thought. 2
Sharpe's Fox Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 The problem with the remain-at-all-costs Labour MP's is that they want an ideologically pure party rather than one that can win. 1
Guest MattP Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 He's lost Owen Jones, other Trots on the NEC, communists in the party membership and even Aaron Bastani. He still hasn't done enough to lose Chris Williamson though
Buce Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 Giant M20 Operation Brock lorry park 'could last years' A giant 13-mile lorry park on the M20 could last for years in a no-deal Brexit situation, a council has warned. An impact assessment by Dover District Council has expressed concern over how ports would cope with the potential situation. The document is critical of the slow pace of work on a "temporary" scheme, named Operation Brock, and said "there does not appear to be a Plan B". The BBC has approached the government for a response. Operation Stack is currently used on closed sections of the M20 in Kent, where lorries park while waiting to cross the English Channel when traffic is disrupted. The new strategy, Operation Brock, plans to use a contraflow to keep the roads open when problems arise. The Dover council report stated: "A 13-mile stretch of the coast-bound section of the M20, between junction eight near Maidstone and junction nine near Ashford, will be earmarked to hold heavy goods vehicles, in what will effectively become a giant temporary lorry park holding around 2,000 lorries. "It is likely a permanent solution will not be in place for many years if enacted through current planning processes and procedures." The report, released under a Freedom of Information request, said "there could be gridlock around the town" if Brexit "ends up creating regulatory and tariff barriers between the UK and the EU". "Customs checks on imports from outside the common market can take between five minutes to 45 minutes per vehicle," it added. "Port officials have warned that increasing the average time it takes to clear customs by as little as two minutes could lead to 17-mile traffic jams." Conservative MP for Dover Charlie Elphicke tweeted that the report underlined the case for investment in border infrastructure and roads. He added: "The government has not done enough to prepare in the two years since the EU referendum." Barnier rules out UK's customs proposal Brexit: All you need to know Reality Check: The EU's 'no deal' preparations More than 10,000 freight vehicles pass through Dover on peak days as it handles one sixth of the UK's total trade in goods with a value of £119bn per year. In 2015, queues of 4,600 lorries stretched back 30 miles and the daily cost to the UK economy was estimated at £250m.
Guest MattP Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 Don't doubt this for a second, this government is just as shady as the one ran by Cameron and Osborne.
Webbo Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 6 minutes ago, MattP said: Don't doubt this for a second, this government is just as shady as the one ran by Cameron and Osborne. It's so OTT it's counter productive. Grounded flights, food shortages, no insulin, as if any country outside the EU suffers that way. If they toned it down a bit people might be more inclined to believe, as it it's laughable.
Guest MattP Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 1 minute ago, Webbo said: It's so OTT it's counter productive. Grounded flights, food shortages, no insulin, as if any country outside the EU suffers that way. If they toned it down a bit people might be more inclined to believe, as it it's laughable. Newsnight had someone on last night claiming Brexit could be the end of sandwiches.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 5 minutes ago, Webbo said: Grounded flights, food shortages, no insulin, as if any country outside the EU suffers that way. How many countries wake up having ended a 40+ year, supposedly overbearing, relationship with the EU overnight? It's not difficult to comprehend the 30th of March next year for us would be quite a bit different to Australia being outside of the EU anyway.
Webbo Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 1 minute ago, Kopfkino said: How many countries wake up having ended a 40+ year, supposedly overbearing, relationship with the EU overnight? It's not difficult to comprehend the 30th of March next year for us would be quite a bit different to Australia being outside of the EU anyway. Do you seriously believe any of that is going to happen? Why would Spain, Portugal, Greece vote to stop people flying there on holiday? Why would food/insulin producers refuse to make money selling to us. Is Europe the only place you can buy those things?It won't be a surprise, there'll be plenty of time to plan.
Buce Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 UK-Ireland flights will be grounded without post-Brexit deal Irish Aviation Authority confirms that UK and EU carriers will lose connectivity in hard Brexit Flights between the UK and the rest of the European Union will be grounded by a hard Brexit unless a separate deal to cover aviation is struck with London , the Irish Aviation Authority (IAA) has warned. The declaration by the IAA follows criticism in Britain yesterday of Taoiseach Leo Varadkar after he warned that British aircraft would lose rights to Irish air space. Under the Chicago Convention, aircraft from signatory countries have right to overfly another signatory country’s airpspace, and this will continue after a no-deal Brexit. However, flights between the UK and the remaining 27 EU member states will be grounded the event of a hard Brexit unless a side deal covering aviation is struck. Taoiseach Leo Varadkar said on Wednesday that the Government was stepping up preparations for a disorderly Brexit, and warned “planes would not fly” in the event no withdrawal agreement is struck. In that event, a spokesman for the IAA said: “There would need to be a new agreement in place to maintain the existing level of connectivity between Europe and the UK.” Asked to clarify whether this would mean another agreement would be needed for UK flights to land in the Republic and other EU states, the spokesman said: “Regarding EU/UK flights, yes, another agreement or the reinstatement of old bi-lateral agreements would need to be in place if a hard Brexit occurs, to provide for connectivity between Europe and the UK.” The spokesman pointed out that “there is no World Trade Organisation (WTO) fallback position for aviation traffic rights in the event of a hard Brexit”, and said this had been conveyed to the Government and the European Commission. This position was backed up by the European Commission, which said EU rules in the field of air transport will no longer apply to the UK after Brexit, which would have “consequences in the different areas of air transport”. Among them, it said, carriers of EU member states “will no longer enjoy traffic rights to or from the territory of the United Kingdom”. Asked to clarify whether this would mean that Irish airlines would not be permitted to land in the UK, the IAA spokesman said: “Yes - in effect, as in the absence of no new agreement being reached between the EU and the UK that provides for air access, then there would be an interregnum in the period post March 29th, 2019.” The European Commission said that in order to keep an EU operating licence certain conditions must be met. “The conditions include, among others, the need to have one’s principal place of business within an EU member state,” it said. The airline must also be “majority owned and effectively controlled” by EU member states. “If the conditions are no longer fulfilled as a consequence of the United Kingdom becoming a third country, the operating licence at issue will no longer be valid,” it said. “Air carriers of the United Kingdom will no longer enjoy traffic rights under any air transport agreement to which the union is a party, be it to or from the territory of the United Kingdom, be it to or from the territory of any of the EU member states.” It is for these reasons that low cost carrier easyJet has established a headquarters in Austria. Other British carriers include Flybe, Jet2, Virgin Atlantic, and Aer Lingus’ sister airline British Airways. A spokeswoman for the Dublin Airport Authority pointed out that 10 million passengers travel between the airport and the UK annually, making it a third of its annual passenger numbers. She said a hard Brexit could have a significant impact on passenger traffic as well as UK tourism into the Republic in general, given the potential for traffic restrictions in a future EU-UK aviation agreement. She added that due to the lack of “fall-back” rules for the industry it was key that “a post-Brexit EU-UK aviation agreement will continue to support a liberal aviation market”. https://www.irishtimes.com/business/transport-and-tourism/uk-ireland-flights-will-be-grounded-without-post-brexit-deal-1.3571311
Guest Kopfkino Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 11 minutes ago, Webbo said: Do you seriously believe any of that is going to happen? Why would Spain, Portugal, Greece vote to stop people flying there on holiday? Why would food/insulin producers refuse to make money selling to us. Is Europe the only place you can buy those things?It won't be a surprise, there'll be plenty of time to plan. I do believe planes could be grounded, it's not a quick thing to sort even if there will be plenty of time. We will leave the EASA so any certificates issued by the CAA are no longer valid. It may well be that by then we will have managed to get in a position (the CAA needs a huge recruitment drive) to re-certify UK airlines but they still become third country operators and have to be approved as such to operate in the EU. This takes 30 days from application and in theory the application can't be done until we have left the EASA (they may make allowances). And added to that, all agreements with other countries that the EASA has would cease. There is a reason why people that actually understand aviation think this is a huge problem that can't just be overcome by Spain wanting our holidaymakers. Food and insulin etc might not be an immediate problem, but it could be an issue. For lorries to bring food into the country, they first have to get out and tight margins in logistics mean firms aren't going to be sending empty lorries out (assuming the lorries can operate in the EU after no deal). How are we getting food into the country if lorries can't get out?
breadandcheese Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 19 minutes ago, Buce said: UK-Ireland flights will be grounded without post-Brexit deal Irish Aviation Authority confirms that UK and EU carriers will lose connectivity in hard Brexit I'd rather the country remains in the EU but this one's a ridiculous scare story. Not least because there are other treaties that govern open skies and that most Irish flights cross over UK airspace both to Europe and North America (UK aviation controls a patch of airspace over the Atlantic to the west of Ireland). There are also treaties covering British fighter jets flying over Ireland to defend it should Ireland suffer a terrorist attack (as Ireland is a neutral country that doesn't have any supersonic air capability). So this scare story is just silly without foundation.
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 31 July 2018 Author Posted 31 July 2018 41 minutes ago, Webbo said: Do you seriously believe any of that is going to happen? Why would Spain, Portugal, Greece vote to stop people flying there on holiday? Why would food/insulin producers refuse to make money selling to us. Is Europe the only place you can buy those things?It won't be a surprise, there'll be plenty of time to plan. Because it takes organisations ages to put different plans in place and naturally they need to know what the new positions are before to do that. There may also be structural issues, such as lack of border enforcement officials to carry out required checks.
Buce Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 4 minutes ago, breadandcheese said: I'd rather the country remains in the EU but this one's a ridiculous scare story. Not least because there are other treaties that govern open skies and that most Irish flights cross over UK airspace both to Europe and North America (UK aviation controls a patch of airspace over the Atlantic to the west of Ireland). There are also treaties covering British fighter jets flying over Ireland to defend it should Ireland suffer a terrorist attack (as Ireland is a neutral country that doesn't have any supersonic air capability). So this scare story is just silly without foundation. Not according to the spokesman for the IAA.
Guest Kopfkino Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 9 minutes ago, breadandcheese said: I'd rather the country remains in the EU but this one's a ridiculous scare story. Not least because there are other treaties that govern open skies and that most Irish flights cross over UK airspace both to Europe and North America (UK aviation controls a patch of airspace over the Atlantic to the west of Ireland). There are also treaties covering British fighter jets flying over Ireland to defend it should Ireland suffer a terrorist attack (as Ireland is a neutral country that doesn't have any supersonic air capability). So this scare story is just silly without foundation. It's nothing to do with using airspace. The article notes the ICAO Chicago Convention means aircraft can still use other countries airspace. But they won't be able to land in the EU, nor elsewhere if EASA agreements aren't immediately replicated.
breadandcheese Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 4 minutes ago, Kopfkino said: It's nothing to do with using airspace. The article notes the ICAO Chicago Convention means aircraft can still use other countries airspace. But they won't be able to land in the EU, nor elsewhere if EASA agreements aren't immediately replicated. So would European airlines not be allowed to fly to and from the UK if we unilaterally allowed them? If we said to Lufthansa, continue flights to London, we have no problem, will Germany then stop them landing back in Frankfurt?
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 31 July 2018 Posted 31 July 2018 1 hour ago, Webbo said: It's so OTT it's counter productive. Grounded flights, food shortages, no insulin, as if any country outside the EU suffers that way. If they toned it down a bit people might be more inclined to believe, as it it's laughable. You are right Webbo. Only crazy people would believe it; those hell bent on denying the democratic vote of the people, to leave awful clutches of the EU. The Labour left, bleating like sheep, who wish to undermine Democracy. Well, they can just bleat on, as we are leaving the E.U., so they will just have to get used to it.
Recommended Posts