It wasn’t good enough for the leader to routinely defer to his shadow chancellor when confronted with a difficult decision – a shadow chancellor who on three separate occasions undermined my efforts to agree collective positions on health matters.
It wasn’t good enough for the leader to say one thing to me, only for his political secretary to phone a day later and say: “He may have said that, but I know what he really thinks.”
It wasn’t good enough for the leader to read his position from a typed up script at shadow cabinet meetings discussing the prospect of military action against Isis in Syria or the EU referendum.
And it wasn’t good enough that whenever he appeared on TV, his description of a process, or his analysis of a problem, ended in confusion or despair on the party’s position – article 50, counterterrorism, “7.5 out of 10” on Brexit.
West Virginia Third Congressional District Primary Update
(Much more interesting than Brexit...)
The Republican primary garnered 37,600 votes in total. The Democratic one 57,300. That's a massive difference, and is completely unprecedented in what is normally a safe Republican District.
Bear in mind the winner this year will probably only need 70,000 votes in November to take the District. Also bear in mind that in polls, Ojeda was more popular - with Republicans - than any of their candidates.
This is a Congressional District Trump won 74-24. It will be a Democratic pick-up by future President Richard Ojeda.
Get your money on now.
Get your money on where? Where can you bet on W. Virginia Third?
If Trump wins in 2020, Ojeda could be the Democratic nominee in 2024.
Where can you bet on Democratic nominee in 2024? And IMO that's just too far away, I'd want something like 1,000-1 for it to be worth it.
Take that 1,000-1: Ojeda is a white, tattooed, working class Obama.
Lady Phyll Opoku-Gyimah is maybe best-placed to increase the Labour majority in Lewisham East.Some other impressive women coming forwards too.
In January, LGBT campaigner Phyll Opoku-Gyimah became briefly best-known for turning down the MBE she'd been offered on 2016's New Year's Honours list. She was flattered, she said to Diva magazine, but wasn't hugely keen on accepting an award linked to "colonialism and its toxic and enduring legacy in the Commonwealth, where – among many other injustices – LGBTQI people are still being persecuted, tortured and even killed because of sodomy laws."
Sounds a perfect Corbynista...its all the evil empire's fault for everything ever.
I do see her point, time that MBE and similar gongs were renamed.
Perhaps the MBE could be relaunched as The Commonwealth Medal.
Folk are familiar with MBE OBE and the like. The solution is simple. Replace "Empire" with "Excellence"
Slightly late to the party here but just wanted to commend Alastair on an excellent header. Unfortunately, too many on both sides seem to regard reaching an workable agreement as a pleasant bonus, should the process so conclude - while they prioritise their primary goal of playing to their own audiences. Negotiation requires understanding the other side. The EU has never understood, nor sought to understand, the Brexit mindset but simply assumed them to be endemically hostile and adopted a similarly hostile attitude in consequence (it has to be said that many brexiteers have not helped themselves in that respect).
This is true and the reverse also holds - our government, largely, and almost everyone who voted Leave, also have little understanding or interest in the EU beyond a feeling they don't like it much. This is a much bigger problem, though, because the EU won't do anything fundamentally different because of Brexit while the UK is seriously impacted by it.
If we want a successful negotiation, we need to understand what the EU side actually wants and not what we think it ought to want. We can then trade those things against a shopping list of what we want, which could include top level access to Galileo. From my understanding the EU wants, in order of priority, are:
- Commitment to UK alignment to EU regulations, including but not limited to Northern Ireland. - Shared security. - UK diplomatic support for EU international positions. - Money.
If we offer those, or a good part of them, we should get things in return. The EU no longer cares what the British as an ex-member thinks of them. It won't continue top level access to Galileo etc because we might get upset.
Their Galileo decision shows the relationship only works one way. They want full cooperation from the UK on intelligence/defence matters, yet aren't willing to trust the UK with access to their special satellite program. Wasn't there howls of outrage that the UK was seen as suggesting security could be used as a bargaining chip early in the negotiations?
Any outcome will be a downgrade for us from the status quo. A successful negotiation will see a smaller downgrade than would otherwise happen. That might seem stupid but it's a consequence of Brexit being all downside and no upside.
Only if we are foolhardy enough to concede to "Commitment to UK alignment to EU regulations, including but not limited to Northern Ireland."
No longer aligning with EU regulations is why we're leaving.
Selling into the EU market would still mean conforming but we would not have to follow EU regulations for the 90% of domestic activity in the way we do now.
It wasn’t good enough for the leader to routinely defer to his shadow chancellor when confronted with a difficult decision – a shadow chancellor who on three separate occasions undermined my efforts to agree collective positions on health matters.
It wasn’t good enough for the leader to say one thing to me, only for his political secretary to phone a day later and say: “He may have said that, but I know what he really thinks.”
It wasn’t good enough for the leader to read his position from a typed up script at shadow cabinet meetings discussing the prospect of military action against Isis in Syria or the EU referendum.
And it wasn’t good enough that whenever he appeared on TV, his description of a process, or his analysis of a problem, ended in confusion or despair on the party’s position – article 50, counterterrorism, “7.5 out of 10” on Brexit.
That sounds like a good argument for the Lib Dem campaign. What are the current odds?
That assumes the LibDem campaign is any more coherent.
But your lot should be making hay on the Left, with Labour led by Brexit's Bessy Mate. Pity you aren't competitive in most of the seats there.
This is true and the reverse also holds - our government, largely, and almost everyone who voted Leave, also have little understanding or interest in the EU beyond a feeling they don't like it much. This is a much bigger problem, though, because the EU won't do anything fundamentally different because of Brexit while the UK is seriously impacted by it.
If we want a successful negotiation, we need to understand what the EU side actually wants and not what we think it ought to want. We can then trade those things against a shopping list of what we want, which could include top level access to Galileo. From my understanding the EU wants, in order of priority, are:
- Commitment to UK alignment to EU regulations, including but not limited to Northern Ireland. - Shared security. - UK diplomatic support for EU international positions. - Money.
If we offer those, or a good part of them, we should get things in return. The EU no longer cares what the British as an ex-member thinks of them. It won't continue top level access to Galileo etc because we might get upset.
Their Galileo decision shows the relationship only works one way. They want full cooperation from the UK on intelligence/defence matters, yet aren't willing to trust the UK with access to their special satellite program. Wasn't there howls of outrage that the UK was seen as suggesting security could be used as a bargaining chip early in the negotiations?
Any outcome will be a downgrade for us from the status quo. A successful negotiation will see a smaller downgrade than would otherwise happen. That might seem stupid but it's a consequence of Brexit being all downside and no upside.
I thought the EU wanted to continue with existing security/defence treaties and agreements? Saying that they can't trust the UK with access to their satellites while at the same time lapping up all the intelligence they can get their hands on seems a bit ridiculous.
The Galileo discussion is probably the best example yet of the EU’s determination to be inflexible and to be seen to punish the UK, even if the reality of the situation is that they are cutting off their nose to spite their face.
It is funny that China is considered a partner in Galileo having put in 230 million Euros into the project whilst the UK is to be barred from involvement after paying around 1.2 billion Euros. Maybe we should ask for our money back.
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
Yeah, on what planet is that going to happen?
Exactly - we have a common travel area outside Schengen with pretty much identical visa policies for non EU visitors. Ireland wants to protect its borders as much as the UK.
Visa free travel and freedom of movement are two different things. Brits can visit New Zealand for six months as tourists and we have a reciprocal health care agreement but we can't work there!
How many ground stations do you need for a satellite navigation system? I know A-GPS uses ground stations, but I assumed Glonass, Galileo and the Chinese one didn't bother.
Loads and some are located within British territory and a lot of the tech is British designed which the government may claim proprietary rights over if they try and force us out.
As I said before, this strikes me as a completely petty and unnecessary conflict. On the one side the EU says they want an intelligence sharing agreement and on the other we're not to be trusted and can't have access to the satellite system. It's completely inconsistent. Though it matches up with my view of the EU perfectly and hopefully the veil has lifted for a few of the more ardent remainers (including the FT).
I think I just heard on the 1 o'clock news that though the Europeans want to continue the Iran deal it's unlikely to hold because European firms including British ones who deal with Iran are likely to be boycotted by the US. Something no country can afford.
If ever there was a necessity for a strong EU with all hands to the pumps this is it. Are the UK seriously prepared to allow itself and the rest of the EU and Europe to be held to ransom by a lunatic?
This is one of those issues that has nothing to do with the EU per se or their relationship with the UK. Britain, Germany and France are standing firm on opposition to the Trump decision over Iran and there is absolutely no suggestion that the UK is considering taking a different line to either Germany or France (or China and Russia for that matter) on this.
The issue is whether the US sanctions effectively sanction any non-US company dealing with Iran or only stops US companies from doing so.
If the former, any French or German company or bank wishing to trade in or with the US will effectively be forced to stop trading with Iran or find itself subject to US enforcement action. It doesn’t matter how much Britain and the EU countries stick together. Unless they can find some way of ensuring that their companies are not legally caught by these new US sanctions, business will have to take action to avoid being caught.
Trump’s move is stupid for another reason. Why should North Korea now believe any promises or guarantees made by a US President?
I don’t have one but again I fail to see what’s wrong with them in general. I can see a case for local-specific restrictions (to avoid graveyarding certain parts of Cornwall, for eg) but otherwise not.
All of these bete noires - the BTL’ers, the second-home owners, the foreigners who buy off-plan - are just convenient demons.
They are symptoms, not cause, and none immoral or unwelcome in their own right.
I think it's a proven fact that foreign money and older people using BTL as pensions are the reason we have stupidly unaffordable houses. They are the cause. The symptoms are younger graduates with well paid jobs voting for Corbyn.
I’d love to see the evidence of that. As it is, your contentions seem communistic.
If we want more housing, why can’t we just build some more? We don’t ration other goods in the way you suggest.
It is in fact the de facto rationing we already have, but certain tax advantages, that has caused people to favour property as an asset class.
I'm not against building new houses, where did I say I was?! I'm pretty sure I even said that investors who build or redevelop should get exemptions and allowances from any value taxes!
What I'm saying is that we've got a situation where 0.9m people own 5.5m properties. That is not sustainable.
West Virginia Third Congressional District Primary Update
(Much more interesting than Brexit...)
The Republican primary garnered 37,600 votes in total. The Democratic one 57,300. That's a massive difference, and is completely unprecedented in what is normally a safe Republican District.
Bear in mind the winner this year will probably only need 70,000 votes in November to take the District. Also bear in mind that in polls, Ojeda was more popular - with Republicans - than any of their candidates.
This is a Congressional District Trump won 74-24. It will be a Democratic pick-up by future President Richard Ojeda.
Get your money on now.
There are some interesting Democrat winners in Trump supporting states. Senator Jon Tester and Governor Steve Bullock, both from Montana, Governors John Edwards from Louisiana (although he so little different from mainstream Republicanism he might struggle with the primary) and Gov Roy Cooper from North Carolina. John Hickenlooper from Colorado has also been mentioned by yourself amongst others. These could be interesting if Democrats decide to put up a candidate with cross-party support against Trump.
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
Being admitted as a refugee to an EU country does not give you the right to free movement in the EU (de facto you could move around Schengen, but I think I'm right in saying you could be picked up by a random check and sent back to your refuge-granting member state). Ireland, as a member of the CTA does maintain border controls with the rest of the EU (except currently the UK obviously) so could and would send you back if you don't have the necessary visa to enter Ireland.
And in any case the vast majority of illegal immigrants to most countries have entered legally e.g. as a visitor and then violated the terms of their entry.
Any outcome will be a downgrade for us from the status quo. A successful negotiation will see a smaller downgrade than would otherwise happen. That might seem stupid but it's a consequence of Brexit being all downside and no upside.
I thought the EU wanted to continue with existing security/defence treaties and agreements? Saying that they can't trust the UK with access to their satellites while at the same time lapping up all the intelligence they can get their hands on seems a bit ridiculous.
The Galileo discussion is probably the best example yet of the EU’s determination to be inflexible and to be seen to punish the UK, even if the reality of the situation is that they are cutting off their nose to spite their face.
We don't need to give the EU lessons about cut noses and spiteful faces. The truth is our nose is at a much bigger risk than the EU's. It's not that I think the EU is inherently more sensible than we are. The point is, Brexit is going to affect us much more than the EU and they know it.
Security and satellites are two areas where the UK has something valuable that the EU would miss. Injdeed had the UK not been a member of the EU I would still have expected us to participate in both respects.
At one point CHINA was part of Galileo. OK, so that was a different project back then, but still.
Security cooperation is something the EU cares about. They can do satellites themselves. The discussion is about top level access to Galileo data, which is restricted to EU members and is not available to non EU-member associates such as Norway and Switzerland.
German MEP Christian Ehler doesn't think the EU can "do the satellites themselves". Or at least, not as well as with us.
Does he have special knowledge, or is he just an average (too thick to be in the national Parliament) MEP?
Well a friend of mine from uni who does this kind of stuff said it would be very tough for the EU to replicate what the UK provides in terms of the locations and expertise to the project. Oddly the UK has enough overseas territory and trusted allies to build out our own system but the EU might struggle to securely locate all of their ground stations in appropriate parts of the world. It could mean intermittent gaps in the service or paying for a military presence in non aligned nations.
Their Galileo decision shows the relationship only works one way. They want full cooperation from the UK on intelligence/defence matters, yet aren't willing to trust the UK with access to their special satellite program. Wasn't there howls of outrage that the UK was seen as suggesting security could be used as a bargaining chip early in the negotiations?
Any outcome will be a downgrade for us from the status quo. A successful negotiation will see a smaller downgrade than would otherwise happen. That might seem stupid but it's a consequence of Brexit being all downside and no upside.
I thought the EU wanted to continue with existing security/defence treaties and agreements? Saying that they can't trust the UK with access to their satellites while at the same time lapping up all the intelligence they can get their hands on seems a bit ridiculous.
The Galileo discussion is probably the best example yet of the EU’s determination to be inflexible and to be seen to punish the UK, even if the reality of the situation is that they are cutting off their nose to spite their face.
It is funny that China is considered a partner in Galileo having put in 230 million Euros into the project whilst the UK is to be barred from involvement after paying around 1.2 billion Euros. Maybe we should ask for our money back.
The UK is barred from data sharing that is only available to EU members, as set out in the treaty agreed at the time by the UK and other EU members. The UK would be degraded to the lower associate level occupied by Norway and Switzerland.
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
Yeah, on what planet is that going to happen?
If you want to come to the UK , without the correct papers, would be the best route through Eire.
Then a minor road across the no border area.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there is a border when you land in Dublin. Not to mention the absurdity of a million refugees buying plane tickets...
I think I just heard on the 1 o'clock news that though the Europeans want to continue the Iran deal it's unlikely to hold because European firms including British ones who deal with Iran are likely to be boycotted by the US. Something no country can afford.
If ever there was a necessity for a strong EU with all hands to the pumps this is it. Are the UK seriously prepared to allow itself and the rest of the EU and Europe to be held to ransom by a lunatic?
This is one of those issues that has nothing to do with the EU per se or their relationship with the UK. Britain, Germany and France are standing firm on opposition to the Trump decision over Iran and there is absolutely no suggestion that the UK is considering taking a different line to either Germany or France (or China and Russia for that matter) on this.
The issue is whether the US sanctions effectively sanction any non-US company dealing with Iran or only stops US companies from doing so.
If the former, any French or German company or bank wishing to trade in or with the US will effectively be forced to stop trading with Iran or find itself subject to US enforcement action. It doesn’t matter how much Britain and the EU countries stick together. Unless they can find some way of ensuring that their companies are not legally caught by these new US sanctions, business will have to take action to avoid being caught.
Trump’s move is stupid for another reason. Why should North Korea now believe any promises or guarantees made by a US President?
Oh I agree. What the other countries should do is step up the pressure on the US by making it clear that any action taken against European companies will be met with an equal response.
Bear in mind that in the case of Airbus for example it is estimated that 275,000 US jobs depend on their operations in the States. Not sure it will help Trump's popularity much with his blue collar workers if those jobs disappear.
How many ground stations do you need for a satellite navigation system? I know A-GPS uses ground stations, but I assumed Glonass, Galileo and the Chinese one didn't bother.
Loads and some are located within British territory and a lot of the tech is British designed which the government may claim proprietary rights over if they try and force us out..
Sorry to be dim (and I don't disagree with you regarding the stupidity of the EU in this), but GLONASS just seems to use ground stations for augmented accuracy, and only in Russia.
The Galileo discussion is probably the best example yet of the EU’s determination to be inflexible and to be seen to punish the UK...
Security and satellites are two areas where the UK has something valuable that the EU would miss. Injdeed had the UK not been a member of the EU I would still have expected us to participate in both respects.
At one point CHINA was part of Galileo. OK, so that was a different project back then, but still.
Security cooperation is something the EU cares about. They can do satellites themselves. The discussion is about top level access to Galileo data, which is restricted to EU members and is not available to non EU-member associates such as Norway and Switzerland.
German MEP Christian Ehler doesn't think the EU can "do the satellites themselves". Or at least, not as well as with us.
Does he have special knowledge, or is he just an average (too thick to be in the national Parliament) MEP?
Well a friend of mine from uni who does this kind of stuff said it would be very tough for the EU to replicate what the UK provides in terms of the locations and expertise to the project. Oddly the UK has enough overseas territory and trusted allies to build out our own system but the EU might struggle to securely locate all of their ground stations in appropriate parts of the world. It could mean intermittent gaps in the service or paying for a military presence in non aligned nations.
How many ground stations do you need for a satellite navigation system? I know A-GPS uses ground stations, but I assumed Glonass, Galileo and the Chinese one didn't bother.
You need ground stations to calibrate the signal if you want a high degree of accuracy, otherwise it's subject to all sort of errors (e.g. ionosphere scattering).
What I really don't understand is the EU insistence that any Galileo work be moved out of the UK on day 1 after Brexit, given that a substantial amount of work happens in (e.g.) Switzerland, which provides the super-accurate clocks... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-44055475
As far as I can see, this isn't about the EU 'following rules' at all; they are just being awkward. They're entitled to do so, but sometimes being a dick is just being a dick.
The more I think about it the more furious I am with the government for not having a fucking clue about what we are going to be doing when we leave.
In another, albeit I realise unrealistic world, the government would have put forward their policy proposal for a customs union or whatever, and the opposition would have tried to tear it to bits, as is their job.
As it stands, and notwithstanding my belief or rather fervent hope that we will see some kind of a sensible deal, come the deadline, it does seem to be no way to run a democracy.
Their Galileo decision shows the relationship only works one way. They want full cooperation from the UK on intelligence/defence matters, yet aren't willing to trust the UK with access to their special satellite program. Wasn't there howls of outrage that the UK was seen as suggesting security could be used as a bargaining chip early in the negotiations?
Any outcome will be a downgrade for us from the status quo. A successful negotiation will see a smaller downgrade than would otherwise happen. That might seem stupid but it's a consequence of Brexit being all downside and no upside.
I thought the EU wanted to continue with existing security/defence treaties and agreements? Saying that they can't trust the UK with access to their satellites while at the same time lapping up all the intelligence they can get their hands on seems a bit ridiculous.
The Galileo discussion is probably the best example yet of the EU’s determination to be inflexible and to be seen to punish the UK, even if the reality of the situation is that they are cutting off their nose to spite their face.
It is funny that China is considered a partner in Galileo having put in 230 million Euros into the project whilst the UK is to be barred from involvement after paying around 1.2 billion Euros. Maybe we should ask for our money back.
The UK is barred from data sharing that is only available to EU members, as set out in the treaty agreed at the time by the UK and other EU members. The UK would be degraded to the lower associate level occupied by Norway and Switzerland.
The Financial Times reports that in its letter to the UK government, the European Commission said security elements of the GPS project needed to be protected to avoid them being "irretrievably compromised" for several years by being shared with the UK
We don't need to give the EU lessons about cut noses and spiteful faces. The truth is our nose is at a much bigger risk than the EU's. It's not that I think the EU is inherently more sensible than we are. The point is, Brexit is going to affect us much more than the EU and they know it.
Security and satellites are two areas where the UK has something valuable that the EU would miss. Injdeed had the UK not been a member of the EU I would still have expected us to participate in both respects.
At one point CHINA was part of Galileo. OK, so that was a different project back then, but still.
Security cooperation is something the EU cares about. They can do satellites themselves. The discussion is about top level access to Galileo data, which is restricted to EU members and is not available to non EU-member associates such as Norway and Switzerland.
German MEP Christian Ehler doesn't think the EU can "do the satellites themselves". Or at least, not as well as with us.
Does he have special knowledge, or is he just an average (too thick to be in the national Parliament) MEP?
Well a friend of mine from uni who does this kind of stuff said it would be very tough for the EU to replicate what the UK provides in terms of the locations and expertise to the project. Oddly the UK has enough overseas territory and trusted allies to build out our own system but the EU might struggle to securely locate all of their ground stations in appropriate parts of the world. It could mean intermittent gaps in the service or paying for a military presence in non aligned nations.
Looking at the map at http://www.esa.int/var/esa/storage/images/esa_multimedia/images/2015/01/galileo_remote_sites/15190715-1-eng-GB/Galileo_remote_sites_node_full_image_2.png it would seem that most of the ground stations *are* in French overseas territories. The only area where the UK appears to offers coverage no other EU state has is in the south Atlantic, and as someone mentioned Ascension could be replaced with inviting Brazil in to provide Trinidade. I'd say that the Falklands could be replaced with a station in Argentina or a second Antarctic location, in the Antarctic Peninsula where it looks like Spain has a couple of bases there that could serve.
I think I just heard on the 1 o'clock news that though the Europeans want to continue the Iran deal it's unlikely to hold because European firms including British ones who deal with Iran are likely to be boycotted by the US. Something no country can afford.
If ever there was a necessity for a strong EU with all hands to the pumps this is it. Are the UK seriously prepared to allow itself and the rest of the EU and Europe to be held to ransom by a lunatic?
This is one of those issues that has nothing to do with the EU per se or their relationship with the UK. Britain, Germany and France are standing firm on opposition to the Trump decision over Iran and there is absolutely no suggestion that the UK is considering taking a different line to either Germany or France (or China and Russia for that matter) on this.
The issue is whether the US sanctions effectively sanction any non-US company dealing with Iran or only stops US companies from doing so.
If the former, any French or German company or bank wishing to trade in or with the US will effectively be forced to stop trading with Iran or find itself subject to US enforcement action. It doesn’t matter how much Britain and the EU countries stick together. Unless they can find some way of ensuring that their companies are not legally caught by these new US sanctions, business will have to take action to avoid being caught.
Trump’s move is stupid for another reason. Why should North Korea now believe any promises or guarantees made by a US President?
Oh I agree. What the other countries should do is step up the pressure on the US by making it clear that any action taken against European companies will be met with an equal response.
Bear in mind that in the case of Airbus for example it is estimated that 275,000 US jobs depend on their operations in the States. Not sure it will help Trump's popularity much with his blue collar workers if those jobs disappear.
Oh I don't know, I think Trump would quite like a world where only Boeing was allowed to sell to US airlines.
Thank you, @AlastairMeeks, for a very interesting article. I shall be interested to read the comments but wanted to say Thanks before the thread changed.
How many ground stations do you need for a satellite navigation system? I know A-GPS uses ground stations, but I assumed Glonass, Galileo and the Chinese one didn't bother.
Loads and some are located within British territory and a lot of the tech is British designed which the government may claim proprietary rights over if they try and force us out..
Sorry to be dim (and I don't disagree with you regarding the stupidity of the EU in this), but GLONASS just seems to use ground stations for augmented accuracy, and only in Russia.
I'll ask my uni mate, though I think it's to do with global accuracy, without the UK territory base stations the satellites won't be able to provide the same accuracy on a global basis.
The tech stuff is probably more important as the UK government won't want to let it go to the EU if we're not in the project. I don't know how that get remedied though, other than money and lots of it.
I think I just heard on the 1 o'clock news that though the Europeans want to continue the Iran deal it's unlikely to hold because European firms including British ones who deal with Iran are likely to be boycotted by the US. Something no country can afford.
If ever there was a necessity for a strong EU with all hands to the pumps this is it. Are the UK seriously prepared to allow itself and the rest of the EU and Europe to be held to ransom by a lunatic?
This is one of those issues that has nothing to do with the EU per se or their relationship with the UK. Britain, Germany and France are standing firm on opposition to the Trump decision over Iran and there is absolutely no suggestion that the UK is considering taking a different line to either Germany or France (or China and Russia for that matter) on this.
The issue is whether the US sanctions effectively sanction any non-US company dealing with Iran or only stops US companies from doing so.
If the former, any French or German company or bank wishing to trade in or with the US will effectively be forced to stop trading with Iran or find itself subject to US enforcement action. It doesn’t matter how much Britain and the EU countries stick together. Unless they can find some way of ensuring that their companies are not legally caught by these new US sanctions, business will have to take action to avoid being caught.
Trump’s move is stupid for another reason. Why should North Korea now believe any promises or guarantees made by a US President?
Oh I agree. What the other countries should do is step up the pressure on the US by making it clear that any action taken against European companies will be met with an equal response.
Bear in mind that in the case of Airbus for example it is estimated that 275,000 US jobs depend on their operations in the States. Not sure it will help Trump's popularity much with his blue collar workers if those jobs disappear.
Oh I don't know, I think Trump would quite like a world where only Boeing was allowed to sell to US airlines.
I think I just heard on the 1 o'clock news that though the Europeans want to continue the Iran deal it's unlikely to hold because European firms including British ones who deal with Iran are likely to be boycotted by the US. Something no country can afford.
If ever there was a necessity for a strong EU with all hands to the pumps this is it. Are the UK seriously prepared to allow itself and the rest of the EU and Europe to be held to ransom by a lunatic?
This is one of those issues that has nothing to do with the EU per se or their relationship with the UK. Britain, Germany and France are standing firm on opposition to the Trump decision over Iran and there is absolutely no suggestion that the UK is considering taking a different line to either Germany or France (or China and Russia for that matter) on this.
The issue is whether the US sanctions effectively sanction any non-US company dealing with Iran or only stops US companies from doing so.
If the former, any French or German company or bank wishing to trade in or with the US will effectively be forced to stop trading with Iran or find itself subject to US enforcement action. It doesn’t matter how much Britain and the EU countries stick together. Unless they can find some way of ensuring that their companies are not legally caught by these new US sanctions, business will have to take action to avoid being caught.
Trump’s move is stupid for another reason. Why should North Korea now believe any promises or guarantees made by a US President?
Oh I agree. What the other countries should do is step up the pressure on the US by making it clear that any action taken against European companies will be met with an equal response.
Bear in mind that in the case of Airbus for example it is estimated that 275,000 US jobs depend on their operations in the States. Not sure it will help Trump's popularity much with his blue collar workers if those jobs disappear.
Oh I don't know, I think Trump would quite like a world where only Boeing was allowed to sell to US airlines.
He might but I am not sure all those out of work people would agree.
So Boris is desperate for a deal with Iran, but doesn't care about a deal with Europe.
I think he just wants a different deal with Europe.
The guy (Boris) is simply a pompous disingenuous lying tw*t who only cares about himself.
His sort should not be in a local council let alone be our Foreign Secretary. Hopefully the electorate of Uxbridge and South Ruislip can kick this lying turd out at the next GE.
I think I just heard on the 1 o'clock news that though the Europeans want to continue the Iran deal it's unlikely to hold because European firms including British ones who deal with Iran are likely to be boycotted by the US. Something no country can afford.
If ever there was a necessity for a strong EU with all hands to the pumps this is it. Are the UK seriously prepared to allow itself and the rest of the EU and Europe to be held to ransom by a lunatic?
This is one of those issues that has nothing to do with the EU per se or their relationship with the UK. Britain, Germany and France are standing firm on opposition to the Trump decision over Iran and there is absolutely no suggestion that the UK is considering taking a different line to either Germany or France (or China and Russia for that matter) on this.
The issue is whether the US sanctions effectively sanction any non-US company dealing with Iran or only stops US companies from doing so.
If the former, any French or German company or bank wishing to trade in or with the US will effectively be forced to stop trading with Iran or find itself subject to US enforcement action. It doesn’t matter how much Britain and the EU countries stick together. Unless they can find some way of ensuring that their companies are not legally caught by these new US sanctions, business will have to take action to avoid being caught.
Trump’s move is stupid for another reason. Why should North Korea now believe any promises or guarantees made by a US President?
Oh I agree. What the other countries should do is step up the pressure on the US by making it clear that any action taken against European companies will be met with an equal response.
Bear in mind that in the case of Airbus for example it is estimated that 275,000 US jobs depend on their operations in the States. Not sure it will help Trump's popularity much with his blue collar workers if those jobs disappear.
Oh I don't know, I think Trump would quite like a world where only Boeing was allowed to sell to US airlines.
He might but I am not sure all those out of work people would agree.
I'm sure Boeing would need to recruit quite a few people to start making all of those extra planes.
So Boris is desperate for a deal with Iran, but doesn't care about a deal with Europe.
I think he just wants a different deal with Europe.
The guy (Boris) is simply a pompous disingenuous lying tw*t who only cares about himself.
His sort should not be in a local council let alone be our Foreign Secretary. Hopefully the electorate of Uxbridge and South Ruislip can kick this lying turd out at the next GE.
Looks like the Tory vote was up in that constituency in the locals.
How many ground stations do you need for a satellite navigation system? I know A-GPS uses ground stations, but I assumed Glonass, Galileo and the Chinese one didn't bother.
Loads and some are located within British territory and a lot of the tech is British designed which the government may claim proprietary rights over if they try and force us out..
Sorry to be dim (and I don't disagree with you regarding the stupidity of the EU in this), but GLONASS just seems to use ground stations for augmented accuracy, and only in Russia.
Accuracy is important, and getting more so.
Galileo isn't really a commercial necessity, though its use alongside another system (US GPS) does significantly increase accuracy in particular circumstances. It's more like an insurance policy, or defence spending (with the benefit of staying current with aspects of space/satellite technology). Given that we've contributed to the costs, there's really no reason to lock us out, other than a desire to be awkward, and to nick our share of the commercial work.
Again, the EU is entirely entitled to do so - just as we are entitled to demand our contribution back. There is no absolute need under EU rules for them to do so, however.
The more I think about it the more furious I am with the government for not having a fucking clue about what we are going to be doing when we leave.
In another, albeit I realise unrealistic world, the government would have put forward their policy proposal for a customs union or whatever, and the opposition would have tried to tear it to bits, as is their job.
As it stands, and notwithstanding my belief or rather fervent hope that we will see some kind of a sensible deal, come the deadline, it does seem to be no way to run a democracy.
It is, and has always been, May's modus (in)operandi.
Their Galileo decision shows the relationship only works one way. They want full cooperation from the UK on intelligence/defence matters, yet aren't willing to trust the UK with access to their special satellite program. Wasn't there howls of outrage that the UK was seen as suggesting security could be used as a bargaining chip early in the negotiations?
Any outcome will be a downgrade for us from the status quo. A successful negotiation will see a smaller downgrade than would otherwise happen. That might seem stupid but it's a consequence of Brexit being all downside and no upside.
I thought the EU wanted to continue with existing security/defence treaties and agreements? Saying that they can't trust the UK with access to their satellites while at the same time lapping up all the intelligence they can get their hands on seems a bit ridiculous.
The Galileo discussion is probably the best example yet of the EU’s determination to be inflexible and to be seen to punish the UK, even if the reality of the situation is that they are cutting off their nose to spite their face.
It is funny that China is considered a partner in Galileo having put in 230 million Euros into the project whilst the UK is to be barred from involvement after paying around 1.2 billion Euros. Maybe we should ask for our money back.
The UK is barred from data sharing that is only available to EU members, as set out in the treaty agreed at the time by the UK and other EU members. The UK would be degraded to the lower associate level occupied by Norway and Switzerland.
The Financial Times reports that in its letter to the UK government, the European Commission said security elements of the GPS project needed to be protected to avoid them being "irretrievably compromised" for several years by being shared with the UK
Lady Phyll Opoku-Gyimah is maybe best-placed to increase the Labour majority in Lewisham East.Some other impressive women coming forwards too.
In January, LGBT campaigner Phyll Opoku-Gyimah became briefly best-known for turning down the MBE she'd been offered on 2016's New Year's Honours list. She was flattered, she said to Diva magazine, but wasn't hugely keen on accepting an award linked to "colonialism and its toxic and enduring legacy in the Commonwealth, where – among many other injustices – LGBTQI people are still being persecuted, tortured and even killed because of sodomy laws."
Sounds a perfect Corbynista...its all the evil empire's fault for everything ever.
I do see her point, time that MBE and similar gongs were renamed.
Perhaps the MBE could be relaunched as The Commonwealth Medal.
Folk are familiar with MBE OBE and the like. The solution is simple. Replace "Empire" with "Excellence"
And be referred to as his or her excellency
Aren’t they already “My bloody effort” and “other bugger’s efforts”?
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
That could happen today.
And just like today, anyone who is in the UK illegally can be removed.
Yes. But now we are part of the EU -s o we have no choice. I'm sure I heard many times the phrase "controlling our borders". What kind of control is effected with open borders ?
The more I think about it the more furious I am with the government for not having a fucking clue about what we are going to be doing when we leave.
In another, albeit I realise unrealistic world, the government would have put forward their policy proposal for a customs union or whatever, and the opposition would have tried to tear it to bits, as is their job.
As it stands, and notwithstanding my belief or rather fervent hope that we will see some kind of a sensible deal, come the deadline, it does seem to be no way to run a democracy.
In last year's general election, voters chose chaos and a government without a mandate or the parliamentary numbers to resolve anything. That is what they are getting.
Bill Wiggin, a Conservative backbencher, is speaking now. He is supporting the Watson amendments, NC20 and NC21, which would introduce the punitive costs provisions for newspapers that do not sign up to an approved regulator.
I have no idea why he has such an opinion....
Bill Wiggin claimed £11,000 in phantom mortgage payments
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
Yeah, on what planet is that going to happen?
If you want to come to the UK , without the correct papers, would be the best route through Eire.
Then a minor road across the no border area.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there is a border when you land in Dublin. Not to mention the absurdity of a million refugees buying plane tickets...
I didn't realise they were no illegal immigrants in Ireland or there are no East Europeans there. Wait, some of them actually work for me.
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
Yeah, on what planet is that going to happen?
If you want to come to the UK , without the correct papers, would be the best route through Eire.
Then a minor road across the no border area.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there is a border when you land in Dublin. Not to mention the absurdity of a million refugees buying plane tickets...
I didn't realise they were no illegal immigrants in Ireland or there are no East Europeans there. Wait, some of them actually work for me.
Not sure you should be admitting to employing illegal immigrants...
The more I think about it the more furious I am with the government for not having a fucking clue about what we are going to be doing when we leave.
In another, albeit I realise unrealistic world, the government would have put forward their policy proposal for a customs union or whatever, and the opposition would have tried to tear it to bits, as is their job.
As it stands, and notwithstanding my belief or rather fervent hope that we will see some kind of a sensible deal, come the deadline, it does seem to be no way to run a democracy.
In last year's general election, voters chose chaos and a government without a mandate or the parliamentary numbers to resolve anything. That is what they are getting.
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
That could happen today.
And just like today, anyone who is in the UK illegally can be removed.
Yes. But now we are part of the EU -s o we have no choice. I'm sure I heard many times the phrase "controlling our borders". What kind of control is effected with open borders ?
And during the referendum campaign I expressed my annoyance with the constant references to 'borders' when what was meant was controlling who can live and work in the UK.
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
Yeah, on what planet is that going to happen?
If you want to come to the UK , without the correct papers, would be the best route through Eire.
Then a minor road across the no border area.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there is a border when you land in Dublin. Not to mention the absurdity of a million refugees buying plane tickets...
I didn't realise they were no illegal immigrants in Ireland or there are no East Europeans there. Wait, some of them actually work for me.
You really think a million are going to fly to Dublin to get to the UK? OK.
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
That could happen today.
And just like today, anyone who is in the UK illegally can be removed.
Yes. But now we are part of the EU -s o we have no choice. I'm sure I heard many times the phrase "controlling our borders". What kind of control is effected with open borders ?
So why don't we see a million refugees flying to Dublin?
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
That could happen today.
And just like today, anyone who is in the UK illegally can be removed.
Yes. But now we are part of the EU -s o we have no choice. I'm sure I heard many times the phrase "controlling our borders". What kind of control is effected with open borders ?
So why don't we see a million refugees flying to Dublin? Newham
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
Yeah, on what planet is that going to happen?
If you want to come to the UK , without the correct papers, would be the best route through Eire.
Then a minor road across the no border area.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think there is a border when you land in Dublin. Not to mention the absurdity of a million refugees buying plane tickets...
I didn't realise they were no illegal immigrants in Ireland or there are no East Europeans there. Wait, some of them actually work for me.
You really think a million are going to fly to Dublin to get to the UK? OK.
Heathrow is easier, and closer to London where everyone enjoys living 20 to a semi-detached.
It wasn’t good enough for the leader to routinely defer to his shadow chancellor when confronted with a difficult decision – a shadow chancellor who on three separate occasions undermined my efforts to agree collective positions on health matters.
It wasn’t good enough for the leader to say one thing to me, only for his political secretary to phone a day later and say: “He may have said that, but I know what he really thinks.”
It wasn’t good enough for the leader to read his position from a typed up script at shadow cabinet meetings discussing the prospect of military action against Isis in Syria or the EU referendum.
And it wasn’t good enough that whenever he appeared on TV, his description of a process, or his analysis of a problem, ended in confusion or despair on the party’s position – article 50, counterterrorism, “7.5 out of 10” on Brexit.
heLOLm.
Sour grapes from a Progress anointed one,showing the reduced influence of that party -within -a -party.
Exactly. The EU tells us to string up the razor wire, we tell them to bugger off.
The EU doesn't tell us to do anything.
It's the headbangers who are squealing about controlling our borders. It's clear they don't regard the border in Ireland as "ours"
How do we tell them to bugger off?
We don't want to impose tariffs on imports from the EU - nothing to control
We don't want to stop EU citizens visiting the UK - nothing to control
We want to decide who gets the right to live and work here - you don't control this on the border
Now please explain why the EU wants us to string up the razor wire across the Emerald Isle.
So I take it you'd have no problem if any of the 1m Syrian refugees flew to Dublin and took the train to Belfast.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
That could happen today.
And just like today, anyone who is in the UK illegally can be removed.
Yes. But now we are part of the EU -s o we have no choice. I'm sure I heard many times the phrase "controlling our borders". What kind of control is effected with open borders ?
Control on who works in this country, who gets social housing, who claims our benefits etc doesn't happen at the border.
Bill Wiggin, a Conservative backbencher, is speaking now. He is supporting the Watson amendments, NC20 and NC21, which would introduce the punitive costs provisions for newspapers that do not sign up to an approved regulator.
I have no idea why he has such an opinion....
Bill Wiggin claimed £11,000 in phantom mortgage payments
That's an old story! He's since featured in Private Eye and he's had a long-running row with the Hereford Times, his local paper.
We used to have rotten boroughs. Maybe we need a new term for a country that plans to muzzle the free press by awarding costs against it whatever the circumstances.
Their Galileo decision shows the relationship only works one way. They want full cooperation from the UK on intelligence/defence matters, yet aren't willing to trust the UK with access to their special satellite program. Wasn't there howls of outrage that the UK was seen as suggesting security could be used as a bargaining chip early in the negotiations?
Any outcome will be a downgrade for us from the status quo. A successful negotiation will see a smaller downgrade than would otherwise happen. That might seem stupid but it's a consequence of Brexit being all downside and no upside.
I thought the EU wanted to continue with existing security/defence treaties and agreements? Saying that they can't trust the UK with access to their satellites while at the same time lapping up all the intelligence they can get their hands on seems a bit ridiculous.
The Galileo discussion is probably the best example yet of the EU’s determination to be inflexible and to be seen to punish the UK, even if the reality of the situation is that they are cutting off their nose to spite their face.
It is funny that China is considered a partner in Galileo having put in 230 million Euros into the project whilst the UK is to be barred from involvement after paying around 1.2 billion Euros. Maybe we should ask for our money back.
The UK is barred from data sharing that is only available to EU members, as set out in the treaty agreed at the time by the UK and other EU members. The UK would be degraded to the lower associate level occupied by Norway and Switzerland.
The Financial Times reports that in its letter to the UK government, the European Commission said security elements of the GPS project needed to be protected to avoid them being "irretrievably compromised" for several years by being shared with the UK
They literally said they don't trust the UK on this matter. Despite them wanting us to continue sharing intelligence with them.
Yeah, but they don't trust anyone else either - not Norway, the US, Switzerland. I think more likely than not it will be sorted out. We will get a deal of some sort. Thing is, the best possible deal is worse than what we had before. There we go.
Hmm. You misquote. What he says is the main problem is the squabbling over Brexit not Brexit itself. He blames the extremists on both sides and the Government paralysed in the middle.
Hmm. You misquote. What he says is the main problem is the squabbling over Brexit not Brexit itself. He blames the extremists on both sides and the Government paralysed in the middle.
Except you’d have to assume that Brexit, and Brexit squabbling, are somehow separable.
In reality, Brexit was always going to come with the squabbling, given it’s nebulous, fanciful nature.
Comments
But your lot should be making hay on the Left, with Labour led by Brexit's Bessy Mate. Pity you aren't competitive in most of the seats there.
I know you personally would not have a problem with that - but does your fellow Leavers ?
Visa free travel and freedom of movement are two different things. Brits can visit New Zealand for six months as tourists and we have a reciprocal health care agreement but we can't work there!
As I said before, this strikes me as a completely petty and unnecessary conflict. On the one side the EU says they want an intelligence sharing agreement and on the other we're not to be trusted and can't have access to the satellite system. It's completely inconsistent. Though it matches up with my view of the EU perfectly and hopefully the veil has lifted for a few of the more ardent remainers (including the FT).
If the former, any French or German company or bank wishing to trade in or with the US will effectively be forced to stop trading with Iran or find itself subject to US enforcement action. It doesn’t matter how much Britain and the EU countries stick together. Unless they can find some way of ensuring that their companies are not legally caught by these new US sanctions, business will have to take action to avoid being caught.
Trump’s move is stupid for another reason. Why should North Korea now believe any promises or guarantees made by a US President?
Then a minor road across the no border area.
And in any case the vast majority of illegal immigrants to most countries have entered legally e.g. as a visitor and then violated the terms of their entry.
https://www.mapsofworld.com/france/french-overseas-territories.html
Bear in mind that in the case of Airbus for example it is estimated that 275,000 US jobs depend on their operations in the States. Not sure it will help Trump's popularity much with his blue collar workers if those jobs disappear.
And just like today, anyone who is in the UK illegally can be removed.
What I really don't understand is the EU insistence that any Galileo work be moved out of the UK on day 1 after Brexit, given that a substantial amount of work happens in (e.g.) Switzerland, which provides the super-accurate clocks...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-44055475
As far as I can see, this isn't about the EU 'following rules' at all; they are just being awkward. They're entitled to do so, but sometimes being a dick is just being a dick.
In another, albeit I realise unrealistic world, the government would have put forward their policy proposal for a customs union or whatever, and the opposition would have tried to tear it to bits, as is their job.
As it stands, and notwithstanding my belief or rather fervent hope that we will see some kind of a sensible deal, come the deadline, it does seem to be no way to run a democracy.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43546209
They literally said they don't trust the UK on this matter. Despite them wanting us to continue sharing intelligence with them.
Good afternoon, everyone.
The tech stuff is probably more important as the UK government won't want to let it go to the EU if we're not in the project. I don't know how that get remedied though, other than money and lots of it.
His sort should not be in a local council let alone be our Foreign Secretary. Hopefully the electorate of Uxbridge and South Ruislip can kick this lying turd out at the next GE.
Galileo isn't really a commercial necessity, though its use alongside another system (US GPS) does significantly increase accuracy in particular circumstances. It's more like an insurance policy, or defence spending (with the benefit of staying current with aspects of space/satellite technology).
Given that we've contributed to the costs, there's really no reason to lock us out, other than a desire to be awkward, and to nick our share of the commercial work.
Again, the EU is entirely entitled to do so - just as we are entitled to demand our contribution back. There is no absolute need under EU rules for them to do so, however.
"Galileo"
"We will not let you go".
An executive at Airbus says that UK work on the Galileo sat-nav system will have to be moved out of the country if the company wins a key contract.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-44055475
I have no idea why he has such an opinion....
Bill Wiggin claimed £11,000 in phantom mortgage payments
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5358100/MPs-expenses-Bill-Wiggin-claimed-11000-in-phantom-mortgage-payments.html
By, a Brexiter.
https://capx.co/it-is-official-brexit-squabbling-is-damaging-the-economy/
We used to have rotten boroughs. Maybe we need a new term for a country that plans to muzzle the free press by awarding costs against it whatever the circumstances.
In reality, Brexit was always going to come with the squabbling, given it’s nebulous, fanciful nature.