Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Ladbrokes open market on the battle within LAB for Lewisham Ea

13»

Comments

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 19,858

    Mr. Meeks, I've searched Youtube but cannot find the footage, but a peer (I believe a Lib Dem) said in the Lords in recent days, quite overtly, that he wanted to prevent our departure from the EU.

    Mr. P, on a scale from Blair to Stalin, where does Webbe stand?

    A man in the pub, I forget which one, said quite overtly, that he preferred Hawaiian pizza.

    Get a grip. Why are Brexiters so paranoiac?
    Lords Taverne, Newby, Adonis and Heseltine have all said they will do everything they can to stop Brexit. Not just to modify it or change it but to stop it. And that is just with about a minute of checking on google. There are many more.

    There is nothing paranoid about this claim. They are happy to go on record and admit it.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 19,858

    CD13 said:

    Mr fire,

    "The referendum result was close, so the outcome that best reflects that is leaving the EU abut staying very close. EEA membership would meet that."

    So if Jezza wins the GE by a couple of percent only, he will implement some Conservative policies to reflect the closeness of the result?

    And if Remain had won 52/48, would all the Remainers now be advocating dropping out of the EU and becoming members of the EEA as a middle ground? Yeah, right.
    No, because, obviously, Remainng would have won. It would be just as wrong to “interpret” such a result as an endorsement for further integration as it is for those who claim a Leave vote means we must leave the CU/SM
    But that is exactly what it would have been and how the EU would have interpreted it. This is one of the big lies at the heart of the Remain campaign - the idea that the EU would or could remain fixed in its current form. It was never going to be the case and a vote for Remain would have been a vote for further integration. At least some Remaniacs on here are honest enough to admit that.
    Except in the real world, Cameron did actually secure a few concessions. Minor ones, maybe. But not nothing.

    Please stop lying Mr Tyndall.
    HE secured nothing. More Remoaner dishonesty. It is becoming endemic.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,914

    CD13 said:

    Mr fire,

    "The referendum result was close, so the outcome that best reflects that is leaving the EU abut staying very close. EEA membership would meet that."

    So if Jezza wins the GE by a couple of percent only, he will implement some Conservative policies to reflect the closeness of the result?

    And if Remain had won 52/48, would all the Remainers now be advocating dropping out of the EU and becoming members of the EEA as a middle ground? Yeah, right.
    No, because, obviously, Remainng would have won. It would be just as wrong to “interpret” such a result as an endorsement for further integration as it is for those who claim a Leave vote means we must leave the CU/SM
    But that is exactly what it would have been and how the EU would have interpreted it. This is one of the big lies at the heart of the Remain campaign - the idea that the EU would or could remain fixed in its current form. It was never going to be the case and a vote for Remain would have been a vote for further integration. At least some Remaniacs on here are honest enough to admit that.
    Except in the real world, Cameron did actually secure a few concessions. Minor ones, maybe. But not nothing.

    Please stop lying Mr Tyndall.
    HE secured nothing. More Remoaner dishonesty. It is becoming endemic.
    Capitalising the pronoun still doesn’t make any sense of of your laughable attempt to rewrite history. Do you actually believe this stuff?
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 3,960

    The “unicorn” thing on smart border is particular nonsense. Yes, it’s new technology. Yes, it hasn’t been done before. But that doesn’t mean it can’t be or will never be. That just a political attack to stop it happening.

    It’s a major programme (my speciality) that would involve physical infrastructure (cameras, cables, servers, and inspection depots) particularly at Dover and Holyhead IT and central management (database and HMRC linkage) and operations (mobile customs officers and trained personnel). That would cover road transport. Air and sea freight “just” needs expansion of customs lanes and officers at our major ports and airports and/ or a similar form of smart pre-clearance with EU shipments, but it’s far less of an issue as those supply chains tend not to work on a “just in time” basis.

    I’d say you’d need a year or so for a full feasibility/concept study. Eighteen months to procure and design. And then 2-3 years to build, plus a year or two to test and commission and train the operators.

    So 2025 for a “go live” date is about right. You could attack it on ground of cost (probably several billion) or on extra trade friction with the EU (prob 0.2-0.4% GDP per annum) in service but not on feasibility in principle.

    A 2025 implementation is no good as the it won't survive the inevitable tory GE defeat in 2022.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 4,914

    Mr. Meeks, I've searched Youtube but cannot find the footage, but a peer (I believe a Lib Dem) said in the Lords in recent days, quite overtly, that he wanted to prevent our departure from the EU.

    Mr. P, on a scale from Blair to Stalin, where does Webbe stand?

    A man in the pub, I forget which one, said quite overtly, that he preferred Hawaiian pizza.

    Get a grip. Why are Brexiters so paranoiac?
    Lords Taverne, Newby, Adonis and Heseltine have all said they will do everything they can to stop Brexit. Not just to modify it or change it but to stop it. And that is just with about a minute of checking on google. There are many more.

    There is nothing paranoid about this claim. They are happy to go on record and admit it.
    So what?
    Of course there are folk who want to stop Brexit. Maybe even 48% of the country.

    I fail to see why this is some kind of conspiracy against the people, unless one’s preferred model is majoritarian tyranny.
  • archer101auarcher101au Posts: 1,612



    Good post.
    First coherent description of max fac I’ve seen anywhere.

    It is good to have a proper discussion - but I think you are overestimating the complexity of Maxfac.

    Lets be honest - Customs are just like taxes - they rely on self certification backed by random (and infrequent) inspections and large penalties for false declaration. The level of actual inspection is tiny.

    Nothing is needed on the roads. All that is needed is a website to go and make a declaration (you need to be pre-registered if you are over the size limit, small traders can be ignored in NI). Based on a risk weighting, some people (say 1%) are told they need to present the goods for inspection at a customs post away from the border. If there are tariffs, they can be charged electronically based on the declaration. Customs periodically inspect the premises of the traders and check their compliance with huge fines and prosecution if they have cheated.

    What more is really needed than they have already? Not much. More staff, certainly, but other than a little extra facilities in NI this is what customs already does.

    The obvious point is that Maxfac is nothing other than what Customs should be already and will be in the future. It should be the aim of the Government to make UK Customs the most efficient in the World by using Maxfac on ALL goods, not just EU shipments.

    It was mentioned that certain sectors that rely on JIT heavily (mostly auto) could be part of a mini-customs union just for those sectors (eg alignment on tariffs and regulations) - this is allowed under WTO if part of an overall trade agreement.

    I am sure the civil service would like to turn this into a five year mega project, but I reckon the private sector could come up with a solution in about a year.
This discussion has been closed.