Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » NEW PB / Polling Matters podcast. What do the public think of

24

Comments

  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 1,876

    alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    On topic but at the same time completely off topic. It is genuinely frightening how much our manufacturing depends on these JiT systems. If they can be derailed by something as minor as Brexit then god help us if we have a real problem like a Carrington event or a case of nuclear terrorism.

    When I did the course on nuclear terrorism last year one of the points that was made was that it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    The Fukishima disaster made the whole of industry that had global supply chains wake up. In Fukishima there was the only factory worldwide that made the metallic for metallic paint for the car industry. It suddenly became unavailable. Supply chains from then on became multi supplier and closer to home and in multiple diverse locations.
  • The_TaxmanThe_Taxman Posts: 2,896

    alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    On topic but at the same time completely off topic. It is genuinely frightening how much our manufacturing depends on these JiT systems. If they can be derailed by something as minor as Brexit then god help us if we have a real problem like a Carrington event or a case of nuclear terrorism.

    When I did the course on nuclear terrorism last year one of the points that was made was that it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    Reminds me of the Threads film of the 1980s, which of course was a full nuclear war not a one off attack. The regrettable thing is the 'deranged actor' whether state or terrorist network only have to be lucky once for them to induce mayhem.
  • alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    On topic but at the same time completely off topic. It is genuinely frightening how much our manufacturing depends on these JiT systems. If they can be derailed by something as minor as Brexit then god help us if we have a real problem like a Carrington event or a case of nuclear terrorism.

    When I did the course on nuclear terrorism last year one of the points that was made was that it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    Or just move to Europe and the problem is solve and we lose tens of thousands of jobs
  • alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    On topic but at the same time completely off topic. It is genuinely frightening how much our manufacturing depends on these JiT systems. If they can be derailed by something as minor as Brexit then god help us if we have a real problem like a Carrington event or a case of nuclear terrorism.

    When I did the course on nuclear terrorism last year one of the points that was made was that it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    Or just move to Europe and the problem is solve and we lose tens of thousands of jobs
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,628
    alex. said:

    alex. said:

    notme said:

    Just read that the option for a one off extension to the transition period shown in the draft treaty has now been changed from 20XX to 2022. Significant move

    The XX was only ever there because it was a draft not because it was going to be open ended.
    Wasn't it always 2020 - just with part Roman numerals to show how, you know, they are integrating bits of other Euro-culture.....
    It is still 2020. This clause is about a single potential one off extension to the transition period IF THE UK GOVT REQUESTS IT. The ERG are incapable of understanding that this is nothing to do with the EU "trapping us in" for as long as possible but something that we THE UK REQUESTED to ease our transition to new arrangements. In fact we will have to pay for it.

    EDIT: sorry 2021 (for the default on the transition period end).

    Indeed. That the Hard Brexiteers have had to resort to fake news shows they are rattled.

    I suspect May's deal (or something very much like it) will get past the HoC in the next month.
    I wish it were them "resorting to fake news". At least then there is the scope for them to self examine whether they are quite on the right course. I think a lot of them genuinely believe what they are saying....
    They may believe it but a lot of it is still fake.
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,647

    December '22 is still very tight indeed. It suggests End State is agreed and ratified in 3 years 9 months after we leave. It creates another cliff edge giving power to the EU as the Transition can only be extended once. It's Barnier quite reasonably upping the ante. He's saying to the ERG " If you reopen this so we will we. "

    At least we might prepare a bit better for the second cliff edge.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 1,876
    edited November 2018

    alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    There are no proof points in any of your links about JIT from European suppliers.

    They could be using a system of continental suppliers keeping stock in a UK warehouse which is then sent from their to meet the JIT timescale.

    "... from there... "
    So having lost the argument completely all you have now is being a grammar police person.
    With respect you are looking rather ill informed on a vital matter to our car and aerospace industry
    Where are your case studies?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,605

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

  • alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    There are no proof points in any of your links about JIT from European suppliers.

    They could be using a system of continental suppliers keeping stock in a UK warehouse which is then sent from their to meet the JIT timescale.

    You are demonstrating the utter lack of knowledge so evident in ERG
    Why can you not provide the case studies proof points for your argument?
    Both Ben and I have provided the google links for you. It is for you to read them if you wish

    I am not making any futher comments. Like Ben I do not like hitting my head against a brick wall
  • alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    There are no proof points in any of your links about JIT from European suppliers.

    They could be using a system of continental suppliers keeping stock in a UK warehouse which is then sent from their to meet the JIT timescale.

    You are demonstrating the utter lack of knowledge so evident in ERG
    Why can you not provide the case studies proof points for your argument?
    Both Ben and I have provided the google links for you. It is for you to read them if you wish

    I am not making any futher comments. Like Ben I do not like hitting my head against a brick wall
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262

    alex. said:

    notme said:

    Just read that the option for a one off extension to the transition period shown in the draft treaty has now been changed from 20XX to 2022. Significant move

    The XX was only ever there because it was a draft not because it was going to be open ended.
    Wasn't it always 2020 - just with part Roman numerals to show how, you know, they are integrating bits of other Euro-culture.....
    It is still 2020. This clause is about a single potential one off extension to the transition period IF THE UK GOVT REQUESTS IT. The ERG are incapable of understanding that this is nothing to do with the EU "trapping us in" for as long as possible but something that we THE UK REQUESTED to ease our transition to new arrangements. In fact we will have to pay for it.

    EDIT: sorry 2021 (for the default on the transition period end).

    Indeed. That the Hard Brexiteers have had to resort to fake news shows they are rattled.

    I suspect May's deal (or something very much like it) will get past the HoC in the next month.
    I doubt it, however I do find this horror that keeps being expressed at EU rules for things applying during transition to be a very poor sign, since a lot of it seems to be an argument against there being a transition period at all, and I know we jest about how people should have acted sooner, but that there would be a transition period has been obvious for a very long time, surely, and if that is a deal breaker why would people have waited until the end. You cannot tweak the existence of that.
  • alex. said:

    December '22 is still very tight indeed. It suggests End State is agreed and ratified in 3 years 9 months after we leave. It creates another cliff edge giving power to the EU as the Transition can only be extended once. It's Barnier quite reasonably upping the ante. He's saying to the ERG " If you reopen this so we will we. "

    At least we might prepare a bit better for the second cliff edge.
    That's a fair point. But politically a no no. The referendum result would have been discharged. If we didn't feel able to jump 9ff the cliff 2 years 9 months after the referendum we won't do it 5 years 6 months later with the mandate gone.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262
    edited November 2018

    What no thread on the demise of fluffers....

    After Brexit the fluffing industry can rise again, and indeed help others to rise.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,628

    alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    On topic but at the same time completely off topic. It is genuinely frightening how much our manufacturing depends on these JiT systems. If they can be derailed by something as minor as Brexit then god help us if we have a real problem like a Carrington event or a case of nuclear terrorism.

    When I did the course on nuclear terrorism last year one of the points that was made was that it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    I think that's a very good point Richard. It will probably take such an event to force a re-evaluation of this global JIT model.

    However, any such black swan event would probably impact globally, whereas we are in danger of unnecessarily self-inflicting something very similar on ourselves alone (well, with some impact on the EU too).
  • alex.alex. Posts: 4,647
    edited November 2018

    alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.


    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    On topic but at the same time completely off topic. It is genuinely frightening how much our manufacturing depends on these JiT systems. If they can be derailed by something as minor as Brexit then god help us if we have a real problem like a Carrington event or a case of nuclear terrorism.

    When I did the course on nuclear terrorism last year one of the points that was made was that it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    The Fukishima disaster made the whole of industry that had global supply chains wake up. In Fukishima there was the only factory worldwide that made the metallic for metallic paint for the car industry. It suddenly became unavailable. Supply chains from then on became multi supplier and closer to home and in multiple diverse locations.
    Yes it's one reason why some of the concerns about No deal are probably a little bit overblown, in the sense that it will be short term disruption caused by bad planning and/or lack of capacity, not a permanent problem. Businesses will always pursue the cheapest and most efficient options to operate, but this always creates the danger that they don't build in sufficient risk contingency. Every so often a major event reveals the weaknesses in their planning and big changes happen to make sure it doesn't happen again.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 39,833

    alex. said:

    December '22 is still very tight indeed. It suggests End State is agreed and ratified in 3 years 9 months after we leave. It creates another cliff edge giving power to the EU as the Transition can only be extended once. It's Barnier quite reasonably upping the ante. He's saying to the ERG " If you reopen this so we will we. "

    At least we might prepare a bit better for the second cliff edge.
    That's a fair point. But politically a no no. The referendum result would have been discharged. If we didn't feel able to jump 9ff the cliff 2 years 9 months after the referendum we won't do it 5 years 6 months later with the mandate gone.
    The result is only discharged by leaving the EU. For all intents and purposes we would be EU members during the course of the transition, even the withdrawal agreement says that.
  • Of course if the Status Quo Transition lasts til December 2022 then that year's General Election becomes a Brexit election. Absolutely everything it anything can be overridden via party manifesto. A People's Vote to coin a phrase.
  • Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing Corbyn said today was that he did not accept rstriction on state aid in the agreement. It is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 6,294

    dixiedean said:


    In which case, we should move to greater devolution. Dismantling our Over-centralisation of powers, coupled with a radical updating of our (unwritten) Constitution is one possible side benefit of Brexit.
    One which is never made by its proponents, AFAIK.

    Um. I am a big fan of devolution - and of course of Scottish Independence. I always get flak on here for pointing out I believe it is illogical to be a Brexiteer for reasons of self determination and yet oppose Scottish Independence. I would be delighted to see real powers devolved to counties and districts but I am always told this is impossible because all local councillors are so corrupt and in hoc to vested interests.

    I exaggerate of course but that is an argument I hear time and time again.

    I would love Brexit to be just the first step in a reformation of our systems of governance.
    Good for you for being logically consistent, and welcome back. Must say I had forgotten you argued in such a way. You are, though, something of a lone voice.
    As a Remainer, one thing that stands out from this sorry saga,is that the standard of governance, and debate in this country is piss poor on all sides.
    A Brexit which involved such a reformation would at least be something. If local councillors really are corrupt, then that could be looked at too.
    Brexit provides such a window of opportunity. But vanishingly few of its proponents want to look through it.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,628
    kle4 said:

    alex. said:

    notme said:

    Just read that the option for a one off extension to the transition period shown in the draft treaty has now been changed from 20XX to 2022. Significant move

    The XX was only ever there because it was a draft not because it was going to be open ended.
    Wasn't it always 2020 - just with part Roman numerals to show how, you know, they are integrating bits of other Euro-culture.....
    It is still 2020. This clause is about a single potential one off extension to the transition period IF THE UK GOVT REQUESTS IT. The ERG are incapable of understanding that this is nothing to do with the EU "trapping us in" for as long as possible but something that we THE UK REQUESTED to ease our transition to new arrangements. In fact we will have to pay for it.

    EDIT: sorry 2021 (for the default on the transition period end).

    Indeed. That the Hard Brexiteers have had to resort to fake news shows they are rattled.

    I suspect May's deal (or something very much like it) will get past the HoC in the next month.
    I doubt it, however I do find this horror that keeps being expressed at EU rules for things applying during transition to be a very poor sign, since a lot of it seems to be an argument against there being a transition period at all, and I know we jest about how people should have acted sooner, but that there would be a transition period has been obvious for a very long time, surely, and if that is a deal breaker why would people have waited until the end. You cannot tweak the existence of that.
    There is undoubtedly a plot to force a disruptive Hard Brexit. The cynic in me suspects those on both the extreme right and left are trying to engineer it to suit their own (separate) nefarious undemocratic ends.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 8,519

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing Corbyn said today was that he did not accept rstriction on state aid in the agreement. It is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Telegraph not impressed with Labours attempts to be all things to all men

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2018/11/18/labours-confused-contradictory-brexit-policy-bewildering-irresponsible/

    Bewildering - is the least of it.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,628

    Of course if the Status Quo Transition lasts til December 2022 then that year's General Election becomes a Brexit election. Absolutely everything it anything can be overridden via party manifesto. A People's Vote to coin a phrase.

    Mind you, without a Status Quo Transition the country would just be going down down deeper and down.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262

    dixiedean said:


    In which case, we should move to greater devolution. Dismantling our Over-centralisation of powers, coupled with a radical updating of our (unwritten) Constitution is one possible side benefit of Brexit.
    One which is never made by its proponents, AFAIK.

    Um. I am a big fan of devolution - and of course of Scottish Independence. I always get flak on here for pointing out I believe it is illogical to be a Brexiteer for reasons of self determination and yet oppose Scottish Independence.
    Um, no it isn't. I believe in self determination for the Scots, I would just prefer it if they self determined to remain in this union even if we leave another union. One doesn't have to believe in total independence from any other body if you believe in self determination. Self evidently you do not, since the SNP strongly support being in the EU union even as they do not wish to be in the UK union. Do they not believe in self determination, or a strong, independent scottish nation? Of course they do.
  • Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 8,519

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    McDonnell will say whatever he needs to get power.

    There is a reason why people say he is more dangerous than Jezbollah
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262
    edited November 2018

    Of course if the Status Quo Transition lasts til December 2022 then that year's General Election becomes a Brexit election. Absolutely everything it anything can be overridden via party manifesto. A People's Vote to coin a phrase.

    Mind you, without a Status Quo Transition the country would just be going down down deeper and down.
    It'll be fine, we'll get whatever we want once we can figure out what to tell the EU about what we're proposing.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 16,796

    Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.

    Think tomorrow is THE day.

    If they don't get 48 letters tomorrow ERG is indeed all piss and wind!

    We shall see....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262
    edited November 2018
    Floater said:

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    McDonnell will say whatever he needs to get power.

    There is a reason why people say he is more dangerous than Jezbollah
    Corbyn will go along with it, not least because the members want it. His famous rigidity has not been much in evidence in pushing for what is his, supposed, preference when it comes to the EU, he has allowed a complete free hand. After years as leader he has changed by necessity due to the role, and are we to believe he would not do something the party as a whole wanted at the potential cost of gaining power, even if it limited his options later a bit more than he would like? I don't buy it.

    What would be a bit weird is if the deal (somehow) passed, then because that destroys the Tories' majority, we can an election which Labour win before or shortly after we enter the transition.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,628
    edited November 2018
    kle4 said:

    Of course if the Status Quo Transition lasts til December 2022 then that year's General Election becomes a Brexit election. Absolutely everything it anything can be overridden via party manifesto. A People's Vote to coin a phrase.

    Mind you, without a Status Quo Transition the country would just be going down down deeper and down.
    It'll be fine, we'll get whatever we want once we can figure out what to tell the EU about what we're proposing.
    So long as we don't keep changing our minds again and again.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 8,519

    alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    SNIP SNIP

    it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    The Fukishima disaster made the whole of industry that had global supply chains wake up. In Fukishima there was the only factory worldwide that made the metallic for metallic paint for the car industry. It suddenly became unavailable. Supply chains from then on became multi supplier and closer to home and in multiple diverse locations.
    I did not know that - what was the disruption like? (
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,545

    December '22 is still very tight indeed. It suggests End State is agreed and ratified in 3 years 9 months after we leave. It creates another cliff edge giving power to the EU as the Transition can only be extended once. It's Barnier quite reasonably upping the ante. He's saying to the ERG " If you reopen this so we will we. "

    Dec 2022 is also after the next election, ensuring that that GE takes place in a febrile atmosphere much like the present.

    Unless the government collapses first, of course.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,628
    Floater said:

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing Corbyn said today was that he did not accept rstriction on state aid in the agreement. It is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Telegraph not impressed with Labours attempts to be all things to all men

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2018/11/18/labours-confused-contradictory-brexit-policy-bewildering-irresponsible/

    Bewildering - is the least of it.
    Telegraph not impressed with Labour. In other news, night will follow day tomorrow. :smile:
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262

    kle4 said:

    Of course if the Status Quo Transition lasts til December 2022 then that year's General Election becomes a Brexit election. Absolutely everything it anything can be overridden via party manifesto. A People's Vote to coin a phrase.

    Mind you, without a Status Quo Transition the country would just be going down down deeper and down.
    It'll be fine, we'll get whatever we want once we can figure out what to tell the EU about what we're proposing.
    So long as we don;t keep changing our minds again and again.
    Some things will remain the same, never fear, after all we'll still be *checks Status Quo discography* living on an island.
  • GIN1138 said:

    Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.

    Think tomorrow is THE day.

    If they don't get 48 letters tomorrow ERG is indeed all piss and wind!

    We shall see....
    My guess is Baker and Mogg have been led up the garden path by MPs who talk a good rebellion in the Red Lion after 4 pints, but don't actually write any letters.

    We shall see tomorrow.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 11,545

    Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.

    Depends what time and day Brady checks his pigeonhole.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,628
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    Of course if the Status Quo Transition lasts til December 2022 then that year's General Election becomes a Brexit election. Absolutely everything it anything can be overridden via party manifesto. A People's Vote to coin a phrase.

    Mind you, without a Status Quo Transition the country would just be going down down deeper and down.
    It'll be fine, we'll get whatever we want once we can figure out what to tell the EU about what we're proposing.
    So long as we don;t keep changing our minds again and again.
    Some things will remain the same, never fear, after all we'll still be *checks Status Quo discography* living on an island.
    You win again!

    (Oops sorry wrong band)
  • Of course Transition till December 2022 begins to lay out a credible path to ' Remaining '. The End State is fornally rejoining the EU after having never really left via Transition. The referendum ' discharged ' and the Brexsh*ters worn down by counter mobilisation, demographic shifts, a popular bored of the topic, the experience of Taxation without Representation euro purgatory and crucially that rejoining would be a protest vote against the government and the rotten elites failure of statecraft. The same force that drive the Leave vote.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 10,628
    Foxy said:

    Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.

    Depends what time and day Brady checks his pigeonhole.
    Be funny if Brady's off on holiday for a week :lol:
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262

    Foxy said:

    Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.

    Depends what time and day Brady checks his pigeonhole.
    Be funny if Brady's off on holiday for a week :lol:
    And, though I wish him well, it is flu season, he might get laid up with something.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 8,519

    Floater said:

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing Corbyn said today was that he did not accept rstriction on state aid in the agreement. It is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Telegraph not impressed with Labours attempts to be all things to all men

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2018/11/18/labours-confused-contradictory-brexit-policy-bewildering-irresponsible/

    Bewildering - is the least of it.
    Telegraph not impressed with Labour. In other news, night will follow day tomorrow. :smile:
    Well, I can understand you might not want to listen to the Telegraph

    That's why it was so helpful for one of your own shadow ministers to describe your position as "bollocks"


  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 2,300
    edited November 2018



    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?


    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    On topic but at the same time completely off topic. It is genuinely frightening how much our manufacturing depends on these JiT systems. If they can be derailed by something as minor as Brexit then god help us if we have a real problem like a Carrington event or a case of nuclear terrorism.

    When I did the course on nuclear terrorism last year one of the points that was made was that it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    The Fukishima disaster made the whole of industry that had global supply chains wake up. In Fukishima there was the only factory worldwide that made the metallic for metallic paint for the car industry. It suddenly became unavailable. Supply chains from then on became multi supplier and closer to home and in multiple diverse locations.
    But if Fukushima had the only supplier, then all the manufacturers relying on it worldwide were in the same situation. A hard Brexit is going to disproportionally affect British industry by disrupting its supply chains.
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 8,519
    kle4 said:

    Floater said:

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    McDonnell will say whatever he needs to get power.

    There is a reason why people say he is more dangerous than Jezbollah
    Corbyn will go along with it, not least because the members want it. His famous rigidity has not been much in evidence in pushing for what is his, supposed, preference when it comes to the EU, he has allowed a complete free hand. After years as leader he has changed by necessity due to the role, and are we to believe he would not do something the party as a whole wanted at the potential cost of gaining power, even if it limited his options later a bit more than he would like? I don't buy it.

    What would be a bit weird is if the deal (somehow) passed, then because that destroys the Tories' majority, we can an election which Labour win before or shortly after we enter the transition.
    "a bit"

    LOL
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262
    Scott_P said:
    Uh, if 17 were given in private why the heck was Baker spouting such nonsense about being sure of being over?
  • Foxy said:

    Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.

    Depends what time and day Brady checks his pigeonhole.

    One paper this morning mentioned letters being pushed under Brady's office door!
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,368
    Next Tory leader is split fairly evenly between Raab, Javid, Johnson and Gove on Betfair.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125574963
  • kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Uh, if 17 were given in private why the heck was Baker spouting such nonsense about being sure of being over?
    :lol:

    It seems the rebellion has faltered.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 39,833

    Of course Transition till December 2022 begins to lay out a credible path to ' Remaining '. The End State is fornally rejoining the EU after having never really left via Transition. The referendum ' discharged ' and the Brexsh*ters worn down by counter mobilisation, demographic shifts, a popular bored of the topic, the experience of Taxation without Representation euro purgatory and crucially that rejoining would be a protest vote against the government and the rotten elites failure of statecraft. The same force that drive the Leave vote.

    Again, it won't be discharged until the UK actually leaves.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262
    Floater said:

    Floater said:

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing Corbyn said today was that he did not accept rstriction on state aid in the agreement. It is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Telegraph not impressed with Labours attempts to be all things to all men

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2018/11/18/labours-confused-contradictory-brexit-policy-bewildering-irresponsible/

    Bewildering - is the least of it.
    Telegraph not impressed with Labour. In other news, night will follow day tomorrow. :smile:
    Well, I can understand you might not want to listen to the Telegraph

    That's why it was so helpful for one of your own shadow ministers to describe your position as "bollocks"

    Publicly?

    Besides, ministers and shadow ministers are free to do what they want now, we are assured leader statements even if officially (albeit not enthusiastically) backed by their Cabinet it does not count as policy.
  • Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.

    There are two ways of reading Graham Brady's comments today. One is that they are nowhere near 48. The other is they are near 48 and he knows they will reach 48.

    It comes down to how you interpret his extraordinary intervention saying that he himself wouldn't submit a letter and doesn't think a challenge will help.

    Why would a '22 Chairman taking the extraordinary step of publicly arguing against a challenge if he knows, and by definition he really would know, one isn't coming ?

  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,605

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing Corbyn said today was that he did not accept rstriction on state aid in the agreement. It is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Then why is McDonnell (who you specifically mentioned) warming to the idea and even using the phrase peoples vote...

    State aid rules doesn't even really affect the previous manifesto, plenty of nationally owned rail companies on the continent.

    It is however one of the advantages of Brexit to Corbyn's mind, his criticism of a lack of one of the advantages in the deal doesn't necessarily imply that he wants Brexit at all costs. It doesn't really fit with allowed the shadow chancellor to make his recent comments and going along with the motions at conference.

    When he genuinely disagreed with the direction of Labour he made it perfectly clear, like with Trident, despite going along with it. Nobody thinks Corbyn has suddenly had a change of mind because he made his own views clear whilst accepting the direction the party had set.
  • It seems the cake lovers are six unicorns short of the take-over plan.

  • DadgeDadge Posts: 1,965

    alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    On topic but at the same time completely off topic. It is genuinely frightening how much our manufacturing depends on these JiT systems. If they can be derailed by something as minor as Brexit then god help us if we have a real problem like a Carrington event or a case of nuclear terrorism.

    When I did the course on nuclear terrorism last year one of the points that was made was that it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    "something as minor as Brexit"

    joker
  • Night all.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,368

    Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.

    There are two ways of reading Graham Brady's comments today. One is that they are nowhere near 48. The other is they are near 48 and he knows they will reach 48.

    It comes down to how you interpret his extraordinary intervention saying that he himself wouldn't submit a letter and doesn't think a challenge will help.

    Why would a '22 Chairman taking the extraordinary step of publicly arguing against a challenge if he knows, and by definition he really would know, one isn't coming ?

    I don't think you can read anything into his comments to be honest.
  • kle4 said:

    Foxy said:

    Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.

    Depends what time and day Brady checks his pigeonhole.
    Be funny if Brady's off on holiday for a week :lol:
    And, though I wish him well, it is flu season, he might get laid up with something.
    My good lady and I were struck down with a respiratory infection six weeks ago and still have not recovered. I hope Graham Brady doesn't follow our example
  • RobD said:

    Of course Transition till December 2022 begins to lay out a credible path to ' Remaining '. The End State is fornally rejoining the EU after having never really left via Transition. The referendum ' discharged ' and the Brexsh*ters worn down by counter mobilisation, demographic shifts, a popular bored of the topic, the experience of Taxation without Representation euro purgatory and crucially that rejoining would be a protest vote against the government and the rotten elites failure of statecraft. The same force that drive the Leave vote.

    Again, it won't be discharged until the UK actually leaves.
    This demonstrates the one small way in which you've already lost. The referendum result is now an abstract painting. We can all look at it and decide it means exactly want we want and be entirely right.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262
    AndyJS said:

    Next Tory leader is split fairly evenly between Raab, Javid, Johnson and Gove on Betfair.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125574963

    I'd have given Raab a reason able chance but making his pitch that he is easily fooled does not sound great. But then again Javid and Gove would be stupid picks given they ostensibly support the deal May is getting binned for (even if Gove is playing both sides and Javid is hiding). Obviously Boris is usually a lay, so, hmm, the position is unclear to me. Hunt's in the same bind as Javid, although he made a good conference speech I don't know enough about Cox to know why he would appeal en masse to the MPs.
  • kle4 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Uh, if 17 were given in private why the heck was Baker spouting such nonsense about being sure of being over?
    :lol:

    It seems the rebellion has faltered.
    "Oh, I'm afraid the deflector shield will be quite operational when your friends arrive!"
  • RobDRobD Posts: 39,833

    RobD said:

    Of course Transition till December 2022 begins to lay out a credible path to ' Remaining '. The End State is fornally rejoining the EU after having never really left via Transition. The referendum ' discharged ' and the Brexsh*ters worn down by counter mobilisation, demographic shifts, a popular bored of the topic, the experience of Taxation without Representation euro purgatory and crucially that rejoining would be a protest vote against the government and the rotten elites failure of statecraft. The same force that drive the Leave vote.

    Again, it won't be discharged until the UK actually leaves.
    This demonstrates the one small way in which you've already lost. The referendum result is now an abstract painting. We can all look at it and decide it means exactly want we want and be entirely right.
    It really isn't. The result was to leave the EU.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,368
    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    Next Tory leader is split fairly evenly between Raab, Javid, Johnson and Gove on Betfair.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125574963

    I'd have given Raab a reason able chance but making his pitch that he is easily fooled does not sound great. But then again Javid and Gove would be stupid picks given they ostensibly support the deal May is getting binned for (even if Gove is playing both sides and Javid is hiding). Obviously Boris is usually a lay, so, hmm, the position is unclear to me. Hunt's in the same bind as Javid, although he made a good conference speech I don't know enough about Cox to know why he would appeal en masse to the MPs.
    Cox gave a good speech at conference but I just don't seem him as a serious leadership contender.
  • Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 .
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing Corbyn said today was that he did not accept rstriction on state aid in the agreement. It is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Then why is McDonnell (who you specifically mentioned) warming to the idea and even using the phrase peoples vote...

    State aid rules doesn't even really affect the previous manifesto, plenty of nationally owned rail companies on the continent.

    It is however one of the advantages of Brexit to Corbyn's mind, his criticism of a lack of one of the advantages in the deal doesn't necessarily imply that he wants Brexit at all costs. It doesn't really fit with allowed the shadow chancellor to make his recent comments and going along with the motions at conference.

    When he genuinely disagreed with the direction of Labour he made it perfectly clear, like with Trident, despite going along with it. Nobody thinks Corbyn has suddenly had a change of mind because he made his own views clear whilst accepting the direction the party had set.
    The 18 anti referendum labour mps were named tonight and the same source expected Corbyn and McDonnell to follow suit

    However, even if they didn't those 18 labour votes would kill of the second referendum. It would not pass
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 36,209
    edited November 2018
    kle4 said:

    Floater said:

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general election. The trade deal might not be completed by the time of the next election (and on track record won't be) so it could be changed by the incoming party at the GE - indeed could be a key determinant of that election.

    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    McDonnell will say whatever he needs to get power.

    There is a reason why people say he is more dangerous than Jezbollah
    Corbyn will go along with it, not least because the members want it. His famous rigidity has not been much in evidence in pushing for what is his, supposed, preference when it comes to the EU, he has allowed a complete free hand. After years as leader he has changed by necessity due to the role, and are we to believe he would not do something the party as a whole wanted at the potential cost of gaining power, even if it limited his options later a bit more than he would like? I don't buy it.

    What would be a bit weird is if the deal (somehow) passed, then because that destroys the Tories' majority, we can an election which Labour win before or shortly after we enter the transition.
    Given Jezza hasn't even read the deal (and unlikely with his pea sized brain to understand it), he relies on others to explain what it means....can anybody see a problem with that when it comes to his famous rigidity...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262
    Looking up facts on Geoffrey Cox I see that a predecessor in his seat switched to the LDs in 95, was a LD MEP for 10 years, but rejoined the Tories shortly after May took the helm. Always fun to find the little stories out there.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:


    ERG were making much about it going on until 2099

    That's because the ERG are, by and large, a bit unhinged. It was just a last little niggling detail whether it would be 2 or 3 years.
    Stewart Jackson holding hands in horror apparently saying Barnier will keep us in the EU until 2022. Last night ERG were saying forever.

    To be fair it is only 12 months later
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general
    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Then why is McDonnell (who you specifically mentioned) warming to the idea and even using the phrase peoples vote...

    State aid rules doesn't even really affect the previous manifesto, plenty of nationally owned rail companies on the continent.

    It is however one of the advantages of Brexit to Corbyn's mind, his criticism of a lack of one of the advantages in the deal doesn't necessarily imply that he wants Brexit at all costs. It doesn't really fit with allowed the shadow chancellor to make his recent comments and going along with the motions at conference.

    When he genuinely disagreed with the direction of Labour he made it perfectly clear, like with Trident, despite going along with it. Nobody thinks Corbyn has suddenly had a change of mind because he made his own views clear whilst accepting the direction the party had set.
    I feel you really don’t understand the creeping liberalisation of rail services across the continent. When state aid is offered it is offered for a service that has to be competitively tendered. This doesn’t stop state owned companies from running railways. But it stops you insisting it’s your state owned company that does it.
  • Time to go

    No doubt the ERG hope to get their vnoc while TM ignores them and continues to negotiate in Europe

    I hope everyone has a good ights rest

    Good night folks
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,605

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:

    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 .
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing Corbyn said today was that he did not accept rstriction on state aid in the agreement. It is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Then why is McDonnell (who you specifically mentioned) warming to the idea and even using the phrase peoples vote...

    State aid rules doesn't even really affect the previous manifesto, plenty of nationally owned rail companies on the continent.

    It is however one of the advantages of Brexit to Corbyn's mind, his criticism of a lack of one of the advantages in the deal doesn't necessarily imply that he wants Brexit at all costs. It doesn't really fit with allowed the shadow chancellor to make his recent comments and going along with the motions at conference.

    When he genuinely disagreed with the direction of Labour he made it perfectly clear, like with Trident, despite going along with it. Nobody thinks Corbyn has suddenly had a change of mind because he made his own views clear whilst accepting the direction the party had set.
    The 18 anti referendum labour mps were named tonight and the same source expected Corbyn and McDonnell to follow suit

    However, even if they didn't those 18 labour votes would kill of the second referendum. It would not pass
    I've only seen it as possible with a decent chunk of Tory support TBH*. Never thought about the calculations regarding Labour but I would have thought there would be more than 18 against it if it came to a vote.

    *Which is why I've always been pretty pessimistic on the idea previously but it has been growing as a possibility.

    I have dismissed the chances of it before, I still don't think it will happen but it is a very plausible outcome these days.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,605
    notme said:

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general
    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Then why is McDonnell (who you specifically mentioned) warming to the idea and even using the phrase peoples vote...

    State aid rules doesn't even really affect the previous manifesto, plenty of nationally owned rail companies on the continent.

    It is however one of the advantages of Brexit to Corbyn's mind, his criticism of a lack of one of the advantages in the deal doesn't necessarily imply that he wants Brexit at all costs. It doesn't really fit with allowed the shadow chancellor to make his recent comments and going along with the motions at conference.

    When he genuinely disagreed with the direction of Labour he made it perfectly clear, like with Trident, despite going along with it. Nobody thinks Corbyn has suddenly had a change of mind because he made his own views clear whilst accepting the direction the party had set.
    I feel you really don’t understand the creeping liberalisation of rail services across the continent. When state aid is offered it is offered for a service that has to be competitively tendered. This doesn’t stop state owned companies from running railways. But it stops you insisting it’s your state owned company that does it.
    There's wiggle room, counter examples in other countries or if you are really having problems with it ways to work around the problem so the rules are adhered to in a technical way only.

    Britain being in the EU and having state run railways is not going to be something the EU is going to get to worried about.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 12,505
    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    Next Tory leader is split fairly evenly between Raab, Javid, Johnson and Gove on Betfair.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125574963

    I'd have given Raab a reason able chance but making his pitch that he is easily fooled does not sound great. But then again Javid and Gove would be stupid picks given they ostensibly support the deal May is getting binned for (even if Gove is playing both sides and Javid is hiding). Obviously Boris is usually a lay, so, hmm, the position is unclear to me. Hunt's in the same bind as Javid, although he made a good conference speech I don't know enough about Cox to know why he would appeal en masse to the MPs.
    Cox Out
  • Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:

    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 .
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion.

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Then why is McDonnell (who you specifically mentioned) warming to the idea and even using the phrase peoples vote...

    State aid rules doesn't even really affect the previous manifesto, plenty of nationally owned rail companies on the continent.

    It is however one of the advantages of Brexit to Corbyn's mind, his criticism of a lack of one of the advantages in the deal doesn't necessarily imply that he wants Brexit at all costs. It doesn't really fit with allowed the shadow chancellor to make his recent comments and going along with the motions at conference.

    When he genuinely disagreed with the direction of Labour he made it perfectly clear, like with Trident, despite going along with it. Nobody thinks Corbyn has suddenly had a change of mind because he made his own views clear whilst accepting the direction the party had set.
    The 18 anti referendum labour mps were named tonight and the same source expected Corbyn and McDonnell to follow suit

    However, even if they didn't those 18 labour votes would kill of the second referendum. It would not pass
    I've only seen it as possible with a decent chunk of Tory support TBH*. Never thought about the calculations regarding Labour but I would have thought there would be more than 18 against it if it came to a vote.

    *Which is why I've always been pretty pessimistic on the idea previously but it has been growing as a possibility.

    I have dismissed the chances of it before, I still don't think it will happen but it is a very plausible outcome these days.
    It is logical to assume it may happen but tonights confirmation of these labour mps and their numbers has really put an end to the peoples vote campaign leaving deal or no deal
  • kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    Next Tory leader is split fairly evenly between Raab, Javid, Johnson and Gove on Betfair.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125574963

    I'd have given Raab a reason able chance but making his pitch that he is easily fooled does not sound great. But then again Javid and Gove would be stupid picks given they ostensibly support the deal May is getting binned for (even if Gove is playing both sides and Javid is hiding). Obviously Boris is usually a lay, so, hmm, the position is unclear to me. Hunt's in the same bind as Javid, although he made a good conference speech I don't know enough about Cox to know why he would appeal en masse to the MPs.
    Cox Out
    Are we back to talking about fluffers again?
  • Dadge said:

    alex. said:
    Warehousing has been one of the fastest growing sectors in the last few years - already well underwater
    Why do we need warehouses I read on here and in the press constantly that membership of the EU means we have JIT supply chains and no warehousing is required?

    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.
    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    On topic but at the same time completely off topic. It is genuinely frightening how much our manufacturing depends on these JiT systems. If they can be derailed by something as minor as Brexit then god help us if we have a real problem like a Carrington event or a case of nuclear terrorism.

    When I did the course on nuclear terrorism last year one of the points that was made was that it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    "something as minor as Brexit"

    joker
    Compared to the other scenarios I was mentioning it is microscopic. Beside this wasn't about Brexit it was a serious comment on the whole system of JiT.
  • kle4 said:

    dixiedean said:


    In which case, we should move to greater devolution. Dismantling our Over-centralisation of powers, coupled with a radical updating of our (unwritten) Constitution is one possible side benefit of Brexit.
    One which is never made by its proponents, AFAIK.

    Um. I am a big fan of devolution - and of course of Scottish Independence. I always get flak on here for pointing out I believe it is illogical to be a Brexiteer for reasons of self determination and yet oppose Scottish Independence.
    Um, no it isn't. I believe in self determination for the Scots, I would just prefer it if they self determined to remain in this union even if we leave another union. One doesn't have to believe in total independence from any other body if you believe in self determination. Self evidently you do not, since the SNP strongly support being in the EU union even as they do not wish to be in the UK union. Do they not believe in self determination, or a strong, independent scottish nation? Of course they do.
    That is a valid criticism of the SNP illogical stance of the SNP, not an argument against my points.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    Next Tory leader is split fairly evenly between Raab, Javid, Johnson and Gove on Betfair.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125574963

    I'd have given Raab a reason able chance but making his pitch that he is easily fooled does not sound great. But then again Javid and Gove would be stupid picks given they ostensibly support the deal May is getting binned for (even if Gove is playing both sides and Javid is hiding). Obviously Boris is usually a lay, so, hmm, the position is unclear to me. Hunt's in the same bind as Javid, although he made a good conference speech I don't know enough about Cox to know why he would appeal en masse to the MPs.
    Cox Out
    Oh, have the resignations started up again? Cool. Perhaps he can take the gutless five with him and they can do the job the ERG seem to be finding so hard.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    notme said:

    Barnesian said:

    Andrew said:
    It's significant because IIRC the date is 31 December 2022 which is after the next general
    This is going to go on for a while yet - unless we have a referendum in April and Remain wins with MEPs elected in May in the usual way. Then we can get on with our lives.
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Then why is McDonnell (who you specifically mentioned) warming to the idea and even using really affect the previous manifesto, plenty of nationally owned rail companies on the continent.

    It is however one of the advantages of Brexit to Corbyn's mind, his criticism of a lack of one of the advantages in the deal doesn't necessarily imply that he wants Brexit at all costsCorbyn has suddenly had a change of mind because he made his own views clear whilst accepting the direction the party had set.
    I feel you really don’t understand the creeping liberalisation of rail services across the continent. When state aid is offered it is offered for a service that has to be competitively tendered. This doesn’t stop state owned companies from running railways. But it stops you insisting it’s your state owned company that does it.
    There's wiggle room, counter examples in other countries or if you are really having problems with it ways to work around the problem so the rules are adhered to in a technical way only.

    Britain being in the EU and having state run railways is not going to be something the EU is going to get to worried about.
    They see what we have as the way forward. It’s one thing being tardy in tendering contacts, it’s another having a competive process in place and removing it. Good luck with that.

    If you want a state run railways (god knows why) it won’t be old school. It needs to wash its own face.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 1,708

    Dadge said:


    FFS!! JIT supply chains are one of the things a No Deal Brexit would royally screw! So we would need more warehouse space.

    One thing I am interested in is we have been told so often about JIT supply chains you would thought that the CBI, the Govt, all the other vested interests of staying in the EU would have been able to have produced case study after case study of JIT supply chains operating in practice. Yet we have nada, not one. Makes me a bit suspicious and wanting some facts.
    I am not sure if you have ever come across a useful internet search tool called Google but you should really try it some time. Using it to search for "JIT supply chains in the UK" produces 890,000 results. Here are a couple:

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/03/brexit-uk-car-industry-mini-britain-eu

    http://ukandeu.ac.uk/could-brexit-spell-the-end-for-just-in-time-production/

    On topic but at the same time completely off topic. It is genuinely frightening how much our manufacturing depends on these JiT systems. If they can be derailed by something as minor as Brexit then god help us if we have a real problem like a Carrington event or a case of nuclear terrorism.

    When I did the course on nuclear terrorism last year one of the points that was made was that it would only take one attack - and not even a successful one - on any major port around the world and world trade would grind to a halt completely. The security systems on these ports may be very good in some instances - at least with regard to stopping dangerous items leaving the port and getting into the country itself - but as far as checking or stopping anything entering the port itself they are non existent. The delays that would result from putting in place a proper security system would render JiT completely obsolete.
    "something as minor as Brexit"

    joker
    Compared to the other scenarios I was mentioning it is microscopic. Beside this wasn't about Brexit it was a serious comment on the whole system of JiT.
    A Carrington Event would make Brexit look like a tiddler.

    The thing is, such an event is a force of nature. Brexit is not - a deal can be done, a solution can be found, it is only the stubbornness of people that is preventing it. Planes may fall from the sky in a Carrington Event. They won't no matter how hard a Brexit we end up in.

    Good to see you posting again, by the way :)
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 8,519

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    Next Tory leader is split fairly evenly between Raab, Javid, Johnson and Gove on Betfair.

    https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.125574963

    I'd have given Raab a reason able chance but making his pitch that he is easily fooled does not sound great. But then again Javid and Gove would be stupid picks given they ostensibly support the deal May is getting binned for (even if Gove is playing both sides and Javid is hiding). Obviously Boris is usually a lay, so, hmm, the position is unclear to me. Hunt's in the same bind as Javid, although he made a good conference speech I don't know enough about Cox to know why he would appeal en masse to the MPs.
    Cox Out
    Are we back to talking about fluffers again?
    That was an actual LOL moment - then I had to explain my outburst to wife :-)

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262
    On topic, I'm not entirely persuaded by Matt and Keiran's delving into the numbers to suggest a slightly more nuanced Brexit view from the public, even if it is still very bad for May. The filtering out of the don't knows perhaps is relevant as they suggest.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Floater said:
    This happened in my neck of the woods. Only uncovered by a local journalist digging.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262
    On topic, it does feel right that the summary is really that the Tories are more divided, and Labour have plenty of opinions but pretty much focused on Remain when you get right down to it.

    Hopefully at some point soon that can be the divide between the two - not that I want Brexit to be entirely a partisan issue, but we may as well make it a remain party and a leave party now.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,361
    kle4 said:

    On topic, it does feel right that the summary is really that the Tories are more divided, and Labour have plenty of opinions but pretty much focused on Remain when you get right down to it.

    Hopefully at some point soon that can be the divide between the two - not that I want Brexit to be entirely a partisan issue, but we may as well make it a remain party and a leave party now.

    If only it were that simple.

    The problem is that the Leave side falls into two camps: those who wanted to leave the EU because it was too protectionist, and those who wanted to leave it because it wasn't protectionist enough.

    Which Leave group should the Leave Party represent?
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,605
    notme said:

    notme said:

    Barnesian said:
    That would be bliss. But news tonight that 18 labour mps will vote down a second referendum makes it look dead in the water. And that does not include Corbyn and McDonnell who absolutely will vote it down
    I think that assessment is based more on your dislike of Corbyn and McDonnell than what they would actually do..

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/peoples-vote-more-likely-than-election-says-john-mcdonnell-as-labour-stance-shifts-rwh8rhzrj

    Not on this occassion. The first thing is the foundation of his policies and he cannot allow any restriction, hence why in he would vote it down

    The other 18 anti referendum labour mps have been named on twitter
    Then why is McDonnell (who you specifically mentioned) warming to the idea and even using really affect the previous manifesto, plenty of nationally owned rail companies on the continent.

    It is however one of the advantages of Brexit to Corbyn's mind, his criticism of a lack of one of the advantages in the deal doesn't necessarily imply that he wants Brexit at all costsCorbyn has suddenly had a change of mind because he made his own views clear whilst accepting the direction the party had set.
    I feel you really don’t understand the creeping liberalisation of rail services across the continent. When state aid is offered it is offered for a service that has to be competitively tendered. This doesn’t stop state owned companies from running railways. But it stops you insisting it’s your state owned company that does it.
    There's wiggle room, counter examples in other countries or if you are really having problems with it ways to work around the problem so the rules are adhered to in a technical way only.

    Britain being in the EU and having state run railways is not going to be something the EU is going to get to worried about.
    They see what we have as the way forward. It’s one thing being tardy in tendering contacts, it’s another having a competive process in place and removing it. Good luck with that.

    If you want a state run railways (god knows why) it won’t be old school. It needs to wash its own face.
    They being sections, some of them do not which is why they do not have our system in their own countries. Dealing with Labour wanting nationalised railways will be a breeze after having to put up with Tory governments for years...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 49,262
    rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    On topic, it does feel right that the summary is really that the Tories are more divided, and Labour have plenty of opinions but pretty much focused on Remain when you get right down to it.

    Hopefully at some point soon that can be the divide between the two - not that I want Brexit to be entirely a partisan issue, but we may as well make it a remain party and a leave party now.

    If only it were that simple.

    The problem is that the Leave side falls into two camps: those who wanted to leave the EU because it was too protectionist, and those who wanted to leave it because it wasn't protectionist enough.

    Which Leave group should the Leave Party represent?
    I know it is not that simple at the moment, but things are getting to the point where even Labour may not be able to balance between leave, any leave, and remain and just pick one, and it would surely be Remain and Corbyn could not stop that.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 27,361
    AndyJS said:
    I guess for a man of his age and mental acuity, the whole "cross in box thing" is a bit confusing.
  • NotchNotch Posts: 145
    edited November 2018
    If the two-year period specified by A50 comes to be extended (huge Spartan if, and very unlikely), there will be great scope for gaming the EU election by those who want to turn it into a referendum. And if it isn't, events in Britain will loom large in a number of remaining member states, most probably in the nationalist-populist pan of the scales.
  • Mr Trump added that it may be no one will find out who was behind the killing...

    "But at the same time we do have an ally and I want to stick with an ally that in many ways has been very good," he added.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46254571

    It is like Corbyn response on Russia...we just know, it could be anybody....
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 55,573
    AndyJS said:
    xD He's a leaver at heart !
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 36,209
    edited November 2018
    rcs1000 said:

    AndyJS said:
    I guess for a man of his age and mental acuity, the whole "cross in box thing" is a bit confusing.
    Especially when one is looking for the box labelled "out, but kinda of in arrangement that allows me to create a proper socialist paradise."
  • NotchNotch Posts: 145
    rcs1000 said:

    AndyJS said:
    I guess for a man of his age and mental acuity, the whole "cross in box thing" is a bit confusing.
    Would you prefer him to say "Well if it's May's Deal - yes or no, then I'd vote no; if it's AV with May's Deal, No Deal and Remain, I'd vote Remain 1 and May's Deal 2; if on the other hand it's (etc.)"?
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 2,300
    Notch said:

    If the two-year period specified by A50 comes to be extended (huge Spartan if, and very unlikely), there will be great scope for gaming the EU election by those who want to turn it into a referendum. And if it isn't, events in Britain will loom large in a number of remaining member states, most probably in the nationalist-populist pan of the scales.

    But the UK won’t be electing MEPs during the transition period.
  • This article sets out the caveats and context on Rightmove House Price Data quite well. But it's another data point showing economic slowndown. If it meant stable low inflation House price in perpetuity even I might be a leaver. But I suspect we've just artificially pricked an artificial bubble which was artificially inflated to keep the post Coalition austerity drive economy on track.

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/nov/19/uk-house-prices-fall-5000-brexit-south-november-rightmove?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
  • NotchNotch Posts: 145
    rpjs said:

    Notch said:

    If the two-year period specified by A50 comes to be extended (huge Spartan if, and very unlikely), there will be great scope for gaming the EU election by those who want to turn it into a referendum. And if it isn't, events in Britain will loom large in a number of remaining member states, most probably in the nationalist-populist pan of the scales.

    But the UK won’t be electing MEPs during the transition period.
    I meant if departure itself is delayed.
  • rcs1000 said:

    kle4 said:

    On topic, it does feel right that the summary is really that the Tories are more divided, and Labour have plenty of opinions but pretty much focused on Remain when you get right down to it.

    Hopefully at some point soon that can be the divide between the two - not that I want Brexit to be entirely a partisan issue, but we may as well make it a remain party and a leave party now.

    If only it were that simple.

    The problem is that the Leave side falls into two camps: those who wanted to leave the EU because it was too protectionist, and those who wanted to leave it because it wasn't protectionist enough.

    Which Leave group should the Leave Party represent?
    Assuming it is the Labour leavers who want more protection - they are only a very small group of five or six.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,605

    Mr Trump added that it may be no one will find out who was behind the killing...

    "But at the same time we do have an ally and I want to stick with an ally that in many ways has been very good," he added.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46254571

    It is like Corbyn response on Russia...we just know, it could be anybody....

    I look forward to his proposing tough sanctions on Saudi Arabia... unless by that you meant it was nothing like Corbyn's response to Russia....

    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-vladimir-putin-theresa-may-sergei-skripal-magnitsky-laws-a8253786.html
  • Floater said:
    Fake psychiatrist for 20 years in the NHS.

    The deception by Alemi, thought to be of Iranian extraction, was only discovered after she was convicted of trying to fake the will of an elderly woman to steal her £1.3 million fortune.

    But she did choose a red Lotus Elise as her car - so not all bad.
  • Foxy said:

    Well, well, Sunday night...

    Still not 48 letters.

    I suppose it could all kick off tomorrow afternoon when MPs get back to Westminster.

    Depends what time and day Brady checks his pigeonhole.
    And there is no audit process. Who knows if Brady did not get one or two sent in the post?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 36,209
    edited November 2018

    Mr Trump added that it may be no one will find out who was behind the killing...

    "But at the same time we do have an ally and I want to stick with an ally that in many ways has been very good," he added.

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46254571

    It is like Corbyn response on Russia...we just know, it could be anybody....

    I look forward to his proposing tough sanctions on Saudi Arabia... unless by that you meant it was nothing like Corbyn's response to Russia....

    https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-vladimir-putin-theresa-may-sergei-skripal-magnitsky-laws-a8253786.html
    You aren't convincing anybody. His own MPs were aghast at his response and it wasn't just that day in the HoC, and of course he had access to intelligence which none of us can see, but the same intel that led to Boris calling out Putin straight away and the government not backtracking an inch, with all other major western countries backing that up.
This discussion has been closed.