0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.
for me NNK its we won't be in the inevitable European state. You may disagree with my opinion but that's it
QuoteThis is all so pointless. We are creating a vast customs bureaucracy (with costs passed on to the consumer) to check goods which already meet the EU standards the UK has contributed to setting over the last four decades. Why? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/12/local-anger-over-plans-for-post-brexit-lorry-park-at-ashford And this is likely to be the first of many! Still waiting for one of you leavers to tell me how we're going to be better off leaving the EU!
This is all so pointless. We are creating a vast customs bureaucracy (with costs passed on to the consumer) to check goods which already meet the EU standards the UK has contributed to setting over the last four decades. Why?
Quote from: Ldr on July 14, 2020, 03:00:28 pmfor me NNK its we won't be in the inevitable European state. You may disagree with my opinion but that's it I'm not sure that a United States of Europe is inevitable, (and had we remained in the EU it wouldn't have happened as we had the power of veto). But let's just say it does happen - then how is our being worse off, (we already are by the way), by our not being a part of it a benefit? And before you throw in the 'unelected bureaucrats' myth, all positions in the EU are elected; unlike our home grown unelected bureaucrats such as Dominic Cummings and Baroness Evans.
Quote from: Not Now Kato on July 14, 2020, 03:15:26 pmQuote from: Ldr on July 14, 2020, 03:00:28 pmfor me NNK its we won't be in the inevitable European state. You may disagree with my opinion but that's it I'm not sure that a United States of Europe is inevitable, (and had we remained in the EU it wouldn't have happened as we had the power of veto). But let's just say it does happen - then how is our being worse off, (we already are by the way), by our not being a part of it a benefit? And before you throw in the 'unelected bureaucrats' myth, all positions in the EU are elected; unlike our home grown unelected bureaucrats such as Dominic Cummings and Baroness Evans.Are members of the EU Commission, that has the sole right to propose EU legislation, democratically elected by the people’s of Europe?
Quote from: Herbert Anchovy on July 14, 2020, 03:44:04 pmQuote from: Not Now Kato on July 14, 2020, 03:15:26 pmQuote from: Ldr on July 14, 2020, 03:00:28 pmfor me NNK its we won't be in the inevitable European state. You may disagree with my opinion but that's it I'm not sure that a United States of Europe is inevitable, (and had we remained in the EU it wouldn't have happened as we had the power of veto). But let's just say it does happen - then how is our being worse off, (we already are by the way), by our not being a part of it a benefit? And before you throw in the 'unelected bureaucrats' myth, all positions in the EU are elected; unlike our home grown unelected bureaucrats such as Dominic Cummings and Baroness Evans.Are members of the EU Commission, that has the sole right to propose EU legislation, democratically elected by the people’s of Europe? No. They are, like the Tory government advisors who appear to be doing more than proposing legislation, the chosen representatives of individual governments. Thus the elected representative of the government.
Quote from: Not Now Kato on July 14, 2020, 01:34:54 pmQuoteThis is all so pointless. We are creating a vast customs bureaucracy (with costs passed on to the consumer) to check goods which already meet the EU standards the UK has contributed to setting over the last four decades. Why? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/12/local-anger-over-plans-for-post-brexit-lorry-park-at-ashford And this is likely to be the first of many! Still waiting for one of you leavers to tell me how we're going to be better off leaving the EU!NNK I’ve given you an example before, so that’s not true. As I’ve commented on here numerous times before, one advantage of leaving the EU is that the UK will not need to sign up to the EU fourth rail package.
Quote from: Herbert Anchovy on July 14, 2020, 03:23:04 pmQuote from: Not Now Kato on July 14, 2020, 01:34:54 pmQuoteThis is all so pointless. We are creating a vast customs bureaucracy (with costs passed on to the consumer) to check goods which already meet the EU standards the UK has contributed to setting over the last four decades. Why? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/12/local-anger-over-plans-for-post-brexit-lorry-park-at-ashford And this is likely to be the first of many! Still waiting for one of you leavers to tell me how we're going to be better off leaving the EU!NNK I’ve given you an example before, so that’s not true. As I’ve commented on here numerous times before, one advantage of leaving the EU is that the UK will not need to sign up to the EU fourth rail package. I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you suggesting that the Guardian article is wrong? We're not going to build a lory park at Ashford? There isn't going to be the increase in bureaucracy that the government says there's going to be? As to the 4th rail package, what are the disadvantages of standardisation?
Quote from: Herbert Anchovy on July 14, 2020, 03:44:04 pmQuote from: Not Now Kato on July 14, 2020, 03:15:26 pmQuote from: Ldr on July 14, 2020, 03:00:28 pmfor me NNK its we won't be in the inevitable European state. You may disagree with my opinion but that's it I'm not sure that a United States of Europe is inevitable, (and had we remained in the EU it wouldn't have happened as we had the power of veto). But let's just say it does happen - then how is our being worse off, (we already are by the way), by our not being a part of it a benefit? And before you throw in the 'unelected bureaucrats' myth, all positions in the EU are elected; unlike our home grown unelected bureaucrats such as Dominic Cummings and Baroness Evans.Are members of the EU Commission, that has the sole right to propose EU legislation, democratically elected by the people’s of Europe? Of course they are. We elect MEPS to act on our behalf. The MEPS, on our behalf, elect the members of the EU Comission. They vote, on our behalf, on all legislative matters. Well, they did until we left! Now, tell me, who voted for Dominic Cummings? Who voted for Baroness Evans?
Quote from: Not Now Kato on July 14, 2020, 10:34:35 pmQuote from: Herbert Anchovy on July 14, 2020, 03:23:04 pmQuote from: Not Now Kato on July 14, 2020, 01:34:54 pmQuoteThis is all so pointless. We are creating a vast customs bureaucracy (with costs passed on to the consumer) to check goods which already meet the EU standards the UK has contributed to setting over the last four decades. Why? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jul/12/local-anger-over-plans-for-post-brexit-lorry-park-at-ashford And this is likely to be the first of many! Still waiting for one of you leavers to tell me how we're going to be better off leaving the EU!NNK I’ve given you an example before, so that’s not true. As I’ve commented on here numerous times before, one advantage of leaving the EU is that the UK will not need to sign up to the EU fourth rail package. I'm not sure what you are saying. Are you suggesting that the Guardian article is wrong? We're not going to build a lory park at Ashford? There isn't going to be the increase in bureaucracy that the government says there's going to be? As to the 4th rail package, what are the disadvantages of standardisation?I wasn’t commenting on the Guardian article. I don’t disagree with the article. I was commenting on your regular diatribe that nobody has ever provided you with an example of how we can be better off outside the EU. As for the fourth rail package, I have studied this in a fair amount of detail and to describe it as standardisation is missing the point completely. One of the primary purposes of the package is to open up rail markets to both state and private ownership. As part of this package, the state cannot ‘own’ or ‘run’ the complete rail network, only part and all of this must be procured through a procurement and tender process. As a consequence, it will be virtually impossible for a member state to nationalise its complete rail infrastructure. As an advocate of railway nationalisation I consider this to be a bad thing. So, to answer your specific point again, one advantage of leaving the EU is that a future Labour government will be able to re-nationalise the railway network and infrastructure if it sees fit.
Quote from: Not Now Kato on July 14, 2020, 10:41:42 pmQuote from: Herbert Anchovy on July 14, 2020, 03:44:04 pmQuote from: Not Now Kato on July 14, 2020, 03:15:26 pmQuote from: Ldr on July 14, 2020, 03:00:28 pmfor me NNK its we won't be in the inevitable European state. You may disagree with my opinion but that's it I'm not sure that a United States of Europe is inevitable, (and had we remained in the EU it wouldn't have happened as we had the power of veto). But let's just say it does happen - then how is our being worse off, (we already are by the way), by our not being a part of it a benefit? And before you throw in the 'unelected bureaucrats' myth, all positions in the EU are elected; unlike our home grown unelected bureaucrats such as Dominic Cummings and Baroness Evans.Are members of the EU Commission, that has the sole right to propose EU legislation, democratically elected by the people’s of Europe? Of course they are. We elect MEPS to act on our behalf. The MEPS, on our behalf, elect the members of the EU Comission. They vote, on our behalf, on all legislative matters. Well, they did until we left! Now, tell me, who voted for Dominic Cummings? Who voted for Baroness Evans?Dont forget "I dont want to be an MP any more Nicky Morgan " Morgan accepted the appointment by Boris Johnson of Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport in July 2019, even though she had stated in 2018 she would not serve in a Johnson government. In October 2019, Morgan announced she would stand down as an MP at the 2019 general election but retained her cabinet post as part of the second Johnson ministry after being elevated to the House of Lords as a life peer.Dont forget Zac Goldsmith (the opposer of new Runway at Heathrow) eitherGoldsmith was made Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Environment and International Development on 27 July 2019 and was promoted to Minister of State with the right to attend Cabinet on 10 September 2019. He was defeated at the 2019 general election, again by Sarah Olney. After the election, Boris Johnson awarded Goldsmith with a life peerage, making him a member of the House of Lords and allowing him to retain his ministerial position. On 13 February 2020, he acquired the additional role of Minister of State for Foreign Affairs with responsibility for the Pacific. Snouts in troughs - snouts in troughs simple as that. HOL should also be abolished to stop the "back door electing like these two" and I mean by all PartiesWhat is particularly ironic is that we are discussing on here unelected beauro's and it was cited it as a reason for voting Leave to (insert 3 word Mantra) " Take back control" yet Liar Johnson has already proved a master at doing the opposite with ths tactic
NNKOf course I put ‘can’ rather than ‘will’ because who knows when and if we will renationalise the railways? The point is that we CAN do it if we wish. If we remained in the EU then it’s impossible. I’m not sure where you’ve cut and past your references to the fourth rail package but you’re not painting the full picture here. State ownership is allowed, however one organisation (state owned or otherwise) cannot own all aspects of the network! So, by default full state ownership cannot happen! Also, current ownership of part infrastructure can and will be relinquished in some areas. Some private and state owned routes in Europe are being forced through a procurement process for ownership. Over the past couple of years a number of European countries have been fined by the EU for ‘back door’ state ownership. This is where state ownership hides behind a private organisation. Despite what you may think, the EU are fundamentally opposed to nationalised railway infrastructures and the primary purpose of the package is to, at best dissuade and at worst prevent, railway nationalisation. Can I demonstrate that rail nationalisation benefits the people of the UK? Do I really need to answer that? Have you used trains since privatisation?
Quote from: Herbert Anchovy on July 15, 2020, 01:31:02 pmNNKOf course I put ‘can’ rather than ‘will’ because who knows when and if we will renationalise the railways? The point is that we CAN do it if we wish. If we remained in the EU then it’s impossible. I’m not sure where you’ve cut and past your references to the fourth rail package but you’re not painting the full picture here. State ownership is allowed, however one organisation (state owned or otherwise) cannot own all aspects of the network! So, by default full state ownership cannot happen! Also, current ownership of part infrastructure can and will be relinquished in some areas. Some private and state owned routes in Europe are being forced through a procurement process for ownership. Over the past couple of years a number of European countries have been fined by the EU for ‘back door’ state ownership. This is where state ownership hides behind a private organisation. Despite what you may think, the EU are fundamentally opposed to nationalised railway infrastructures and the primary purpose of the package is to, at best dissuade and at worst prevent, railway nationalisation. Can I demonstrate that rail nationalisation benefits the people of the UK? Do I really need to answer that? Have you used trains since privatisation? I haven't cut or pasted a single thing in my reply HA. Whenever I have done that in any post I have always inserted my C&P inside a quote box, followed by an attribution link below it. What I have posted above is from my own understanding, neither more nor less. I would disagree with your statement that the EU are fundamentally opposed to nationalised railway infrastructures though I understand what you're saying. Perhaps a better way of putting it is that the EU would prefer to see an open competitive marketplace for the benefit of customers. The 'state' is completely free to compete with private enterprise if it can. As to your last question, I've been a regular rail traveller since 1965 so have experienced both 'nationalised' and 'privatised over a nationalised backbone' rail travel. The former was fair at best, (poor and degenerating rolling stock, poor timekeeping, (largely due to the technology in use at the time), the latter started off well but degenerated to as bad a level as the former. In both cases this was down to cut backs, (Dr Beeching anyone?), and lack of investment. Re-nationalisation, in itself, will lead to no tangible benefits. It will require significant investment from government to improve, and this is true for all forms of public and private transport. At the end of the day we live in a country which now does things down to a price rather than up to a standard, and I can't see that changing any time soon.
The Irish have found out to their cost just what they can and can't do in their own country. It has just cost them 13 billion euro. At the risk of being called biased, I think if this had happened in the UK, Apple would be accused of having friends in high places.
Apple and Ireland have won their appeal against the European Commission over a 13 billion euro (£11.6 billion) tax bill.
Ireland wins appeal in €13 billion Apple tax case
“The outcome vindicates Ireland’s adherence, not just to Irish but also European rules, when levying taxation,” said Brian Keegan, director of public policy at Chartered Accountants Ireland. “While the amounts of money are vast and the additional tax ... would be welcome, particularly now as we struggle to pay for the cost of the pandemic, it would have been wrong to claim money that is not rightfully ours.”
It is a blow for the European Commission, which brought the case.
Quote from: Not Now Kato on July 15, 2020, 03:17:31 pmQuote from: Herbert Anchovy on July 15, 2020, 01:31:02 pmNNKOf course I put ‘can’ rather than ‘will’ because who knows when and if we will renationalise the railways? The point is that we CAN do it if we wish. If we remained in the EU then it’s impossible. I’m not sure where you’ve cut and past your references to the fourth rail package but you’re not painting the full picture here. State ownership is allowed, however one organisation (state owned or otherwise) cannot own all aspects of the network! So, by default full state ownership cannot happen! Also, current ownership of part infrastructure can and will be relinquished in some areas. Some private and state owned routes in Europe are being forced through a procurement process for ownership. Over the past couple of years a number of European countries have been fined by the EU for ‘back door’ state ownership. This is where state ownership hides behind a private organisation. Despite what you may think, the EU are fundamentally opposed to nationalised railway infrastructures and the primary purpose of the package is to, at best dissuade and at worst prevent, railway nationalisation. Can I demonstrate that rail nationalisation benefits the people of the UK? Do I really need to answer that? Have you used trains since privatisation? I haven't cut or pasted a single thing in my reply HA. Whenever I have done that in any post I have always inserted my C&P inside a quote box, followed by an attribution link below it. What I have posted above is from my own understanding, neither more nor less. I would disagree with your statement that the EU are fundamentally opposed to nationalised railway infrastructures though I understand what you're saying. Perhaps a better way of putting it is that the EU would prefer to see an open competitive marketplace for the benefit of customers. The 'state' is completely free to compete with private enterprise if it can. As to your last question, I've been a regular rail traveller since 1965 so have experienced both 'nationalised' and 'privatised over a nationalised backbone' rail travel. The former was fair at best, (poor and degenerating rolling stock, poor timekeeping, (largely due to the technology in use at the time), the latter started off well but degenerated to as bad a level as the former. In both cases this was down to cut backs, (Dr Beeching anyone?), and lack of investment. Re-nationalisation, in itself, will lead to no tangible benefits. It will require significant investment from government to improve, and this is true for all forms of public and private transport. At the end of the day we live in a country which now does things down to a price rather than up to a standard, and I can't see that changing any time soon.NNKOk, I apologise & I’ll take the first bit back. The question is, is it a free and competitive market? One entity will not be able to manage more than one feature of the rail network. So, the state could own track management but can’t own the train management for example. Consequently, state ownership (how most people understand it) could never happen under EU law! A sovereign state cannot make the decision to renationalise. As I’ve said before, countries have received huge fines for attempting to covertly install state control and this is going to make it more difficult. What the fourth package is looking to do is to install free market principles in railways by fragmenting ownership, similar to our own railway system in the UK. While a nationalised rail network isn’t perfect, it’s certainly preferential than a free market solution. So, to answer your original point, the freedom to completely renationalise the rail network is one advantage of leaving the EU.
More empty slogans to fool the gullible from Dominic Cummings.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4aO-YTQ94jA&feature=youtu.be And you're paying for them! Check Change Go, what does that even mean?
Seen the ads on the telly. They don’t actually tell us anything practical do they.?So what’s the point.?
I suspect Dominic is losing his mojo if he can't come up with owt better than Check Change Go. That sound like someone with onset dementia going through their list before going to the shop.
Up to 12 apparently.... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-customs-centres-kent-lorry-park-eu-exit-ashford-a9616486.html