Jump to content
Jools

The Positive Brexit Thread

Recommended Posts

Just now, SwindonCanary said:

that's a lie !

You make Homer Simpson look like Einstein! BTW repeating the same stupid line over and over again is typical of a parrot not a canary. Perhaps you should change your name

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

that's a lie !

Try "Pieces of eight" for a change Polly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

well stop telling lies !

Oh nearly, keep trying "pieces of eight", I'm sure you'll get the hang of it with a bit of effort Polly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Disgraceful 😡

Britain has matched just two of the EU’s 13 bans of harmful chemicals since Brexit

News follows several declarations from prominent Brexiteers that the UK’s regulation would be better managed outside the auspices Brussels

Plans to introduce tougher protections for the environment after Brexit have fallen by the wayside, with Britain matching just two of the EU’s 13 bans of harmful chemicals since the end of the transition period, a coalition of green groups warns today.

Despite assurances from Brexiteers that the UK would have more stringent environmental rules after it left the EU, Britain will actually have looser regulations on the use of microplastics, lead in PVC windows and rubber pellets on astroturf pitches, which are thought to be carcinogenic.

Greener UK, a coalition of groups including the National Trust, RSPB, WWF and the Marine Conservation Society, said the UK was now in the “slow lane” on regulating harmful substances, and warned that Britain’s new chemicals regulator was underfunded and understaffed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

This is a positive Brexit thread NOT a name calling thread, you are sad man.

Opinion | Covid has exposed the myth of European Union solidarity (brusselstimes.com)

The procurement of vaccines was always a decision for individual states, that's why we were able to do so when we were in the EU.

Once again you demonstrate that you voted to leave an organisation that you know very little about.

 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not actually a Brexit thing but have you seen the levels of sewage dumping by our water companies @Van wink? A real problem that is being under reported, mostly only by local papers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, horsefly said:

So you support bankrupting the economy too do you, because that is exactly what would happen if the UK ceased trading with the EU which is the source of 50% of our trade. So very stupid. 

The refusal to buy EU goods will not bankrupt our economy BUT it will move supply of goods to other areas, mainly from the UK as it rebalances  and gives more business to UK companies, existing and new as we develop outside of the EUSSR. We are already seeing biotech companies such as AZ and Novavax avoiding the EU as they behave agressively towards innocent business in raiding factories and denying exports for legitimate orders.  All good for UK PLC !!

Goods that we cannot supply in the UK will be imported from outside of the EU  ASAP as we rebalance. 

Edited by paul moy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Disgraceful 😡

Britain has matched just two of the EU’s 13 bans of harmful chemicals since Brexit

News follows several declarations from prominent Brexiteers that the UK’s regulation would be better managed outside the auspices Brussels

Plans to introduce tougher protections for the environment after Brexit have fallen by the wayside, with Britain matching just two of the EU’s 13 bans of harmful chemicals since the end of the transition period, a coalition of green groups warns today.

Despite assurances from Brexiteers that the UK would have more stringent environmental rules after it left the EU, Britain will actually have looser regulations on the use of microplastics, lead in PVC windows and rubber pellets on astroturf pitches, which are thought to be carcinogenic.

Greener UK, a coalition of groups including the National Trust, RSPB, WWF and the Marine Conservation Society, said the UK was now in the “slow lane” on regulating harmful substances, and warned that Britain’s new chemicals regulator was underfunded and understaffed

Well, it is what you voted for...😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Herman said:

Not actually a Brexit thing but have you seen the levels of sewage dumping by our water companies @Van wink? A real problem that is being under reported, mostly only by local papers.

Yep has been a problem for a long time, but getting worse now I believe due to climate change and frequency of high rainfall incidents with surface water run off.We also seem to be building more and more houses, which I agree with, but without ensuring sufficient infrastructure is there for dealing with drainage. We need some massive investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

Well, it is what you voted for...😎

is it

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, paul moy said:

The refusal to buy EU goods will not bankrupt our economy BUT it will move supply of goods to other areas, mainly from the UK as it rebalances  and gives more business to UK companies, existing and new as we develop outside of the EUSSR. We are already seeing biotech companies such as AZ and Novavax avoiding the EU as they behave agressively towards innocent business in raiding factories and denying exports for legitimate orders. .

Goods that we cannot supply in the UK will be imported from outside of the EU  ASAP. 

In a thread that contains more than its fair share of hairbrain ideas, this takes the biscuit. Do you really think stopping trade with the EU would not harm us? I give you parts for the car industry as a starter for 10. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, paul moy said:

The refusal to buy EU goods will not bankrupt our economy BUT it will move supply of goods to other areas, mainly from the UK as it rebalances  and gives more business to UK companies, existing and new as we develop outside of the EUSSR. We are already seeing biotech companies such as AZ and Novavax avoiding the EU as they behave agressively towards innocent business in raiding factories and denying exports for legitimate orders. .

Goods that we cannot supply in the UK will be imported from outside of the EU  ASAP. 

Oh dear! you really are the dumbest fake economist there has ever been. You said "I voted to never trade with the awful EU ever again" I would have thought that even the stupidest fake economist would understand that "trade" includes both imports and EXPORTS. I was clearly wrong to think that no one could be so chronically thick that they wouldn't understand this simplest of facts. So refusing to trade with the organisation that accounts for 50% of our trading economy would indeed bankrupt the country you utterly ridiculous xenephobic buffoon.

 

 

Edited by horsefly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, paul moy said:

The refusal to buy EU goods will not bankrupt our economy BUT it will move supply of goods to other areas, mainly from the UK as it rebalances  and gives more business to UK companies, existing and new as we develop outside of the EUSSR. We are already seeing biotech companies such as AZ and Novavax avoiding the EU as they behave agressively towards innocent business in raiding factories and denying exports for legitimate orders.  All good for UK PLC !!

Goods that we cannot supply in the UK will be imported from outside of the EU  ASAP as we rebalance. 

You really are sad.

Any news on the US / EU free trade agreement ?

Wheres my link ?

Why do you keep running on about vaccine on the the Brexit thread ? Nothing to do with Brexit ? 
The EU have purchased no Novavax so why would they be concerned in manufacturing it, even though Poland are going to manufacture some for their own use.

Finally hows Alex Belfield today, does he still feel the police were wrong to keep harassing Jimmy Saville ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-disruption/half-of-uk-firms-expect-long-term-post-brexit-disruption-survey-idUSKBN2BP1KR?il=0

The Survation survey for London First/EY, conducted in February, found 75% had experienced some disruption, even though 71% said they had felt prepared for the changes.

.................

“It’s clear that the disruptions to UK trade with the EU go beyond teething problems with the new regime,” said John Dickie, Acting Chief Executive of London First.

“If the government is to champion Global Britain successfully, it must redouble its efforts to fix our trading relationship with the EU.”
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Van wink said:

Disgraceful 😡

Britain has matched just two of the EU’s 13 bans of harmful chemicals since Brexit

News follows several declarations from prominent Brexiteers that the UK’s regulation would be better managed outside the auspices Brussels

Plans to introduce tougher protections for the environment after Brexit have fallen by the wayside, with Britain matching just two of the EU’s 13 bans of harmful chemicals since the end of the transition period, a coalition of green groups warns today.

Despite assurances from Brexiteers that the UK would have more stringent environmental rules after it left the EU, Britain will actually have looser regulations on the use of microplastics, lead in PVC windows and rubber pellets on astroturf pitches, which are thought to be carcinogenic.

Greener UK, a coalition of groups including the National Trust, RSPB, WWF and the Marine Conservation Society, said the UK was now in the “slow lane” on regulating harmful substances, and warned that Britain’s new chemicals regulator was underfunded and understaffed

Disgraceful indeed, but it was always a part of the government's agenda. This is an example of precisely why the government refused to sign up to a clause in the brexit deal that agreed to match EU quality standards. And the price for that refusal is all too evident in the disastrous trading figures for UK exports to the EU. Because we didn't agree to match EU standards a requirement was necessitated for a massive increase in red-tape in order for the EU to protect itself from the import of sub-standard products. We have all seen the twitter feeds picturing business owners standing in front of the 30 plus forms they now need to complete to export their goods to the EU, forms that would have been entirely unnecessary had the government simply agreed to match EU standards.

It is truly a scandal that this government is prepared to sacrifice the economic viabilty of so many of the UK's SMEs in order to subject UK citizens to lower (indeed, potentially dangerous) quality and safety standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

TRUE THOUGH 

Indeed it is true that only you could decry name calling and then do precisely that in one short sentence. Glad you agree, but you really must stop posting these things or I really might die laughing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Van wink said:

Disgraceful 😡

Britain has matched just two of the EU’s 13 bans of harmful chemicals since Brexit

News follows several declarations from prominent Brexiteers that the UK’s regulation would be better managed outside the auspices Brussels

Plans to introduce tougher protections for the environment after Brexit have fallen by the wayside, with Britain matching just two of the EU’s 13 bans of harmful chemicals since the end of the transition period, a coalition of green groups warns today.

Despite assurances from Brexiteers that the UK would have more stringent environmental rules after it left the EU, Britain will actually have looser regulations on the use of microplastics, lead in PVC windows and rubber pellets on astroturf pitches, which are thought to be carcinogenic.

Greener UK, a coalition of groups including the National Trust, RSPB, WWF and the Marine Conservation Society, said the UK was now in the “slow lane” on regulating harmful substances, and warned that Britain’s new chemicals regulator was underfunded and understaffed

... and today I read , just to balance things a bit, that the EU which was going to reduce natural gas useage due to climate effects has reneged on a deal with scientists .....  when it suits eh !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Van wink said:

is it

 

Yes. Despite what many are now claiming, the referendum vote, as the ballot paper made clear, was on something very simple. In or out. Nothing else. So Brexit can only be defined that way - that at some point after the vote the UK would leave the  EU, and that is what has happened.

There were no guarantees of this or that post-Brexit deal. So anyone voting for Brexit had to do so on the pessimistic assumption that they would get what from their point of view was the worst possible post-Brexit deal, but that for whatever reason it would still be worth it.

So a hard brexiter, like Paul Moy, perhaps, would have to assume there would be a Brexit in name only, with the UK doing a Norway and staying in the single market, with freedom of movement, but that even so that would be better than not leaving the EU.

And a soft Brexiter (I can't offhand think of a poster on this thread like that, but perhaps you might be able to😜) would have to assume they would get the hardest possible Brexit, with no trade deal, and perhaps even an indefensible  bonfire of environmental standards, but also regard that as a price worth paying.

As it stands, although he whinges as much as ever, Moy, if he only ever took a step back and used his brain, would realise he has got a Brexit much closer to the one he wanted and further away that the one he didn't want than our mythical Soft Brexiter, whose vote has produced what for them is very close to their idea of the worst possible Brexit.

But that was the risk they took. Anyone who was thinking of voting for Brexit but only if they got the Brexit they wanted, and viewed other Brexits as anathema, should have voted  Remain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is quite correct.

"But that was the risk they took. Anyone who was thinking of voting for Brexit but only if they got the Brexit they wanted, and viewed other Brexit's as anathema, should have voted Remain."

I voted Remain principally as I'm not in the habit of writing blank cheques and no remotely credible Brexit plan was given (and still isn't).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

Yes. Despite what many are now claiming, the referendum vote, as the ballot paper made clear, was on something very simple. In or out. Nothing else. So Brexit can only be defined that way - that at some point after the vote the UK would leave the  EU, and that is what has happened.

There were no guarantees of this or that post-Brexit deal. So anyone voting for Brexit had to do so on the pessimistic assumption that they would get what from their point of view was the worst possible post-Brexit deal, but that for whatever reason it would still be worth it.

So a hard brexiter, like Paul Moy, perhaps, would have to assume there would be a Brexit in name only, with the UK doing a Norway and staying in the single market, with freedom of movement, but that even so that would be better than not leaving the EU.

And a soft Brexiter (I can't offhand think of a poster on this thread like that, but perhaps you might be able to😜) would have to assume they would get the hardest possible Brexit, with no trade deal, and perhaps even an indefensible  bonfire of environmental standards, but also regard that as a price worth paying.

As it stands, although he whinges as much as ever, Moy, if he only ever took a step back and used his brain, would realise he has got a Brexit much closer to the one he wanted and further away that the one he didn't want than our mythical Soft Brexiter, whose vote has produced what for them is very close to their idea of the worst possible Brexit.

But that was the risk they took. Anyone who was thinking of voting for Brexit but only if they got the Brexit they wanted, and viewed other Brexits as anathema, should have voted  Remain.

Thanks for the lecture. 
The reality is that I voted for our ability as a sovereign nation to make the sorts of decisions, such as those concerning use of hazardous substances as above, for ourselves. That is exactly what has happened. Now whether or not I agree with the way in which the discretion has been exercised is a completely different matter, my remedy for that is through the ballot box or other lobbying, a preferable situation in my view to the  UK legislature slavishly following EU directive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you never stop to look at the people running the Leave contingent? It was pretty obvious which way we were heading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Van wink said:

Now whether or not I agree with the way in which the discretion has been exercised is a completely different matter, my remedy for that is through the ballot box or other lobbying, a preferable situation in my view to the  UK legislature slavishly following EU directive.

You do realise that as a member of the EU the UK had a voice in all the issues concerning its directives, as indeed does every member country of the EU. To describe the situation as "slavishly" following EU directive is thus rather excessive wouldn't you say? And do bear in mind that there are all too many people in the world who know exactly what it is like to be enslaved, and I'm sure they wouldn't associate it with the practices of the EU, however much you might despise its bureaucracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, horsefly said:
4 minutes ago, horsefly said:

You do realise that as a member of the EU the UK had a voice in all the issues concerning its directives, as indeed does every member country of the EU. To describe the situation as "slavishly" following EU directive is thus rather excessive wouldn't you say? And do bear in mind that there are all too many people in the world who know exactly what it is like to be enslaved, and I'm sure they wouldn't associate it with the practices of the EU, however much you might despise its bureaucracy.

And you wonder why people don’t engage, can’t help yourself can you, bye bye x đŸ·đŸ€„đŸ˜‰

Edited by Van wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...