kuro68k wrote: » The British government is going to take it right to the cliff edge and hope that someone else compromises. Of course they have their excuses already lined up if no-one does, only real question is who they will blame.
lawred2 wrote: » McGiver wrote: » The ideology is OK and is perfectly deliverable within the EU framework. It's in fact nothing else than Social Democracy. The problem is that the UK is so much on the right and free market side with unions decimated and no compromise/dialogue between workers and employers in organised manner, that anything from their point of view is seen as "socialist". Not sure why Corbyn doesn't like the EU. After all the Socialists are the second largest group in the EP. Barosso? Former communist then socialist. But the hard-left may say that he's corrupted by the dark globalist forces what's going on there? what's the back story to that gathering? could either be a football match or a successful carpet bombing of somewhere in the middle east..
McGiver wrote: » The ideology is OK and is perfectly deliverable within the EU framework. It's in fact nothing else than Social Democracy. The problem is that the UK is so much on the right and free market side with unions decimated and no compromise/dialogue between workers and employers in organised manner, that anything from their point of view is seen as "socialist". Not sure why Corbyn doesn't like the EU. After all the Socialists are the second largest group in the EP. Barosso? Former communist then socialist. But the hard-left may say that he's corrupted by the dark globalist forces
Tell me how wrote: » Real world impact right there. I'm sure this wasn't something which happened overnight. What did this company try to do to allay fears? Did they approach ye to discuss potential implications or have ye had any discussions and are instead just starting to divert the work elsewhere?
ancapailldorcha wrote: » He's obviously convinced that his ideology is for the common good but yes, he is doing it because it will get him into power.
EdgeCase wrote: » The problem though at this stage is that it's already too late for that kind of stuff. The business community absolutely failed to challenge this in any meaningful way and they're clearly out of the loop when it comes to lobbying as they've had no impact. I'm starting to see reports beginning to mention the words 'politically unstable' in reference to the UK which is really dire for FDI and even domestic companies' expansion plans.
lawred2 wrote: » I actually saw something on BBC news a while back about a company involved in either medical device testing or pharma product testing that was warning about this exact problem.. Fairly sure that they were based in Wales somewhere.
EdgeCase wrote: » Why isn't this company going to every paper in the country? I just do not get British industry. They're sitting in relative silence while this stuff is going on around them. I'm actually surprised that they're that passive. Either they're living in magic unicorn land and think that everything's going to be fine or they're afraid to speak in case they get backlash. Can you imagine if the Government here did something that had this kind of negative impact here? There'd be absolute outrage on Joe Duffy and elsewhere about job losses and how the policy is destroying their export contracts. It looks like the 'project fear' chants worked to silence any criticism.
lawred2 wrote: » What could they do? it's out of their hands. They will no longer have the regulatory approval to test products for the EU market without mutual recognition in place.. Short of moving the lab to Ireland - they were torpedoed in the short term. Unless mutual recognition can be sorted by Brexit day? But again that's dice rolling for any customer of this company.
Tell me how wrote: » Real world impact right there. I'm sure this wasn't something which happened overnight.What did this company try to do to allay fears? Did they approach ye to discuss potential implications or have ye had any discussions and are instead just starting to divert the work elsewhere?
Boris Johnson is facing accusations of hypocrisy after a letter leaked to The Times revealed that he gave his reluctant blessing to checks on trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland while he was foreign secretary. It comes after he flaunted his unionist credentials in an address to the DUP conference, suggesting that such checks would be unconscionable.
demfad wrote: » Just an update on Brexit-Russia-Trump which may yet play a role:The Wikileaks indictments are this week (most likely) in US. Will Farage be implicated? A roundup of his Russian associations here. Look at what happens when his Aide Cotrell was indicted by FBI agents in Farage's company. Farages team sent the details of teh indictments to the Russian ambassador in London. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/25/why-wont-nigel-farage-answer-my-brexit-questions?CMP=share_btn_tw
Hammer Archer wrote: » In my work, we're seeing direct consequences of Brexit. I work in the pharmaceutical industry and a lot of the products that we release would be manufactured outside the EU. EU regulations state that these products must be tested by a registered EU lab (with the exception of countries like Australia and Switzerland where mutual recognition agreements are in place). We have a good few contract labs across the EU that carry out this testing for us. But the lab we use most often is in the UK. They're an extremely reliable lab and we give them the guts of £1 million per year as payment (more if you include our sister companies that also use them). They employ around 30-40 people and are very good at what they do. But now, through no fault of their own, we have to pull out of this lab and move to those in EU countries. It's likely that this lab will go out of business or, at the very least, have to lay off the majority of their workforce as a direct result of Brexit. This is because, at this point, we will not be able to release products to EU markets based on this lab's testing as they will no longer be in the EU and no MRA will be in place. Dozens of jobs probably gone as a direct result of Brexit. I feel extremely sorry for them but there really is no alternative.
RobMc59 wrote: » Don't you think that if Corbyn at least showed the country what he's thinking-at the moment it does look like he's sitting like a spider waiting to pounce and his motives are being questioned-is he doing it for the good of the people or his own ends?
ancapailldorcha wrote: » They have the advantage of being in opposition though. "Labour opened the floodgates" and "Labour overspent" will soon be replaced with similar aphorisms about the Conservative party. Corbyn knows this. All he has to do is to wait.
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » UK national debt has shot up under the Tories. Despite all the cutbacks and austerity.https://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt_analysis
LeinsterDub wrote: Corbin hates the EU. Simple as. He wants out too
Water John wrote: » It's hard to identify which is The Monster Raving Lunatic Party.
Hurrache wrote: » First Up wrote: » Its the only deal they will get. I know, that's my point.
First Up wrote: » Its the only deal they will get.
Anthracite wrote: » The nightmare scenario is that he wants out and reckons that a crash-out Brexit can be blamed on the Tories for decades to come.
Akrasia wrote: » He would be right. A crash out would be entirely the fault of the Tories. But, a lot of people will remember just how craven Corbyn was during this period and how they put absolutely no pressure on May to pull them back from the brink and avoid disaster. If the UK crash out, the Tories are finished, but Labour will be deeply wounded.
LeinsterDub wrote: » Corbin hates the EU. Simple as. He wants out too
O'Neill wrote: » I really don't think a peope's vote is going to solve anything. In fact in my opinion it will make things worse. I honestly think we just need to see this nonsense out.
Tell me how wrote: » I think that sometimes parties (all parties, all countries) get too caught up in the literal sense of the term opposition. This leads to opposing what could be sensible policies purely because of a sense that they must object. This is such a monumental event that I think that they should have offered to participate in a national governmental strategic group to aid with Brexit negotiations. In Ireland, people complain about FF supporting FG with confidence and supply agreements and in September there was noise made from some within FF about calling a halt to this and angling for a GE. Micheal Martin said that a GE was not appropriate given what is going on with Brexit. While the true motivations for this may have been a belief that they were not strong enough to contest, I think it was better for the country to recognize the monumental events taking place. I know I am speaking somewhat idealistically but it cannot be that the best people to form policy are always automatically going to be from the side which has managed to form a government. Taking the literal approach in the case of Labour and Brexit is essentially hoping that it will be such a mess that they will be left in power as an outcome of it. That is not the best way to serve those that voted for you.
