Capt'n Midnight wrote: » The ferry contracts have gone to two well established EU ferry companies and a UK shell company which has no assets or experience."Why choose a company that never moved a single truck in their entire history and give them £14m? I don't understand the logic of that,"
Nody wrote: » And the contracted ferry capacity is about 5% of the Dover - Calais daily capacity...
Bambi wrote: » My guess would be they're putting this in as a dedicated fast channel for certain crucial imports
Spanish Eyes wrote: » What do you all reckon would happen if May's deal is rejected by the impending vote in January? Would there be a possibility of Cabinet just saying, feck this, we can unilaterally withdraw A50 now, let's just do it. Maybe the fallout would be worse than a few Etonites dictating the destruction of Britain with a No Deal scenario. But I think myself that a good many of UK residents are not really that politically aware, and get their information from the divided media. You are on one side or the other. I dunno. Just thinking out loud.
bilston wrote: » A50 won't be withdrawn without another referendum. Even as a Remainer I can see that that would be totally undemocratic and could lead to very serious consequences. If May's deal is defeated (which it probably will be) then the options are extend A50 (needs EU27 agreement), a general election either called by May, or on the back of a defeat for the govt in a no confidence motion, a second referendum or as well a managed a no deal scenario as possible. I imagine there will be an attempt to extend A50 first and then we will go from there. Even if it is extended it is likely to be for a matter of weeks, you're really just kicking the can down the road, or more likely giving more time to allow for as organised a no deal scenario as possible... Anyway I hope we've all enjoyed the last 10 days or so of Brexit respite because come Monday week it will be front centre and back of the news agenda again.
Company Director DUDLEY, Glenn Roy Correspondence address Curtis House, 34 Third Avenue, Hove, England, BN3 2PD Role ACTIVE Director Date of birth April 1954 Appointed on 5 April 2017 Nationality English Country of residence England Occupation Marine Consultant
Sam Russell wrote: » One of the directors of that company gives his nationality as 'English'. I did not realise that England had broken away from the UK of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and now issued their own passports - soon to be blue (but printed in France).
Keatsian wrote: » English is still a nationality, even though for official purposes its people are citizens of the United Kingdom. There is no designation you can put next to “nationality” that covers all of the UK, since United Kingdomish didn’t catch on for some reason.
lawred2 wrote: Thought British was the nationality
First Up wrote: » I know plenty of Scots and Welsh who would disagree.
lawred2 wrote: » ? Thought British was the nationality
Keatsian wrote: » Try that one up North and see how you get on. If England is a nation (or Scotland or Wales), it follows that its people are of English nationality.
lawred2 wrote: » I think you'd find as many only willing to be considered so as the opposite.. It's only a technical point. I don't care one bit what they consider themselves to be. British is a formal legal term for the nationality of UK citizens.
Sam Russell wrote: » I thought nationality was printed on the front of passports. Now there is a problem with language as we have both Eire and Ireland on the front, but most refer to themselves as Irish. I thought British passports had Great Britain on theirs. That would make the bearer British. The fact is that this company was a £2 company founded in 5th April 2017, and not filed any accounts, nor required to until 31 January 2020, just after the end of the transition period ends. I think it is a bit odd that such a company is given a large Gov contract with no tendering, and no history of any sort.
Water John wrote: When you see these two bit Cos getting contracts your ears prick up. Remember the 2 person outfit from nowhere that got the re-electrification contract in Puerto Rico?
Strazdas wrote: » A bit of a scandal brewing here? There are already many questions on Twitter as to how a dubious company could be awarded a multi million pound contract.
murphaph wrote: » In fairness to the businesses and state agencies involved, the figures clearly show we have become even less reliant on the UK market than before the referendum. It's down to under 10% of our exports which is really quite a remarkable achievement. More can and is being done right now though. Brexit may turn out to be a blessing in disguise for Ireland medium term.
devnull wrote: » I guess someone is going to profit from it, be interesting to know if they have any connections. This is worth a read about the history of this particular companyhttps://theisleofthanetnews.com/2018/11/05/thanet-council-dismisses-request-for-officer-bribery-investigation-as-unsubstantiated/
judeboy101 wrote: » Current migrant attempts to cross the channel aren't helping things.
Strazdas wrote: » People with knowledge of public service procurement saying on Twitter that something very dodgy appears to have happened here. Normally a company like this wouldn't be touched with a barge pole. The amount of money involved is striking too, £14m is a hell of a lot of money.
dresden8 wrote: » They're Africans and Syrians expelled by WASP policies from Africa and the Middle East. They are just coming home to roost. The Brits broke it, they bought it.
Folkstonian wrote: » Well actually they are mostly Iranians and they are coming from France.
dresden8 wrote: » https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/486911/Migrants-travelling-to-UK-across-the-Channel-in-makeshift-boats-and-dinghys No mention of Iranians here.
Folkstonian wrote: » Your article is from July 2014
