Another Brexit Casualty

[antony1969]

More celebrity scaremongering to go with the rest of the remoaners endless whinging

... Apparently 50% or more of NHS staff are from other EU countries ... Nearly ... its 5.5% ... Stick to cooking

[snowie]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-06

 

Politicians are a dangerous bunch. They dangle unattainable visions of glorious futures before us, and invite us to buy their offerings. That is why their offering so often seems to evaporate after the election.

 

Politicians are dangerous, but politicians who don't inspire are a waste of time; and our time, over the last couple of years at least, has been wasted.

I haven't been inspired for getting on for 20 years! And that didn't turn out very well.

Regards

Alan b

[RogerC]

It seems to me that the remoaners with their crystal ball of doom and gloom are simply a section of the populace that are totally risk averse.

Some on here are constantly harping on about not knowing enough about the 'end game' to enable them to make an informed decision.

Brian, one who usually posts reasoned debate persists in the viewpoint that 'as one who strongly suspects leaving will be the wrong choice' and 'stuck with it way into the future of national decline'.   Doom and gloom without a shred of evidence yet he condemns the UK out of hand because he 'thinks he knows' the outcome. 

There is comment that not enough was/is known about the outcome to make a thoroughly informed decision.  Yet another comment is 'Get that wrong and we shall see our relative standard of living, and those of our children, stagnate or decline over decades'.   Yet another doom and gloom comment.  Why not comment 'we will get it right and the whole nation will prosper'?  Either comment is valid.  Unfortunately there are too many who are running scared of life outside the monolithic bureaucratic entity that is the EU to accept that life might...yes might...be better outside.

The bottom line as I see it is that there are too many moaning about not knowing enough about the future to enable them to make a decision.  Now that is like wanting to know the winner of the Derby before placing a bet................just plain stupid.

[Violet1956]

RogerC - 2017-10-06 8:06 PM

 

The bottom line as I see it is that there are too many moaning about not knowing enough about the future to enable them to make a decision.  Now that is like wanting to know the winner of the Derby before placing a bet................just plain stupid.

 

Isn't the point that some have made is that placing the bet was plain stupid Roger *-)

 

Veronica

[RogerC]

Violet1956 - 2017-10-06 8:34 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-06 8:06 PMThe bottom line as I see it is that there are too many moaning about not knowing enough about the future to enable them to make a decision.  Now that is like wanting to know the winner of the Derby before placing a bet................just plain stupid.

Isn't the point that some have made is that placing the bet was plain stupid Roger *-) Veronica

I take it that you are referring to the remain camp who have decided leaving is stupid?  In which case it returns us to the dilemma of who is right?  I reiterate as of now no one is right, no one is wrong because the outcome is not and will not be known, good/bad/indifferent until the negotiations are complete and the implementation of said negotiations has time to filter through to us mere mortals.

Should you be referring to the leave side then no I don't think it is stupid.  It is they who have a positive outlook that the UK can prosper under it's own direction.  They may not be right but at least they are not claiming it is something they 'know' as the remain camp is doing. It is something they desire.

[John52]

How can anyone seriously believe these clowns could outwit 27 other countries to get us a better deal out than we had when we were in?

The outcome is as good as known -(so the pound is falling).

They will come back with a bum deal and the Tory press will help them present it as a Good Deal for Britain

[Tracker]

You can moan and complain and find excuses all you like but the bruatal truth is - wait for it - the UK is leaving the EU.

 

Like it or not you can all choose to make it work or you can sit at home as keyboard warriors and moan about it and attempt to spread depression and doom and gloom.

 

Get real people - it will happen - so make the most of it and give up on the moaning.

 

[Guest pelmetman]

There are currently 195 ish countries on this planet if you don't include Tawain and one or two others.......of those 195 we are the 5th biggest economy :-| ........

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If there was a market for whining whinging Remoaners we'd be the worlds biggest economy >:-) .........

 

 

 

 

[Violet1956]

RogerC - 2017-10-06 9:20 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-10-06 8:34 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-06 8:06 PMThe bottom line as I see it is that there are too many moaning about not knowing enough about the future to enable them to make a decision.  Now that is like wanting to know the winner of the Derby before placing a bet................just plain stupid.

Isn't the point that some have made is that placing the bet was plain stupid Roger *-) Veronica

I take it that you are referring to the remain camp who have decided leaving is stupid?  In which case it returns us to the dilemma of who is right?  I reiterate as of now no one is right, no one is wrong because the outcome is not and will not be known, good/bad/indifferent until the negotiations are complete and the implementation of said negotiations has time to filter through to us mere mortals.

Should you be referring to the leave side then no I don't think it is stupid.  It is they who have a positive outlook that the UK can prosper under it's own direction.  They may not be right but at least they are not claiming it is something they 'know' as the remain camp is doing. It is something they desire.

I was referring to the "better the devil you know" school of thought. I realise that we don't really know how it is going to turn out as yet. Also there will no doubt be continuing debate about what amounts to success or failure and how much time needs to have gone by before there will be a reliable measure of that. Veronica

[RogerC]

Violet1956 - 2017-10-06 10:30 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-06 9:20 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-10-06 8:34 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-06 8:06 PMThe bottom line as I see it is that there are too many moaning about not knowing enough about the future to enable them to make a decision.  Now that is like wanting to know the winner of the Derby before placing a bet................just plain stupid.

Isn't the point that some have made is that placing the bet was plain stupid Roger *-) Veronica

I take it that you are referring to the remain camp who have decided leaving is stupid?  In which case it returns us to the dilemma of who is right?  I reiterate as of now no one is right, no one is wrong because the outcome is not and will not be known, good/bad/indifferent until the negotiations are complete and the implementation of said negotiations has time to filter through to us mere mortals.

Should you be referring to the leave side then no I don't think it is stupid.  It is they who have a positive outlook that the UK can prosper under it's own direction.  They may not be right but at least they are not claiming it is something they 'know' as the remain camp is doing. It is something they desire.

I was referring to the "better the devil you know" school of thought. I realise that we don't really know how it is going to turn out as yet. Also there will no doubt be continuing debate about what amounts to success or failure and how much time needs to have gone by before there will be a reliable measure of that. Veronica

We will have to agree to differ on that one then.  'The Devil.....'as you put it has (amongst other things) financially bullied Greece into doing it's political bidding under threat of withholding funding, signally failed to control it's borders, failed to submit proper accounts since it's inception, totally messed up the UK fishing, spent billions of the member state populace money on selfish interest movement to Strasbourg each month at a cost of £150,000,000 per year to name but a few reasons 'The Devil you know' is not one I feel is better.

It costs approximately (according to the Huffington Post...hopefully middle ground) £178,000,000 to build a state of the art hospital and that means those self important mandarins, who are supposedly there to serve us Joe Public, squander the cost of a new hospital every 14 months on a self important display of total arrogance and profligacy.   It is beyond a disgrace...it is indefensible and if that isn't enough to justify leaving I don't know what is!

[John52]

pelmetman - 2017-10-06 10:13 PM

we are the 5th biggest economy

Turnover is Vanity, Profit is Sanity.

http://www.nationaldebtclock.co.uk/

[John52]

RogerC - 2017-10-07 12:00 AM

Violet1956 - 2017-10-06 10:30 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-06 9:20 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-10-06 8:34 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-06 8:06 PMThe bottom line as I see it is that there are too many moaning about not knowing enough about the future to enable them to make a decision.  Now that is like wanting to know the winner of the Derby before placing a bet................just plain stupid.

Isn't the point that some have made is that placing the bet was plain stupid Roger *-) Veronica

I take it that you are referring to the remain camp who have decided leaving is stupid?  In which case it returns us to the dilemma of who is right?  I reiterate as of now no one is right, no one is wrong because the outcome is not and will not be known, good/bad/indifferent until the negotiations are complete and the implementation of said negotiations has time to filter through to us mere mortals.

Should you be referring to the leave side then no I don't think it is stupid.  It is they who have a positive outlook that the UK can prosper under it's own direction.  They may not be right but at least they are not claiming it is something they 'know' as the remain camp is doing. It is something they desire.

I was referring to the "better the devil you know" school of thought. I realise that we don't really know how it is going to turn out as yet. Also there will no doubt be continuing debate about what amounts to success or failure and how much time needs to have gone by before there will be a reliable measure of that. Veronica

We will have to agree to differ on that one then.  'The Devil.....'as you put it has (amongst other things) financially bullied Greece into doing it's political bidding under threat of withholding funding, signally failed to control it's borders, failed to submit proper accounts since it's inception, totally messed up the UK fishing, spent billions of the member state populace money on selfish interest movement to Strasbourg each month at a cost of £150,000,000 per year to name but a few reasons 'The Devil you know' is not one I feel is better.

It costs approximately (according to the Huffington Post...hopefully middle ground) £178,000,000 to build a state of the art hospital and that means those self important mandarins, who are supposedly there to serve us Joe Public, squander the cost of a new hospital every 14 months on a self important display of total arrogance and profligacy.   It is beyond a disgrace...it is indefensible and if that isn't enough to justify leaving I don't know what is!

The UNelected and Absurdly over-populated House of Lords alone is bigger than the Elected European Parliament for 28 countries!!!!!! And don't get me started on the UNelected Royal Family and Hangers On!!!!!!!! Why do we have an election to leave the EU, but no election to leave them?

[Barryd999]

I can't believe that after all this time and now having learned just how vital both the single market and customs union is (not to mention almost impossible to leave) that the Brexiteers are still simply relying on blind faith that it will be alright on the night and anyone considering the arguments against having looked at the mounting evidence against Brexit is just a doom and gloom moaner.

 

Saying lets just see what happens and how can anyone know the outcome is just plain stupid. I don't think its right to call Brexiteers stupid or kind but if you advocate such a fingers crossed and hope for the best attitude then you must be.

 

We don't know what will happen just like the man who jumped off the sky scraper who all the way down kept saying "so far so good" but if we do jump off the skyscraper without a parachute or something "soft" to land on I think the outcome is obvious to all but the blind Brexit faithful.

 

As for being risk averse! Don't make me laugh! :D I've taken risks all my life both in business and personal. Risks that would make many have a heart attack or fill their pants but generally to take a big risk there has to be a chance of a huge possible reward and with Brexit there simply isn't. At best we will leave in name only and will only end up a bit worse off. At worse we will sink without trace. Why would anyone take that risk? Especially now we know just how impossible its going to be to unravel ourselves from even the customs union. It just ain't happening

[John52]

Barryd999 - 2017-10-07 9:24 AM

I don't think its right to call Brexiteers stupid

I wouldn't say Boris Johnson is stupid either.

Joining the Brexit side, and promising the impossible to get elected, is a better career move than being just another suit on the remain side. :-(

[Brian Kirby]

RogerC - 2017-10-06 8:06 PM...........................The bottom line as I see it is that there are too many moaning about not knowing enough about the future to enable them to make a decision.  Now that is like wanting to know the winner of the Derby before placing a bet................just plain stupid.

But it isn't, Roger, is it? One can have a pretty good stab at the winner of the Derby by looking at the odds on the entrants. Those odds are set by the bookies, who are the ones who will lose most of they get it wrong, so their minds are pretty sharp! They set the odds by studying form for the whole field, and taking account of the running conditions and the recent records of the jockeys.

 

What you're talking about is the equivalent of shutting one's eyes and sticking a pin in the list of runners. That is just plain stupid if you want a good chance of picking the winner - though not stupid if you're just betting a quid for a bit of fun. You'll get the fun and the excitement, and hey, there is still an outside chance you may win! Besides all of which, if you really want to make money in horse racing you stick to the flat, never the sticks.

 

My point is that these are all sensible routes (assuming sensible is not a oxymoron in the context of betting on horses! :-)) to selecting a winner (or, at minimal expense, a bit of fun). In the case of Brexit, what we were being invited to do was the equivalent of betting the house on a horse picked by sticking a pin in the list of runners, instead of looking at the equivalent of the bookies odds. Sadly, too many took that option. Backing optimism over realism (I'm assuming here it was the pessimists who didn't vote!)

 

No-one knows for certain which horse will, actually, win, but by looking at the odds, and then spreading the risk by backing the second favourite for a place rather than a win, one can get a good indication of probability, minimise the downside risk, and keeping the potential for loss proportionate. But then, I don't back horses. Fool's game. :-D

 

Back to Brexit, I wanted to know the odds before betting. They weren't available, so I backed the least worst option, which was to keep the status quo until someone presents a compelling case for changing it. No-one did. No-one yet has. Why bet one's country against an undefined future at undeclared odds - unless, of course, one has unwittingly become a betting addict. :-D

[Violet1956]

RogerC - 2017-10-07 12:00 AM

Violet1956 - 2017-10-06 10:30 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-06 9:20 PM

Violet1956 - 2017-10-06 8:34 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-06 8:06 PMThe bottom line as I see it is that there are too many moaning about not knowing enough about the future to enable them to make a decision.  Now that is like wanting to know the winner of the Derby before placing a bet................just plain stupid.

Isn't the point that some have made is that placing the bet was plain stupid Roger *-) Veronica

I take it that you are referring to the remain camp who have decided leaving is stupid?  In which case it returns us to the dilemma of who is right?  I reiterate as of now no one is right, no one is wrong because the outcome is not and will not be known, good/bad/indifferent until the negotiations are complete and the implementation of said negotiations has time to filter through to us mere mortals.

Should you be referring to the leave side then no I don't think it is stupid.  It is they who have a positive outlook that the UK can prosper under it's own direction.  They may not be right but at least they are not claiming it is something they 'know' as the remain camp is doing. It is something they desire.

I was referring to the "better the devil you know" school of thought. I realise that we don't really know how it is going to turn out as yet. Also there will no doubt be continuing debate about what amounts to success or failure and how much time needs to have gone by before there will be a reliable measure of that. Veronica

We will have to agree to differ on that one then.  'The Devil.....'as you put it has (amongst other things) financially bullied Greece into doing it's political bidding under threat of withholding funding, signally failed to control it's borders, failed to submit proper accounts since it's inception, totally messed up the UK fishing, spent billions of the member state populace money on selfish interest movement to Strasbourg each month at a cost of £150,000,000 per year to name but a few reasons 'The Devil you know' is not one I feel is better.

It costs approximately (according to the Huffington Post...hopefully middle ground) £178,000,000 to build a state of the art hospital and that means those self important mandarins, who are supposedly there to serve us Joe Public, squander the cost of a new hospital every 14 months on a self important display of total arrogance and profligacy.   It is beyond a disgrace...it is indefensible and if that isn't enough to justify leaving I don't know what is!

I agree that you have fairly represented some of the worst aspects of the Devil we know Roger; the spending on movement to Strasbourg in particular is an indefensible waste of public funds. Wherever there's a trough there will be pigs with their noses in it. We have our own examples in the UK. Veronica

[Brian Kirby]

Tracker - 2017-10-06 10:04 PM.....................Get real people - it will happen - so make the most of it and give up on the moaning.

Says the man who elsewhere said no-one can know the future. :-D A case of reason being influenced by desire? :-D

[Tracker]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-07 11:58 AM

 

Tracker - 2017-10-06 10:04 PM.....................Get real people - it will happen - so make the most of it and give up on the moaning.

Says the man who elsewhere said no-one can know the future. :-D A case of reason being influenced by desire? :-D

 

No Brian, as once again you try to distort what I said to reflect your own well known views.

 

More a case of reason following reality, and the reality is that nobody knows how it will turn out and you and others can complain and find as many out of context examples as you like but it is all a waste of time other than trying to impose your views on everyone else.

 

I have no desire one way or t'other but I do happen to think that out will be better for the UK in the long run and as I have said many times, that long run might be fraught at times, but then so would staying in an an even less democratic united states of Europe .

[Brian Kirby]

RogerC - 2017-10-07 12:00 AM.........................£178,000,000 to build a state of the art hospital and that means those self important mandarins, who are supposedly there to serve us Joe Public, squander the cost of a new hospital every 14 months on a self important display of total arrogance and profligacy.   It is beyond a disgrace...it is indefensible and if that isn't enough to justify leaving I don't know what is!

To bring this back to home, and to the purview of the "mother of parliaments", at what cost should the houses of parliament be refurbished, should that cost be inflated to allow the members to remain in occupation during the works, or should we turn the HoP into a "visitor attraction" and build a new parliament building in, say, Birmingham - so that it is more geographically central, and how many hospitals could be built for the same cost? These things are choices, Roger, and the decisions are made by our elected representatives - because that is what we elect them to do. They make mistakes and misjudgements, and are roundly criticised when they do, but they are also human, which is another reason we elect them.

 

Your "self-important mandarins" do not "make" EU decisions. Last time I looked, EU decisions are only "made" when the European parliament (who we all elect), the council (which is made of our various government ministers, who we all elect), and the commission, (your self-important mandarins) agree unanimously, or by two to one, that it shall be done.

 

So, at worst, if the commission proposes a measure, it requires the support of one or other of the two elected bodies to bring it to fruition. If the parliament and the commission (both elected) agree, then the "self important mandarins" have to do as they are told. They are civil servants, so are inevitably demeaned as mandarins, but they do not run Europe - we do - through its democratic institutions. You may not like the outcomes, but that's 21st century democracy for you! :-)

[Brian Kirby]

Tracker - 2017-10-07 12:16 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-07 11:58 AM

 

Tracker - 2017-10-06 10:04 PM.....................Get real people - it will happen - so make the most of it and give up on the moaning.

Says the man who elsewhere said no-one can know the future. :-D A case of reason being influenced by desire? :-D

 

No Brian, as once again you try to distort what I said to reflect your own well known views.

 

More a case of reason following reality, and the reality is that nobody knows how it will turn out and you and others can complain and find as many out of context examples as you like but it is all a waste of time other than trying to impose your views on everyone else.

 

I have no desire one way or t'other but I do happen to think that out will be better for the UK in the long run and as I have said many times, that long run might be fraught at times, but then so would staying in an an even less democratic united states of Europe .

Read again what you posted Rich. Is it me, or is there no clear blue water between your "nobody knows how it will turn out" above, and my "the man who elsewhere said no-one can know the future"? Damned if I can see how my piece distorts yours! It seems merely a remarkably true echo to me. :-) So, phooey to your "distortion"! :-D

 

But then: "I have no desire one way or t'other", is immediately followed by the self-contradictory "I do happen to think that out will be better for the UK in the long run". I'm assuming the latter statement reflects a desire? If so, it is certainly a desire that I echo: that we shall benefit in the long run from whatever outcome emerges. But that is reliant on mere hope. However, it seems we have now to rely only on hope, since use of reason has been denied us. :-D

[RogerC]

Brian Kirby - 2017-10-07 12:21 PM

RogerC - 2017-10-07 12:00 AM.........................£178,000,000 to build a state of the art hospital and that means those self important mandarins, who are supposedly there to serve us Joe Public, squander the cost of a new hospital every 14 months on a self important display of total arrogance and profligacy.   It is beyond a disgrace...it is indefensible and if that isn't enough to justify leaving I don't know what is!

To bring this back to home, and to the purview of the "mother of parliaments", at what cost should the houses of parliament be refurbished, should that cost be inflated to allow the members to remain in occupation during the works, or should we turn the HoP into a "visitor attraction" and build a new parliament building in, say, Birmingham - so that it is more geographically central, and how many hospitals could be built for the same cost? These things are choices, Roger, and the decisions are made by our elected representatives - because that is what we elect them to do. They make mistakes and misjudgements, and are roundly criticised when they do, but they are also human, which is another reason we elect them.Your "self-important mandarins" do not "make" EU decisions. Last time I looked, EU decisions are only "made" when the European parliament (who we all elect), the council (which is made of our various government ministers, who we all elect), and the commission, (your self-important mandarins) agree unanimously, or by two to one, that it shall be done.So, at worst, if the commission proposes a measure, it requires the support of one or other of the two elected bodies to bring it to fruition. If the parliament and the commission (both elected) agree, then the "self important mandarins" have to do as they are told. They are civil servants, so are inevitably demeaned as mandarins, but they do not run Europe - we do - through its democratic institutions. You may not like the outcomes, but that's 21st century democracy for you! :-)

Brian I'm getting to the point whereby I feel you are either playing a very good game of devils advocate or are a graduate of the Alastair Campbell school of obfuscation and spin.  Either way your arguments are more and more coming across as plain silly.

The choice of renovations to the HoP is maintenance of a national heritage site.  Yes our MP's make some silly decisions....that's a failing of all humans at some point or other.  However the £150,000,000 is a despicably profligate waste of our money that the EU continues to perpetrate...it is in my opinion a criminal act in using our money to serve no one other than the ego of those concerned.   Attempts to stop this shameful activity have always been met with the French veto.  National ego is at work here 'NOT' democracy and dress your arguments as you will the clear and indisputable fact is that the EU is knowingly wasting £150,000,000 of our money every year.....and it is increasing.

Now that is one example of the self interest of just one member state overriding the possible will of the other states.

To use an analogy that might fit:

Lets assume a golf club chairman has an interior decorating company and every year spends unnecessarily, as members feel, on refurbishments.  They have a vote on it but the Chairman has the right of veto and uses it.  Therefore the members money continues to be wasted, the Chairman's company profits from a guaranteed annual refurbishment contract.

The analogy is that France uses it's veto not just out of vanity but to ensure the 'money train' keeps rolling in every month.  

To date it has cost over £2,000,000,000 or at today's rate Euro 2,228,336,697.  How can anyone continue to be desirous of membership of a club that can not stand up to one self interested, self serving, egotistical member that is costing the club members BILLIONS?????

[RogerC]

John52 - 2017-10-07 9:23 AM

The UNelected and Absurdly over-populated House of Lords alone is bigger than the Elected European Parliament for 28 countries!!!!!! And don't get me started on the UNelected Royal Family and Hangers On!!!!!!!! Why do we have an election to leave the EU, but no election to leave them?

Agreed the House of Lords has become a vehicle for political cronyism....so we agree on something.  However as usual it doesn't take much to get you started on the Royal bashing.  Depending which side of the fence one stands, and your side is all too clear, it is claimed the Royals either bring in an estimated £1,000,000,000(Brand Finance research company) or cost us £330,000,000 (Campaign group Republic).  So it is clear there is huge disparity in claims which sort of parallels the EU IN/OUT question.  Whatever the case I don't see the relevance of an argument over the Royals in the context of this EU debate........but then irrelevance has never stooped you in the past.

[antony1969]

Barryd999 - 2017-10-07 9:24 AM

 

I can't believe that after all this time and now having learned just how vital both the single market and customs union is (not to mention almost impossible to leave) that the Brexiteers are still simply relying on blind faith that it will be alright on the night and anyone considering the arguments against having looked at the mounting evidence against Brexit is just a doom and gloom moaner.

 

Saying lets just see what happens and how can anyone know the outcome is just plain stupid. I don't think its right to call Brexiteers stupid or kind but if you advocate such a fingers crossed and hope for the best attitude then you must be.

 

We don't know what will happen just like the man who jumped off the sky scraper who all the way down kept saying "so far so good" but if we do jump off the skyscraper without a parachute or something "soft" to land on I think the outcome is obvious to all but the blind Brexit faithful.

 

As for being risk averse! Don't make me laugh! :D I've taken risks all my life both in business and personal. Risks that would make many have a heart attack or fill their pants but generally to take a big risk there has to be a chance of a huge possible reward and with Brexit there simply isn't. At best we will leave in name only and will only end up a bit worse off. At worse we will sink without trace. Why would anyone take that risk? Especially now we know just how impossible its going to be to unravel ourselves from even the customs union. It just ain't happening

 

Seventeen and a half million stupid folk walking around and many of them would have a heart attack if they took on the risks Barry has in life ... Stupid and risk averse another couple of names to add to the long list we've been called along with racists , Alf Garnett types and ill informed I suppose ... His magical crystal ball tells him the country that is the worlds 5th largest economy that has countries like America , Japan , Australia and the rest openly talking eagerly of wanting good trade deals with us will "sink without trace" because we are leaving the EU 8-)

[Brian Kirby]

RogerC - 2017-10-07 12:50 PM........................How can anyone continue to be desirous of membership of a club that can not stand up to one self interested, self serving, egotistical member that is costing the club members BILLIONS??

I didn't think my analogy that outlandish. Most member states question the desirability, waste, and inefficiency of shifting the parliament back and forth. That is why the figure has recently been revealed (Telegraph of 3 October 2017 - don't know whether this was your source). It is an attempt to shame the French into relenting. Maybe Macron will be persuaded?

 

However, even at that price, the cost, despite all the zeros, isn't that great in overall terms. I'm not seeking to justify it, only to give it some context.

 

I'm happy to be corrected if any of the following figures are wrong, but the UK contributed, gross I believe, in 2015, 13.4% of the total European budget. So we paid 13.4% of that 150,000,000, which is £20, 310,000. In the same year the UK government spent, under all headings, £434,4000,000,000 (£734.4 billion). In that context, our share of the cost of moving the European parliament back and forth, was 0.002766% of total UK central government spending. So yes, it is a large sum of money, and no, I wouldn't turn it down if offered (please note, Philip Hammond! :-)), but is 0.002766% really worth leaving the EU over? This seems to me a case of elevating cost above value.

 

Motorhomes are insane prices. Yet we all own one. I assume we do this because we consider their value to us to be great enough to justify their cost. That value is intangible, and is clearly not universally accepted. Others doubtless think the whole bunch of us completely mad, as they enjoy their expensive golf club memberships, their cruises, their staycations, their package tours, etc. etc.

 

So, while I disapprove of the historic anomaly of the costly moving of the European parliament, I'm prepared to pay my personal share of that 0.002766% - because I think it's worth it! :-D Also, because I think it will change in time.

 

On the history of the moves, here is a Wiki extract: "The Parliament is based in three different cities with numerous buildings. A protocol attached to the Treaty of Amsterdam requires that 12 plenary sessions be held in Strasbourg (none in August but two in September), which is the Parliament's official seat, while extra part sessions as well as committee meetings are held in Brussels. Luxembourg hosts the Secretariat of the European Parliament. The European Parliament is the only assembly in the world with more than one meeting place and one of the few that does not have the power to decide its own location.

 

The Strasbourg seat is seen as a symbol of reconciliation between France and Germany, the Strasbourg region having been fought over by the two countries in the past. However, the cost and inconvenience of having two seats is questioned. While Strasbourg is the official seat, and sits alongside the Council of Europe, Brussels is home to nearly all other major EU institutions, with the majority of Parliament's work being carried out there. Critics have described the two-seat arrangement as a "travelling circus", and there is a strong movement to establish Brussels as the sole seat. This is because the other political institutions (the Commission, Council and European Council) are located there, and hence Brussels is treated as the 'capital' of the EU. This movement has received strong backing through numerous figures, including the Commission First-Vice President who stated that "something that was once a very positive symbol of the EU reuniting France and Germany has now become a negative symbol—of wasting money, bureaucracy and the insanity of the Brussels institutions". The Green Party has also noted the environmental cost in a study led by Jean Lambert MEP and Caroline Lucas MEP; in addition to the extra 200 million euro spent on the extra seat, there are over 20,268 tonnes of additional carbon dioxide, undermining any environmental stance of the institution and the Union. The campaign is further backed by a million-strong online petition started by Cecilia Malmström MEP. In August 2014, an assessment by the European Court of Auditors calculated that relocating the Strasbourg seat of the European Parliament to Brussels would save €113.8 million per year. In 2006, there were allegations of irregularity in the charges made by the city of Strasbourg on buildings the Parliament rented, thus further harming the case for the Strasbourg seat.

 

Most MEPs prefer Brussels as a single base. A poll of MEPs found 89% of the respondents wanting a single seat, and 81% preferring Brussels. Another, more academic, survey found 68% support.[13] In July 2011, an absolute majority of MEPs voted in favour of a single seat. In early 2011, the Parliament voted to scrap one of the Strasbourg sessions by holding two within a single week. The mayor of Strasbourg officially reacted by stating "we will counter-attack by upturning the adversary's strength to our own profit, as a judoka would do." However, as Parliament's seat is now fixed by the treaties, it can only be changed by the Council acting unanimously, meaning that France could veto any move. The former French President Nicolas Sarkozy has stated that the Strasbourg seat is "non-negotiable", and that France has no intention of surrendering the only EU Institution on French soil. Given France's declared intention to veto any relocation to Brussels, some MEPs have advocated civil disobedience by refusing to take part in the monthly exodus to Strasbourg."

 

The Treaty of Amsterdam was signed on 10/11/97, on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom, by Douglas Henderson, Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. So, the UK government, which could at that time, as far as I know, have vetoed it, presumably supported it. 1997 is the year in which Blair succeeded Major, so presumably the negotiations were mainly under Major, but signed under Blair. I say no more, except that things are never quite so black and white as they may seem. :-D

[Brian Kirby]

antony1969 - 2017-10-07 3:29 PM

 

Barryd999 - 2017-10-07 9:24 AM

 

I can't believe that after all this time and now having learned just how vital both the single market and customs union is (not to mention almost impossible to leave) that the Brexiteers are still simply relying on blind faith that it will be alright on the night and anyone considering the arguments against having looked at the mounting evidence against Brexit is just a doom and gloom moaner.

 

Saying lets just see what happens and how can anyone know the outcome is just plain stupid. I don't think its right to call Brexiteers stupid or kind but if you advocate such a fingers crossed and hope for the best attitude then you must be.

 

We don't know what will happen just like the man who jumped off the sky scraper who all the way down kept saying "so far so good" but if we do jump off the skyscraper without a parachute or something "soft" to land on I think the outcome is obvious to all but the blind Brexit faithful.

 

As for being risk averse! Don't make me laugh! :D I've taken risks all my life both in business and personal. Risks that would make many have a heart attack or fill their pants but generally to take a big risk there has to be a chance of a huge possible reward and with Brexit there simply isn't. At best we will leave in name only and will only end up a bit worse off. At worse we will sink without trace. Why would anyone take that risk? Especially now we know just how impossible its going to be to unravel ourselves from even the customs union. It just ain't happening

 

Seventeen and a half million stupid folk walking around and many of them would have a heart attack if they took on the risks Barry has in life ... Stupid and risk averse another couple of names to add to the long list we've been called along with racists , Alf Garnett types and ill informed I suppose ... His magical crystal ball tells him the country that is the worlds 5th largest economy that has countries like America , Japan , Australia and the rest openly talking eagerly of wanting good trade deals with us will "sink without trace" because we are leaving the EU 8-)

Before we all get into a "my gonads are bigger than yours" contest over who is the more risk averse, consider this.

 

There is an international award called the Darwin Award. It recognises those who "have contributed to human evolution by selecting themselves out of the gene pool via death or sterilization by their own actions".

 

The smart manage risks, the foolish take them. Generally, the smart survive, while the foolish go on to gain the award. However, there is some debate as to whether those who fail in managing a risk should also be included among those gaining the award. Me? I couldn't possibly comment! :-D