Benefits to the MH community of a no deal Brexit?

[Conrad]

OK folks, I've thought of a benefit!

 

Pet passport scheme scrapped, new system such a faff and needing 4 month-lead in, many won't bother. So.....fewer people booking on ferries, easier for others to get a space!

[witzend]

pelmetman - 2020-12-14 7:48 PM

 

I didn't vote to leave because I'm a selfish motorhomer

I voted for what was best for the UK after 40+ years experience of living with what I was too young to vote for

I can remember voting whether to Join or Not. When the vote went to Join No one could understand who voted for it everyone said it had to be a Fix I can't remember anyone saying they voted to join.

But there wasn't the fuss that the Remoaners are making now everyone had to accept it was a democratic decision to join

[veletron]

There are zero benefits, not to motorhomers nor anyone else! The only folks who will benefit are those betting on a no-deal with their millions, and, perhaps fishermen - although fishing is worth approximately nothing to the UK economy - 0.5% of GDP - if it disappeared entirely tomorrow, the economy would not notice.

[747]

Conrad - 2020-12-14 9:47 PM

 

OK folks, I've thought of a benefit!

 

Pet passport scheme scrapped, new system such a faff and needing 4 month-lead in, many won't bother. So.....fewer people booking on ferries, easier for others to get a space!

 

Actually it appears that the new system will be easier than the current pet passport system. Plenty of information on other forums, some with links.

[Derek Uzzell]

witzend - 2020-12-14 10:07 PM

 

pelmetman - 2020-12-14 7:48 PM

 

I didn't vote to leave because I'm a selfish motorhomer

I voted for what was best for the UK after 40+ years experience of living with what I was too young to vote for

I can remember voting whether to Join or Not. When the vote went to Join No one could understand who voted for it everyone said it had to be a Fix I can't remember anyone saying they voted to join.

But there wasn't the fuss that the Remoaners are making now everyone had to accept it was a democratic decision to join

 

The UK joined the EU in January 1973. In 1975 (after a change of Government) a UK referendum was held regarding continuation of EU membership (there was never a referendum on JOINING the EU). The 1975 referendum apparently produced a 67% vote in favour of continued membership on a national turnout of 64%. This result was not legally binding, but Harold Wilson (the then PM) had said that - whichever way the vote went - the Government would accept the decision. I can’t remember which way I voted in 1975, but if I did vote it was likely to have been for EU membership continuation.

 

In 1941 Japan attacked the US naval base at Pearl Harbour, with the predictable result that the US declared war on Japan and its allies. In August 1945 atomic bombs were dropped on two Japanese cites and, 6 days later, Japan surrendered ending the 2nd world war. If Japan had known in 1941 that, 4 years later, the country would lose the war so catastrophically, would war on the US still have been declared and Pearl Harbour still have been attacked? If it had been known in 1941 that (despite being defeated in the 2nd world war and A-bombed) Japan would have become an industrial superpower by the 1990s, would Japan still have decided to attack Pearl Harbour?

 

In the 2016 referendum my wife and I both voted for the UK to remain in the EU. Given our ages (both in our early-70s then), that neither of us had offspring and that our lifestyle was relatively comfortable, it seemed near certain that leaving the EU would disadvantage us for the foreseeable future. Like Japan, it may be that, 4 years from now (or 7 years after the referendum) the UK will look back and fervently wish the vote had gone the other way. Or, 20 years from now, that the UK may look back and be overjoyed that the nation left the EU. But in the short term it was predictably going to be a bumpy ride and, in the run-up to the referendum, the jingoistic arguments put forward for leaving the EU had little credibility as far as I was concerned.

 

As far as I can see, in the event of a no-deal’ BREXIT, all the short-term effects on UK motorcaravanners will be negative. 20 years from now (or even 5 years from now) some post-BREXIT motorhome-related benefits might have become apparent, but I can’t imagine what these might be and it’s extremely unlikely they’ll benefit me.

 

 

 

[Barryd999]

One things for certain, going back to 2016 motorhomers were certainly pro Brexit. I Can remember the polls on all of the forums and apart from FACTS which was still pro Brexit but not by much all of the other big forums including this one ran polls and some were as high as 70% in favour of leaving. Where are they all now? apart from the Jihadi Brexiteers like Dave Pelmet who would sell his wifes house, his motorhome and his granny for the harshest Brexit possible the silence is deafening. I have to wonder why that is.

 

I have tried hard to think of some benefits of leaving, not just for the motorhome lifestyle but in general and to be honest, I am struggling. Something about sovereignty perhaps but did we ever really lose it or did the likes of the Mail and Express just tell us we did? One things for sure, the world is made up of trading blocs now and which ever one you sign up for and we will be signing up for them or we will go under you have to follow rules. When the next generation takes over I suspect if the EU will have us we will inevitably rejoin. Perhaps it wont even be that long.

[Ocsid]

For us the biggest, and fatal impact of a "full on no deal" would be the loss of our EHIC, far from any advantage.

 

With that not picking up any emergency medical cost, it will be down to us or any insurance we might get.

 

Given our age and both with so far uninsurable pre existing medical conditions, we have not the wherewithal to risk going.

 

Exceeding depressing and hard to see any positive spin off coming that can offset that huge "quality of life" loss that is looming for us personally.

 

No good comparing with how we did things 40 years ago, neither of us now live in quite the same bodies, as we did 40 years back

[slowdriver]

747 - 2020-12-15 9:07 AM

 

Actually it appears that the new system will be easier than the current pet passport system. Plenty of information on other forums, some with links.

 

It was be most helpful if you could point me to those links. Many thanks

[silverback]

don't know if this helps cos i have no pets and not read it *-) (lol)

http://apha.defra.gov.uk/documents/ov/Briefing-Note-3920.pdf?fbclid=IwAR29ofMtJ01BdAlLO2_uPxvGgpyVWW9XzHYC_kY4e1rHE0vC51AGtNIc62U

Jonathan

[Derek Uzzell]

I believe the guidance on this gov.uk October 2020 webpage has not altered since then.

 

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/pet-travel-to-europe-from-1-january-2021

 

See also

 

https://www.outandaboutlive.co.uk/motorhomes/news/government-updates-rules-for-travel-to-europe-with-pets-in-2021

 

https://www.caravanclub.co.uk/overseas-holidays/useful-information/travelling-after-brexit/taking-your-pet-to-Europe/

 

(For motorhome owners or caravanners, the revised arrangements do not seem simpler to me...)

[Barryd999]

Ocsid - 2020-12-15 9:59 AM

 

For us the biggest, and fatal impact of a "full on no deal" would be the loss of our EHIC, far from any advantage.

 

With that not picking up any emergency medical cost, it will be down to us or any insurance we might get.

 

Given our age and both with so far uninsurable pre existing medical conditions, we have not the wherewithal to risk going.

 

Exceeding depressing and hard to see any positive spin off coming that can offset that huge "quality of life" loss that is looming for us personally.

 

No good comparing with how we did things 40 years ago, neither of us now live in quite the same bodies, as we did 40 years back

 

Sadly I suspect it will be lost deal or no deal now. Any deal Johnson brings back (if he does) will be bare bones but still have us tied to EU rules. I doubt EHIC card will be high up the agenda.

 

On most of our long trips to Europe one of us generally ends up in flipping causality at some point or other. 2012 Mrs D needed to be rushed to hospital in the Italian Alps with a kidney stone that was blocking her urinary tract. Could have been fatal. That involved two hospitals, several specialist consultants, numerous other staff and two ambulance trips. I dread to think what the cost would have been without the EHIC. similar but not as serious happened in France in 2017. As its a pre known condition I wonder if insurance would cover it in the future.

 

I dont think there is anything stopping the government negotiating retaining the EHIC card though but I bet they dont. Its well known that the NHS seldom claim here for visiting European EHIC patients that need treatment as they know the money will go to the treasury and not them.

[Brian Kirby]

Derek Uzzell - 2020-12-15 9:20 AM

witzend - 2020-12-14 10:07 PM

pelmetman - 2020-12-14 7:48 PM

I didn't vote to leave because I'm a selfish motorhomer

I voted for what was best for the UK after 40+ years experience of living with what I was too young to vote for

I can remember voting whether to Join or Not. When the vote went to Join No one could understand who voted for it everyone said it had to be a Fix I can't remember anyone saying they voted to join.

But there wasn't the fuss that the Remoaners are making now everyone had to accept it was a democratic decision to join

The UK joined the EU in January 1973. In 1975 (after a change of Government) a UK referendum was held regarding continuation of EU membership (there was never a referendum on JOINING the EU). The 1975 referendum apparently produced a 67% vote in favour of continued membership on a national turnout of 64%. This result was not legally binding, but Harold Wilson (the then PM) had said that - whichever way the vote went - the Government would accept the decision. I can’t remember which way I voted in 1975, but if I did vote it was likely to have been for EU membership continuation.

In 1941 Japan attacked the US naval base at Pearl Harbour, with the predictable result that the US declared war on Japan and its allies. In August 1945 atomic bombs were dropped on two Japanese cites and, 6 days later, Japan surrendered ending the 2nd world war. If Japan had known in 1941 that, 4 years later, the country would lose the war so catastrophically, would war on the US still have been declared and Pearl Harbour still have been attacked? If it had been known in 1941 that (despite being defeated in the 2nd world war and A-bombed) Japan would have become an industrial superpower by the 1990s, would Japan still have decided to attack Pearl Harbour?

In the 2016 referendum my wife and I both voted for the UK to remain in the EU. Given our ages (both in our early-70s then), that neither of us had offspring and that our lifestyle was relatively comfortable, it seemed near certain that leaving the EU would disadvantage us for the foreseeable future. Like Japan, it may be that, 4 years from now (or 7 years after the referendum) the UK will look back and fervently wish the vote had gone the other way. Or, 20 years from now, that the UK may look back and be overjoyed that the nation left the EU. But in the short term it was predictably going to be a bumpy ride and, in the run-up to the referendum, the jingoistic arguments put forward for leaving the EU had little credibility as far as I was concerned.

As far as I can see, in the event of a no-deal’ BREXIT, all the short-term effects on UK motorcaravanners will be negative. 20 years from now (or even 5 years from now) some post-BREXIT motorhome-related benefits might have become apparent, but I can’t imagine what these might be and it’s extremely unlikely they’ll benefit me.

In anticipation of the reprimand, I'm including the above posts for context, and for the avoidance of repetition. Mea culpa!

:-D

 

But yes, all of the above, plus I do remember a lot of reading of pro and con arguments before I voted to remain in 1975, in the hope that the UK would be prompted to change its industrial management practises and possible even it largely destructive two party political system under the influence of our new continental partners.

 

I was highly dubious at the eastern expansion of the EU, in 2004, and more so in 2007, which required the absorption of too many fledgling democracies, at too early a stage in their development of market economics. I would have favoured encouragement and assistance for them to form a parallel bloc, with a view to future merger when they had worked it all out. Some have, some are still struggling. Who knows?

 

We have two daughters and three grand children, to whom we had hoped our generation would bequeath a better world. That world has now, in terms of easy accessibility for work, life and study, shrunk.

 

My first experience of "Europe" was in 1958 - 60, in school exchanges with a French family. Perhaps that conditioned my attitudes - I don't know, but it definitely taught me French! :-)

 

In 2016 we, too, voted remain. The EEC/EU is, as someone remarked a few days ago, a permanent negotiation. Too many thought the the EEC was a fixed entity, and became uneasy as it changed, feeling it no longer reflected what the UK had joined in 1973. Same with the EU. However, I think it was an inevitable development in response to the war-stained history of Europe, and the history of the evolution of the modern nation states via absorption of the preceding Dukedoms, Principalities, Margravates, Duchies, Republics etc. etc.

 

This has largely been driven by developments in technology, transport, and communications, and I do not see those diminishing. The EU will continue to evolve, and eventually we will re-join it - or be drawn into some other confederation of nation states. There are sound economic reasons for this to happen. The investment necessary for developing even the humble motor car is now too great for one single state to sustain for its own market, and requires access to multiple markets, and cross border investments, to sustain it. This is hugely magnified within, for example, the aircraft industry.

 

So, even though it may be an inglorious notion, I think the best motto is: "if you can't beat them, join them". The rider is that if you join them do so fully, not as some part-time spectator who stands at the back and carps, or as a convenient cover for having adopted policies you support, but find politically inconvenient!

[747]

slowdriver - 2020-12-15 10:03 AM

 

747 - 2020-12-15 9:07 AM

 

Actually it appears that the new system will be easier than the current pet passport system. Plenty of information on other forums, some with links.

 

It was be most helpful if you could point me to those links. Many thanks

This thread may be informative.

 

https://wildcamping.co.uk/threads/not-researched-or-checked-but-looks-official.84257/

[colin]

And as that thread shows, the possible new system will be little different to the present system, excepting some people will have to jump through a few more hoops when returning, and adds Ireland to the list of countries needing paperwork, not sure how this is a 'benefit'.

[747]

colin - 2020-12-15 1:23 PM

 

And as that thread shows, the possible new system will be little different to the present system, excepting some people will have to jump through a few more hoops when returning, and adds Ireland to the list of countries needing paperwork, not sure how this is a 'benefit'.

 

You are critical even though you say it is 'little different' to the present scheme. Yet you ignore the assertion that it needs a 4 month 'lead in' as asserted by another member.

 

No need to explain that as I will be ignoring this thread from now on as it is starting to go in a circle.

[Brian Kirby]

This might help: https://tinyurl.com/ybctubha The link is to the Gov.uk website, and it clearly states that the process should start "at least 4 months before you travel".

 

Jim, the thread title invites opinions on the benefits of a no deal Brexit for motorhomers. What is your view?

[Derek Uzzell]

In fact (and I think this is what was been touched on earlier) there is evidently a recent update that should facilitate UK-to-EU pet-travel. This is summarised in this on-line German English-language article dated yesterday.

 

https://www.thelocal.de/20201214/update-new-rules-on-pet-travel-as-uk-granted-listed-status-by-eu

[curdle]

Derek Uzzell - 2020-12-16 1:21 AM

 

In fact (and I think this is what was been touched on earlier) there is evidently a recent update that should facilitate UK-to-EU pet-travel. This is summarised in this on-line German English-language article dated yesterday.

 

What is not clear: If you travel (from the UK) before the 1st January on a pet passport, do you need the new certificate in order to return to the UK in January or later?

[curdle]

witzend - 2020-12-15 5:07 AM

 

" I didn't vote to leave because I'm a selfish motorhomer

I voted for what was best for the UK after 40+ years experience of living with what I was too young to vote for

I can remember voting whether to Join or Not. When the vote went to Join No one could understand who voted for it everyone said it had to be a Fix I can't remember anyone saying they voted to join.

But there wasn't the fuss that the Remoaners are making now everyone had to accept it was a democratic decision to join"

 

How does a discussion become "a fuss"? This appears the fundamental problem these days in all areas of UK public debate. I was relatively neutral in this since I am in the fortunate position of holding tri-nationality, one of which is citizen of a European country still in the bloc. I do not have assurance, however, of the status vis a vis a Schengen ruling on my wife's UK nationality, so we still have to figure out, how that will affect us as a couple travelling in the future.

 

Despite Pelmetman howling at the moon, my question is serious in intent. In the narrow frame of motor-homers who have been enormous beneficiaries for EU free movement, how can Brexit be viewed as anything other than an unmitigated disaster. I can understand many reasons for Brexit, but as a motor-homer I have to wonder what thoughts went through peoples minds before voting, hence my musings, not a fuss.

[crocs]

Is it just me, or has this become (and perhaps was always intended to become) a political discussion?

[curdle]

Brian Kirby - 2020-12-16 12:55 AM

 

This might help: https://tinyurl.com/ybctubha The link is to the Gov.uk website, and it clearly states that the process should start "at least 4 months before you travel".

 

Jim, the thread title invites opinions on the benefits of a no deal Brexit for motorhomers. What is your view?

 

Brian. Is your question directed at me (using my diminutive) or some one else?

[curdle]

crocs - 2020-12-16 3:31 AM

 

Is it just me, or has this become (and perhaps was always intended to become) a political discussion?

 

just you. Some thoughtful replies actually.

[silverback]

curdle - 2020-12-15 7:25 PM

 

Derek Uzzell - 2020-12-16 1:21 AM

 

In fact (and I think this is what was been touched on earlier) there is evidently a recent update that should facilitate UK-to-EU pet-travel. This is summarised in this on-line German English-language article dated yesterday.

What is not clear: If you travel (from the UK) before the 1st January on a pet passport, do you need the new certificate in order to return to the UK in January or later?

If you travel before the 1st January everything is the same as before and on return as well because travel start date is before the 1st....just like it is with the EHIC card is still valid if travel before 1st jan until you return to the UK

Jonathan

[Barryd999]

It may be a mute point as regards travelling in the near future to the European mainland as I saw a list of third countries that are allowed into Europe after the 1st of January and the UK is not one of them and probably wont be for some time. I will see if I can find a link to it. Essential travel only I believe.

 

 

[Brian Kirby]

curdle - 2020-12-15 8:46 PM

 

Brian Kirby - 2020-12-16 12:55 AM

This might help: https://tinyurl.com/ybctubha The link is to the Gov.uk website, and it clearly states that the process should start "at least 4 months before you travel".

 

Jim, the thread title invites opinions on the benefits of a no deal Brexit for motorhomers. What is your view?

Brian. Is your question directed at me (using my diminutive) or some one else?

No James, it was in response to this from Jim (747):

747 - 2020-12-15 4:22 PM

colin - 2020-12-15 1:23 PM

And as that thread shows, the possible new system will be little different to the present system, excepting some people will have to jump through a few more hoops when returning, and adds Ireland to the list of countries needing paperwork, not sure how this is a 'benefit'.

You are critical even though you say it is 'little different' to the present scheme. Yet you ignore the assertion that it needs a 4 month 'lead in' as asserted by another member.

No need to explain that as I will be ignoring this thread from now on as it is starting to go in a circle.

I just thought it a shame that he felt pushed out. Apologies for the confusion. :-)