Benefits of Brexit
Discussion
KrissKross said:
Keep the sensible ones, bin the rubbish ones, simple no?
Care to answer other peoples questions?
He doesn't answer questions, just goes off on one when he thinks he found a great point. I'm still waiting on why he thought it best for everyone to just vote Remain and negotiate with the EU after having delivered legitimacy and after Cameron failed so miserably , to his great Nissan insight that never was, his great moral stance on migrant rights that went wrong , to questions yesterday on why French participation within NATO had got anything to do with the UK saying the EU benefits from the UK's security spending. Care to answer other peoples questions?
He's a waste of time troll on PH who hasn't stopped chucking his toys out since June 24th. On a near daily basis he searches the Indy and Guardian for a bad news story and trumpets it with glee, the only problem being he was really hoping for a quick job loss or economic doom story in the hope it would revert Brexit, but nearly a year on all we've got is some company may employ tens of people in a subsidiary office and some doom articles by the convicted EU loving fraudster, Dennis MacShane.
Tomorrow will be the same and forever more until he wraps himself in a EU flag and is seen heading for Dover in a people carrier with Clegg, Farron Mandelson , Blair and Lilly Allen.
Deptford Draylons said:
KrissKross said:
Keep the sensible ones, bin the rubbish ones, simple no?
Care to answer other peoples questions?
He doesn't answer questions, just goes off on one when he thinks he found a great point. I'm still waiting on why he thought it best for everyone to just vote Remain and negotiate with the EU after having delivered legitimacy and after Cameron failed so miserably , to his great Nissan insight that never was, his great moral stance on migrant rights that went wrong , to questions yesterday on why French participation within NATO had got anything to do with the UK saying the EU benefits from the UK's security spending. Care to answer other peoples questions?
He's a waste of time troll on PH who hasn't stopped chucking his toys out since June 24th. On a near daily basis he searches the Indy and Guardian for a bad news story and trumpets it with glee, the only problem being he was really hoping for a quick job loss or economic doom story in the hope it would revert Brexit, but nearly a year on all we've got is some company may employ tens of people in a subsidiary office and some doom articles by the convicted EU loving fraudster, Dennis MacShane.
Tomorrow will be the same and forever more until he wraps himself in a EU flag and is seen heading for Dover in a people carrier with Clegg, Farron Mandelson , Blair and Lilly Allen.
Come on, this is the benefits thread. There must be some?
Still nothing on the laws then?
Some ideas here.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien...
Some ideas here.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien...
Im happy for political parties to propose what are repealed. Obviously it's not just for me.
A key advantage is that as more EU regulation comes along we will not automatically have to include it. If some companies need to to be able to export fine, let them get on with it. If it looks reasonable, include it but we don't have to waste time in frivolous laws.
3 which jump out to me.
European Technical Specifications for Interoperability. The UK had a proven electrification specification. Now new standards have increased costs by billions meaning many schemes are uneconomic. So we can continue riding around in stinking diesels for a few more years.
Alternative investment fund managers directive. Negatively viewed, the govs own impact analysis had significant cost. Part of more costant attacks on the city, for example caps on bonuses.
Overly onerous protection for great crested newts. They are rarer in mainland europe but things are everywhere in the southern UK and have in my industry alone cost millions and have stopped projects dead.
A key advantage is that as more EU regulation comes along we will not automatically have to include it. If some companies need to to be able to export fine, let them get on with it. If it looks reasonable, include it but we don't have to waste time in frivolous laws.
3 which jump out to me.
European Technical Specifications for Interoperability. The UK had a proven electrification specification. Now new standards have increased costs by billions meaning many schemes are uneconomic. So we can continue riding around in stinking diesels for a few more years.
Alternative investment fund managers directive. Negatively viewed, the govs own impact analysis had significant cost. Part of more costant attacks on the city, for example caps on bonuses.
Overly onerous protection for great crested newts. They are rarer in mainland europe but things are everywhere in the southern UK and have in my industry alone cost millions and have stopped projects dead.
gazapc said:
Im happy for political parties to propose what are repealed. Obviously it's not just for me.
A key advantage is that as more EU regulation comes along we will not automatically have to include it. If some companies need to to be able to export fine, let them get on with it. If it looks reasonable, include it but we don't have to waste time in frivolous laws.
3 which jump out to me.
European Technical Specifications for Interoperability. The UK had a proven electrification specification. Now new standards have increased costs by billions meaning many schemes are uneconomic. So we can continue riding around in stinking diesels for a few more years.
Alternative investment fund managers directive. Negatively viewed, the govs own impact analysis had significant cost. Part of more costant attacks on the city, for example caps on bonuses.
Overly onerous protection for great crested newts. They are rarer in mainland europe but things are everywhere in the southern UK and have in my industry alone cost millions and have stopped projects dead.
Thanks for replying with some content.A key advantage is that as more EU regulation comes along we will not automatically have to include it. If some companies need to to be able to export fine, let them get on with it. If it looks reasonable, include it but we don't have to waste time in frivolous laws.
3 which jump out to me.
European Technical Specifications for Interoperability. The UK had a proven electrification specification. Now new standards have increased costs by billions meaning many schemes are uneconomic. So we can continue riding around in stinking diesels for a few more years.
Alternative investment fund managers directive. Negatively viewed, the govs own impact analysis had significant cost. Part of more costant attacks on the city, for example caps on bonuses.
Overly onerous protection for great crested newts. They are rarer in mainland europe but things are everywhere in the southern UK and have in my industry alone cost millions and have stopped projects dead.
Do this mean the UK couldn't meet Euro train standards? In what way? If we are ignoring them anyway, where is the problem? Interested to know more about this.
Newts: We've solved that one whilst in the EU
http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2017/02/08/no-...
Banking? Not sure you can argue brexit is looking good for banking. Sure we can ditch euro regs, but we're about to watch the passporting work leave the country. Plus the UK always stopped the Euros messing with the city - not anymore.....this is ine of the downsides.
Edited by ///ajd on Saturday 1st April 11:14
///ajd said:
So the UK couldn't meet Euro train standards? In what way? If we are ignoring them anyway, where is the problem?
Predominantly overly cautious clearances for electrification equipment. We had used our own standards since the 50s with no safety issues. That changed recently and now the clearances required are much larger. It's a serious problem for the UK as our loading gauge is significantly smaller than on the mainland. Thus the number of bridges you have to raise, tunnel floors lowered, equipment moved goes up massively. And great the newt problem has been solved, but it's taken years, cost millions (in delays to projects not to mention the cost of consultation/trials etc). It could of all been avoided if they didn't make the problem in the first place. (Note I'm not advocating we go around running over animals with cars)
gazapc said:
Im happy for political parties to propose what are repealed. Obviously it's not just for me.
A key advantage is that as more EU regulation comes along we will not automatically have to include it. If some companies need to to be able to export fine, let them get on with it. If it looks reasonable, include it but we don't have to waste time in frivolous laws.
3 which jump out to me.
European Technical Specifications for Interoperability. The UK had a proven electrification specification. Now new standards have increased costs by billions meaning many schemes are uneconomic. So we can continue riding around in stinking diesels for a few more years.
Alternative investment fund managers directive. Negatively viewed, the govs own impact analysis had significant cost. Part of more costant attacks on the city, for example caps on bonuses.
Overly onerous protection for great crested newts. They are rarer in mainland europe but things are everywhere in the southern UK and have in my industry alone cost millions and have stopped projects dead.
Given how little you know about all of the above, my guess is that you copied them from somewhere rather than came up with it on your own. A key advantage is that as more EU regulation comes along we will not automatically have to include it. If some companies need to to be able to export fine, let them get on with it. If it looks reasonable, include it but we don't have to waste time in frivolous laws.
3 which jump out to me.
European Technical Specifications for Interoperability. The UK had a proven electrification specification. Now new standards have increased costs by billions meaning many schemes are uneconomic. So we can continue riding around in stinking diesels for a few more years.
Alternative investment fund managers directive. Negatively viewed, the govs own impact analysis had significant cost. Part of more costant attacks on the city, for example caps on bonuses.
Overly onerous protection for great crested newts. They are rarer in mainland europe but things are everywhere in the southern UK and have in my industry alone cost millions and have stopped projects dead.
TSI only applies to new systems and a major upgrade to the existing system. Show me where 'new standards' have increased cost 'by billions'.
In the meantime I'll put that one together with 'Eu doesn't allow us to have bendy bananas'.
gazapc said:
///ajd said:
So the UK couldn't meet Euro train standards? In what way? If we are ignoring them anyway, where is the problem?
Predominantly overly cautious clearances for electrification equipment. We had used our own standards since the 50s with no safety issues. That changed recently and now the clearances required are much larger. It's a serious problem for the UK as our loading gauge is significantly smaller than on the mainland. Thus the number of bridges you have to raise, tunnel floors lowered, equipment moved goes up massively. And great the newt problem has been solved, but it's taken years, cost millions (in delays to projects not to mention the cost of consultation/trials etc). It could of all been avoided if they didn't make the problem in the first place. (Note I'm not advocating we go around running over animals with cars)
I'd guess that UK & industry were represented when setting stds, and these were driven by safety arguments - it is not uncommon for old stds to be found wanting and the age of UK rail infrastructure is an issue - witness the effort put into APT etc. to avoid TGV like infra cost.
Exemptions are possible usually if the cost/benefit case doesn't work.
It would be interesting to hear about the specifics here - are you talking about the electrification of brunels GWR? You have to ask, are the clearances driven by dogma or safety? It should be the latter.
jjlynn27 said:
Given how little you know about all of the above, my guess is that you copied them from somewhere rather than came up with it on your own.
TSI only applies to new systems and a major upgrade to the existing system. Show me where 'new standards' have increased cost 'by billions'.
In the meantime I'll put that one together with 'Eu doesn't allow us to have bendy bananas'.
We could go on about this for ages. The point (mostly) is that the EU has handed down regulation on many matters for which we were already perfectly well regulated already, forcing us into pointless changes of rules and procedures just to make sure that everyone in the EU was doing everything in exactly the same way.TSI only applies to new systems and a major upgrade to the existing system. Show me where 'new standards' have increased cost 'by billions'.
In the meantime I'll put that one together with 'Eu doesn't allow us to have bendy bananas'.
In my view, that's the issue. when I ship things all over the world I have to deal with a lot of different regulatory regimes, but generally speaking they all recognise that the tests and procedures we have here are fine. This is "mutual recognition" and is the basis that most global trade works on.
There's no need for our processes and procedures to be exactly the same as the processes and procedures in other countries, just that they are of an equivalent standard. Such a system understands that there may be certain things specific to a country that need to be taken into account - mutual recognition embraces diversity where EU directives crush it for nobody's benefit apart from the people who take a salary for promulgating those directives.
jjlynn27 said:
TSI only applies to new systems and a major upgrade to the existing system.
Ok so major upgrades to existing systems.... like electrification that I specifically mentioned. Just look at the overspend and delay that it and the ORR caused on the Glasgow - Edingburgh works. And we still have many hundreds of miles of track to electrify. How many people have been electricuted in the last 50 years due to the UK adopting insufficient OHL height? Gold plating standards just because they can be is a way to ensure no electrification goes forward. As the poster above rightly points out, it's regulation from the top down and means that local (in this case national) experience is overridden by an irrational EU need to harmonise everything.And I'll let my clients know that they can ignore me on GCN as I copied it from the internet. I'm sure having cancelled a £15m+ development they would be pleased to hear.
gazapc said:
Ok so major upgrades to existing systems.... like electrification that I specifically mentioned. Just look at the overspend and delay that it and the ORR caused on the Glasgow - Edingburgh works. And we still have many hundreds of miles of track to electrify. How many people have been electricuted in the last 50 years due to the UK adopting insufficient OHL height? Gold plating standards just because they can be is a way to ensure no electrification goes forward. As the poster above rightly points out, it's regulation from the top down and means that local (in this case national) experience is overridden by an irrational EU need to harmonise everything.
And I'll let my clients know that they can ignore me on GCN as I copied it from the internet. I'm sure having cancelled a £15m+ development they would be pleased to hear.
That post just shows that you don't have a clue what you are on about. Where did you copy your 'original' list from?And I'll let my clients know that they can ignore me on GCN as I copied it from the internet. I'm sure having cancelled a £15m+ development they would be pleased to hear.
I'm still waiting for 'many billions'. After all, you wouldn't make that up, would you?
As for Edi - Gla;
Over time standards are becoming stricter and safer.
Karl Budge is a regional director of infrastructure projects for Network Rail.
Burge said:
That doesn't mean it was a complete rewire of EGIP and everything that had been put up, which is what the media suggested several weeks ago.
What it meant was redesign in certain areas and very localised changes around structures where we had to change the wire height slightly or risk-assess through to prove that we didn't need to.
What it meant was redesign in certain areas and very localised changes around structures where we had to change the wire height slightly or risk-assess through to prove that we didn't need to.
jjlynn27 said:
gazapc said:
Ok so major upgrades to existing systems.... like electrification that I specifically mentioned. Just look at the overspend and delay that it and the ORR caused on the Glasgow - Edingburgh works. And we still have many hundreds of miles of track to electrify. How many people have been electricuted in the last 50 years due to the UK adopting insufficient OHL height? Gold plating standards just because they can be is a way to ensure no electrification goes forward. As the poster above rightly points out, it's regulation from the top down and means that local (in this case national) experience is overridden by an irrational EU need to harmonise everything.
And I'll let my clients know that they can ignore me on GCN as I copied it from the internet. I'm sure having cancelled a £15m+ development they would be pleased to hear.
That post just shows that you don't have a clue what you are on about. Where did you copy your 'original' list from?And I'll let my clients know that they can ignore me on GCN as I copied it from the internet. I'm sure having cancelled a £15m+ development they would be pleased to hear.
I'm still waiting for 'many billions'. After all, you wouldn't make that up, would you?
As for Edi - Gla;
Over time standards are becoming stricter and safer.
Karl Budge is a regional director of infrastructure projects for Network Rail.
Burge said:
That doesn't mean it was a complete rewire of EGIP and everything that had been put up, which is what the media suggested several weeks ago.
What it meant was redesign in certain areas and very localised changes around structures where we had to change the wire height slightly or risk-assess through to prove that we didn't need to.
What it meant was redesign in certain areas and very localised changes around structures where we had to change the wire height slightly or risk-assess through to prove that we didn't need to.
///ajd said:
gazapc said:
Im happy for political parties to propose what are repealed. Obviously it's not just for me.
A key advantage is that as more EU regulation comes along we will not automatically have to include it. If some companies need to to be able to export fine, let them get on with it. If it looks reasonable, include it but we don't have to waste time in frivolous laws.
3 which jump out to me.
European Technical Specifications for Interoperability. The UK had a proven electrification specification. Now new standards have increased costs by billions meaning many schemes are uneconomic. So we can continue riding around in stinking diesels for a few more years.
Alternative investment fund managers directive. Negatively viewed, the govs own impact analysis had significant cost. Part of more costant attacks on the city, for example caps on bonuses.
Overly onerous protection for great crested newts. They are rarer in mainland europe but things are everywhere in the southern UK and have in my industry alone cost millions and have stopped projects dead.
Thanks for replying with some content.A key advantage is that as more EU regulation comes along we will not automatically have to include it. If some companies need to to be able to export fine, let them get on with it. If it looks reasonable, include it but we don't have to waste time in frivolous laws.
3 which jump out to me.
European Technical Specifications for Interoperability. The UK had a proven electrification specification. Now new standards have increased costs by billions meaning many schemes are uneconomic. So we can continue riding around in stinking diesels for a few more years.
Alternative investment fund managers directive. Negatively viewed, the govs own impact analysis had significant cost. Part of more costant attacks on the city, for example caps on bonuses.
Overly onerous protection for great crested newts. They are rarer in mainland europe but things are everywhere in the southern UK and have in my industry alone cost millions and have stopped projects dead.
Do this mean the UK couldn't meet Euro train standards? In what way? If we are ignoring them anyway, where is the problem? Interested to know more about this.
Newts: We've solved that one whilst in the EU
http://www.constructionenquirer.com/2017/02/08/no-...
Banking? Not sure you can argue brexit is looking good for banking. Sure we can ditch euro regs, but we're about to watch the passporting work leave the country. Plus the UK always stopped the Euros messing with the city - not anymore.....this is ine of the downsides.
Edited by ///ajd on Saturday 1st April 11:14
crankedup said:
It's looking like very little will change regards the city banks, they do not want the upheaval and, more pertently, the huge costs involved with compliance regulations.
https://www.ft.com/content/194077bc-1533-11e7-80f4...///ajd said:
crankedup said:
///ajd said:
Atomic12C said:
So to continue this thread....
if the media were not on a total mission to keep propagating fear in the populous in aid of their agenda and viewing numbers, I think the potential positives of Brexit should be well known by now; however it would seem there is a large amount of fear that is still being installed by the likes of BBC and SKY to name a few.
Potential benefits...
(1) Having control over laws and implementation.
(2) Having control over taxation (VAT etc)
(3) Ability to 'import' labour that will be of benefit to the UK.
(4) Fewer trade barriers with the rest of the world.
(5) Economic growth that is not linked to the debts of the EU.
Its not quite got going this thread has it.if the media were not on a total mission to keep propagating fear in the populous in aid of their agenda and viewing numbers, I think the potential positives of Brexit should be well known by now; however it would seem there is a large amount of fear that is still being installed by the likes of BBC and SKY to name a few.
Potential benefits...
(1) Having control over laws and implementation.
(2) Having control over taxation (VAT etc)
(3) Ability to 'import' labour that will be of benefit to the UK.
(4) Fewer trade barriers with the rest of the world.
(5) Economic growth that is not linked to the debts of the EU.
Perhaps it is a lack of material - can we flesh out some of the benefits above?
1) which laws shall we now change - top 3?
2) what shall we do - higher or lower, and what will be the benefit?
3) which labour is it that we can't import now?
4) which trade barriers shall we reduce - top 3?
5) debts of the EU? do you mean EU nations? which ones are holding us back and how?
We can add another
6) cheaper fish and chips
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien...
Edited by ///ajd on Thursday 30th March 20:40
If you can't it comes across as you're just parroting some irrelevant "bendy banana" anti EU drivel from the Express.
I'm sure that is not the case - come on, this is the brexit benefit thread - lets see the specific pluses rolled out so we can look forward to them.
All we know for sure is that the eu legislative programme over the past forty years, that is to be taken on board by the UK and sifted through what we should keep and what we junk"
Your mention of the Daily express, never read it myself, is it worth the cost?
KrissKross said:
///ajd said:
lets see the specific pluses
Your questions seem to be based around the supernatural sometimes. Do you read horoscopes or such like?If you run a business, you might have a marketing team, sales people and a bit of experience. Piece them together with a good cash flow and you might be able to predict the next few weeks or months to help your business grow. If someone knew how to get this spot on they would be a trillionaire.
To be able to answer in the way you expect would mean that people will need to see into the future, well you might be aware that is not possible, so don't ask questions that no human is capable of answering.
Good things for any home or country:
Control & safety, ie who you let in/out of your house, do you leave your front door open when you go to work, if you don't can I ask why?
Teamwork, when the team of 10 has 9 accountants and one person doing something productive, guess who will loose their job first?
Common sense, hugely lacking these days. Not measurable with a certificate or degree.
Numbers, what we need v what we do not need. Very binary and nothing to do with race or sex.
Other stuff but if you don't agree on the above I suggest you go back to consulting the stars for an answer. By the way I have a unicorn for sale if you want it?
Deptford Draylons said:
KrissKross said:
Keep the sensible ones, bin the rubbish ones, simple no?
Care to answer other peoples questions?
He doesn't answer questions, just goes off on one when he thinks he found a great point. I'm still waiting on why he thought it best for everyone to just vote Remain and negotiate with the EU after having delivered legitimacy and after Cameron failed so miserably , to his great Nissan insight that never was, his great moral stance on migrant rights that went wrong , to questions yesterday on why French participation within NATO had got anything to do with the UK saying the EU benefits from the UK's security spending. Care to answer other peoples questions?
He's a waste of time troll on PH who hasn't stopped chucking his toys out since June 24th. On a near daily basis he searches the Indy and Guardian for a bad news story and trumpets it with glee, the only problem being he was really hoping for a quick job loss or economic doom story in the hope it would revert Brexit, but nearly a year on all we've got is some company may employ tens of people in a subsidiary office and some doom articles by the convicted EU loving fraudster, Dennis MacShane.
Tomorrow will be the same and forever more until he wraps himself in a EU flag and is seen heading for Dover in a people carrier with Clegg, Farron Mandelson , Blair and Lilly Allen.
///ajd said:
Still nothing on the laws then?
Some ideas here.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien...
Made himself look a bit of a chump, we can only trust in our Government to provide acceptable T&C from the brexit talks. All the speculation means jack sSome ideas here.
http://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien...
te.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff