How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 7)

[gooner1]

chrispmartha said:

Disregarding the illegal bit until you post proof

This is exactly the point Airbus will do what’s best for Airbus it just happens what Airbus is best for Airbus may not be the best for the UK

Edited by chrispmartha on Thursday 24th January 11:40

And they will continue to do so, Brexit or not.

[chrispmartha]

gooner1 said:

chrispmartha said:

Disregarding the illegal bit until you post proof

This is exactly the point Airbus will do what’s best for Airbus it just happens what Airbus is best for Airbus may not be the best for the UK

Edited by chrispmartha on Thursday 24th January 11:40

And they will continue to do so, Brexit or not.

Of course they will, no one has said otherwise

[gizlaroc]

chrispmartha said:

Disregarding the illegal bit until you post proof

This is exactly the point Airbus will do what’s best for Airbus it just happens what Airbus is best for Airbus may not be the best for the UK

It was a pretty heated debate that ran for a good 10 years.

Many from different industries stepped in to have their say as they thought it was a good example of huge subsidies just not being fair no matter what industry you're in. It is protectionist and while it is good for those involved in the company who is receiving the benefit the knock on effect, many argue, does far more damage.

[chrispmartha]

gizlaroc said:

chrispmartha said:

Disregarding the illegal bit until you post proof

This is exactly the point Airbus will do what’s best for Airbus it just happens what Airbus is best for Airbus may not be the best for the UK

It was a pretty heated debate that ran for a good 10 years.

Many from different industries stepped in to have their say as they thought it was a good example of huge subsidies just not being fair no matter what industry you're in. It is protectionist and while it is good for those involved in the company who is receiving the benefit the knock on effect it has will do far more damage.

OK what was the outcome, was it deemed illegal (either way it doesn’t affect the point of my argument)

[Ridgemont]

amusingduck said:

Tuna said:

And in other news...

The People's Vote have officially announced they aren't going to table an amendment to get a People's Vote.

I'm sure the usual suspects will be along to tell us that support for the People's Vote hasn't fizzled out, and that they definitely do have lots of support for it in Parliament, and they certainly are going to save us all from Brexit any moment now.

Maybe watching George Osborne and Tony Blair (together at last!) broadcasting live from the expensive sunny slopes of Davos finally convinced people that the People's Vote definitely wasn't the liberal elite trying to tell them what to do.

I think a lot of the blame can be apportioned to Helicopter123. If only he'd tried just that little bit harder to will a peoples vote into existance, it would have happened.

Oh well

Maybe Corbyn has received guidance from the mothership

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/bre...

[Canute]

assuming a good percentage of Airbus workers voted for Brexit, I wonder what they think of their employer and Brexit now?

[superlightr]

The EU
Its a bit like sex.
You are either in fully - balls deep like Germany or half in a bit like Sweden or totally out like China.
Some are in tighter then others.

The UK are balls deep but wearing a condom - protected from the Euro but still rhythmically playing the game. The trouble is after ploughing away for 40 odd years its getting a bit repetitive, the sex is ok bit the side niggles are getting bigger, the mental is loaming and the cost of keeping the dick in is getting more expensive. The dick is thinking I'll have some additional action elsewhere - grass is greener and all that plus would save a lot of money to pay for more dicking. It will be ok.

Turkey are like a rival dick trying to get in but they are feking ugly and have poor hygiene so the EU wont touch them with a barge pole but the EU like the attention and keeps teasing them.


Greece is the exotic lover to the EU - a bit daring, not really in Europe historically but good for a hard shag but when worn out will be discarded. Greece are sending flowers and bending over doing naughty things for the EU as they still want to be loved. trying too hard.

Italy is playing it calm and nonchalant - they are happy to be in deep when they are in town but equally happy now the fun and excitement is fading to go elsewhere.

Ireland loves being balls deep with the EU - cant get enough of it. Going like a jack hammer but has recently found out that the EU has been cheating on them - they are pretty pissed off.

Scotland is like the younger brother - wants to be big enough for some of the action but everyone laughs at them as they haven't started shaving yet. EU is more of a MILF to them. A crush.

Some poetic licence has been applied.

Certainly the UK public that voted are being dicked around and feked up by both the EU and our own MP's but nothing new there.

[Tuna]

bhstewie said:

There seems to be a slew of prominent Leave supporters who are saying one thing and doing another - do you ever wonder why?

Trading and working in the global market is *exactly* what most of the Brexit proponents have been calling for throughout this whole ridiculous exercise.

It's getting a bit hard to tell who the 'Little Englanders' are, when Remainers are strangely insistent that people should only conduct their affairs within the UK. And the overblown claims that Leave supporters are somehow 'not supporting Britain' by actually wanting to do business with the wide world are stunning hypocrisy from the people who are apparently so keen on FoM, international investment and all that. Does it not occur to you that both sides actually have visions of working on the global stage, albeit with different political infrastructure behind them?

[Mrr T]

MDMetal said:

Fittster said:

MDMetal said:

Does anyone who voted leave seriously think the day after we leave it'll be milk and honey?

Why wouldn't they? They politicians supporting leave didn't say things would get worse after leaving.

because contrary to how people are treated by their elected representatives most of them actually have brains and are aware of highs and lows and the difference between long and short term.

Unless you have spoken to all leave voters you have no idea of what they thought. As it is the Leave campaign was clear this would be the easiest deal ever, it would be done in an afternoon over tea (and maybe cake), they need us more than we need them. Based on this I would suggest most leave voters expected leaving to have no negative economic effect. If leave had campaigned on a clear platform that the likeliest brexit exit was without an withdrawal agreement and every one should expect to be worst off and won. Then you would have a point. Then again I do not think leave would have won with that strategy.

[BOR]

Andrea Leadsom, the leader of the Commons, said the half-term recess has not been cancelled - or, at least, not yet. She said the plan for the House to rise on Thursday 14 February and return on Monday 24 February “is and does remain the position”. But she said this would have to be confirmed by a Commons vote, meaning there is still time for the mini recess to be abandoned.

Er...hallo... is it me ? Don't you mofos have something important to sort out right now ?

What is wrong with your country ? Why don't you sort yourselves out ? Why is it taking you so long to do this?

[crankedup]

Lord.Vader said:

Welshbeef said:

The A380 and A400 and the rampant success of the Dreamliner plus the new 747 replacement are smashing Airbus our of the park.

Shows how much you know when you quote two Airbus programmes that are over 15 years old when the A320 family (NEO / XLR / UXLR) and the A350 is the fastest selling A/C family ever and including the new A220 (Bombardier) we delivered over 800 a/c last year, the highest ever.

The 747 isn't being directly replaced, there is a new -8 variant, as neither Airbus nor Boeing see a market for X-Large ac.

Brexit has already cost Airbus 10's of millions, with no level of certainty, you can understand the frustration!

We have around over 10,000 eployees in the UK (direct), plus sub contractors, supply chain, external contracts, etc.

Whilst Brexit wouldn't mean the immediate closure of the plants, if we do not get the next generation wing (circa 2025) then it will be the beginning of the end for manufacturing (Airbus) in the UK.

Never been involved with aircraft manufacturing and have only a smattering of ‘knowledge’ about such things. However, I make an assumption that such major investment, R&D require significant time frames from board to shop floor? As you suggest Airbus will not close down overnight, if at all, perhaps working within a non EU Country will not be so detrimental to the business. The infrastructure being in place with a highly skilled workforce of 10,000 is not something easily replicated. Perhaps the U.K. will have a deal with the EU that will ensure continued and sensible supply to satisfy all?

[Pan Pan Pan]

Lord.Vader said:

Pan Pan Pan said:

p1stonhead said:

Tuna said:

bhstewie said:

More positive news https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46984229

Airbus gets rolled out around every crunch point to helpfully suggest we do what's best for the EU. They thought we should join the Euro, thought we should vote Remain, think we should not go for 'no deal'.

Why anyone thinks they actually have our country's best interests at heart is beyond me.

They dont? They have their own and their workers interests at heart. Some are UK workers.

There are 800 000 UK nationals working in the EU, whereas 2.15 million EU nationals are working in the UK. A friends son was working for Airbus, and when there was the notion of a slight glitch in sales, he, plus some of his UK buddies were given the sack, so that they could hold onto less skilled but local workers What should the UK similarly do to show that it has UK workers interests at heart in this matter? It seems to be the case that the EU can do anything it likes to protect its workers interests, but it is not OK if the UK tries to do the same.

Interesting, I'd love to know when / where this was, in 10+ years I have never heard of any CORE staff member getting sacked other than for gross misconduct.

If they were flexible workforce / temp staff then sorry but they are there to be cut when there is a flex in demand.

I do not know for certain, but your last sentence may well be the case. It was my friends son commenting on the fact that they were being sacked, when less qualified locals were being retained, that made him feel somewhat disgruntled in this instance.

[chrispmartha]

Tuna said:

Remainers are strangely insistent that people should only conduct their affairs within the UK.

Why are you constantly making things up?

With this and your claim that remainers think Airbus (and others) are or should be doing what’s best for the UK

Who has said these things? Let alone be insistent about them.

[chrispmartha]

crankedup said:

. Perhaps the U.K. will have a deal with the EU that will ensure continued and sensible supply to satisfy all?

Perhaps they will, but Airbus’ statement related to a ‘no deal’ situation.

[bitchstewie]

Tuna said:

bhstewie said:

There seems to be a slew of prominent Leave supporters who are saying one thing and doing another - do you ever wonder why?

Trading and working in the global market is *exactly* what most of the Brexit proponents have been calling for throughout this whole ridiculous exercise.

It's getting a bit hard to tell who the 'Little Englanders' are, when Remainers are strangely insistent that people should only conduct their affairs within the UK. And the overblown claims that Leave supporters are somehow 'not supporting Britain' by actually wanting to do business with the wide world are stunning hypocrisy from the people who are apparently so keen on FoM, international investment and all that. Does it not occur to you that both sides actually have visions of working on the global stage, albeit with different political infrastructure behind them?

I'm sure they do, but sorry, I think it looks like you're saying one thing and doing another when you say that Brexit will be the best thing ever for Britain right before moving your HQ to Singapore, calling for a hard Brexit whilst warning your financial clients of the risks of Brexit uncertainty, or applying for French residency etc.

In isolation it's all a series of little one offs but as a whole do you honestly not think it looks slightly hypocritical to be saying something is great whilst simultaneously taking steps to insulate yourself from any negative consequences from doing it?

[gooner1]

Mrr T said:

MDMetal said:

Fittster said:

MDMetal said:

Does anyone who voted leave seriously think the day after we leave it'll be milk and honey?

Why wouldn't they? They politicians supporting leave didn't say things would get worse after leaving.

because contrary to how people are treated by their elected representatives most of them actually have brains and are aware of highs and lows and the difference between long and short term.

Unless you have spoken to all leave voters you have no idea of what they thought. As it is the Leave campaign was clear this would be the easiest deal ever, it would be done in an afternoon over tea (and maybe cake), they need us more than we need them. Based on this I would suggest most leave voters expected leaving to have no negative economic effect. If leave had campaigned on a clear platform that the likeliest brexit exit was without an withdrawal agreement and every one should expect to be worst off and won. Then you would have a point. Then again I do not think leave would have won with that strategy.

Should be were the words used, not would be.
But you already knew that.
As for most leave voters not expecting no negative economic effect , you are just fooling
yourself with statements like that.

Following your premise of a clear campaign platform, I wonder how many more leave vote
would have been cast were it not for the incessant Project Fear media assault?

[stichill99]

Superlightr Fantastic summary,I understand Europe now

[ATG]

Think I saw Macron in FRA1 escorted by the Met on Fleet St at about 10am today. Don't see anything in the news or on his agenda today about a visit to London, so perhaps it was someone else, but it looked a lot like him.

[gooner1]

chrispmartha said:

Of course they will, no one has said otherwise

Happy days then.

[MDMetal]

Mrr T said:

MDMetal said:

Fittster said:

MDMetal said:

Does anyone who voted leave seriously think the day after we leave it'll be milk and honey?

Why wouldn't they? They politicians supporting leave didn't say things would get worse after leaving.

because contrary to how people are treated by their elected representatives most of them actually have brains and are aware of highs and lows and the difference between long and short term.

Unless you have spoken to all leave voters you have no idea of what they thought. As it is the Leave campaign was clear this would be the easiest deal ever, it would be done in an afternoon over tea (and maybe cake), they need us more than we need them. Based on this I would suggest most leave voters expected leaving to have no negative economic effect. If leave had campaigned on a clear platform that the likeliest brexit exit was without an withdrawal agreement and every one should expect to be worst off and won. Then you would have a point. Then again I do not think leave would have won with that strategy.

You've fallen into the trap of thinking the electorate listen and trust MP's. you're assuming people voted to leave because of something they were told not because of things they thought. This is why there's some much noise around more votes or telling people they won't get what they were promised. In reality I doubt a huge proportion of leave voters made their mind up based on anything said during the campaign so their unlikely to be changed by anything said after.