FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > brexit bonus ?
brexit bonus ?
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *eavenNhell OP Couple
over a year ago
carrbrook stalybridge |
https://www.facebook.com/stratford4europe/photos/a.271305096651042/963223824125829/?type=3&eid=ARA35PRbiuYt8AQTsPVWJAGHmekLG7KO8pykWfh-LQEaaYO8E43FuicVAk8PdY_pLOmDT1ObOChYxe9e&__xts__%5B0%5D=68.ARBuPaAk_RflxS6f41Of2R_S3F6bDPi4ULxC4uSdIUkjpUmdCifTdqMRzDV8QDYXaEoB0oFXNem-azv6CCUVcEIHbMEkucGayxTDQXU3um2pD_WD58wls0_aP3epM4VdpkPKmrMeU0dsG33KOk1XeleMbkIP-hL4CjNT4EiifMlV9lZdhv3ljIG1LdQYFX1zNIQzw8tFID9_Qm3lm86bt9hUEscM4HCjUHVBIwz0y6COo7cUzzOkDOgDw8x2hcxWPm9GwjV2mTVbgMk8YB9TjbyY46_uL4tQCCDTFSqv-x51jkOIzJ4ffkvjjAdN3zIPwyJNrtUs2R2-ILFNxuub1KiECKBizKKGQyGXCjGzaYXA_79JVoCEkSygLlm6VojR1DJ4BE3Ef9azn_6BDdbbG4feaR3uuWQx5cYj1KgSXCZQv3kbTh3Ih1ioAI6OqphqCXsE_g8wk_JcF6DuVfu8yYba49HKitjlhRv6bkT_55wyKgAUU-XC1ntR6NvKGEQINYZPS6JiEfYlJqRFqsDZ&__tn__=EEHH-R
260 jobs gone at former passport manufacurers de la rue in gateshead |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"https://www.facebook.com/stratford4europe/photos/a.271305096651042/963223824125829/?type=3&eid=ARA35PRbiuYt8AQTsPVWJAGHmekLG7KO8pykWfh-LQEaaYO8E43FuicVAk8PdY_pLOmDT1ObOChYxe9e&__xts__%5B0%5D=68.ARBuPaAk_RflxS6f41Of2R_S3F6bDPi4ULxC4uSdIUkjpUmdCifTdqMRzDV8QDYXaEoB0oFXNem-azv6CCUVcEIHbMEkucGayxTDQXU3um2pD_WD58wls0_aP3epM4VdpkPKmrMeU0dsG33KOk1XeleMbkIP-hL4CjNT4EiifMlV9lZdhv3ljIG1LdQYFX1zNIQzw8tFID9_Qm3lm86bt9hUEscM4HCjUHVBIwz0y6COo7cUzzOkDOgDw8x2hcxWPm9GwjV2mTVbgMk8YB9TjbyY46_uL4tQCCDTFSqv-x51jkOIzJ4ffkvjjAdN3zIPwyJNrtUs2R2-ILFNxuub1KiECKBizKKGQyGXCjGzaYXA_79JVoCEkSygLlm6VojR1DJ4BE3Ef9azn_6BDdbbG4feaR3uuWQx5cYj1KgSXCZQv3kbTh3Ih1ioAI6OqphqCXsE_g8wk_JcF6DuVfu8yYba49HKitjlhRv6bkT_55wyKgAUU-XC1ntR6NvKGEQINYZPS6JiEfYlJqRFqsDZ&__tn__=EEHH-R
260 jobs gone at former passport manufacurers de la rue in gateshead "
Now that ladies and gentlemen IS a link     |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"https://www.facebook.com/stratford4europe/photos/a.271305096651042/963223824125829/?type=3&eid=ARA35PRbiuYt8AQTsPVWJAGHmekLG7KO8pykWfh-LQEaaYO8E43FuicVAk8PdY_pLOmDT1ObOChYxe9e&__xts__%5B0%5D=68.ARBuPaAk_RflxS6f41Of2R_S3F6bDPi4ULxC4uSdIUkjpUmdCifTdqMRzDV8QDYXaEoB0oFXNem-azv6CCUVcEIHbMEkucGayxTDQXU3um2pD_WD58wls0_aP3epM4VdpkPKmrMeU0dsG33KOk1XeleMbkIP-hL4CjNT4EiifMlV9lZdhv3ljIG1LdQYFX1zNIQzw8tFID9_Qm3lm86bt9hUEscM4HCjUHVBIwz0y6COo7cUzzOkDOgDw8x2hcxWPm9GwjV2mTVbgMk8YB9TjbyY46_uL4tQCCDTFSqv-x51jkOIzJ4ffkvjjAdN3zIPwyJNrtUs2R2-ILFNxuub1KiECKBizKKGQyGXCjGzaYXA_79JVoCEkSygLlm6VojR1DJ4BE3Ef9azn_6BDdbbG4feaR3uuWQx5cYj1KgSXCZQv3kbTh3Ih1ioAI6OqphqCXsE_g8wk_JcF6DuVfu8yYba49HKitjlhRv6bkT_55wyKgAUU-XC1ntR6NvKGEQINYZPS6JiEfYlJqRFqsDZ&__tn__=EEHH-R
260 jobs gone at former passport manufacurers de la rue in gateshead
Now that ladies and gentlemen IS a link "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"https://www.facebook.com/stratford4europe/photos/a.271305096651042/963223824125829/?type=3&eid=ARA35PRbiuYt8AQTsPVWJAGHmekLG7KO8pykWfh-LQEaaYO8E43FuicVAk8PdY_pLOmDT1ObOChYxe9e&__xts__%5B0%5D=68.ARBuPaAk_RflxS6f41Of2R_S3F6bDPi4ULxC4uSdIUkjpUmdCifTdqMRzDV8QDYXaEoB0oFXNem-azv6CCUVcEIHbMEkucGayxTDQXU3um2pD_WD58wls0_aP3epM4VdpkPKmrMeU0dsG33KOk1XeleMbkIP-hL4CjNT4EiifMlV9lZdhv3ljIG1LdQYFX1zNIQzw8tFID9_Qm3lm86bt9hUEscM4HCjUHVBIwz0y6COo7cUzzOkDOgDw8x2hcxWPm9GwjV2mTVbgMk8YB9TjbyY46_uL4tQCCDTFSqv-x51jkOIzJ4ffkvjjAdN3zIPwyJNrtUs2R2-ILFNxuub1KiECKBizKKGQyGXCjGzaYXA_79JVoCEkSygLlm6VojR1DJ4BE3Ef9azn_6BDdbbG4feaR3uuWQx5cYj1KgSXCZQv3kbTh3Ih1ioAI6OqphqCXsE_g8wk_JcF6DuVfu8yYba49HKitjlhRv6bkT_55wyKgAUU-XC1ntR6NvKGEQINYZPS6JiEfYlJqRFqsDZ&__tn__=EEHH-R
260 jobs gone at former passport manufacurers de la rue in gateshead
Now that ladies and gentlemen IS a link "
Ha, does anyone have a more friendly link |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The company in gateshead won't be making any more passports as it's been outsourced to an EU company
They're also allegedly the wrong colour and made from a substance resembling tissue paper.
I guess the government is not going to support British companies after all even in the most prominent issue
Ah well, they can always blame Covid for all the job losses. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The company in gateshead won't be making any more passports as it's been outsourced to an EU company
They're also allegedly the wrong colour and made from a substance resembling tissue paper.
I guess the government is not going to support British companies after all even in the most prominent issue
Ah well, they can always blame Covid for all the job losses."
Brilliant |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously  ) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )"
That's the problem. There are a lot of fanatics that want absolutely nothing to do with Europe, hence praising the joke of a man that is Trump. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
That's the problem. There are a lot of fanatics that want absolutely nothing to do with Europe, hence praising the joke of a man that is Trump."
My comment was actually towards the other side and lionels reference to the 'protect british jobs' slogan. They are quick to jump on anything they think discredist brexit but this particular thing actually discredits their doom and gloom attitude and is giving them what their campaign was supposedly fighting for (trade withing europe).
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )"
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
That's the problem. There are a lot of fanatics that want absolutely nothing to do with Europe, hence praising the joke of a man that is Trump.
My comment was actually towards the other side and lionels reference to the 'protect british jobs' slogan. They are quick to jump on anything they think discredist brexit but this particular thing actually discredits their doom and gloom attitude and is giving them what their campaign was supposedly fighting for (trade withing europe).
"
You dont think it discredits Brexit just a tad? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
That's the problem. There are a lot of fanatics that want absolutely nothing to do with Europe, hence praising the joke of a man that is Trump.
My comment was actually towards the other side and lionels reference to the 'protect british jobs' slogan. They are quick to jump on anything they think discredist brexit but this particular thing actually discredits their doom and gloom attitude and is giving them what their campaign was supposedly fighting for (trade withing europe).
"
Discredit Brexit?? It's dicrediting itself day by day!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up"
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
That's the problem. There are a lot of fanatics that want absolutely nothing to do with Europe, hence praising the joke of a man that is Trump.
My comment was actually towards the other side and lionels reference to the 'protect british jobs' slogan. They are quick to jump on anything they think discredist brexit but this particular thing actually discredits their doom and gloom attitude and is giving them what their campaign was supposedly fighting for (trade withing europe).
You dont think it discredits Brexit just a tad?"
No. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy."
It may be too you but it means different things to different people.
To a lot of people it's about immigration.
The brexiteers shamefully played the patriotism card which is why the story above is so embarrassing.
And I've said this a million times now..how were we controlled by the eu when we had the power of veto?
You realise we have beauracracy in this country. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
"
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer."
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
It may be too you but it means different things to different people.
To a lot of people it's about immigration.
The brexiteers shamefully played the patriotism card which is why the story above is so embarrassing.
And I've said this a million times now..how were we controlled by the eu when we had the power of veto?
You realise we have beauracracy in this country."
No, the fundamental basis of brexit is leaving the European union. You can try to appropriate what you want to it individuals opinions on why it should happen are just opinions, of which there are many. If you want to judge everybody that wanted brexit by the worst of the bunch then that just proves that you are just clutching at straws.
As for vetos, are you saying that we could just refuse anything and everything, without consequences? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?"
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
It may be too you but it means different things to different people.
To a lot of people it's about immigration.
The brexiteers shamefully played the patriotism card which is why the story above is so embarrassing.
And I've said this a million times now..how were we controlled by the eu when we had the power of veto?
You realise we have beauracracy in this country.
No, the fundamental basis of brexit is leaving the European union. You can try to appropriate what you want to it individuals opinions on why it should happen are just opinions, of which there are many. If you want to judge everybody that wanted brexit by the worst of the bunch then that just proves that you are just clutching at straws.
As for vetos, are you saying that we could just refuse anything and everything, without consequences?"
No..are you suggesting that every single person voted for Brexit for the same reasons you did.
Lots of people voted for Brexit (especially in the north)for immigration reasons.
Why would we refuse anything that was beneficial to us?
I was saying that we meekly just did everything the eu told us is a myth as we had the power of a veto..and as brexiteers keep telling us..we were one of the most powerful nation states.
That's why we didnt join the euro surely? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
It may be too you but it means different things to different people.
To a lot of people it's about immigration.
The brexiteers shamefully played the patriotism card which is why the story above is so embarrassing.
And I've said this a million times now..how were we controlled by the eu when we had the power of veto?
You realise we have beauracracy in this country.
No, the fundamental basis of brexit is leaving the European union. You can try to appropriate what you want to it individuals opinions on why it should happen are just opinions, of which there are many. If you want to judge everybody that wanted brexit by the worst of the bunch then that just proves that you are just clutching at straws.
As for vetos, are you saying that we could just refuse anything and everything, without consequences?
No..are you suggesting that every single person voted for Brexit for the same reasons you did.
Lots of people voted for Brexit (especially in the north)for immigration reasons.
Why would we refuse anything that was beneficial to us?
I was saying that we meekly just did everything the eu told us is a myth as we had the power of a veto..and as brexiteers keep telling us..we were one of the most powerful nation states.
That's why we didnt join the euro surely?"
Everone did vote for the same reason, to leave the eu. (BTW, i didnt vote leave..). Their motivations for that will vary.
As i said before, trying to lump every one into the same category is disingenuous, you even conceded this when you said it means different thing to different people yet you continue to do it, basically just parroting the brexiteers are gammons narative from the front pages of the daily rags. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
It may be too you but it means different things to different people.
To a lot of people it's about immigration.
The brexiteers shamefully played the patriotism card which is why the story above is so embarrassing.
And I've said this a million times now..how were we controlled by the eu when we had the power of veto?
You realise we have beauracracy in this country.
No, the fundamental basis of brexit is leaving the European union. You can try to appropriate what you want to it individuals opinions on why it should happen are just opinions, of which there are many. If you want to judge everybody that wanted brexit by the worst of the bunch then that just proves that you are just clutching at straws.
As for vetos, are you saying that we could just refuse anything and everything, without consequences?
No..are you suggesting that every single person voted for Brexit for the same reasons you did.
Lots of people voted for Brexit (especially in the north)for immigration reasons.
Why would we refuse anything that was beneficial to us?
I was saying that we meekly just did everything the eu told us is a myth as we had the power of a veto..and as brexiteers keep telling us..we were one of the most powerful nation states.
That's why we didnt join the euro surely?
Everone did vote for the same reason, to leave the eu. (BTW, i didnt vote leave..). Their motivations for that will vary.
As i said before, trying to lump every one into the same category is disingenuous, you even conceded this when you said it means different thing to different people yet you continue to do it, basically just parroting the brexiteers are gammons narative from the front pages of the daily rags."
Sorry that's what I meant their intentions.
I'll be honest in the last 3 years I have not heard one convincing argument about leaving.Instead all I've heard is vague noises about taking back control,and not being told what to do by Europe and stopping immigrants coming in ,so to be perfectly honest with you,its not easy having a positive interpretation of the average leave voter. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
It may be too you but it means different things to different people.
To a lot of people it's about immigration.
The brexiteers shamefully played the patriotism card which is why the story above is so embarrassing.
And I've said this a million times now..how were we controlled by the eu when we had the power of veto?
You realise we have beauracracy in this country.
No, the fundamental basis of brexit is leaving the European union. You can try to appropriate what you want to it individuals opinions on why it should happen are just opinions, of which there are many. If you want to judge everybody that wanted brexit by the worst of the bunch then that just proves that you are just clutching at straws.
As for vetos, are you saying that we could just refuse anything and everything, without consequences?
No..are you suggesting that every single person voted for Brexit for the same reasons you did.
Lots of people voted for Brexit (especially in the north)for immigration reasons.
Why would we refuse anything that was beneficial to us?
I was saying that we meekly just did everything the eu told us is a myth as we had the power of a veto..and as brexiteers keep telling us..we were one of the most powerful nation states.
That's why we didnt join the euro surely?
Everone did vote for the same reason, to leave the eu. (BTW, i didnt vote leave..). Their motivations for that will vary.
As i said before, trying to lump every one into the same category is disingenuous, you even conceded this when you said it means different thing to different people yet you continue to do it, basically just parroting the brexiteers are gammons narative from the front pages of the daily rags.
Sorry that's what I meant their intentions.
I'll be honest in the last 3 years I have not heard one convincing argument about leaving.Instead all I've heard is vague noises about taking back control,and not being told what to do by Europe and stopping immigrants coming in ,so to be perfectly honest with you,its not easy having a positive interpretation of the average leave voter."
I think that most rational leavers (and remainers) dont really engage in conversation as they are just labeled as a gammon and/or racist and get ridiculed or face being browbeaten over their views and opinions.
The actual gammons and racists dont care as they view remainers with the same contempt they recieve and are willing to trade insults and narrow minded opinions with their counterparts hence the whole situation looking like a farce. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ony 2016Man
over a year ago
Huddersfield /derby cinemas |
Today is 23 June 2020 , when I read the headline of this post " Brexit Bonus " my initial thought / hope was that , at last , 4 years after the vote ( 23 June 2016 ) someone had finally found a brexit bonus ,,alas , no |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
De La Rue have been making banknote and security papers for international markets for a long time. The UK passport market is hardly worth their while. As more countries move over to polymer banknotes, De La Rue are not going to worry about piddling little orders like the UK passport one. They need to concentrate on banknotes and other high volume security papers. The volume just wasnt there for UK passports. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on. "
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings? "
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Taken from Twitter...
BREXIT UPDATE:
Rees-Mogg: “Open funds in Ireland because Brexit"
Lawson: “I want French residency because Brexit”
Farage: “German passports for my kids and pension for me”
Dyson: “Moving HQ to Singapore”
Boris Johnson’s dad: “I want French passport” |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer."
No rose collared spectacles here.
I do know about De la Rue actually as I used to do business with them a long time ago,
You’ve just said in this case the the majority of the money will possibly leave the country which is my point.
The jobs would have stayed and if after the majority of the money had left as you say, some would stay in the UK. Giving the contract to a foreign producer is a guarantee 100% will leave Britain. That’s our tax payments.
I can give another example as my family we’re involved. Contracts were issued for joint surveys of the seabed in the North Sea. The countries involved were The Netherlands, Norway and the U.K.
The contract lasted for just under a year at £30k + per day for each ship per country with each country responsible for charters in their sector.
The Netherlands ship was a chartered from the The Netherlands. The Norwegian ship yes, you guessed from a Norway. The British ship at a few thousand per day cheaper was chartered from The Republic of Ireland.
The only condition was the Captain had to be British.
The crew were Russian, Singapore and Irish. The Captain lived in Dublin.
Tell me how that is best practice financially for the U.K. tax payer?
The drain on tax contribution is my point! Once it’s gone it’s definitely gone! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority."
The fact that he was given his own press conference? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
No rose collared spectacles here.
I do know about De la Rue actually as I used to do business with them a long time ago,
You’ve just said in this case the the majority of the money will possibly leave the country which is my point.
The jobs would have stayed and if after the majority of the money had left as you say, some would stay in the UK. Giving the contract to a foreign producer is a guarantee 100% will leave Britain. That’s our tax payments.
I can give another example as my family we’re involved. Contracts were issued for joint surveys of the seabed in the North Sea. The countries involved were The Netherlands, Norway and the U.K.
The contract lasted for just under a year at £30k + per day for each ship per country with each country responsible for charters in their sector.
The Netherlands ship was a chartered from the The Netherlands. The Norwegian ship yes, you guessed from a Norway. The British ship at a few thousand per day cheaper was chartered from The Republic of Ireland.
The only condition was the Captain had to be British.
The crew were Russian, Singapore and Irish. The Captain lived in Dublin.
Tell me how that is best practice financially for the U.K. tax payer?
The drain on tax contribution is my point! Once it’s gone it’s definitely gone! "
You are forgetting the fact that the decision saved £120m. The contract value is £260m and de la rues bid being £380m. That means that nearly half of the contract value has be kept in the UK's coffers.
One further thing, the company making them- gemalto, will be creating 70 jobs IN THE UK to manufacture them. The descision on awarding the contract was also governed under EU procurrment law...
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/gemalto-awarded-the-new-passport-contract |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?"
That doesnt prove any authority. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Taken from Twitter...
BREXIT UPDATE:
Rees-Mogg: “Open funds in Ireland because Brexit"
Lawson: “I want French residency because Brexit”
Farage: “German passports for my kids and pension for me”
Dyson: “Moving HQ to Singapore”
Boris Johnson’s dad: “I want French passport”"
What does this actually prove and mean?
I cant be bothered going through all of them but dyson are not moving their headquaters due to brexit and their uk operations remain largely unchanged. They are moving due to incentives and opportunities which are irrespective of brexit. Trying to claim it is because of, or has relevance to Brexit is once again, clutching at straws. Unfortunately remainers love to lap up and parrot things like this without any understanding just to try and score point's. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority."
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout."
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout.
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves? "
Another person who clearly swallowed the 'I couldn't see, so went for a drive' |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout.
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves?
Another person who clearly swallowed the 'I couldn't see, so went for a drive' "
Wrong. I couldn't give a toss if he stays or goes and my impartiality allows me to see the hypocrisy, agenda and blinkered views on both sides. You obviously cant. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout.
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves?
Another person who clearly swallowed the 'I couldn't see, so went for a drive' "
And its interesting to see you go for baseless judgement and attempts to discredit rather than dealing with facts and answering questions. Very typical... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout.
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves?
Another person who clearly swallowed the 'I couldn't see, so went for a drive'
Wrong. I couldn't give a toss if he stays or goes and my impartiality allows me to see the hypocrisy, agenda and blinkered views on both sides. You obviously cant."
Sure can, Alistair Campbell was hideous as well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??"
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout.
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves?
Another person who clearly swallowed the 'I couldn't see, so went for a drive'
Wrong. I couldn't give a toss if he stays or goes and my impartiality allows me to see the hypocrisy, agenda and blinkered views on both sides. You obviously cant.
Sure can, Alistair Campbell was hideous as well. "
Did you post about him on the internet every day? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout.
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves?
Another person who clearly swallowed the 'I couldn't see, so went for a drive'
Wrong. I couldn't give a toss if he stays or goes and my impartiality allows me to see the hypocrisy, agenda and blinkered views on both sides. You obviously cant.
Sure can, Alistair Campbell was hideous as well.
Did you post about him on the internet every day?"
And btw, disliking Alistair Campbell hardly makes you impartial. He is despised by many, including labour die hards. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
"
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day."
How cute, you think voting takes courage.
At least you (indirectly) answered one question, you prefer to try and discredit the person and not tbe argument. As i said, typical...
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *estivalMan
over a year ago
borehamwood |
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day."
ah i see your still telling people they have no balls if they dont vote lol mmmm takes massive balls to stick a cross in a box |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day.
ah i see your still telling people they have no balls if they dont vote lol mmmm takes massive balls to stick a cross in a box "
And you both seem to struggle. How odd |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day.
How cute, you think voting takes courage.
At least you (indirectly) answered one question, you prefer to try and discredit the person and not tbe argument. As i said, typical...
"
Your argument is null and void. If you don't vote your opinion is useless. Easiest thing in the world to moan about stuff and not take a stance. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day.
How cute, you think voting takes courage.
At least you (indirectly) answered one question, you prefer to try and discredit the person and not tbe argument. As i said, typical...
Your argument is null and void. If you don't vote your opinion is useless. Easiest thing in the world to moan about stuff and not take a stance. "
Me not voting has no relevance to the argument or the facts. All you are doing is avoiding, deflecting and trying to discredit.
I have taken a stance, and i am standing by it and willing to put it out there and be judged for it.
You dont know and haven't even asked what my stance is. But true to form you rush towards a conclusion on something you dont have the full facts on. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day.
How cute, you think voting takes courage.
At least you (indirectly) answered one question, you prefer to try and discredit the person and not tbe argument. As i said, typical...
Your argument is null and void. If you don't vote your opinion is useless. Easiest thing in the world to moan about stuff and not take a stance.
Me not voting has no relevance to the argument or the facts. All you are doing is avoiding, deflecting and trying to discredit.
I have taken a stance, and i am standing by it and willing to put it out there and be judged for it.
You dont know and haven't even asked what my stance is. But true to form you rush towards a conclusion on something you dont have the full facts on."
You didn't vote fella, it's irrelevant. It's like telling a friend to order you anything off the menu, then moaning when it turns up and it wasn't what you wanted |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day.
How cute, you think voting takes courage.
At least you (indirectly) answered one question, you prefer to try and discredit the person and not tbe argument. As i said, typical...
Your argument is null and void. If you don't vote your opinion is useless. Easiest thing in the world to moan about stuff and not take a stance.
Me not voting has no relevance to the argument or the facts. All you are doing is avoiding, deflecting and trying to discredit.
I have taken a stance, and i am standing by it and willing to put it out there and be judged for it.
You dont know and haven't even asked what my stance is. But true to form you rush towards a conclusion on something you dont have the full facts on.
You didn't vote fella, it's irrelevant. It's like telling a friend to order you anything off the menu, then moaning when it turns up and it wasn't what you wanted "
I see it more as a friend demanding to order from somewhere shit, even though you have told them and then watching their disgust as they eat it whilst i enjoy the food i cooked myself.
Anyway, what is irrelevant is whether i voted or not. Either way the facts are still the same. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day.
How cute, you think voting takes courage.
At least you (indirectly) answered one question, you prefer to try and discredit the person and not tbe argument. As i said, typical...
Your argument is null and void. If you don't vote your opinion is useless. Easiest thing in the world to moan about stuff and not take a stance.
Me not voting has no relevance to the argument or the facts. All you are doing is avoiding, deflecting and trying to discredit.
I have taken a stance, and i am standing by it and willing to put it out there and be judged for it.
You dont know and haven't even asked what my stance is. But true to form you rush towards a conclusion on something you dont have the full facts on.
You didn't vote fella, it's irrelevant. It's like telling a friend to order you anything off the menu, then moaning when it turns up and it wasn't what you wanted
I see it more as a friend demanding to order from somewhere shit, even though you have told them and then watching their disgust as they eat it whilst i enjoy the food i cooked myself.
Anyway, what is irrelevant is whether i voted or not. Either way the facts are still the same. "
Choose something on the menu, plenty options. If it's so bad, leave the restaurant |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day.
How cute, you think voting takes courage.
At least you (indirectly) answered one question, you prefer to try and discredit the person and not tbe argument. As i said, typical...
Your argument is null and void. If you don't vote your opinion is useless. Easiest thing in the world to moan about stuff and not take a stance.
Me not voting has no relevance to the argument or the facts. All you are doing is avoiding, deflecting and trying to discredit.
I have taken a stance, and i am standing by it and willing to put it out there and be judged for it.
You dont know and haven't even asked what my stance is. But true to form you rush towards a conclusion on something you dont have the full facts on.
You didn't vote fella, it's irrelevant. It's like telling a friend to order you anything off the menu, then moaning when it turns up and it wasn't what you wanted
I see it more as a friend demanding to order from somewhere shit, even though you have told them and then watching their disgust as they eat it whilst i enjoy the food i cooked myself.
Anyway, what is irrelevant is whether i voted or not. Either way the facts are still the same. "
Also, i haven't moaned about the outcome of the votes once. You dont even know which 'side' I'm on . Though im sure you will jump in with a baseless assumption. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day.
How cute, you think voting takes courage.
At least you (indirectly) answered one question, you prefer to try and discredit the person and not tbe argument. As i said, typical...
Your argument is null and void. If you don't vote your opinion is useless. Easiest thing in the world to moan about stuff and not take a stance.
Me not voting has no relevance to the argument or the facts. All you are doing is avoiding, deflecting and trying to discredit.
I have taken a stance, and i am standing by it and willing to put it out there and be judged for it.
You dont know and haven't even asked what my stance is. But true to form you rush towards a conclusion on something you dont have the full facts on.
You didn't vote fella, it's irrelevant. It's like telling a friend to order you anything off the menu, then moaning when it turns up and it wasn't what you wanted
I see it more as a friend demanding to order from somewhere shit, even though you have told them and then watching their disgust as they eat it whilst i enjoy the food i cooked myself.
Anyway, what is irrelevant is whether i voted or not. Either way the facts are still the same.
Also, i haven't moaned about the outcome of the votes once. You dont even know which 'side' I'm on . Though im sure you will jump in with a baseless assumption. "
You are not on a side. Everything is shit, your words. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So, did you vote??
Still going down the character assassination road are we....?
No. I dont vote for government and i didnt vote for brexit. (Awaits the "your opinion doesnt count" bullshit)
Full of opinions but not the courage to vote, on anything. Superb. Have a good day.
How cute, you think voting takes courage.
At least you (indirectly) answered one question, you prefer to try and discredit the person and not tbe argument. As i said, typical...
Your argument is null and void. If you don't vote your opinion is useless. Easiest thing in the world to moan about stuff and not take a stance.
Me not voting has no relevance to the argument or the facts. All you are doing is avoiding, deflecting and trying to discredit.
I have taken a stance, and i am standing by it and willing to put it out there and be judged for it.
You dont know and haven't even asked what my stance is. But true to form you rush towards a conclusion on something you dont have the full facts on.
You didn't vote fella, it's irrelevant. It's like telling a friend to order you anything off the menu, then moaning when it turns up and it wasn't what you wanted
I see it more as a friend demanding to order from somewhere shit, even though you have told them and then watching their disgust as they eat it whilst i enjoy the food i cooked myself.
Anyway, what is irrelevant is whether i voted or not. Either way the facts are still the same.
Also, i haven't moaned about the outcome of the votes once. You dont even know which 'side' I'm on . Though im sure you will jump in with a baseless assumption.
You are not on a side. Everything is shit, your words."
How surprising, you take some words out of context, attribute your own meaning to suit and then declare it as fact. There seems to be a pattern here..
And you have still avoided the topic and the points within and tried to derail and discredit it, and me. Another common trait of those that can't rationalise or debate. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Does it say ‘Made in France’ on the blue passport? This is Brexit in a nutshell.
In the same vein, you have Bojo’s father applying for French nationality.
Laughing stock.
"
As I understand it, the passports are printed in Poland. So it should say made in Poland on the cover.
Were I that company, I would so put that on there...
;-) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )"
Except that is directly related to BREXIT. The reason why the Gateshead company could not compete on price with the EU one used is because, post BREXIT, it could not guarantee that it would not have to pay import duties on the cotton paper used which is made in Turkey. The EU company that got the contract could guarantee its price because it new that it would not have to pay any import duties on the same cotton paper from Turkey.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy."
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Taken from Twitter...
BREXIT UPDATE:
Rees-Mogg: “Open funds in Ireland because Brexit"
Lawson: “I want French residency because Brexit”
Farage: “German passports for my kids and pension for me”
Dyson: “Moving HQ to Singapore”
Boris Johnson’s dad: “I want French passport”"
To be fair to Johnson's dad he did publicly come out against BREXIT, as have his brother and sister too.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Except that is directly related to BREXIT. The reason why the Gateshead company could not compete on price with the EU one used is because, post BREXIT, it could not guarantee that it would not have to pay import duties on the cotton paper used which is made in Turkey. The EU company that got the contract could guarantee its price because it new that it would not have to pay any import duties on the same cotton paper from Turkey.
"
At last! A reasoned response.
You are quite right, i should have chosen my words better.
The blue passport is a result of brexit and i will take your word for it that cotton prices could have factored into the higher quote, however i doubt it would be to the tune of £120m.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout.
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves? "
Actually yes, they do.
Alastair Campbell, Sir Bernard Ingham.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
"
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout.
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves?
Actually yes, they do.
Alastair Campbell, Sir Bernard Ingham.
"
Not even nearly close to the attention dc got/gets. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Except that is directly related to BREXIT. The reason why the Gateshead company could not compete on price with the EU one used is because, post BREXIT, it could not guarantee that it would not have to pay import duties on the cotton paper used which is made in Turkey. The EU company that got the contract could guarantee its price because it new that it would not have to pay any import duties on the same cotton paper from Turkey.
At last! A reasoned response.
You are quite right, i should have chosen my words better.
The blue passport is a result of brexit and i will take your word for it that cotton prices could have factored into the higher quote, however i doubt it would be to the tune of £120m.
"
I don't know if it totally made up the difference in price but, as apart from the cover, that is what the whole passport is made from, I would guess it made up a pretty large part of it.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout.
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves?
Actually yes, they do.
Alastair Campbell, Sir Bernard Ingham.
Not even nearly close to the attention dc got/gets."
Well having been actively involved in campaigns to slam Alistair Campbell and meetings to counter the attacks on Bernard Ingham I can assure that they were just as malicious and targeted to damage. The only difference now is that, with social media, the stories spread wider and quicker.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Except that is directly related to BREXIT. The reason why the Gateshead company could not compete on price with the EU one used is because, post BREXIT, it could not guarantee that it would not have to pay import duties on the cotton paper used which is made in Turkey. The EU company that got the contract could guarantee its price because it new that it would not have to pay any import duties on the same cotton paper from Turkey.
At last! A reasoned response.
You are quite right, i should have chosen my words better.
The blue passport is a result of brexit and i will take your word for it that cotton prices could have factored into the higher quote, however i doubt it would be to the tune of £120m.
I don't know if it totally made up the difference in price but, as apart from the cover, that is what the whole passport is made from, I would guess it made up a pretty large part of it.
"
Its a biometric passport with an embedded data chip. I would imagine that and the other security features are the bulk of the cost. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
What you are saying makes perfect sense but surely the entire raison d'etre of the brexit campaign was we dont need those Europeans..we are better on our own?
No, the only people implying that are either the extremes of the brexit voters, which are the minority, or the people trying to ridicule/discredit brexit.
People want to go on holiday to spain, buy french wine and german cars etc etc. Very few want to completely remove europe from our lives and economy. They just dont want the unelected leaders, (extra) bureaucracy, and so on.
Would that include unelected leaders like Dominic eye test, 260 mile, no child care, Barnard Castle Cummings?
No need to guess your opinion on this and im sure there are plenty that share it however I wonder how many have any proof of him having any actual authority.
The fact that he was given his own press conference?
That doesnt prove any authority.
Do unelected spin doctors normally get their own press conferences?
The fact that the entire gmnt bent over backwards to get him out of trouble suggests he has some clout.
Do spin doctors normally get relentless targeting, vilification, used as a pawn to discredit the government and be requested to explain themselves?
Actually yes, they do.
Alastair Campbell, Sir Bernard Ingham.
Not even nearly close to the attention dc got/gets.
Well having been actively involved in campaigns to slam Alistair Campbell and meetings to counter the attacks on Bernard Ingham I can assure that they were just as malicious and targeted to damage. The only difference now is that, with social media, the stories spread wider and quicker.
"
Also, the circumstances and current situation made it an even bigger story and added extra outrage. Him giving statement on it was both wanted and expected but it isn't an indication of him having any authority or power beyond his station. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?"
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote "
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic."
As you avoid the polling booth |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic.
As you avoid the polling booth "
You've proven my point beautifully. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic.
As you avoid the polling booth
You've proven my point beautifully. "
Maybe you can muster the get up and go to vote next time you feel so strongly. Probably not. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic.
As you avoid the polling booth
You've proven my point beautifully.
Maybe you can muster the get up and go to vote next time you feel so strongly. Probably not."
Anything usefull to contribute or are you all out of mental capacity?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic.
As you avoid the polling booth
You've proven my point beautifully.
Maybe you can muster the get up and go to vote next time you feel so strongly. Probably not.
Anything usefull to contribute or are you all out of mental capacity?
"
Strange, coming from a bloke who was letting the EU tell him what to think |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
They were telling us what to listen to apparently. Who would of thought? Daily Mail has done its job on you hasn't it? For somebody with such strong opinions you have been very easily decieved. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic.
As you avoid the polling booth
You've proven my point beautifully.
Maybe you can muster the get up and go to vote next time you feel so strongly. Probably not.
Anything usefull to contribute or are you all out of mental capacity?
Strange, coming from a bloke who was letting the EU tell him what to think "
Where is your proof of that? Oh yeah, another out context quote from an analogy used to iterate a point..
Once again your argument is bullshit that you think scores you points. Trouble is its fooling nobody, and you already forfeited the game... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic.
As you avoid the polling booth
You've proven my point beautifully.
Maybe you can muster the get up and go to vote next time you feel so strongly. Probably not.
Anything usefull to contribute or are you all out of mental capacity?
Strange, coming from a bloke who was letting the EU tell him what to think
Where is your proof of that? Oh yeah, another out context quote from an analogy used to iterate a point..
Once again your argument is bullshit that you think scores you points. Trouble is its fooling nobody, and you already forfeited the game... "
It's literally what you said... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic.
As you avoid the polling booth
You've proven my point beautifully.
Maybe you can muster the get up and go to vote next time you feel so strongly. Probably not.
Anything usefull to contribute or are you all out of mental capacity?
Strange, coming from a bloke who was letting the EU tell him what to think
Where is your proof of that? Oh yeah, another out context quote from an analogy used to iterate a point..
Once again your argument is bullshit that you think scores you points. Trouble is its fooling nobody, and you already forfeited the game...
It's literally what you said..."
Perhaps learn the difference between an analogy and an opinion.
Nowhere in there does it state or imply that i let the eu tell me what to think. Infact it diesnt even contain the word 'think'. That is just another one of you fabrications. So, no. Its not literally what i said. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic.
As you avoid the polling booth
You've proven my point beautifully.
Maybe you can muster the get up and go to vote next time you feel so strongly. Probably not.
Anything usefull to contribute or are you all out of mental capacity?
Strange, coming from a bloke who was letting the EU tell him what to think
Where is your proof of that? Oh yeah, another out context quote from an analogy used to iterate a point..
Once again your argument is bullshit that you think scores you points. Trouble is its fooling nobody, and you already forfeited the game...
It's literally what you said...
Perhaps learn the difference between an analogy and an opinion.
Nowhere in there does it state or imply that i let the eu tell me what to think. Infact it diesnt even contain the word 'think'. That is just another one of you fabrications. So, no. Its not literally what i said."
Very odd analogy then if what you stated has no bearing on the point you are trying to make. Very confusing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Anyway, as entertaining as this has been, you crack on with moaning about stuff,so passionately that you don't even have the conviction to simply put a tick in a box. Have a marvelous evening. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
Brexit is supposed be about promoting British manufacturing and British jobs and so this sets a poor example regardless of which side of brexit you claim to be on.
Manufacturing the glorious blue passport proclaimed by Boris in any country other than the UK and in a different colour is a fairly big pr fk up
Brexit is about leaving EU control and bureaucracy.
And replacing that EU bureaucracy with a lot more of our own. Brilliant!
Would you let someone dictate every aspect of what you personally do so you dont have to think, or would you rather make your own decisions on what you can eat, drive, listen to etc?
Felt so strongly...but didn't vote
Didnt you just say i don't have a side?
Maybe one day you will make a valid assumption, i wouldnt bet on it though as you are too busy sniping and running from the questions, fact and off topic.
As you avoid the polling booth
You've proven my point beautifully.
Maybe you can muster the get up and go to vote next time you feel so strongly. Probably not.
Anything usefull to contribute or are you all out of mental capacity?
Strange, coming from a bloke who was letting the EU tell him what to think
Where is your proof of that? Oh yeah, another out context quote from an analogy used to iterate a point..
Once again your argument is bullshit that you think scores you points. Trouble is its fooling nobody, and you already forfeited the game...
It's literally what you said...
Perhaps learn the difference between an analogy and an opinion.
Nowhere in there does it state or imply that i let the eu tell me what to think. Infact it diesnt even contain the word 'think'. That is just another one of you fabrications. So, no. Its not literally what i said.
Very odd analogy then if what you stated has no bearing on the point you are trying to make. Very confusing. "
Im sorry if its too difficult for you. This might help.
Analogy -
a comparison between one thing and another, typically for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
My analogy was an accentuated simplification of the reasoning behind replacing eu beurocracy with our own.
Ps, incase i am moving to fast for you -
Accentuate - to make (something) more prominent or noticeable
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )"
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
"
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
"
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The company in gateshead won't be making any more passports as it's been outsourced to an EU company
They're also allegedly the wrong colour and made from a substance resembling tissue paper.
I guess the government is not going to support British companies after all even in the most prominent issue
Ah well, they can always blame Covid for all the job losses."
You didn't expect them to in the first place, did you? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Work had to be rendered for under EU law french company won the tender as labour( Blair) didn't ask for exception when agreements were signed same happened to Gallagher's over hand rolling tobacco work now being done in Poland |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *exy7Man
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
"
There are many ways to look at Brexit.
The economical question for me is not the most important aspect.
Symbolically, raising the middle finger at our European friends who are culturally very close to us with a very similar way of life to kiss Trump's ass and depend on a country (the US) that gets more and more ridiculous with every day that passes saddens me. For the past 50 years, we had got closer to our European friends. People moved to France, Spain etc... and vice -versa. We learnt from each other, we developed close bonds. All this is being thrown away for populist ideas.
For me Brexit is a big vanity project for people who haven't moved on from WW2 and still think we are the centre of the universe - not that we've ever been anyway. It's all misplaced pride and bullshit for people who think British dicks are bigger than everybody else's. Well, they're not.
Time will tell if it was a good decision for the economy. But for me and for the reasons I mentioned above, it is already a disaster and it is the most stupid thing this country could do. We have lost the respect of a lot of our neighbours. It's just embarrassing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
There are many ways to look at Brexit.
The economical question for me is not the most important aspect.
Symbolically, raising the middle finger at our European friends who are culturally very close to us with a very similar way of life to kiss Trump's ass and depend on a country (the US) that gets more and more ridiculous with every day that passes saddens me. For the past 50 years, we had got closer to our European friends. People moved to France, Spain etc... and vice -versa. We learnt from each other, we developed close bonds. All this is being thrown away for populist ideas.
For me Brexit is a big vanity project for people who haven't moved on from WW2 and still think we are the centre of the universe - not that we've ever been anyway. It's all misplaced pride and bullshit for people who think British dicks are bigger than everybody else's. Well, they're not.
Time will tell if it was a good decision for the economy. But for me and for the reasons I mentioned above, it is already a disaster and it is the most stupid thing this country could do. We have lost the respect of a lot of our neighbours. It's just embarrassing."
The whole brexit campaign was based on a mere fraction of all of the relevant issues. There was no real context or explanation of the full implications. Even the people that had every possible peice of information could still only guess what the full implications would be as there is so much reliant on negotiations with unkown outcomes.
People did not know what they where voting for, or against. Though most wont admit it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
No rose collared spectacles here.
I do know about De la Rue actually as I used to do business with them a long time ago,
You’ve just said in this case the the majority of the money will possibly leave the country which is my point.
The jobs would have stayed and if after the majority of the money had left as you say, some would stay in the UK. Giving the contract to a foreign producer is a guarantee 100% will leave Britain. That’s our tax payments.
I can give another example as my family we’re involved. Contracts were issued for joint surveys of the seabed in the North Sea. The countries involved were The Netherlands, Norway and the U.K.
The contract lasted for just under a year at £30k + per day for each ship per country with each country responsible for charters in their sector.
The Netherlands ship was a chartered from the The Netherlands. The Norwegian ship yes, you guessed from a Norway. The British ship at a few thousand per day cheaper was chartered from The Republic of Ireland.
The only condition was the Captain had to be British.
The crew were Russian, Singapore and Irish. The Captain lived in Dublin.
Tell me how that is best practice financially for the U.K. tax payer?
The drain on tax contribution is my point! Once it’s gone it’s definitely gone!
You are forgetting the fact that the decision saved £120m. The contract value is £260m and de la rues bid being £380m. That means that nearly half of the contract value has be kept in the UK's coffers.
One further thing, the company making them- gemalto, will be creating 70 jobs IN THE UK to manufacture them. The descision on awarding the contract was also governed under EU procurrment law...
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/gemalto-awarded-the-new-passport-contract"
Indeed £70 million was saved.
If we assume £40k average wage on those 75 jobs there’s three million back.
That still leaves £257million in the hands of a foreign controlled company. Now Thales the French conglomerate.
Given the example of the charter ships I believe ours is the only country sticking rigidly to the procurement rules.
Leaving the EU will release us from this constraint but it also excludes us from equal treatment in the much bigger market that is Europe.
I’ve yet to see any real benefit from leaving the EU. Replacing one bureaucracy with another doesn't fill me me with confidence and how can adding customs costs make us more competitive?
No trade deals around the world can compete with the richest market on our doorstep.
Nothing short of substantial tax breaks for exporters will convince me to invest further in the UK.
I personally believe the wealth concentration in the south east has caused other areas of the U.K. to suffer and increased the feelings of resentment. This along with the right wing racist news agenda has combined to form the perfect storm to press a self destruct button from which we will struggle to recover.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"This being contracted to another country is disgraceful.
My comment is nothing to do with Brexit.
Even if the U.K. option was 20% more expensive 100% of that cost goes into the U.K. economy. So the taxes we pay out on this contract stay in circulation and eventually go back into the U.K. government.
Giving government money to another country gives 100% of that money to another country and we don’t get a penny back.
Similar to the PPE scandal. paying British factories to manufacture should be mandatory by Government procurement .
It’s not rocket science .
Cheaper is not always best value in the long run.
And British is not always best. De la rue were bot the best option. If the value of keeping the contract in Britain, with then, outweighed the extra money they where trying to charge (£120m) then they would have got the contract.
As it stands, they are a company with financial issues, being investigated by the serious fraud office, have required share holder bailouts and due to having shareholders the majority of the money they would have made from this contract would likely leave the country anyway.
Take off the rose tinted glasses and you might see it clearer.
No rose collared spectacles here.
I do know about De la Rue actually as I used to do business with them a long time ago,
You’ve just said in this case the the majority of the money will possibly leave the country which is my point.
The jobs would have stayed and if after the majority of the money had left as you say, some would stay in the UK. Giving the contract to a foreign producer is a guarantee 100% will leave Britain. That’s our tax payments.
I can give another example as my family we’re involved. Contracts were issued for joint surveys of the seabed in the North Sea. The countries involved were The Netherlands, Norway and the U.K.
The contract lasted for just under a year at £30k + per day for each ship per country with each country responsible for charters in their sector.
The Netherlands ship was a chartered from the The Netherlands. The Norwegian ship yes, you guessed from a Norway. The British ship at a few thousand per day cheaper was chartered from The Republic of Ireland.
The only condition was the Captain had to be British.
The crew were Russian, Singapore and Irish. The Captain lived in Dublin.
Tell me how that is best practice financially for the U.K. tax payer?
The drain on tax contribution is my point! Once it’s gone it’s definitely gone!
You are forgetting the fact that the decision saved £120m. The contract value is £260m and de la rues bid being £380m. That means that nearly half of the contract value has be kept in the UK's coffers.
One further thing, the company making them- gemalto, will be creating 70 jobs IN THE UK to manufacture them. The descision on awarding the contract was also governed under EU procurrment law...
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/gemalto-awarded-the-new-passport-contract
Indeed £70 million was saved.
If we assume £40k average wage on those 75 jobs there’s three million back.
That still leaves £257million in the hands of a foreign controlled company. Now Thales the French conglomerate.
Given the example of the charter ships I believe ours is the only country sticking rigidly to the procurement rules.
Leaving the EU will release us from this constraint but it also excludes us from equal treatment in the much bigger market that is Europe.
I’ve yet to see any real benefit from leaving the EU. Replacing one bureaucracy with another doesn't fill me me with confidence and how can adding customs costs make us more competitive?
No trade deals around the world can compete with the richest market on our doorstep.
Nothing short of substantial tax breaks for exporters will convince me to invest further in the UK.
I personally believe the wealth concentration in the south east has caused other areas of the U.K. to suffer and increased the feelings of resentment. This along with the right wing racist news agenda has combined to form the perfect storm to press a self destruct button from which we will struggle to recover.
"
The money saved is £120m and the contract is for 11 years so the wage you calculated is actually £33m.
That is £153m, of which 120m stays in the public purse.
If de la rue had the contract then there is no guarantee the profits would have stayed in the uk, or even taxed. Despite a company promise on their website to not persue tax avoidance schemes they are under investigation from the serious fraud office for behaving improperly in other aspects of their business.
Regarding your comment about the situation with the container ships. I dont know anything about it but surely if everyone is breaking the rules then surely that negates the benefits of being in the eu? And if we are the only ones playing by the rules then we are losing out by being a part of it? It also makes your claim that we will be excluded from equal treatment a bit nonsensical if we already are being treated unequally. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ackal1Couple
over a year ago
Manchester |
That will teach me to reply after drinking.
You are indeed correct. It is 33 million. Yes the money stays in the public purse, however given their track record it will joint the rest of the 110million being spent on “cheap“ over long term investment.
Do you think it’s correct to source PPE from China over a U.K. manufacturer that’s not covered by any EU restrictions?
I would be very happy to see any bureaucratic benefit emerge after leaving the EU Given the increasing cost of Government over the last 40 years. Sadly I just can’t see it.
My point about the ships was nothing to do with the EU it was to do with the incompetence of our administration.
The survey ship was also contracted by the MOD to work with the Trident submarines, again with Russian crew. National security was not considered as far as I can see and that would have been the perfect reason to award the contract to a U.K. based supplier.
As we outsource more and more of the UK needs in manufacturing we reduce our own countries skill set.
I’m lead to believe the reason we have chosen Chinese and French based companies to oversee the manufacture of our latest Nuclear power station because we no longer have the skill set in the UK to build on our own.
The basic build is being done by UK contractors but after that we outsource. I hope I’m wrong here so if anyone knows please correct me. Lang O’rourke are a main build contractor.
Going forward I believe we must have dynamic government to exploit the tax haven mentality. I’m not convinced with the level of competence I’m seeing but will give them the benefit of the doubt. Rees-Mogg exiting his business seams to show their is no plan as yet.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
"
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"That will teach me to reply after drinking.
You are indeed correct. It is 33 million. Yes the money stays in the public purse, however given their track record it will joint the rest of the 110million being spent on “cheap“ over long term investment.
Do you think it’s correct to source PPE from China over a U.K. manufacturer that’s not covered by any EU restrictions?
I would be very happy to see any bureaucratic benefit emerge after leaving the EU Given the increasing cost of Government over the last 40 years. Sadly I just can’t see it.
My point about the ships was nothing to do with the EU it was to do with the incompetence of our administration.
The survey ship was also contracted by the MOD to work with the Trident submarines, again with Russian crew. National security was not considered as far as I can see and that would have been the perfect reason to award the contract to a U.K. based supplier.
As we outsource more and more of the UK needs in manufacturing we reduce our own countries skill set.
I’m lead to believe the reason we have chosen Chinese and French based companies to oversee the manufacture of our latest Nuclear power station because we no longer have the skill set in the UK to build on our own.
The basic build is being done by UK contractors but after that we outsource. I hope I’m wrong here so if anyone knows please correct me. Lang O’rourke are a main build contractor.
Going forward I believe we must have dynamic government to exploit the tax haven mentality. I’m not convinced with the level of competence I’m seeing but will give them the benefit of the doubt. Rees-Mogg exiting his business seams to show their is no plan as yet.
"
Do we know the reasons why we chose to purchase ppe from china? I would prefer we made them ourselves and i am sure the government would as it would be good pr and the money would stay in our economy.
Again, with regards to the rising cost if government, do we know why the cost has risen? Is it the rise in population needing governance? The rise of inflation? Added complication due to the world becoming more complicated? Or is it just incompetence and wastage?
I personally dont see your example of us playing by the rules as incompetance. Its us doing the right thing and the eu taking the piss. Remember the horror and outrage when it was suggested we dont play by the rules and withold the eu divorce bill?
We do have a shortage of skills and capability in the uk, we are too reliant on cheap foreign labour and exploiting our housing industry for easy money leaving us with artificially high prices. Tgis is the governments fault but the people have been happily complicit in it as well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years."
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *exy7Man
over a year ago
Bristol |
When the tories have had enough blaming everyone (migrants, EU, the Marxist unions etc...) They might start looking at themselves one day and realise they are the reason for the vast majority of the problems we have in this country, including Brexit. They’re running out of scapegoats. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years.
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate? "
Well its like this..the tories have quite a distinguished record in pointing the finger of blame when things are not going swimmingly..single mothers,the unemployed,trade unions,people on benefits,immigrants have all been on the firing line in the past.Even during the corona virus nurses and teaching unions have took a bit of flak.
So if brexit doesn't turn out to be the golden utopia we were promised I fully expect boris to put his hand up and say..we take full responsibility. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *exy7Man
over a year ago
Bristol |
Macron and Merkel. I know they’re horrible europeans and newfound adversaries but they have. But of course you wouldn’t find this in the Mail or the Telegraph who are more interested in looking at Britain’s belly button than covering international news. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years.
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate?
Well its like this..the tories have quite a distinguished record in pointing the finger of blame when things are not going swimmingly..single mothers,the unemployed,trade unions,people on benefits,immigrants have all been on the firing line in the past.Even during the corona virus nurses and teaching unions have took a bit of flak.
So if brexit doesn't turn out to be the golden utopia we were promised I fully expect boris to put his hand up and say..we take full responsibility."
So if you are to blame, you should hold your hands up? I agree.
Can you prove that the examples you mentioned have behaved 100% appropriately? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Macron and Merkel. I know they’re horrible europeans and newfound adversaries but they have. But of course you wouldn’t find this in the Mail or the Telegraph who are more interested in looking at Britain’s belly button than covering international news. "
Care to share? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years.
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate?
Well its like this..the tories have quite a distinguished record in pointing the finger of blame when things are not going swimmingly..single mothers,the unemployed,trade unions,people on benefits,immigrants have all been on the firing line in the past.Even during the corona virus nurses and teaching unions have took a bit of flak.
So if brexit doesn't turn out to be the golden utopia we were promised I fully expect boris to put his hand up and say..we take full responsibility.
So if you are to blame, you should hold your hands up? I agree.
Can you prove that the examples you mentioned have behaved 100% appropriately?"
Blamed for what?
What examples? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Don't think we can just say the Tories blame everyone but themselves, name one government who have said sorry we made a mistake, it's our fault."
The eu have been blamed for various stuff by governments of both parties, and many others. As the eu is the common denominator then logic says its its quite possible they are at least part of the problem.
Of course there is also the fact that blame culture is becoming more and more widespread and this includes both politicians and the public. And even the eu are trying to blame us for all sorts, much of which they are guilty of themselves.
Gaslighting is well and truely in vogue. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years.
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate?
Well its like this..the tories have quite a distinguished record in pointing the finger of blame when things are not going swimmingly..single mothers,the unemployed,trade unions,people on benefits,immigrants have all been on the firing line in the past.Even during the corona virus nurses and teaching unions have took a bit of flak.
So if brexit doesn't turn out to be the golden utopia we were promised I fully expect boris to put his hand up and say..we take full responsibility.
So if you are to blame, you should hold your hands up? I agree.
Can you prove that the examples you mentioned have behaved 100% appropriately?
Blamed for what?
What examples?"
Any of the ones in the first paragraph in your last post. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years.
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate?
Well its like this..the tories have quite a distinguished record in pointing the finger of blame when things are not going swimmingly..single mothers,the unemployed,trade unions,people on benefits,immigrants have all been on the firing line in the past.Even during the corona virus nurses and teaching unions have took a bit of flak.
So if brexit doesn't turn out to be the golden utopia we were promised I fully expect boris to put his hand up and say..we take full responsibility.
So if you are to blame, you should hold your hands up? I agree.
Can you prove that the examples you mentioned have behaved 100% appropriately?
Blamed for what?
What examples?
Any of the ones in the first paragraph in your last post. "
Seriously?
You want me tu say that anyone who has ever signed on has never put a foot wrong in their lives? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years.
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate?
Well its like this..the tories have quite a distinguished record in pointing the finger of blame when things are not going swimmingly..single mothers,the unemployed,trade unions,people on benefits,immigrants have all been on the firing line in the past.Even during the corona virus nurses and teaching unions have took a bit of flak.
So if brexit doesn't turn out to be the golden utopia we were promised I fully expect boris to put his hand up and say..we take full responsibility.
So if you are to blame, you should hold your hands up? I agree.
Can you prove that the examples you mentioned have behaved 100% appropriately?
Blamed for what?
What examples?
Any of the ones in the first paragraph in your last post.
Seriously?
You want me tu say that anyone who has ever signed on has never put a foot wrong in their lives?"
No, i know you can't do that but
I would have thought you would have proof of at least one situation/instance of people being blamed for something they have nothing to be blamed for if you are making that claim.
I am simply making you admit that people do things they can be blamed for. Its rather ironic that you like to blame the tories for anything and everything but take umbrage at them blaming others for stuff.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years.
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate?
Well its like this..the tories have quite a distinguished record in pointing the finger of blame when things are not going swimmingly..single mothers,the unemployed,trade unions,people on benefits,immigrants have all been on the firing line in the past.Even during the corona virus nurses and teaching unions have took a bit of flak.
So if brexit doesn't turn out to be the golden utopia we were promised I fully expect boris to put his hand up and say..we take full responsibility.
So if you are to blame, you should hold your hands up? I agree.
Can you prove that the examples you mentioned have behaved 100% appropriately?
Blamed for what?
What examples?
Any of the ones in the first paragraph in your last post.
Seriously?
You want me tu say that anyone who has ever signed on has never put a foot wrong in their lives?
No, i know you can't do that but
I would have thought you would have proof of at least one situation/instance of people being blamed for something they have nothing to be blamed for if you are making that claim.
I am simply making you admit that people do things they can be blamed for. Its rather ironic that you like to blame the tories for anything and everything but take umbrage at them blaming others for stuff.
"
Cameron skivers versus strives
Boris's comments on single mothers
Phil hammond comments on the disabled in 2017
Johnson's churchillian rhetoric over the eu
Thatcher The enemy within
Tebbit "get in your bike's
How far do you want me to go back?
All right wing populist gmnts do this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years.
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate?
Well its like this..the tories have quite a distinguished record in pointing the finger of blame when things are not going swimmingly..single mothers,the unemployed,trade unions,people on benefits,immigrants have all been on the firing line in the past.Even during the corona virus nurses and teaching unions have took a bit of flak.
So if brexit doesn't turn out to be the golden utopia we were promised I fully expect boris to put his hand up and say..we take full responsibility.
So if you are to blame, you should hold your hands up? I agree.
Can you prove that the examples you mentioned have behaved 100% appropriately?
Blamed for what?
What examples?
Any of the ones in the first paragraph in your last post.
Seriously?
You want me tu say that anyone who has ever signed on has never put a foot wrong in their lives?
No, i know you can't do that but
I would have thought you would have proof of at least one situation/instance of people being blamed for something they have nothing to be blamed for if you are making that claim.
I am simply making you admit that people do things they can be blamed for. Its rather ironic that you like to blame the tories for anything and everything but take umbrage at them blaming others for stuff.
Cameron skivers versus strives
Boris's comments on single mothers
Phil hammond comments on the disabled in 2017
Johnson's churchillian rhetoric over the eu
Thatcher The enemy within
Tebbit "get in your bike's
How far do you want me to go back?
All right wing populist gmnts do this."
It is your opinion that these examples are blameless victims. Where is your proof? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years.
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate?
Well its like this..the tories have quite a distinguished record in pointing the finger of blame when things are not going swimmingly..single mothers,the unemployed,trade unions,people on benefits,immigrants have all been on the firing line in the past.Even during the corona virus nurses and teaching unions have took a bit of flak.
So if brexit doesn't turn out to be the golden utopia we were promised I fully expect boris to put his hand up and say..we take full responsibility.
So if you are to blame, you should hold your hands up? I agree.
Can you prove that the examples you mentioned have behaved 100% appropriately?
Blamed for what?
What examples?
Any of the ones in the first paragraph in your last post.
Seriously?
You want me tu say that anyone who has ever signed on has never put a foot wrong in their lives?
No, i know you can't do that but
I would have thought you would have proof of at least one situation/instance of people being blamed for something they have nothing to be blamed for if you are making that claim.
I am simply making you admit that people do things they can be blamed for. Its rather ironic that you like to blame the tories for anything and everything but take umbrage at them blaming others for stuff.
Cameron skivers versus strives
Boris's comments on single mothers
Phil hammond comments on the disabled in 2017
Johnson's churchillian rhetoric over the eu
Thatcher The enemy within
Tebbit "get in your bike's
How far do you want me to go back?
All right wing populist gmnts do this.
It is your opinion that these examples are blameless victims. Where is your proof?"
Blameless of what exactly?
I said right wing gmnts tend to single out sections of our society and blame them for all our ills.
They have been doing it for decades. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Its all well and good criticising the loss of british jobs but lets not ignore that this decision has saved the british tax payer £120m and the company had 18 months to secure other contracts. The fact they could not further proves they are not a good company to tie ourselves into. They had reported a massive fall in profits and had to restructure and raise capital from shareholders. Has everyone forgotten what happened with carrilion?
Bringing brexit into the argument is particularly laughable as awarding the contract to a franco/dutch company is in line with everyones desire to continue a trading relationship with EU countries. (When it suits, obviously )
It wasn't an argument it was a statement.
How can brexit not be part of any discussion about British passports when you can't have one without the other ?
What about all the flag waving and buy British, the claims that we will save British jobs and we will all be better off ? Did they disappear with the Boris bus ?
If a British company can't be found to make something so British as it's passport then it's a sad situation.
And apparently according to the first people to receive them they are not in fact blue.
Someone making a statement id outlining their argument.
It is sad that there is no british company that could make them at a competitive price but thats how it is.
What about the flag waving etc? Brexit isnt a magic wand that resets reality overnight. It is intended to benefit british jobs and make us better off and has come about, in part, because britain has issues such as British contracts going abroad becauss we can't compete.
Lets not forget that this contract deal was done under the eu and subject to eu rules and regulation meaning that we have to consider tenders from other eu countries.
This is an excerpt from an article talking about it -
"Matt Hancock, culture secretary, blamed EU procurement rules and suggested that post-Brexit, the UK would be able to award government service contracts to British firms.
EU laws on public procurement state that the award of contracts by EU countries must be non-discriminatory to prevent “buy national” policies and promote free movement of goods and services between EU countries.
“The procurement rules are very clear – as it happens, one of the advantages of leaving the European Union is that we will be able to have more control over our own procurement rules but as I understand it, this procurement is not fully complete,” he said. "
It is far more complex than just saying "buy british" or "what about brexit?". For example, many will see freeing ourselves from these procurement rule as a plus without realising that it means eu countries will not be bound by law to consider british companies for their contracts. Swings and roundabouts..
Is brexit the answer or a massive folly? Time will tell. Nobody really knows right now as most people only comsider and comprehend the most simple and basic of arguments.
Gmnt blaming the eu
Expect to hear a lot more of that in the coming few years.
That is a very simplistic and basic argument lionel... care to elaborate?
Well its like this..the tories have quite a distinguished record in pointing the finger of blame when things are not going swimmingly..single mothers,the unemployed,trade unions,people on benefits,immigrants have all been on the firing line in the past.Even during the corona virus nurses and teaching unions have took a bit of flak.
So if brexit doesn't turn out to be the golden utopia we were promised I fully expect boris to put his hand up and say..we take full responsibility.
So if you are to blame, you should hold your hands up? I agree.
Can you prove that the examples you mentioned have behaved 100% appropriately?
Blamed for what?
What examples?
Any of the ones in the first paragraph in your last post.
Seriously?
You want me tu say that anyone who has ever signed on has never put a foot wrong in their lives?
No, i know you can't do that but
I would have thought you would have proof of at least one situation/instance of people being blamed for something they have nothing to be blamed for if you are making that claim.
I am simply making you admit that people do things they can be blamed for. Its rather ironic that you like to blame the tories for anything and everything but take umbrage at them blaming others for stuff.
Cameron skivers versus strives
Boris's comments on single mothers
Phil hammond comments on the disabled in 2017
Johnson's churchillian rhetoric over the eu
Thatcher The enemy within
Tebbit "get in your bike's
How far do you want me to go back?
All right wing populist gmnts do this.
It is your opinion that these examples are blameless victims. Where is your proof?
Blameless of what exactly?
I said right wing gmnts tend to single out sections of our society and blame them for all our ills.
They have been doing it for decades."
Blameless of what they are bieng blamed for..
Non of the examples you gave are being blamed for ALL of our ills, just the ones specific to each individual instance. In contrast to that you are blaming the tories for virtually everything.
You obviously believe that they should be held to account for their failings, which is fine, so why is it wrong to blame others for theirs?
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
