FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > UK is chasing a fantasy
UK is chasing a fantasy
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site) OP
over a year ago
|
The eu have warned uk that they will not negotiate under threat, after a fraught week of brexit talks in brussels that have raised serious concerns about the future of the negotiations, whats your view on it? I agree with eu  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"The eu have warned uk that they will not negotiate under threat, after a fraught week of brexit talks in brussels that have raised serious concerns about the future of the negotiations, whats your view on it? I agree with eu "
A nice copy and paste from the Guardian there!
This refers to a possible demand from the UK about possible reimbursement if the UK is excluded from the Galileo Project. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
It was the UK who supported the rule that non-EU states could not have a central role in Galileo for security reasons. Of course, it was in the EU then. Now it complains about its own rule. The UK looks increasingly pathetic. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It was the UK who supported the rule that non-EU states could not have a central role in Galileo for security reasons. Of course, it was in the EU then. Now it complains about its own rule. The UK looks increasingly pathetic."
Have other non-EU states contributed over a billion pounds towards the total £8 billion cost of Galileo? I don't think they have but the UK certainly has paid over 1/8th the overall cost of Galileo. Not unreasonable then to want access to the satellite system once it is launched and if the EU don't want uk to have access to it its only fair the EU fully reimburses the UK for the total cost of the UK financial contribution towards it.
If anyone is looking pathetic here its the EU, who said they wanted close security cooperation with the UK after Brexit, but now on a security issue like Galileo they don't want cooperation on it?
Chancellor Philip Hammond said this morning that the UK may just decide to build our own anyway with other partners like Australia, I certainly hope this will be the case. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It was the UK who supported the rule that non-EU states could not have a central role in Galileo for security reasons. Of course, it was in the EU then. Now it complains about its own rule. The UK looks increasingly pathetic.
Have other non-EU states contributed over a billion pounds towards the total £8 billion cost of Galileo? I don't think they have but the UK certainly has paid over 1/8th the overall cost of Galileo. Not unreasonable then to want access to the satellite system once it is launched and if the EU don't want uk to have access to it its only fair the EU fully reimburses the UK for the total cost of the UK financial contribution towards it.
If anyone is looking pathetic here its the EU, who said they wanted close security cooperation with the UK after Brexit, but now on a security issue like Galileo they don't want cooperation on it?
Chancellor Philip Hammond said this morning that the UK may just decide to build our own anyway with other partners like Australia, I certainly hope this will be the case. "
UK officials said about 2 weeks ago that they'd build their own. It was widely derided for being the emptiest of threats because that is not going to happen.
And the UK has contributed 12% of the budget but received 15% of the contracts. Another example of how paying in to the EU is a massive benefit and not a black hole where money disappears never to be seen again.
And this is typical Brexiter whining. They want to leave (and many with no deal at all which would include no deal on this issue!) and then cry that theyre going to lose out on the benefits of EU membership. And worse,the UK could have vetoed this rule if they wanted but they were 100% on board when they were in the EU. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
there's absolutely no fucking chance that this government will put their hand in their fucking pockets and pay out for a satelite system .... the nearest we will get is a 'tendering out a contract to some foreign oligarch types' debarcle that is completely obsolete when it is delivered 15 years late and is 50 times the orignal estimated cost, as is per usual for any tory infrastructure plan. the money has gone, just kiss it goodbye and move on instead of bitching and whinging about it. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It was the UK who supported the rule that non-EU states could not have a central role in Galileo for security reasons. Of course, it was in the EU then. Now it complains about its own rule. The UK looks increasingly pathetic.
Have other non-EU states contributed over a billion pounds towards the total £8 billion cost of Galileo? I don't think they have but the UK certainly has paid over 1/8th the overall cost of Galileo. Not unreasonable then to want access to the satellite system once it is launched and if the EU don't want uk to have access to it its only fair the EU fully reimburses the UK for the total cost of the UK financial contribution towards it.
If anyone is looking pathetic here its the EU, who said they wanted close security cooperation with the UK after Brexit, but now on a security issue like Galileo they don't want cooperation on it?
Chancellor Philip Hammond said this morning that the UK may just decide to build our own anyway with other partners like Australia, I certainly hope this will be the case.
UK officials said about 2 weeks ago that they'd build their own. It was widely derided for being the emptiest of threats because that is not going to happen.
And the UK has contributed 12% of the budget but received 15% of the contracts. Another example of how paying in to the EU is a massive benefit and not a black hole where money disappears never to be seen again.
And this is typical Brexiter whining. They want to leave (and many with no deal at all which would include no deal on this issue!) and then cry that theyre going to lose out on the benefits of EU membership. And worse,the UK could have vetoed this rule if they wanted but they were 100% on board when they were in the EU."
I would question why the UK is paying in so much in the first place.
If this is primarily for the security of the EU as a whole then each member state should contribute an equal share. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
There is an upside to this.It means the government needs to invest between 5 and 8 billion in our own GNSS.A boost to our satellite construction industry. Ok obviously it's a minimum of 5 times the cost of Galileo but that's brexit for you.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
Make no mistake, this agenda is being driven primarily by the French, who sense that they can grab our share of the work and contracts.
Matters will come to a head next month, when the next tranche of contracts are hoped to be awarded. These contracts need unanimity to be awarded, and the UK could use their veto. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Make no mistake, this agenda is being driven primarily by the French, who sense that they can grab our share of the work and contracts.
Matters will come to a head next month, when the next tranche of contracts are hoped to be awarded. These contracts need unanimity to be awarded, and the UK could use their veto."
The UK were informed in January that UK companies could no longer work on the security side of the project. If the Tories had been better organised and brought this up back then instead of waiting till now, or if they'd agreed a deal for going forward this wouldnt be an issue. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The UK government is creating nightmares, not dreams or fantasies - though it's certainly been operating as if it's somewhat not of this real world. Issuing Article 50, before it really had much of a plan, letting time drag on, without much progress and letting opportunities pass them by, all seem to be modus operandi of this incompetent lot. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It is just negotitions all part of the silly game polititions play"
I dont think so, we voted for this project and chose to invest in it whilst in the EU.
We had a say and voted for the legal frame work around it.
You cant simply walk up and say "well, I know I built this with you, but im pissing off now so I want my money back and i'd still like to use the thing. Though i'll just settle for the money if thats too much, mate."
There has to be some legal framework or loophole to make the request. This isnt chipping in for a holiday and bailing with your mate. Theres a serious international legal and investment contract here. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It is just negotitions all part of the silly game polititions play
I dont think so, we voted for this project and chose to invest in it whilst in the EU.
We had a say and voted for the legal frame work around it.
You cant simply walk up and say "well, I know I built this with you, but im pissing off now so I want my money back and i'd still like to use the thing. Though i'll just settle for the money if thats too much, mate."
There has to be some legal framework or loophole to make the request. This isnt chipping in for a holiday and bailing with your mate. Theres a serious international legal and investment contract here."
Better than that. The UK voted for the project, approved the budget and voted to say anyone outside the EU using it would have reduced access. Then they decided to leave the EU and now theyre complaining about all their own decisions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Surely this comes under the existing commitments heading as there are things that they want the UK to keep supporting financially!"
I'm not sure that the UK will continue to pay for the Galileo satellite system, post-Brexit. The May government is belatedly wanting to keep within the project, which has security implications of course and I'd certainly not agree to it, if I was the EU, unless there were very good reasons. The UK certainly shouldn't be expecting any refunds and as others point out, the UK agreed the conditions for all countries involvement. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oo hotCouple
over a year ago
North West |
U.K. - Before 2016 “We want opt outs.”
U.K. - Post 2016 “We want opt ins”
I am British and I want what is best for my country and what is best for our neighbours so that we can all prosper. I just find that the quality of political ability in our country is at absolute rock bottom.
If you think about it, so many of the arguments revolving around immigration and the economy are so heated because after all of these years within the EU, no British Govt has ever effectively tracked the economic benefits of the EU and we therefore have not hard data. It seems that this lack of hard data has suited successive Govts by allowing the to either blame or credit the EU for whatever National policy was in question. It is appallingly bad that no hard data exists and that it is now 40 years down the road that this data is being harvested and now being argued over because of its political sensitivity. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"U.K. - Before 2016 “We want opt outs.”
U.K. - Post 2016 “We want opt ins”
I am British and I want what is best for my country and what is best for our neighbours so that we can all prosper. I just find that the quality of political ability in our country is at absolute rock bottom.
If you think about it, so many of the arguments revolving around immigration and the economy are so heated because after all of these years within the EU, no British Govt has ever effectively tracked the economic benefits of the EU and we therefore have not hard data. It seems that this lack of hard data has suited successive Govts by allowing the to either blame or credit the EU for whatever National policy was in question. It is appallingly bad that no hard data exists and that it is now 40 years down the road that this data is being harvested and now being argued over because of its political sensitivity."
I agree - I think it would have been great for successive UK governments to have delivered better information to citizens, including the costs, benefits etc. The more recent data presented EU immigrants and their net contribution to the UK, which was positive - but only part of the picture. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"U.K. - Before 2016 “We want opt outs.”
U.K. - Post 2016 “We want opt ins”
I am British and I want what is best for my country and what is best for our neighbours so that we can all prosper. I just find that the quality of political ability in our country is at absolute rock bottom.
If you think about it, so many of the arguments revolving around immigration and the economy are so heated because after all of these years within the EU, no British Govt has ever effectively tracked the economic benefits of the EU and we therefore have not hard data. It seems that this lack of hard data has suited successive Govts by allowing the to either blame or credit the EU for whatever National policy was in question. It is appallingly bad that no hard data exists and that it is now 40 years down the road that this data is being harvested and now being argued over because of its political sensitivity."
I agree.
I mean poltical education here is poor conpared to a lot of the continental nations.
I very much believe an education about politics and the international institutions that exist should be nessecary in any country. I mesn how else other than community action do you expect to foster civic pride and co-operation? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"U.K. - Before 2016 “We want opt outs.”
U.K. - Post 2016 “We want opt ins”
I am British and I want what is best for my country and what is best for our neighbours so that we can all prosper. I just find that the quality of political ability in our country is at absolute rock bottom.
If you think about it, so many of the arguments revolving around immigration and the economy are so heated because after all of these years within the EU, no British Govt has ever effectively tracked the economic benefits of the EU and we therefore have not hard data. It seems that this lack of hard data has suited successive Govts by allowing the to either blame or credit the EU for whatever National policy was in question. It is appallingly bad that no hard data exists and that it is now 40 years down the road that this data is being harvested and now being argued over because of its political sensitivity.
I agree - I think it would have been great for successive UK governments to have delivered better information to citizens, including the costs, benefits etc. The more recent data presented EU immigrants and their net contribution to the UK, which was positive - but only part of the picture."
I'd question what data you are reading. Any EU data from EU institutions is bound to be biased in the EU's favour. Independent bodies like Migration watch UK, seriously question whether mass uncontrolled immigration is a net benefit, in fact they say it's either neutral or a net drain on the UK. It's not just economically either as the damage mass uncontrolled immigration has done culturally and environmentally as well as other factors is often ignored or not quantified. Even swivel eyed Euro loons like Lib dem leader Vince Cable said shortly after the EU referendum result that mass uncontrolled immigration may not be a positive and could be either neutral or a net drain overall. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"U.K. - Before 2016 “We want opt outs.”
U.K. - Post 2016 “We want opt ins”
I am British and I want what is best for my country and what is best for our neighbours so that we can all prosper. I just find that the quality of political ability in our country is at absolute rock bottom.
If you think about it, so many of the arguments revolving around immigration and the economy are so heated because after all of these years within the EU, no British Govt has ever effectively tracked the economic benefits of the EU and we therefore have not hard data. It seems that this lack of hard data has suited successive Govts by allowing the to either blame or credit the EU for whatever National policy was in question. It is appallingly bad that no hard data exists and that it is now 40 years down the road that this data is being harvested and now being argued over because of its political sensitivity.
I agree.
I mean poltical education here is poor conpared to a lot of the continental nations.
I very much believe an education about politics and the international institutions that exist should be nessecary in any country. I mesn how else other than community action do you expect to foster civic pride and co-operation?"
Would you say people in Italy and Hungary are better educated politically then? Lmao!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
As for all this nonsense about Galileo I really do hope we cut all ties with the project now. The EU can suffer the security implications of it further down the line. The USA is our closest ally militarily and we will continue to use the USA GPS system. As chancellor Philip Hammond said a few days ago the UK may decide to build our own version with other partners like Australia. The UK has the expertise and know how. India also have their own space programme so they could be another potential partner in a UK project. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"U.K. - Before 2016 “We want opt outs.”
U.K. - Post 2016 “We want opt ins”
I am British and I want what is best for my country and what is best for our neighbours so that we can all prosper. I just find that the quality of political ability in our country is at absolute rock bottom.
If you think about it, so many of the arguments revolving around immigration and the economy are so heated because after all of these years within the EU, no British Govt has ever effectively tracked the economic benefits of the EU and we therefore have not hard data. It seems that this lack of hard data has suited successive Govts by allowing the to either blame or credit the EU for whatever National policy was in question. It is appallingly bad that no hard data exists and that it is now 40 years down the road that this data is being harvested and now being argued over because of its political sensitivity.
I agree.
I mean poltical education here is poor conpared to a lot of the continental nations.
I very much believe an education about politics and the international institutions that exist should be nessecary in any country. I mesn how else other than community action do you expect to foster civic pride and co-operation?
Would you say people in Italy and Hungary are better educated politically then? Lmao! "
Quite possibly. Who knows?
I do know however that most people ive met in France, Spain, the Scandi block, Germany the netherlands, and Poland understand tge similarities and differences between political ideologies far more than a lot of people here.
Though maybe ive met annomilies.
I never said people having a better education regarding government and politics would lead to a more liberal population which seems to be the angle youre coming at. A better education would allow peopme to understand tbe pros and cons better and enable them to vote accordingly with a full view of what to expect. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"U.K. - Before 2016 “We want opt outs.”
U.K. - Post 2016 “We want opt ins”
I am British and I want what is best for my country and what is best for our neighbours so that we can all prosper. I just find that the quality of political ability in our country is at absolute rock bottom.
If you think about it, so many of the arguments revolving around immigration and the economy are so heated because after all of these years within the EU, no British Govt has ever effectively tracked the economic benefits of the EU and we therefore have not hard data. It seems that this lack of hard data has suited successive Govts by allowing the to either blame or credit the EU for whatever National policy was in question. It is appallingly bad that no hard data exists and that it is now 40 years down the road that this data is being harvested and now being argued over because of its political sensitivity.
I agree - I think it would have been great for successive UK governments to have delivered better information to citizens, including the costs, benefits etc. The more recent data presented EU immigrants and their net contribution to the UK, which was positive - but only part of the picture.
I'd question what data you are reading. Any EU data from EU institutions is bound to be biased in the EU's favour. Independent bodies like Migration watch UK, seriously question whether mass uncontrolled immigration is a net benefit, in fact they say it's either neutral or a net drain on the UK. It's not just economically either as the damage mass uncontrolled immigration has done culturally and environmentally as well as other factors is often ignored or not quantified. Even swivel eyed Euro loons like Lib dem leader Vince Cable said shortly after the EU referendum result that mass uncontrolled immigration may not be a positive and could be either neutral or a net drain overall. "
Where did you see sophie say "mass uncontrolled immigration"? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
