Brexit #2

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 08:07 AM

It might have given us a vicious, talentless, no-mark right-wing President had not most of the Irish people seen though Peter Casey.

Though that would have been embarrassing,Irish presidents are basically just decorative, but without any significant power. A very sensible arrangement.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 07:44 AM

"Before Jim claims there is no racism or prejudice in Ireland again, have a look at the comments page here."

Karen, I might be being a bit thick, but my understanding is that Jim has consistently said precisely the opposite - especially in terms of racism against the Traveller community?

Feel free to correct me if I'm misunderstanding something.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 07:22 AM

Before Jim claims there is no racism or prejudice in Ireland again, have a look at the comments page here. I selected this one as an example:

"Saw a few Muslims wearing Burkas today. Scary stuff"

https://www.thejournal.ie/ireland-refugees-2-2982893-Sep2016/

The Bank of England did a detailed survey using statistical measures on the effect of immigration on wages and found that only in certain areas of work was there a negative outcome, something like 1% per 10% of immigrant workers in unskilled/semi-skilled areas. They worked on a supply and demand model.

However, arrangements have already been made to allow temporary immigration in some less popular areas eg seasonal farming work. With a Tory government it would not be reasonable to expect wages to go up after Brexit. In fact if you include holiday pay and other things, one of their big reasons for coming out is less regulation.

Take the care secton, where there is a lot of use of immigrant workers, low pay poor conditions and poor services are well rehearsed features of the system, but I see no prospect of these improving as nobody seems able to pay for it.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 05:24 AM

Agreed.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 05:21 AM

You could put it even more strongly, Steve. Of the 52% that voted Leave, 48% could have voted the same way with never a racist thought in their entire lives, and that 2% of racists *could* swing the result. I say could because some of them would still have voted Leave on other grounds.

And I point that out because Remainers are often accused of labelling all Leavers as racist. Not so - it just needed a minority to affect the result.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 04:56 AM

I agree with what you say, Kevin, but my point was that it would have taken just two percent of the voting electorate to vote leave wholly on the grounds of racism/ xenophobia/anti-immigrant to swing the vote in favour of leave. Utterly without evidence, I contend that that is highly likely to have been the case. Just another argument against referendums, I suppose.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 03:55 AM

"There's a lot of racism of one sort or another in society.
"
It's artificial to allot racisim to any social group - it runs through our society like Blackpool runs through rock
Active groups have divided into two camps,
The Tommy Robinson/Nigel Farage crowd who have taken it onto the streets, formed parties (Robindon has about six to his credit(sic) and Farage will no doubt form another now that his creation has been laughed off the political scene
The other (looney left, no doubt!) side have formed anti-racist groups to actively oppose it
As for a large section of the population, it lies dormant to be drawn on when needed by them upstairs
Powell tried his hand at it and became an embarrassment to the establishment, was kicked out and sought refuge with the Sectarian Unionists of Northern Ireland
Interestingly, some of the Sectarian paramilitaries in the North, finding time on their hands following The Troubles, turned their hand to targetting the homes of immigrants DETAILED SURVEY HERE

I have no doubt that racism is rife among the upper echelons of society, but they have learned to use it wisely rather than to have it emblazoned on their T-shirts (or dress shirts, as the case may be)
Brexit was a perfecct example of the skilful use of racism, as was Trump and Orban.... et al
It might have given us a vicious, talentless, no-mark right-wing President had not most of the Irish people seen though Peter Casey
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 02 Jan 19 - 02:16 AM

Surplus labour creates low wages and zero hours contracts.

I think is intended to be a version of "the law of supply and demand". If the supply exceeds the demand, the price falls. If the demand exceeds supply the price rises.

But that is only an approximation to the rule. You need to add in the clause "until some constraint is reached." You can't increase production of widgets indefinitely: you run out of factory space or skilled staff or raw materials. Even if you can't satisfy the demand. And the same is true in the case of labour: things like the minimum wage act as constraints. As can, or could, laws about zero hour contracts.

It is worth remembering that the minimum wage is not about the government being nice. It is about reducing the amount the government would otherwise have to spend on benefits by making the employer shoulder a reasonable part of the burden, rather than take more profit and pass the costs onto the country as a whole.

Subject: RE: Brex
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 09:36 PM

There's a lot of racism of one sort or another in society.

I rather suspect there were a fair few among the Remain vote who were to some extent racist. But they still saw enough reasons to vote to stay in the EU to decide t

And the same would apply the other way, people who weren't in any way racist who had other reasons to vote Brexit.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 05:51 PM

"Surplus labour creates low wages and zero hours contracts."

This is simply not true, and, worse, it is one of the stock racist excuses for keeping immigrants out. Low wages are created by employers paying low wages because they can. Get it? Zero-hours contracts are created by unscrupulous employers who have bought into the Tory lie of the "flexible labour market." Yes there is a minority of workers who put on a brave face to say that those contracts suit them. The truth is that those contracts are one of the most iniquitous developments of modern capitalism, the legacy of the emasculation of the trade unions, started by Thatcher and gleefully perpetuated by New Labour. Corbyn's Labour has promised to get rid of zero-hours contracts. I disagree with almost everything that Corbyn is doing apropos of brexit, but that's one thing I mightily applaud.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 03:12 PM

Steve I would not argue with your suppositions, but I would take issue on one point. Immigration has been a fact of life in the UK for many decades and has presented no real problems. In fact in the 50's immigration was encouraged from the West Indies to swell the labour force. Modern Immigration is now on a scale that impacts the low skilled. Surplus labour creates low wages and zero hours contracts. This is one of the many drawbacks of capitalism. Both Labour and Conservatives could have legislated against the more severe impact of these realities but chose not to. I wonder why not? It was also labour that ceased to keep checks on aliens departing the UK, as a result thousands exist illegally under the radar further depressing unskilled wages. Trying to explain the loss of the referendum on a minority racist,xenophobic ignoramuses voting is insulting all those that voted for other reasons. When are you going to accept you lost. I am surprised you do not blame it on Putin as well.
There is yet another problem in Europe:
Yanis Varoufakis The Euro Has Never Been More Problematic 16th November 2018

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 03:07 PM

"Now is anyone really going to argue with me that fewer than two percent of the voting electorate were racist, xenophobic ignoramuses?"
A little more fundamental than that Steve
A survey carried aout a little over two years ago (published in The Daily Mail, of all places) suggested that between a half and on third of the British population held and had expressed racist views
That is not to say they were active racists, of course they aren't.
Active racism is growing, but it is still a tiny minority who are prepared to act on their prejudices
We (my generation certainly) were conditioned to dislike, distrust or denigrate foreigners we even SANG ABOUT IT IN OUR SCHOOL SERVICES uny=ti it was removed from the hymn books
It is this passive racism that the Brexiteers drew from

It happened here in Ireland recently when a Presidential candidate, PETER CASEY , drew on the Irish hatred and fear of Travellers and managed to push up his vote from nowhere to 22%, and Ireland hasn't got a real race problem
Both depressing an frightening to learn what lies just below the surface
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 01:53 PM

Leave obtained 1.8 percent over the magical fifty mark. Now suppose that that just a little more than that majority had voted remain instead. Let's say two percent of the total voting electorate. That swing would have left remain the winnner. Now is anyone really going to argue with me that fewer than two percent of the voting electorate were racist, xenophobic ignoramuses? The conclusion must be obvious: anti-immigration sentiment won the referendum for remain. It was always there in spades anyway and was exploited extremely cynically, dishonestly and successfully by the leave campaign. Disagree and you're in cloud-cuckoo land. By the way, the proportion of immigrants who claim state benefits is tiny when set alongside the numbers of native Brits who do so. In my mum's care home Elena from Italy and Emilia from Romania (to take just two examples from many) are wonderful, enthusiastic and beautiful women who are over-qualified and who have come here to WORK. Their wages are low and they have to sign up for weekend and shift work. I don't know where we'd be without them and tens of thousands of others like them. I think we may be about to find out.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 01:31 PM

If your remarks were part of an off topic scrum, they were eliminated. Trying to keep to just one Brexit thread means keeping this one on the rails. Play nice.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 01:19 PM

"
Feel free to deal with any of these suggestions in as much detail as you wish, but do so as an adult with a modicum of intelligence that has been, so far missing from your postings
Jim Carroll "

Rather difficult when my response is promptly deleted.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 01:04 PM

Thanks for that S.L.R.
New Year's Res - must try harder
Happy New Year
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 11:08 AM

Keeping foreigners out of Britain was the sole objective of Brexit - it was its raison d'être - it had no other purpose
The effects of this objective were felt immediately after the vote was taken; a sharp rise in racist incidents, a steady rise of open displays of racism - culminating in Britain now being put of a war footing to keep refugees fleeing from our wars out

Okay. Jim finally made a statement that makes sense as to why immigration is a component of Brexit - certainly Farage had his eye on excluding a whole group of people we know he has abhored and discriminated against for years when he got behind the vote.

But this doesn't mean that the whole conversation can or should shift over to the topic of immigration. And stop the name calling and insults. I'm tired of the ad hominem attacks that don't further the conversation but do ratchet up the anger.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 10:03 AM

There is no "uncontrollled immigration". The last time we had uncontrolled immigration was in the dark ages, when the anglo-saxons came over. And the point about the "immigrant workers" is that they are workers. They are working and contributing to society, both through their productivity and through their taxes, which mostly they pay.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 09:21 AM

Jim is right about 'uncontrolled immigration'. It's one of those weasel phrases.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 08:40 AM

That should have begun "would you care to point out where? " - thought I'd copied and pasted it
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 08:38 AM

"Sorry Jim, but that's completely wrong."
Nope - been there, done that
a search of "leftie garbage" should do the trick
Here isn't and has never been "uncontrolled immigration" - a racist myth
If there had, Britain and all wealthier countries would be crammed full of immigrants seeking a better life
If my points are ludicrous, they should be easy to shoot down - "I see no drones", as Nelson would have said if he'd been around
We owe the third World big time - we manipulated their economies, their politics and their cultures to serve the Empire and we made sure the former Colonies were in 'A safe pair of hands' when we left - what is happening now in Pakistan is as good as example as any of the mess we left behind

Morally, we should be committed to accepting refugees from dictatorships we helped to set up and continued to support with arms and money - our contradictory attitude to The Arab Spring is another pretty good example of our indifference and self interest

As far as economic migrants are concerned, we fill our shops with goods produced under near-slave conditions, and so become part of those horrific conditions.

You mentioned Sharia Law - an abhorrent practice, but no less horrific than letting Christian clergymen loose to rape children - very few religious groups can take the high-ground when it comes to the treatment of women
These practices will only end when action is taken within the societies, and that will be don by persuasion and international encouragement, not using them as a weapon to besmear and eject foreigners from Britain, as your lot constantly do

Roadside ID checks - Hitler must be tap-dancing in his bunker - what a frighteningly nasty brave new world you aspire to
This mornings 'Times' (Irish edition) welcomes the fact (in large headlines) that 10,000 people gained Irish citizenship here last year - beats 'Rule Britannia' any day of the week   

Feel free to deal with any of these suggestions in as much detail as you wish, but do so as an adult with a modicum of intelligence that has been, so far missing from your postings
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 07:57 AM

"From the bginning, this feller has been insisting - abusively - that immigration has nothing whatever to do with Brexi"

would you care to point out where? or is it yet another "once upon a time" jimmie story? Go on! try to prove me wrong!

I believe the argument is about uncontrolled immigration. This is probably a proposition a little too subtle for you. You really do spout some rubbish at times. What on earth has sharia law got to do with the subject? How many more bits of other threads are you going to drag in to pad out your ludicrous postings?
Migration figures are notoriously difficult to calculate, for illegal immigrants it is pure guesswork.
Jack Dromey, Deputy General of the Transport and General Workers Union and Labour Party treasurer, suggested in May 2006 that there could be around 500,000 illegal workers. He called for a public debate on whether an amnesty should be considered. Analysis suggests that if the migrants granted amnesty were given access to healthcare and other benefits, the net cost to the exchequer would be £5.530 billion annually. As the food industry claims to feed around 10 million more than the official figures show, the estimated cost of an amnesty could be considerably higher. We are very lucky we live in a society where roadside ID checks are not the norm, as in the Irish Republic. The downside is that an unknown number of ghost illegal immigrants exist under the radar.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 05:39 AM

This is a perfect example of how this garbage is used
From the bginning, this feller has been insisting - abusively - that immigration has nothing whatever to do with Brexit
Now, in one mighty bound, he's out of his closet in full Tommy Robinson mode - from taking our jobs and houses and a drain on the health service to Sharia Law - The Full Monty
It's long been acknowledged that The National Health Service would have collapsed without immigrant Labour, Immigrants have been a benifit to, not a drain on British society
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 04:48 AM

Nicely cross/posted Mac
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 04:47 AM

"Sorry Jim, but that's completely wrong."
We..eeel !!!
Think I ma have put it badly

No argument with what you say about the reason for them in charge to leave Europe - of course it is as you say - all moves such as this are motivated by such reasons.
I'm referring to why the idea was taken up by a significant enough minority of the population to be passed
It was sold and bought on a racist ticket - a classic case of divide and rule

Whether rabid ranters such as the one strutting his stuff on the other thread like it or not, Britain is now a solidly multi-racial and multi-cultural society - in essence, it always has been - Britain could never have become as wealthy and powerful as it did without having to ponce off other nations and cultures - "The Empire on which the sun never sets, they called it ("and the blood never dries", they usually forgot to add)
The incoming of the ex colonials after the fall of the Empires was inevitable - it provided the great and good with a perfect scapegoat to maintain power - while we were fighting each other we were ignoring what they were doing

Things like Brexit never have a singe purpose
Jim

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 04:46 AM

You could be right, Mac, but I think the role of the Tax-Avoiders/Evaders - the Murdochs, Rothermeres, and others (e.g. Rees-Mogg, Redwood and their kind) - should not be underestimated. There are dark forces, very dark forces indeed, afoot in, and behind, the corridors of The Palace of Westminster.

Telling their target-voters to vote Leave because they want to carry on stashing their wealth in tax-havens wouldn't work, would it? But "Look out, that foreigner's coming to steal your job/benefits/overload the NHS/overturn UK law and replace it with Sharia/groom and rape your daughters" certainly did.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 04:33 AM

I somewhat agree, Backwoodsman. The xenophobia was a useful tool of the Leave campaign, rather than the prime reason.

Where I differ is that I don't think there was a sole reason. Taxation was a factor, but not the only one. The ability to increase profit by dropping some of the EU regulations was another, and that is largely independent of taxation.

Leavers are in a far better position to say why they voted as they did, but I am fairly confident that there is no single reason that would have given a majority: that came from a number of different reasons.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 04:22 AM

"Keeping foreigners out of Britain was the sole objective of Brexit - it was its raison d'être - it had no other purpose"

Sorry Jim, but that's completely wrong.

The sole purpose of Brexit was, and is, to allow a small number of immensely wealthy individuals, families, and businesses to avoid becoming subject to the EU Anti-Tax-Avoidance and Evasion regulations which come into force in, IIRC, May 2019, and which would, amongst other things, make them pay tax in the country in which their income and profits are earned.

The rabidly xenophobic Leave campaign was the carefully thought-out tool which those with everything to gain from Leaving used to persuade the easily-influenced, the feeble minded, the disenfranchised, and the Union-Flag-wavers - those with little or nothing to gain - to vote for a result which would guarantee the ability of that small cadre of immensely wealthy people to continue their Tax-Avoidance activities.

The fact that the end of March 2019 is the date set for our departure from the EU is no coincidence, it is essential in order that those who drove, and are still driving, the Leave campaign - the tax-exiles (some not even British!) and tax-avoiding businessmen who give the Tory Party its instructions, and who gave Haddock-Face, Bozo, and Gove The Little Scottish Viper their direction in the Leave campaign - are able to continue to avoid paying taxes in this country on their vast earnings in this country.

Never, in the field of U.K. Politics, have so many been so successfully deceived by so few.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 04:12 AM

Life is more complicated than that, Iains. You also have the selection of which facts you choose to report and the way in which you report them. An entirely factual report can - and frequently is - spun to tell a story to match an opinion. Guido does this all the time, as do many others. If A and B both occur, reporting just A, just B, A as if it causes B and A as if it is caused by B are four distinctly different 'factual'stories.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Jan 19 - 03:46 AM

Is it my imagination, or has some unseen hand moved some postings to a thread I have no intention of posting to ?
To separate Brexit, immigration and the refugees is artificial is nonsensical and to do so is stupid
Keeping foreigners out of Britain was the sole objective of Brexit - it was its raison d'être - it had no other purpose
The effects of this objective were felt immediately after the vote was taken; a sharp rise in racist incidents, a steady rise of open displays of racism - culminating in Britain now being put of a war footing to keep refugees fleeing from our wars out
To keep these incidents apart from Brexit is to rip the heart out of this discussion
I shall continue to post my thoughts to this thread and hope no censorious hand prevents me from doing so
Happy New Year all; or most of you! (New Year Resolution not to be nice to Nazties
Jim
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/brexit-hate-crime-eu-citizens-xenophobia-racism-police-bracing-march-2019-article-50-a8590921.html

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 08:05 PM

Now into the fourth year of the Phony Brexit War. Happy landings...

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 02:19 PM

Fact:    a thing that is known or proved to be true.
Opinion: a view or judgement formed about something, not based on fact or knowledge.

Posting the identical article twice does not alter the fact that it is voicing opinions unlike the font of truth Guido, whose content is factual. As can easily be verified.


Now for some facts that are not derived from scare stories


http://csi.nuff.ox.ac.uk/?p=1153
I think I would have preferred a rephrasing of some of the questions but classing sociology as a science is stretching the definition a little in my book, so perhaps I should not be surprised.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 02:06 PM

Plus, of course, Old Haddock-Face's '70 million Turks waiting to invade the UK'. More Brexit bollocks.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 01:25 PM

The linked article above: GlobalPost

GlobalPost provides original international reporting rooted in integrity, accuracy, independence and powerful storytelling.
aka Once upon a time!

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Raggytash
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 11:33 AM

Once again can I remind posters that this thread is about Brexit.

I will open another thread about refugees and asylum seekers so you continue your discussions there.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 11:31 AM

And, in beast 'Nitpicking Nigs' mode, I'll just point out that it's 'superseded' - no 'c'.
So glad I got a good education - I might resort to the occasional expletive, but at least I can spell properly.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 07:30 AM

Whether it is could be argued or not is beside the point: I could argue black is white, but I would still be wrong. The Schengen area simply is not a country and any argument that is it might be so regarded is simply false. And I suggest that by raising the Schengen area you were making that argument.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 07:15 AM

I was not attempting to change a legal definition. Maybe instead of 'arguably' I should have written "it could be argued that". This does not mean that I was making that argument.
The lack of internal borders make it very difficult for France or Germany to identify the first place of landfall for these migrants. This is a problem of the EU's own making. UK kept out of Schengen, and so retains an ability to attempt to control borders. We can see (in most cases) where those crossing the channel started from, and so should be able to return them.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 07:05 AM

Of course, the countries of the Schengen Area, by removing borders, are giving the appearance of a single country, so arguably the Schengen Area is the 'country' of first landfall.

As our famed demander of precision, I am sure you realise you cannot just change the legal definition of what is and is not a country for your convenience. The Schengen Area is not a country.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 07:00 AM

Will this Dublin agreement apply after Brexit.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: DMcG
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 06:15 AM

I am undecided - still! - whether to apply for a Irish passport. I have Irish citizenship, which is more important, providing the rules don't change. I may apply in the next few weeks, but in practice it would be more symbolic than anything else, since my wife is not entitled to one and we usually travel together. ,

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: David Carter (UK)
Date: 31 Dec 18 - 05:19 AM

I think thats right Jim, Javid has seen Trump sending troops to the Mexican border, and think that this plays right with the sewer press and their readers. Maybe he is right, but it is the lowest form of politics. Meanwhile Williamson thinks that British Standing in the world can be restored by constructing more military bases. Standing with whom, exactly?

As others have said, it is a far right coup, appealing to the basest of emotions in the same way that Mosley and Powell did.

Sadly, my Irish ancestry is two generations too far back to give me the right of an Irish passport. Otherwise my application would have been in some time ago.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 07:05 PM

Not sure that would work. A key part of what is liable to scupper May's "deal" is anti-EU sentiment.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 04:08 PM

Nothing would surprise me about this bunch of self-serving, deceitful Tory Mo-Fo's...

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2018/12/30/a-manufactured-migrant-crisis-to-create-anti-eu-sentiment-ahead-of-the-big-brexit-vote

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 01:49 PM

Rubberboatgate is primarily about Javid positioning himself to make a play for Theresa May's job when she's dumped. Though why anyone would want that is hard to imagine.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 09:01 AM

Just been announced that Britain is in "CRISIS" - following the small boat that managed to land on our coast a couple of days ago, another six refugees have made it across the Channel through the ring of steel
The Home Secretary has promised he will ascertain that there are enough naval vessels on hand to cope with this massive threat to the freedom and well being of the British People
For crying out loud !!!!

Meanwhile, back at the ranch
The Government have awarded £14 million of the taxpayers money to a shipping company that has no vessels and exists only on paper, in order to deal with the likely problems of delivering goods to Europe after a 'No Deal' Brexit
The port this as yet non-existent fleet is proposing to sail from has insisted that they have neither the facilities nor the capacity to deal with vessels of any significant size

Pity Ealing Studios stopped making comedies - this shower is providing plots that would set the British Film Industry back among the world giants in next to no time
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: KarenH
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 08:06 AM

I note that two of the ferry firms involved in the emergency 'No Deal' arrangements are, respectively, Danish and French. This implies that somebody knows at least what taxes will be involved in boat hiring between the UK and the EU.

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 06:57 AM

If you wish Iains - as long as you put up exactly what I said in full
Better still, why not tell us where we can find it so we can see the whole nasty incident in all its glory
I had stopped posting and left home when you and your two expelled mates closed Keith's thread
Enough really is enough
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Iains
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 06:45 AM

"It takes a special talent to close an obituary thread"

Indeed it does Jim. Are you proud of yourself?

Shall I repost your highly offensive comments, so all can see precisely what you are?

Subject: RE: Brexit #2
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 30 Dec 18 - 06:21 AM

Ha-ha! This will get our Right-Wing Extremist Fuckwit foaming at the gills...