I'm not so sure about that, I think the timing could well have been deliberate, sending a blunt message.
.
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
.
Sorry but the real issue is Brexit !
You have just explained why even though you drew entirely the wrong conclusion.
We had tariff free access to Germany, Spain etc.,etc and threw it away because of Brexit, now for your so called plan to work we have to negotiate it back,
Not one of those countries will break ranks with the EU to do a trade deal with us, is that your big idea? oh good grief, where have we heard that tripe before?
And then on top of that feat of magic we must actually create our own car companies (as unlikely as it is possible to be)
Or bribe more foreign companies to replace the Japaneses ones
Until then you haven't got any "Foreign cars" to export, and a market for them, plus the EU will in the meantime have concluded trade deals with those countries anyway.
And what will happen to the many thousands in skilled jobs here thrown out of work, not merely in the car factories, but all the associated suppliers and services?
They will vanish into the labour market, where the fiction of "Full employment" will be maintained on the principle that a part time zero hours job of 3 hours a week means you do not appear in the unemployment figures.
Brexit will fail because no one in power either gives a damn or has the ability and talent to organise the nation to stand on its own two feet.
And we will be left with incompetents of all parties in the House of commons who have royally bungled what should have been the simple task of finding the way to the Exit
you have flow batteries on the near term then maybe nuclear batteries in the future.
We are as a nation held hostage by the ERG and DUP
Afraid not. If we offer terms to get them here rather than the EU getting them, the EU will just tariff block their import. Just another reality cost of Brexit, the EU gaining the ability to discriminate against us.
They can just selectively do it for Japanese cars coming in via us, calling it an anti-dumping measure as they've done with Chinese e-bikes.
.
Don't want to go too far off track with this but your true comment of leaf versus lexus, is exactly the same as VHS v Betamax or phone chargers in the early days. There are two ways to resolve this and EU regulation and ISO standards the best. ..The EU could mandate that all battery packs adhered to specific dimensions,and then all EU countries could put that into law . Individual companies would grumble ,but would acknowledge the sense.
Again wrong""
... just another weak and pathetic effort to divert blame!!
Honda’s most senior executive in Europe was interviewed on the Today Programme to explain Honda’s decision to close its Swindon plant. Honda could not have been clearer: “This is not a Brexit-related issue for us.”
At a time when poorly-performing companies like Flybmi are only too keen to blame Brexit to cover up for their own business failings, Honda’s decision to explicitly rule out Brexit as a factor is particularly notable. Naturally this has not stopped many Losers from spitefully gloating over the demise of thousands of jobs in their desperate pursuit of an ill-informed ‘told-you-so’ moment…
What Honda did blame were the seismic shifts in the automobile industry in recent years, particularly the sudden move towards electrification, fuelled by the diesel scandal and generally poor demand. Turkey is also facing the closure of its Honda plant – despite being in a customs union with the EU…
Oh go on....your debris issue at your French country chateau is of more interest.
Cant you summon your gardener or one of the maids to deal with this?
It can make a horrendous mess out of your tweeds don`t you know.
Michael Tomlinson writing in the Times today:
Above the chamber of the House of Commons, along the winding corridors of the Palace of Westminster, sits the European scrutiny committee, or ESC. It performs a vital function, not least as a persistent reminder of why so many voted to leave: sovereignty over our laws.
The committee assesses the importance of draft EU legislation and then decides whether to ask questions of the government or refer it for a debate. And it is sitting on hundreds of EU legislative instruments which I and many of my colleagues don’t believe are in our national interest.
But we don’t have the power to block legislation forever. In January 2017, the EU’s ports regulations became UK law even though they weren’t wanted by any British ports. The unions did not want them. Parliament did not want them.
And yet they were pushed through by the EU and now sit on our statute book. Sir Bill Cash, the ESC chairman, is fond of reminding us that in his 34 years on the committee, he has never known a single EU law to have been overturned in parliament.
It really is quite simple for me. I believe that our laws should be made in Westminster, and not in Brussels. As Sir Bill puts it, these laws are made in a council of ministers behind closed doors, by consensus, without a transcript, and the proposals are initiated by the European Commission, whose members are unelected.
Let me give another concrete example: daylight saving. I had the pleasure of leading what is likely to be the last EU scrutiny debate of its kind in the House of Commons. This particular EU proposal would end the twice-yearly clock changes and require each country to observe summer time or standard time all year round.
In his state of the union speech in September, Jean-Claude Juncker announced: “Clock-changing must stop. Member states should themselves decide whether their citizens live in summer or winter time. It is a question of subsidiarity.”
However, in reality the proposed directive gives member states little more than a stark and binary choice between permanent summer time or winter time all year round.
Surely we in the UK should decide for ourselves what is in our own national interest and, for example, whether we change our clocks. It should not be dictated by the EU. This goes to the very essence of sovereignty.
During the course of the daylight saving debate, the minister confirmed that we have no plans to change daylight saving time and that we are working with other member states to oppose the proposal.
But as we have seen before, once the EU has set its course our parliament will not be able to prevent it, as long as we remain members.
Thankfully, in just under fifty days, this will all change.
The sheer volume of legislation from the EU takes the biscuit. It amounts to us having to scrutinise more than 1,000 documents per parliamentary session on average, and in this longer session we have already considered more than 2,000 and counting. It is hardly surprising that the work of the ESC makes many of its members more Eurosceptic.
Our chairman could never be accused of being a Europhile, but in an exchange with Ken Clarke on the floor of the House of Commons, he confirmed that in the 1975 referendum he voted “yes” to the EEC. It was only when he was put on to the select committee on European legislation that he began to see the light. I wonder whether the whips look back now and rue the day they put him on to that committee.
The battle for Brexit continues, and the work of the European scrutiny committee serves as a constant reminder to all of us that we must get out of the European Union so that we take back control of our own laws and become a self-governing, independent and free-trading nation once again.
Michael Tomlinson is the Conservative MP for Mid Dorset and Poole
Above the chamber of the House of Commons, along the winding corridors of the Palace of Westminster, sits the European scrutiny committee, or ESC. It performs a vital function, not least as a persistent reminder of why so many voted to leave: sovereignty over our laws.
The committee assesses the importance of draft EU legislation and then decides whether to ask questions of the government or refer it for a debate. And it is sitting on hundreds of EU legislative instruments which I and many of my colleagues don’t believe are in our national interest.
But we don’t have the power to block legislation forever. In January 2017, the EU’s ports regulations became UK law even though they weren’t wanted by any British ports. The unions did not want them. Parliament did not want them.
And yet they were pushed through by the EU and now sit on our statute book. Sir Bill Cash, the ESC chairman, is fond of reminding us that in his 34 years on the committee, he has never known a single EU law to have been overturned in parliament.
It really is quite simple for me. I believe that our laws should be made in Westminster, and not in Brussels. As Sir Bill puts it, these laws are made in a council of ministers behind closed doors, by consensus, without a transcript, and the proposals are initiated by the European Commission, whose members are unelected.
Let me give another concrete example: daylight saving. I had the pleasure of leading what is likely to be the last EU scrutiny debate of its kind in the House of Commons. This particular EU proposal would end the twice-yearly clock changes and require each country to observe summer time or standard time all year round.
In his state of the union speech in September, Jean-Claude Juncker announced: “Clock-changing must stop. Member states should themselves decide whether their citizens live in summer or winter time. It is a question of subsidiarity.”
However, in reality the proposed directive gives member states little more than a stark and binary choice between permanent summer time or winter time all year round.
Surely we in the UK should decide for ourselves what is in our own national interest and, for example, whether we change our clocks. It should not be dictated by the EU. This goes to the very essence of sovereignty.
During the course of the daylight saving debate, the minister confirmed that we have no plans to change daylight saving time and that we are working with other member states to oppose the proposal.
But as we have seen before, once the EU has set its course our parliament will not be able to prevent it, as long as we remain members.
Thankfully, in just under fifty days, this will all change.
The sheer volume of legislation from the EU takes the biscuit. It amounts to us having to scrutinise more than 1,000 documents per parliamentary session on average, and in this longer session we have already considered more than 2,000 and counting. It is hardly surprising that the work of the ESC makes many of its members more Eurosceptic.
Our chairman could never be accused of being a Europhile, but in an exchange with Ken Clarke on the floor of the House of Commons, he confirmed that in the 1975 referendum he voted “yes” to the EEC. It was only when he was put on to the select committee on European legislation that he began to see the light. I wonder whether the whips look back now and rue the day they put him on to that committee.
The battle for Brexit continues, and the work of the European scrutiny committee serves as a constant reminder to all of us that we must get out of the European Union so that we take back control of our own laws and become a self-governing, independent and free-trading nation once again.
Michael Tomlinson is the Conservative MP for Mid Dorset and Poole
"The people didn't want the EU".. well 52% v 48% of the voting population did form that view. However was it a flawed poll?.
What does that mean?
As I say. The real question should be do we want the euro.
In or out. A customs union I have no problem with. Freedom of movement I have no problem with.
Making our laws. Setting our own rules with other countries should be sovereign. Setting our own taxes etc.
Not governed by an unelected cabal whose real plans we will never know.
It is nice to see that this MP can at least construct sentences. It is a pity that his competence does not rise to constructing a logical argument.
Leaving aside the standard lie (I have gone beyond giving MPs a fools pardon if calling it an untruth ),of the EU being unelected.
Let us parse the rest of his rant.
The ESC.. a group which exists apparently and has not found it necessary to vote down many if any of the draft EU legislation. In 43 years.
I don't know or care what these EU port regulations are, but was there a The people didn't want the EU. The politicians did. Change can be good the politicians always say. and a meaningful vote . Was the UK specific legislation and act passed?.
In respect the comments by Mr Junkers and summer time ,it is apparent ,that he either does not know or chooses to missunderstand the meaning of "subsidarity" in EU speech. It means it is the local authority of the country,not for the EU to dictate. So what Junkers was saying is that "it is my opinion that each country must decide it's own time zone " and that he would prefer that they kept the same clock all year round.
Also completely wrong! they would end up penalised by the EU
Much said to mislead and not unbiassed
We had the power, if we didn't use it through incompetence or being too lazy, that is our fault, not the EU
This paragraph is simply untrue
"It really is quite simple for me. I believe that our laws should be made in Westminster, and not in Brussels. As Sir Bill puts it, these laws are made in a council of ministers behind closed doors, by consensus, without a transcript, and the proposals are initiated by the European Commission, whose members are unelected.
Actually
243 MEPs voted against it, 35% of the entire Parliament. It wasn't popular in other countries sue to vested interests who wanted to set their own charges
Last edited:
when it comes to practical things like the daylight saving example that Mr Tomlinson gave, these laws are better made by EU technocrats than our MPs at Westminster, the vast majority of them haven't got the specialist expertise.
We get better laws and the cost saving is very substantial.
Last edited:
Sony, Dyson, Panasonic, Lloyds,Unilever, Goldman Sachs, Barclays, Airbus Flybmi, P&O, HSBC ,JP Morgan, UBS, Ford ,Hitachi ,Toshiba, AXA, Honda ,Moneygram ,Philips, European Banking Authority, European Medicines ,Agency Bank of America .
But apparently, it’s got nothing to do with Brexit.
I'm sure we are all relieved to hear that.
But apparently, it’s got nothing to do with Brexit.
I'm sure we are all relieved to hear that.