Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

Seth Brundle

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Fair play, Rob. Despite being utterly outnumbered, you continue to provide an alternative view of Brexit from a UK perspective. Well done.

He doesn't really. Rob's arguments tend to look for flaws with the EU rather than defend the idiocy of Brexit (which he claims to be opposed to :rolleyes:).
Brexit cannot be defended becaus eit is economic suicide so Brexiteers don't defent it, they just deflect.

RobMc59

tubercolossus wrote: »

And you do see that vaccine procurement is a different thing to vaccine roll-out, don't you? One being EU, the other a national, competency....

Whether its procurement or rollout the EU'S performance is woeful. This link to euronews details how slow the rollout is.

"COVID-19 vaccine: What are the real reasons behind the EU's slow rollout? | Euronews" https://www.euronews.com/amp/2021/01/29/why-has-the-eu-s-coronavirus-vaccine-rollout-been-so-slow

RobMc59

Hurrache wrote: »

I think at this point Rob is only trying to convince himself about Brexit.

I hate brexit but we have to get on with it for now.

ancapailldorcha

RobMc59 wrote: »

Whether its procurement or rollout the EU'S performance is woeful. This link to euronews details how slow the rollout is.

"COVID-19 vaccine: What are the real reasons behind the EU's slow rollout? | Euronews" https://www.euronews.com/amp/2021/01/29/why-has-the-eu-s-coronavirus-vaccine-rollout-been-so-slow

You can't have it both ways, Rob. The European Commission is either the all powerful big brother at which point it's robbed the nation states of Europe of their sovereignty or it's too feeble. These are mutually exclusive viewpoints.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

So who is going to be paying those billions to kick start the Italian and Spanish economies?A quick look at the countries paying in more than they get out includes Ireland i believe, so you are going to be paying for that recovery fund.

Is that any worse than you, as a British taxpayer, funding Serco's Indian track-and-trace sub-contractors? Or handing millions here and billons there to Cayman Islands domiciled PPE non-suppliers?

reslfj

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

That’s true whole purpose of Brexit we were told was stop migration, how does that work if UK just waves thru incoming trucks.

The people border between EU26 countries is unchanged from before to after Brexit and the end of transition.

Persons has always been checked for passports coming into the UK from EU26 countries. All (non criminal) EU26 citizens can enter and stay for 90 days with a valid European passport.
The Irish has of course the CTA.

The new problem at Dover and other UK-EU border stations (plus GB-NI) is, that it's now a customs and regulatory border for goods too.

It doesn't make much sense to confuse cross border travel by people with any of the four FoMs.

Lars

Professor Moriarty

Seth Brundle wrote: »

He doesn't really. Rob's arguments tend to look for flaws with the EU rather than defend the idiocy of Brexit (which he claims to be opposed to :rolleyes:).
Brexit cannot be defended becaus eit is economic suicide so Brexiteers don't defent it, they just deflect.

Whether you consider him to be right or wrong, he is offering a different perspective on Brexit. And he is doing that despite dismissive and denigrating comments at times. I commend him for that.

Strazdas

RobMc59 wrote: »

Whether its procurement or rollout the EU'S performance is woeful. This link to euronews details how slow the rollout is.

"COVID-19 vaccine: What are the real reasons behind the EU's slow rollout? | Euronews" https://www.euronews.com/amp/2021/01/29/why-has-the-eu-s-coronavirus-vaccine-rollout-been-so-slow

The UK is a total outlier though compared to the entire world (bar the US and Israel). Europe is actually performing extremely well with vaccines compared to the other regions.

CelticRambler

RobMc59 wrote: »

Whether its procurement or rollout the EU'S performance is woeful. This link to euronews details how slow the rollout is.

"COVID-19 vaccine: What are the real reasons behind the EU's slow rollout? | Euronews" https://www.euronews.com/amp/2021/01/29/why-has-the-eu-s-coronavirus-vaccine-rollout-been-so-slow

Oh come on, Rob. You've thrashed this particular dead horse into a well-tenderised lasagne at this stage, without recycling last month's news (and a poor quality article at that, which - as pointed out previously - confuses "doses administered" with "full courses completed" to make the UK look better.)

RobMc59

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

You can't have it both ways, Rob. The European Commission is either the all powerful big brother at which point it's robbed the nation states of Europe of their sovereignty or it's too feeble. These are mutually exclusive viewpoints.

The EU strategy over vaccine procurement was unwieldy and slow which has had implications on vaccine rollout imo.

tubercolossus

RobMc59 wrote: »

Whether its procurement or rollout the EU'S performance is woeful. This link to euronews details how slow the rollout is.

"COVID-19 vaccine: What are the real reasons behind the EU's slow rollout? | Euronews" https://www.euronews.com/amp/2021/01/29/why-has-the-eu-s-coronavirus-vaccine-rollout-been-so-slow

My God, you are such a bluffer. Did you think I wouldn't read the article? It clearly states, or rather re-states, the reasons behind the EU's slower procurement of vaccines, many of them unavoidable or laudable (ensuring no liability, 27 different nations to please, more regulation) and also clearly states that many countries' vaccine rollouts were unsatisfactory and came in for criticism.

tubercolossus

RobMc59 wrote: »

The EU strategy over vaccine procurement was unwieldy and slow which has had implications on vaccine rollout imo.

The key word here being the last one, or rather three.

In. My. Opinion.

Leroy42

RobMc59 wrote: »

The EU strategy over vaccine procurement was unwieldy and slow which has had implications on vaccine rollout imo.

The UK strategy over PPE procurement, protection of healthcare workers, dealing with travel, lockdowns and overall deaeths was unwieldy and slow and has implications for the impact of Covid.

Why do you fail to mention this everytime you mention the vaccine rollout.

What is noticeable is the VdL has already been taken to task over the delays and the mistakes. In the UK, apparently it is too soon to have any sort of investigation or review of how the government has handled it because, democracy I suppose

And once again, what has it got to do with Brexit?

You claim to hate brexit. What do you hate about it?

tubercolossus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Whether you consider him to be right or wrong, he is offering a different perspective on Brexit. And he is doing that despite dismissive and denigrating comments at times. I commend him for that.

I actually thought you were being sarcastic.

Strazdas

RobMc59 wrote: »

The EU strategy over vaccine procurement was unwieldy and slow which has had implications on vaccine rollout imo.

Von der Leyen actually admitted all this in her speech on Wednesday. Roll out way too slow, Commission over promised supplies to member states, were too confident etc.

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

Oh come on, Rob. You've thrashed this particular dead horse into a well-tenderised lasagne at this stage, without recycling last month's news (and a poor quality article at that, which - as pointt previously - confuses "doses administered" with "full courses completed" to make the UK look better.)

Yes,the UK has followed its own strategy of administering as many first doses as possible and the plan to administer second doses by up to twelve weeks has been backed up by the WHO.
I don't like anything about brexit and would agree it's response to covid has been awful but the UK's approach to vaccines, whether its procurement or rollout has been very good.
Regarding the £350 million savings on the side of Johnson's bus,I think he should have been barred from office over it as its clearly lies.

Professor Moriarty

tubercolossus wrote: »

I actually thought you were being sarcastic.

No, I wasn't.

tubercolossus

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

No, I wasn't.

Yes, I see that.

reslfj

Sam Russell wrote: »

I was thinking the other way round. Any games on the sea border in Belfast/Larne will cause a few 'problems' on the French side. The French can be quite creative.

It is very unlikely that the EU will introduce any unnecessary measures at the GB-NI-RoI borders.

If Britain refuses to behave, the 'fight' will be between England and the EU26 - for example in Dover. This is where most of the trade passes, and where it will have the best chance of 'sobering' the minds of Westminster.

Lars

RobMc59

CelticRambler wrote: »

Is that any worse than you, as a British taxpayer, funding Serco's Indian track-and-trace sub-contractors? Or handing millions here and billons there to Cayman Islands domiciled PPE non-suppliers?

Unfortunately that's how the elites in power roll.
They like to spend the money then the workers have to pay for it on the never never when the bill arrives. Whilst the elites sail off into the sunset.

reslfj

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

You missed the point of my post, the French on their side could put a blind eye on illegal migrants leaving France for UK, on uk side this truck would just be waved thru despite taking back control of borders rhetoric

The EU plays by the rules!

But the UK must too.
Otherwise it will not be unofficial demonstrations in Calais, but freezing EU-UK negotiation tables in Brussels that will hit the UK.

The French has for years allowed refugee checks in Calais. Nobody will allow refugees in trucks.

Lars

RobMc59

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Yet here you are day in and out making excuses defending said homegrown UK “elites”, now that Brexit has happened they try blame EU for all their mistakes but it’s rather obvious the emperor has no clothes.

Maybe the problem with UK was never the EU but a dysfunctional fundamentally undemocratic system that’s been rotting for decades as it was forced to shed its empire

You are confusing my trying to defend my country as defending 'elites'.I don't like brexit or the tories and agree the UK political system needs an overhaul from top to bottom. People shouldn't have political power just because of their 'privileged' background .Johnson is a prime example of this.

CelticRambler

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Well maybe the EU should send a warning to London that these agents would instead be needed to deal with Brexit related paperwork

There is no benefit to the EU in being seen to allow easier migration across the Channel. The subject of illegal migrants is touchy enough in most EU member states without complicating it by linking it to Brexit.

What the EU would very much like would be a firm commitment by the UK to (re)align itself with SPS rules and regulations, and rules-of-origin. So issuing instructions to all border control points across the Union to increase checks on British imports from 1-in-1000 to 1-in-500 (on the basis of reasonable suspicion of non-compliance) would have a considerably greater impact on the UK than a few dinghies worth of Somali refugees.

I think we saw the opening shots of that battle in Šefčovič's letter the other day. Sort out SPS and RoO and most of the NI problem goes away instantly. Sort out SPS and RoO and most of the impact on the EU goes away too.

reslfj

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

Well maybe the EU should send a warning to London that these agents would instead be needed to deal with Brexit related paperwork

Do you know that this will be the same people ? I don't.

The UK has left the EU and has slower and less access to the Europol/Schengen databases. It's 100% a UK problem.

Lars

Liberalbrehon

I wonder if Johnson et al. will go feck it and just rush to try and create a new Global deregulated free trade economic zone. Sell whatever you want to us and us to you, caveat emptor, bring back the good ole days of the 1820's. This is their dream, isn't it? Would be completely delusional.
UK will be dropping down from 5th largest economy in the world to 10th and further on current trends over next number of years.

johnnyskeleton

RobMc59 wrote: »

Whether its procurement or rollout the EU'S performance is woeful. This link to euronews details how slow the rollout is.

"COVID-19 vaccine: What are the real reasons behind the EU's slow rollout? | Euronews" https://www.euronews.com/amp/2021/01/29/why-has-the-eu-s-coronavirus-vaccine-rollout-been-so-slow

From that article it seems that the EUs approval was not emergency use and so if there is a problem the production company is liable, as opposed to governments indemnifying them.

Also EU is paying less than the UK.

So it isnt that the UK simply better, theyre quicker. Time will tell whether:
A) the quicker rollout actually prevents deaths;
there are significant side effects of the vaccine that need to be compensated for; and
C) whether the extra few months speed that the UK has adopted will allow them to come out of lockdown any quicker - they still have very high daily numbers for all the vaccines that theyve administered.

Lemming

Seth Brundle wrote: »

There can't be positives from it, despite what many Brexit supporters claim. That's why JRM reckons that the benefits will take 50 years to realise.

But the benefits have already started to materialise five weeks into the sunny uplands of Brexit, never mind fifty years; just not for UK PLC. That's the problem with abdicating all responsibility to faith in market forces - sometimes those self-same lauded forces come up with their own solutions to the problems that you create and those solutions are not to your liking or benefit. At all. In this case, companies decamping in part or total out of the UK to the benefit of EU member states instead of the UK.

RobMc59 wrote: »

but the UK's approach to vaccines, whether its procurement or rollout has been very good.

I'll correct you there Rob; the UK government approach has been haphazard at best, prone to awful gambles (most of which have resulted in appalling death statistics), and thus far their current gamble appears to be looking like it may pan out very well. A lot can still go wrong between the pace of rollout, any side-effects that may start to manifest as more and more people are vaccinated, and of course the elephant in the room being however many new virus variants that UK PLC is able to breed/import/export due to inept, democidal mismanagement of the pandemic.

Brexit and the British government haven't caused more vaccines to be produced. Their contract with AZ just means they get priority. It's not some good, it's just a transfer of life-saving vaccines.

Padre_Pio

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

From that article it seems that the EUs approval was not emergency use and so if there is a problem the production company is liable, as opposed to governments indemnifying them.

Also EU is paying less than the UK.

So it isnt that the UK simply better, theyre quicker. Time will tell whether:
A) the quicker rollout actually prevents deaths;
there are significant side effects of the vaccine that need to be compensated for; and
C) whether the extra few months speed that the UK has adopted will allow them to come out of lockdown any quicker - they still have very high daily numbers for all the vaccines that theyve administered.

That is the main point.

I presume the UK govt is on the hook for any compensation payouts since they pushed the vaccines through early, unlike in EU where manufacturers are on the hook.

There's no limit to the amount of money the givt could be forced to pay in compensation if things go tits up.

RobMc59

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

From that article it seems that the EUs approval was not emergency use and so if there is a problem the production company is liable, as opposed to governments indemnifying them.

Also EU is paying less than the UK.

So it isnt that the UK simply better, theyre quicker. Time will tell whether:
A) the quicker rollout actually prevents deaths;
there are significant side effects of the vaccine that need to be compensated for; and
C) whether the extra few months speed that the UK has adopted will allow them to come out of lockdown any quicker - they still have very high daily numbers for all the vaccines that theyve administered.

After scrutinising available data the EU has approved a number of vaccines without any recommendations regarding negative effectiveness. The WHO has done the same which suggests that the UK strategy is correct