Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%

  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%
  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mr. White said:
Heavily edited, so worthless.
Click to expand...

It was well known that the leavers left it open for interpretation so there was a version of brexit that suited almost everyone. So you can believe what you see, edited versions or not.

Farage wanted the have your cake and eat it option where we left and had access to the single market without FoM. People like Pete were telling us that the EU would crumble and let us do what we wanted but it was obvious as signing your own death warrant that they wouldn't/couldn't.
 
Methuselah said:
They hadn't a clue what we would have to do to retain access. Negotiations were in the future and in any event the EU moved the goalposts at regular intervals - and are still moving them.
Click to expand...
Yes they did. The easiest trade deal that's was ever to be negotiated, the EU was to be begging for a deal, excetra. You and a Pete are showing your age. You campaigned with rules of 70 and 80s. However, we have the internet now, it does not forget.

peteblue said:
I could have sworn that both Remain and Leave stated before the referendum that voting to leave meant leaving the single market, therefore no freedom of movement.....
Click to expand...

That's a proper schooling you two have received, undone with your own mirade of Brexit blurts...

And the whole thing wrong with Brexit, it was a spectrum of answers to suit any question that suppoerted it's aim, and of course much would be undone systematically as scenario of Brexit played out. Man up and own it.
 
It's perhaps also worth noting that around the world, it is pretty uniform that in election periods, two things tend to happen. Firstly, not much gets done, as politicians are focused more on getting re-elected than on doing stuff. Secondly, what does get done veers heavily away from what is actually good, and heavily towards what will help people get re-elected (think of economic policies that favour swing states).

We're in a situation where the United States are in election mode already, and Germany, the main economy in the EU, will be entering election mode towards the end of this year. So the likelihood of striking any sort of trade deal with either by December seems unlikely, and striking one that is in any way favourable even less so.
 
peteblue said:
If this was in anyway correct, then you would have thought that at least 1 leaver within this thread would show themselves to be either a) a racist or b) an idiot. Now I may be wrong, but I haven’t really seen that, have you?......
Click to expand...

I see bigbadjeff a leaver, has been banned from the forum for ‘racism ‘ and I’m confident he wasn’t the first but this post popped into my mind when I saw his ‘joke ‘ .

I’m not suggesting that all leavers, the majority or the prominent ones in this thread are but you asked a question so if felt appropriate to mention his demise . I’m sure another one or two have suffered the same fate but my memory isn’t exactly tip top !
 
Bruce Wayne said:
The EU need to save us from the government wasting money propping up such disastrous firms, clearly. £100 million, gone, just like that. Cheers Boris.
Click to expand...
Spaved up the wall, we weren't leaving on the 31st January as many were trying to suggest back mid January. In fact state aid rules will be very much part of any trade deal with EU USA and whoever with the Tories in charge... Leaves Tory Government transport infrastructure in tatters.
 
Last edited:
Bruce Wayne said:
The EU need to save us from the government wasting money propping up such disastrous firms, clearly. £100 million, gone, just like that. Cheers Boris.
Click to expand...
Actually Bruce, that's not quite right. And Flybe is hardly a disastrous firm and the situation is not quite so simple as you would have us believe.

Firstly, the only leeway that our government has allowed Flybe so far is a deferment of their airport tax, which they did in January to stop them going under then. At the time, they had also discussed two other longer term measures that would make the company more viable. The first was a review of the airport taxes and the second was a £100m loan, the details of which are not public. So it could have been secured by guarantee from the Flybe owners, or maybe match funding. The thing is you don't know what the proposed terms were but you're getting worked up anyway. As it happens, it's now irrelevant as the new chancellor has decided not to overhaul airport taxes, and the treasury have withdrawn the loan offer. That, together with falling demand due to the norovirus, has led to the owners putting the company in administration. So Boris hasn't actually cost the country £100m on a disastrous firm.

Secondly, let's look in a bit more detail at this disastrous firm. Unlike most airline companies it actually provides a service which is not purely based around profit. 80% of it's 100+ routes are unique to them, which is because they are not very profitable and in some cases loss making. But to the communities they service they are absolutely essential. Also, with a few exceptions, they are invariably domestic flights but linking passengers to regional airports that few other flight carriers use. Such as the Channel Islands, Newquay in Cornwall and Southampton. Roughly half of flights to the IOM are with Flybe, including all the flights to the North West where the Islands most serious medical emergencies are handled.

These communities need to be serviced with air travel. But they are not popular destinations and therefore not very profitable. But whilst we expect bus and rail companies to continue servicing their remote locations and absorb the costs, we have not demanded the same standards from our airline companies. Flybe has tried to operate those routes without subsidies and with an airport tax system that works against them, so I suppose it's hardly surprising that they have run into difficulties.

In the ideal world these routes would be shared between the other carriers so the costs could be easily absorbed. The likes of Ryanair and BA kicked off when Flybe were given the minimal concessions in January, so lets see if either are prepared to step into the fold now and take on some of these routes. I won't hold my breath, although I fully expect them to bid for the small number of slots Flybe have at Heathrow. Greed!!!

These communities can't be abandoned by the government. We'll see how many of these routes are taken up by other carriers but I can see a situation whereby the government either have to provide subsidies for these loss making routes, or maybe set up a state owned company to run them, in much the same way as they have done with a couple of rail networks who are not performing.

At the moment, it's a sad day for regional air travel, for the employees of Flybe, and for the tens of thousands more who will be effected by this both logistically and financially.

But hey, it's outside London and the other main cities so that's okay.
 
Barnfred 55 said:
Actually Bruce, that's not quite right. And Flybe is hardly a disastrous firm and the situation is not quite so simple as you would have us believe.

Firstly, the only leeway that our government has allowed Flybe so far is a deferment of their airport tax, which they did in January to stop them going under then. At the time, they had also discussed two other longer term measures that would make the company more viable. The first was a review of the airport taxes and the second was a £100m loan, the details of which are not public. So it could have been secured by guarantee from the Flybe owners, or maybe match funding. The thing is you don't know what the proposed terms were but you're getting worked up anyway. As it happens, it's now irrelevant as the new chancellor has decided not to overhaul airport taxes, and the treasury have withdrawn the loan offer. That, together with falling demand due to the norovirus, has led to the owners putting the company in administration. So Boris hasn't actually cost the country £100m on a disastrous firm.

Secondly, let's look in a bit more detail at this disastrous firm. Unlike most airline companies it actually provides a service which is not purely based around profit. 80% of it's 100+ routes are unique to them, which is because they are not very profitable and in some cases loss making. But to the communities they service they are absolutely essential. Also, with a few exceptions, they are invariably domestic flights but linking passengers to regional airports that few other flight carriers use. Such as the Channel Islands, Newquay in Cornwall and Southampton. Roughly half of flights to the IOM are with Flybe, including all the flights to the North West where the Islands most serious medical emergencies are handled.

These communities need to be serviced with air travel. But they are not popular destinations and therefore not very profitable. But whilst we expect bus and rail companies to continue servicing their remote locations and absorb the costs, we have not demanded the same standards from our airline companies. Flybe has tried to operate those routes without subsidies and with an airport tax system that works against them, so I suppose it's hardly surprising that they have run into difficulties.

In the ideal world these routes would be shared between the other carriers so the costs could be easily absorbed. The likes of Ryanair and BA kicked off when Flybe were given the minimal concessions in January, so lets see if either are prepared to step into the fold now and take on some of these routes. I won't hold my breath, although I fully expect them to bid for the small number of slots Flybe have at Heathrow. Greed!!!

These communities can't be abandoned by the government. We'll see how many of these routes are taken up by other carriers but I can see a situation whereby the government either have to provide subsidies for these loss making routes, or maybe set up a state owned company to run them, in much the same way as they have done with a couple of rail networks who are not performing.

At the moment, it's a sad day for regional air travel, for the employees of Flybe, and for the tens of thousands more who will be effected by this both logistically and financially.

But hey, it's outside London and the other main cities so that's okay.
Click to expand...

Stop writing such long posts ffs lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top