EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[furnessvale]

Just compare the cycling and local buses to the Netherlands. No contest.

I've lived here all my life, nearly 43 years, so I know what it is like.

Cycling? Nothing to do with the Netherlands being flat then?
Cambridge is flat and there are plenty of cyclists there. Not too many in the Pennine villages (except for lycra clad Tour de France wannabes of course).

 

[radamfi]

Cambridge is flat and there are plenty of cyclists there.

Dedicated cycling infrastructure in Cambridge is little different to the rest of the country. People cycle in Cambridge *despite* the conditions, not because of them. Other areas of East Anglia have low cycle rates despite the flat terrain.

http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2011/11/truth-about-cambridge.html

We had three different houses in and around Cambridge, and it's notable that in none of them were any of our neighbours particularly enthusiastic cyclists. In fact, most of our neighbours never rode a bike in the entire time we lived in those houses. This is in sharp contrast with where we live now in Assen. All of our current neighbours cycle for at least some of their journeys. Due to cycling having been made the preserve of the many instead of a hobby activity for a few, there are few "non-cyclists" and no anti-cycling sentiment.

 

[theblackwatch]

Free movement is brilliant and is the best thing about the EU. I would rather die than lose free movement. And if we lose free movement, I will die.

You will die if we don't lose free movement as well, as will I and the rest of us on here. It happens to everyone at some point!

 

[Cantab26]

The point is, nobody seriously thought that we would be leaving the EU back then. The debate was only whether we would become more or less integrated into the EU. If bookies were giving odds on leaving the EU back then, the odds would probably have been 10-1 at the very best.

One must also bear in mind that the EU has changed considerably in the past 20 years.

Dedicated cycling infrastructure in Cambridge is little different to the rest of the country. People cycle in Cambridge *despite* the conditions, not because of them. Other areas of East Anglia have low cycle rates despite the flat terrain.

http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2011/11/truth-about-cambridge.html

You may not be aware that Cambridge is in a somewhat unique position due to the influence of the University, which can have a significant impact on both patterns of living and travel choices.

 

[radamfi]

You may not be aware that Cambridge is in a somewhat unique position due to the influence of the University, which can have a significant impact on both patterns of living and travel choices.

As explained in my link. A lot of people cycle there even though it is not a particularly good town to cycle in. Certainly, the infrastructure is nothing like Dutch standard.

 

[Cantab26]

As explained in my link. A lot of people cycle there even though it is not a particularly good town to cycle in. Certainly, the infrastructure is nothing like Dutch standard.

With the greatest respect, your link does not mention several of the other matters that I had in mind. I am out at the moment so am not able to provide fuller references just now.

 

[radamfi]

With the greatest respect, your link does not mention several of the other matters that I had in mind. I am out at the moment so am not able to provide fuller references just now.

It will be interesting to read those references when you provide them, however if you are choosing somewhere to live based on how good the cycling is, Cambridge would clearly rank poorly compared to Netherlands and Denmark as well as other places in Europe, such as parts of Germany and Belgium. If you read the blog post from David Hembrow that I showed, he originally moved to Cambridge for the cycling, but found out that cycling conditions weren't that great. He moved to Assen in the Netherlands because the cycling is far superior. Assen was particularly advantageous as his children were still at school age, meaning that they didn't have to grow up expecting to be driven everywhere like British kids. Dutch children can go out in the evening without their parents worrying about their safety, in large part because of safe cycling.

 

[Cantab26]

Sorry for the wee delay in replying.

I was referring to the requirement for members and officers of the University to reside within the precincts of the University. These may be found in Chapters II and XI of the Ordinances.

I would post direct links, but this year's statute book is not yet available on the University website in full. The relevant passages are at pp. 176-177 and p. 677 of the hard copy statute book.

The provisions are a tad complicated, but can be briefly summarised as requiring residence within a prescribed distance of the University Church for most of the year (typically within three or five miles, although there are some exceptions such as for the Residentiary Canons of Ely).

As it happens, I was formerly the officer responsible for determining whether a residence satisfied the distance criterion and had the use of a virge for that purpose i.e. a two foot ceremonial staff. Thankfully I was never required to adjudicate on such a dispute!

 

[Cantab26]

One final point: the jurisdiction of the Special Pro-Proctor does not extend to the majority of the University's members and officers insofar as motor vehicles are concerned, so in my experience the residence requirements are a greater influence on the decision to cycle or not.

You may also find it amusing that the University also places restrictions on the keeping of bicycles.

 

[najaB]

Is that the sound of chickens roosting...?

We want our Brexit cash boost - NHS boss

The health service should get the cash boost it was promised during the EU referendum, the head of the NHS in England is expected to say later.

Simon Stevens will use controversial claims used by Vote Leave to put the case for more money in a speech later.

With waiting times worsening, he will say trust in politics will be damaged if the NHS does not get more.

During the referendum it was claimed £350m a week was sent to the EU and that would be better spent on the NHS.

The claim was widely contested at the time and ever since - it did not take into account the rebate the UK had nor the fact the UK benefited from investment from the EU.

 

[Mvann]

Strange how the £350m keeps getting quoted, yet no one has mentioned the €10 billion black hole that the EU will have in its budget and that the EU commission doesn't think it can make that saving and so Germany will have to stump up a sizeable portion of it.

 

[najaB]

Strange how the £350m keeps getting quoted, yet no one has mentioned the €10 billion black hole that the EU will have in its budget and that the EU commission doesn't think it can make that saving and so Germany will have to stump up a sizeable portion of it.

There will only be a £!0B black hole if the UK walks away from the EU without contributing funds which we have already committed to doing. In the future EU budgets will be smaller to account for the fact that the EU will be smaller.

£10B sounds like a lot of money, but it's only around 7.5% of the overall annual budget, by the way. And even if Germany has to fill the black hole by itself, £10B is about 0.3% of their GDP.

 

[Howardh]

So what's happening with the Irish Border then?

Currently open and free for all to travel through, as it stands a "no deal" Brexit means our EU land border would have to be "controlled" to stop goods unfit for the EU (eg US chlorinated chicken) passing over, also goods that require duty to be paid, then there's goods needing tariffs etc.

According to Brexit that border was supposed to remain open and the CTA in place but at the moment that's not gonna happen unless a deal is reached, and then it depends on what type of deal.

Moving the border to the Irish Sea has been ruled out by Davis.

A hard border would (a) need constructing (b) manning at great cost and (c) could re-ignite the Troubles that the GFA quelled (d) mean the abandonment of the CTA.

If Brexit hastens reunification, what do Brexit intend to do with those who voted leave yet will end up in a different country and back in the EU against their wishes should reunification happen?

Brexit answers keenly anticipated.

 

[nlogax]

So what's happening with the Irish Border then?

..

Brexit answers keenly anticipated.

Can't speak for our friendly local neighborhood Brexiteers, but Rumor of the Week is that NI still could stay in the Single Market and Customs Union which would negate the need for a hard border. I'll believe it when I see it.

https://www.ft.com/content/9e11bdcc-c585-11e7-b2bb-322b2cb39656

 

[AlterEgo]

Can't speak for our friendly local neighborhood Brexiteers, but Rumor of the Week is that NI still could stay in the Single Market and Customs Union which would negate the need for a hard border. I'll believe it when I see it.

https://www.ft.com/content/9e11bdcc-c585-11e7-b2bb-322b2cb39656

Sadly the FT is behind a paywall so almost none of us can read that. However if you don't have a "proper" border between NI and the RoI then you'll have to have one between the island of Ireland and Great Britain. Sounds good to me.

 

[nlogax]

Sadly the FT is behind a paywall so almost none of us can read that.

Sorry about that, sometimes the link works for me, sometimes it doesn't. Summary paragraph;

"The EU is demanding Britain accept that Northern Ireland may need to remain inside the European customs union and single market after Brexit to avoid “a hard border on the island of Ireland”. The explicit mention of an “all-island” approach by Dublin and Brussels directly contradicts the UK position and will infuriate the Democratic Unionist party, on whose votes Theresa May’s government depends for a parliamentary majority at Westminster. The European Commission on Wednesday circulated an update on negotiations, seen by the Financial Times, which concludes that the avoidance of “regulatory divergence” on the island of Ireland is “essential” to protect the peace process."

 

[Howardh]

Sadly the FT is behind a paywall so almost none of us can read that. However if you don't have a "proper" border between NI and the RoI then you'll have to have one between the island of Ireland and Great Britain. Sounds good to me.

in theory, possible. But it has been ruled out -
1. It will mean immigration and customs checks for people travelling within their own country (the UK)
2. It will mean some citizens of the UK will have a fiscal advantage over others (ie being able to import reasonable quantities of cheap duty-paid booze and cigs)
3. It could hasten the unification of Ireland which...
4. Is unlikely to appeal to the DUP who currently hold this government to ransom
5. Should Ireland be reunified, what would happen to the British in Northern Ireland, especially those who wish to remain in the UK and leave the EU?
6. It also means the end of the CTA as our trade with Ireland would have to go through our own customs which would be effectively the Irish Sea ports (both sides)
But like I said, it's been ruled out by Davis and no Tory ever changes their mind. Ever....

 

[nlogax]

Either way, what a dog's Brexit of a prospect. Y'know, it's almost like people who voted for this Leave balls-up didn't even vaguely consider the ramifications.

 

[dcsprior]

in theory, possible. But it has been ruled out -
1. It will mean immigration and customs checks for people travelling within their own country (the UK)
2. It will mean some citizens of the UK will have a fiscal advantage over others (ie being able to import reasonable quantities of cheap duty-paid booze and cigs)
3. It could hasten the unification of Ireland which...
4. Is unlikely to appeal to the DUP who currently hold this government to ransom
5. Should Ireland be reunified, what would happen to the British in Northern Ireland, especially those who wish to remain in the UK and leave the EU?
6. It also means the end of the CTA as our trade with Ireland would have to go through our own customs which would be effectively the Irish Sea ports (both sides)
But like I said, it's been ruled out by Davis and no Tory ever changes their mind. Ever....

7. It could mean any other devolved government within the UK who asked for the same thing would have a legitimate grievance if they didn't get it.

 

[Howardh]

Either way, what a dog's Brexit of a prospect. Y'know, it's almost like people who voted for this Leave balls-up didn't even vaguely consider the ramifications.

Can you really blame them for not bothering to think first and just do what the multi-millionaire owners of the right-wing media (who can clear off and live a life of luxury anywhere they choose) told them to do?

 

[furnessvale]

So what's happening with the Irish Border then?

Currently open and free for all to travel through, as it stands a "no deal" Brexit means our EU land border would have to be "controlled" to stop goods unfit for the EU (eg US chlorinated chicken) passing over, also goods that require duty to be paid, then there's goods needing tariffs etc.

According to Brexit that border was supposed to remain open and the CTA in place but at the moment that's not gonna happen unless a deal is reached, and then it depends on what type of deal.

Moving the border to the Irish Sea has been ruled out by Davis.

A hard border would (a) need constructing (b) manning at great cost and (c) could re-ignite the Troubles that the GFA quelled (d) mean the abandonment of the CTA.

If Brexit hastens reunification, what do Brexit intend to do with those who voted leave yet will end up in a different country and back in the EU against their wishes should reunification happen?

Brexit answers keenly anticipated.

The UK will not be imposing a hard border. That will be installed by your friendly neighbourhood EU. Perhaps the question is better directed towards them?

 

[Howardh]

The UK will not be imposing a hard border. That will be installed by your friendly neighbourhood EU. Perhaps the question is better directed towards them?

So you think there WILL be a hard border then?
If so, can the UK and Irish have a referendum on the discontinuation of the CTA; so if the majority wish for the CTA to remain then we scrap Brexit as it's looking like one or t'other? if not, are you prepared to discuss the border arrangements with a certain Mr. Adams?

 

[northwichcat]

The UK will not be imposing a hard border. That will be installed by your friendly neighbourhood EU. Perhaps the question is better directed towards them?

Prior to the Brexit vote we already knew the EU requires passports being scanned on entering or leaving the EU or when travelling between an EU country in the Schengen area and one outside it. When campaigning for Leave Nigel Farage addressed this and said more passport checks might be a nuisance for us but they are essential for the UK's security and preventing illegal immigration. So those who voted Leave voted for a hard border between NI and ROI and also between Gibraltar and Spain. For once a Vote Leave promise might actually be fulfilled!

The only alternative is we follow the EU rules regarding passport control after we leave the EU, despite no longer getting a say in setting them.

 

[radamfi]

The UK will not be imposing a hard border. That will be installed by your friendly neighbourhood EU. Perhaps the question is better directed towards them?

So the UK won't be checking what goods and people pass from ROI and NI? Even if ROI have a check for entry, it is possible for the UK to have none. You can walk from the United States to Mexico through a turnstile without a check, or at least you used to be able to.

It is totally in the gift of the UK whether there is a hard border or not, and it will be the UK's fault if there is one.

 

[furnessvale]

So the UK won't be checking what goods and people pass from ROI and NI? Even if ROI have a check for entry, it is possible for the UK to have none. You can walk from the United States to Mexico through a turnstile without a check, or at least you used to be able to.

It is totally in the gift of the UK whether there is a hard border or not, and it will be the UK's fault if there is one.

So following your logic, it is entirely the fault of Mexico that you cannot walk back through that same turnstile unhindered?

 

[radamfi]

So following your logic, it is entirely the fault of Mexico that you cannot walk back through that same turnstile unhindered?

I was saying that if the UK genuinely didn't want a border check, then they are free to leave the border unchecked in that direction. But you can bet that wouldn't happen. The United States clearly are the ones in this example who want to impose the check the most, and it is their "fault" that there is a check when you go from Mexico to the US. The EU and Irish Republic don't want a check, but the UK are forcing them to impose one (i.e. it is the "fault" of the UK).

 

[furnessvale]

I was saying that if the UK genuinely didn't want a border check, then they are free to leave the border unchecked in that direction. But you can bet that wouldn't happen. The United States clearly are the ones in this example who want to impose the check the most, and it is their "fault" that there is a check when you go from Mexico to the US. The EU and Irish Republic don't want a check, but the UK are forcing them to impose one (i.e. it is the "fault" of the UK).

???????????????
Now you've lost me. However, I am pleased to note that you consider the UK is in a position to "force" the EU to do something against its wishes!

 

[radamfi]

???????????????
Now you've lost me. However, I am pleased to note that you consider the UK is in a position to "force" the EU to do something against its wishes!

Of course, the UK appears to be forcing the EU to impose a border which it doesn't want. This is not news. We have to hope that this is just part of the bluff and counter bluff that is usually part of any negotiation. A hard border is clearly unacceptable. Therefore, the only viable option is for Northern Ireland to stay in the single market.

 

[Groningen]

That Boris Johnson. That he is still a member of government. Amazing!

 

[HSTEd]

I was saying that if the UK genuinely didn't want a border check, then they are free to leave the border unchecked in that direction. But you can bet that wouldn't happen. The United States clearly are the ones in this example who want to impose the check the most, and it is their "fault" that there is a check when you go from Mexico to the US. The EU and Irish Republic don't want a check, but the UK are forcing them to impose one (i.e. it is the "fault" of the UK).

The UK is doing nothing to force the EU to do anything.

The EU is going to impose a hard border because it wants one - it is not the UK's fault.

Additionally imposing a hard border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK is just as unworkable as imposing one between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland.
What do you think the Unionist community would do in such a situation? They are just as likely to take up arms again as the Nationalist community would be in the case of a hard border on the island itself.

If the UK imposes no checks on the border, then it is not responsible for any of the expense associated with the border, and the problems it causes will be the fault of the EU, as the EU is the one imposing it.

The EU is just terrified because a no-deal Brexit likely leads inevitably to Ireland being forced out of the single market. Maybe not immediately but that would be the direction of travel.
Which is why Barnier's negotiating position has solidified as "cave in to all our demands or no deal"