So when I stopped being a member of a heritage railway, I should have asked for 1/1000th of their property (assuming that the railway had 1000 members)?
Right...
The hot air storage area in Brussels interacts with one in Westminster.
I fully expected that answer, but out of interest why is it nonsense? The EU is not a golf club,as often used as an analogy and perhaps the lawyers could make an arguable case.
It probably does and IF the EU had contributed to it perhaps they would have had a part claim to it.
These things are EU property which are owned by the EU that member states have benefit of. If you are not a member state, you don't get to use it without permission. The EU Parliament buildings are for use by the EU, which currently includes us. Once/if we leave, we will no longer have that access.
Would member states that were not members at the time those 'assets' were built be able to use them, despite having made no contribution?
It is far too simplistic to compare the EU to such things. For example, there are many research projects that the UK have contributed to over the years. Has the UK now no rights to a share of the intellectual property?
No, we don't. Hence the issues over Galileo.
So pay our dues, and the problem goes away.
They did stand on a manifesto at the last election that promised to deliver Brexit. Their actions since then have been somewhat at odds with that. It's arguable that's somewhat hypocritical, if they didn't agree with the manifesto, they shouldn't have stood as a candidate for that party.
I wonder why companies and governments pay £millions in legal fees for major cases when all they need to do is consult the experts in UKRailForums.
I don't claim to be an expert. I read what those who have experience have to say.
I think you'll find that individual members of parties have always disagreed with certain policy decisions of that party. Indeed, for years Mr Jeremy Corbyn seems to have disagreed with every single policy of his party. Nevertheless all these MPs have remained in their party and not been expected to leave. Why do you think that Brexit should be any different?
Further analysis shows that the vehicle in question is the DIESEL version of the X-Trail and the market for this has absolutely collapsed. With or without Brexit this particular investment was going to hit the buffers.
Surely post-EU Britain will be back giving tax breaks to drivers who poison us, now we are freed from Nazi EU regulations?
From that article: "Our correspondent said as the announcement was expected to be about planned future investment, the impact on Nissan's current workforce may be very minimal." and also "Nissan refused to shed light on the situation. A spokesman said it 'does not comment on rumour or speculation'."
This new diesel X-Trail is supposed to use a new Renault diesel engine. Unfortunately, try as they may, the French are unable to meet the new emissions regulations and the project is cancelled/seriously delayed.
And I think your first sentence is the Jeremy Corbyn reaction. "Lets spend £100s of millions on a project that is doomed and hope that something turns up in the end".
Sunderland produces 10% of the global production run of the Leaf.
So far Nissan themselves have refused to confirm or deny this rumour.
Which is the entire production outside of Japan and the USA.
