Paderb

Paderb

12p

8 comments posted · 57 followers · following 0

288 weeks ago @ Conservative Home - Five reasons why Labou... · 1 reply · +1 points

I think not. Much investment is being made in the UK despite the doom warnings of Europhile politiicians that has been going on for quite a few years now. I do not have the space nor the time to repeat them here but if you should read the publication that I have mentioned above, I have listed several investment programmes in the automotive industry from just one website and cover large investment for around just 6 months at the beginning of last year. They are substantial.

I suspect that many investors have a pragmatic approach. They also do not believe that there will be any detrimental effect to trading with the EU. Also, there are other qualities with investing in the UK rather than the EU. The first is that the EU is overly regulated. It is true that the finished product must conform with EU standards (which is true of virtually every trading bloc) but the actual process of manufacture in the UK is not so burdened by workplace regulation. Secondly, having once been the 'sick man of Europe' through interminable strikes, the UK is by inclination now one of the most stable work forces in Europe.

There is nothing more harmful to commerce than not having the ability to accurately programme work on time and at a predicted cost.

288 weeks ago @ Conservative Home - Five reasons why Labou... · 1 reply · +1 points

It is not merely 'memory loss' that is Labour's biggest problem. They simply do not have the imagination to come up with any alternative policy to the NHS that is not based purely on ideology. Their biggest trouble on that subject, apart from their appalling record on oversight of the NHS and that, when analysed, is not any different from the Tories in effect.

288 weeks ago @ Conservative Home - Five reasons why Labou... · 3 replies · +1 points

No. (1) It is very unlikely that the EU would attempt to enter a trade war with the UK because any tariffs imposed on us would be reciprocated and as we have historically bought more goods from them, it would cause the EU arguably more harm. (2) The UK already complies with EU directives on imports/exports and so would not be a hardship to continue; (3) Britain already has the infrastructure for vehicle import/export which requires a lot of space for storage. Any attempt by the EU, at least in the short to medium term, to duplicate this would be problematic for them

289 weeks ago @ Conservative Home - Five reasons why Labou... · 5 replies · +1 points

I work with theunituk.com and have compiled an ebook 'Democracy in a Federalized Europe'. In the last chapter, I have listed millions invested in the motor industry alone. It only covers up to June 2014 as I have not updated that chapter yet. It can be downloaded as a ' pdf' file from the website or an animated 'flip book' can be obtained from my drop box using http://tinyurl.com/kt4t6h5 which is a self running executable that does not require the application to run

291 weeks ago @ Conservative Home - Daniel Hannan MEP: Sco... · 0 replies · +1 points

The EU is NOT our largest trading partner as such. We are theirs. We now do more trade with the rest of the World since the last part of 2008. Largely with the Commonwealth whose GDP now greatly exceeds that of the EU with an average growth rate of around 7%.

I would say that it is unthinkable that the EU would be so stupid as to initiate a tariff war with us. Not only is it likely that we would reciprocate, but Germany in particular achieves it's GDP mainly in exports (52%). It is bad enough for them that the Euro is weak without having a large tariff imposed on them as well.

I would advocate that we repeal the 1972 Act rather than go the Article 50 route and be able to negotiate from a position of strength in exactly the same way as any other Country would approach the matter. In my opinion, the Article 50 route would be a complete stitch-up for us as we would not be allowed to be privy to the negotiations which they will actually be imposing on us.

291 weeks ago @ Conservative Home - Daniel Hannan MEP: Sco... · 0 replies · +1 points

I am merely curious, but why, suddenly, is my latest post subject to moderation when I have already made other posts?

291 weeks ago @ Conservative Home - Daniel Hannan MEP: Sco... · 0 replies · +1 points

Whatever the answers to your questions are Keith, the thing of paramount importance is to regain our sovereignty and then worry about those answers. To delay that is to leave us open to the further machinations of the EU with it's accompanying attempts to try to get the UK to hold further referenda until we give the 'right' answer. What price is compensation to business worth if we are not free once again to be masters of our own destiny. In any case, as Daniel Hannan has often said, why would anyone consider shackling themselves to the only trading bloc in the World that is actually diminishing in size?

Much of the uncertainty to business can be immediately alleviated by the simple expedient of repealing the 1972 European Communities Act, then any negotiation after that can be done from a position of strength. To follow the Article 50 route will deny us the right to negotiate as it is specifically stated in that same Article 50 that Britain (or another State that wishes to secede) will not be allowed to participate in the deliberations of the Council of Ministers that will decide the terms of our secession.

"
Article 50

1. Any Member State may decide to withdraw from the Union in accordance with its own constitutional requirements.

2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament.

3. The Treaties shall cease to apply to the State in question from the date of entry into force of the withdrawal agreement or, failing that, two years after the notification referred to in paragraph 2, unless the European Council, in agreement with the Member State concerned, unanimously decides to extend this period.

4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it.

A qualified majority shall be defined in accordance with Article 238(3)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

5. If a State which has withdrawn from the Union asks to rejoin, its request shall be subject to the procedure referred to in Article 49."

Paragraph 4 is the point in question. In concerns me greatly that I know of no politician including Mr. Hannan nor for that matter, Mr Farage, have ever mentioned this yet they both appear to favour the Article 50 Route. Should the UK go this route, it would be akin to a pig in a poke.

319 weeks ago @ Conservative Home - Chris Wilford: Tower H... · 0 replies · +1 points

If anyone should advocate the principle of directly elected Mayors, they should first look at what we have in Bristol. Ferguson is a former architect with considerable left-leaning views that were never publicised in any form of manifesto. Since taking over, he is largely following the ideals of his daughter who runs a charity to close streets as play areas despite the large volume of open spaces in Bristol.

He has gone on to introducing Resident Parking Permit restrictions all over the City and introduce several additional meter bays outside of the City Centre where none existed before even though there was no parking problem.

He has introduced 20mph speed restrictions all over the City including on trunk routes and plans to extend it City wide. He is also extending the plan of deliberately reducing the capacity of existing roads which actually causes considerable congestion, perhaps in anticipation of being allowed to introduce a congestion charge.

Yet for all this, he has done nothing to bring productivity to Bristol despite there being large swathes of commercial building land available, a confluence of major motorways (M4 and M5), a functioning port and not even mentioning the soon to be built over Filton airfield. If anyone wanting extra terminal capacity to service London (with an existing high speed trains service) and domestic airport facility close to the City covering the West Coast and the South West, they need look no further than this.

This man has just far too much executive power in which to follow his own (or rather his daughter's) political agenda.