Purgatory: Brexit V - The Final Reckoning?

lowlands_boylowlands_boy Shipmate
edited October 2021 in Limbo
The thread "Brexit IV; do or die in a ditch?" doesn't seem to have had any posts since October 3rd and has sunk to the 3rd page. On the one hand, that's not surprising as the US elections seem to have been quite important, as has the whole Covid business. On the other, it is quite surprising as we're getting pretty close to the business end of proceedings now, and last night Boris discussed fish over fish that apparently didn't end very well. Seemingly there's an English Channel's worth of gap between the UK and the EU.

The EU have set out some plans if all else fails, and apparently the latest and greatest final date is this coming Sunday 13th December.

So, is it the final reckoning?
Tagged:
«13456717

Comments

  • We're doomed!!!!
  • RussRuss Deckhand, Styx
    Either the EU bodies will act in the economic interests of everybody and agree a trade deal. Or they'll act in the interests of discouraging others from leaving by demanding tribute as the price of a deal.

    Will it be alright on the night? No idea. I've no faith.
  • I doubt it. I think negotiations between UK and EU will drag on for years, just as they do for any bilateral relationship.
  • I doubt it. I think negotiations between UK and EU will drag on for years, just as they do for any bilateral relationship.

    We'd best all make a donation to The Ship so we can keep discussing the latest then.

    Of course in all seriousness there is an apparently insurmountable deadline at the end of this year when there will be the big change from the transition period to what looks like no deal - at least for the time being. Something else might happen years down the line, but it's not looking very healthy for the short term.
  • BoogieBoogie Heaven Host
    Something else will happen down the line.

    We’ll need a change of government first.
  • Furtive GanderFurtive Gander Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Maybe the EU side should call their ("our") bluff:-

    "Right then, let's call a halt to these deadlocked 'talks' as we can see it's going nowhere. We'll manage with our massive population and market and internal argreements on trade and everything else. It'll cost us but nowhere near as much as it'll cost the UK. We'll have all the borders, delays, tarriffs, visas and costs resulting from your decision to leave us (with no attempt to discuss or understand the consequences of leaving). We'll allow current student courses to conclude under current terms and we'll be ready to talk again in a year - if you ask us nicely.
    Good Luck - you'll need it!
    "
  • Russ wrote: »
    Either the EU bodies will act in the economic interests of everybody and agree a trade deal. Or they'll act in the interests of discouraging others from leaving by demanding tribute as the price of a deal.

    The UK as eternal victim.
  • BroJamesBroJames Purgatory Host
    Russ wrote: »
    Either the EU bodies will…

    You could equally well say Either the UK leaders will act in the economic interests of everybody and agree that free trade requires a level playing field and agree a trade deal. Or they'll act in their own short term political interests, and claim that the only reason the UK can’t have the political and economic unicorn they promised is because of EU intransigence.
  • Given the now almost inevitable No-Deal, ISTM that this thread has the potential to become as Hellish as the Hell thread IYSWIM...

    O frabjous day!
    Not.
  • The EU already publishing proposals for no deal arrangements on haulage, flights, fish, etc., in return for level playing field. This is the deal after no deal, or, if you like, Hotel California, you can check out any time, but you can never leave.
  • Yes, and the English *government* is apparently unwilling to accept the deal-after-no-deal.
    https://theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/dec/10/brexit-dominic-raab-eu-trade-deal-boris-johnson-covid-live-updates

  • The most amusing clause is that negotiations would continue next year.
  • BoogieBoogie Heaven Host
    Yes, and the English *government* is apparently unwilling to accept the deal-after-no-deal.
    https://theguardian.com/politics/live/2020/dec/10/brexit-dominic-raab-eu-trade-deal-boris-johnson-covid-live-updates

    Refusing to keep the roads and air routes open? They really want us to become self sufficient, don’t they!?
  • That's the first reaction, as ERG have said, how horrid, but no doubt conversations will continue. It does seem odd, if EU say, here's how to keep roads, flights, fishing, going, and Brits say no. Our lorries don't need roads. I expect there will be a no deal deal, or side deals.
  • The most amusing clause is that negotiations would continue next year.

    I'm not sure that *amusing* is quite the word that springs to mind...
    :disappointed:
  • TurquoiseTasticTurquoiseTastic Kerygmania Host
    It's interesting that Ulster Unionists seem to have largely come around to accepting Irish Sea checks on goods. There doesn't seem to be the huge angst about this that I might have expected.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Pragmatism, perhaps, is the order of the day, rather than angst...

    I see that *England* is to relax EU safety rules as regards lorry-drivers' hours over the Christmas period, in order to minimise delays. Hauliers are not too keen on this, as safety is likely to be impaired, so watch out for tired truckers veering from lane to lane on the motorways of England.

    One or two massive pile-ups are all that's needed to bring Kent to a standstill, at the best of times.

    We really are descending into the maelstrom...
  • Pragmatism, perhaps, is the order of the day, rather than angst...

    I see that *England* is to relax EU safety rules as regards lorry-drivers' hours over the Christmas period, in order to minimise delays. Hauliers are not too keen on this, as safety is likely to be impaired, so watch out for tired truckers veering from lane to lane on the motorways of England.

    One or two massive pile-ups are all that's needed to bring Kent to a standstill, at the best of times.

    We really are descending into the maelstrom...

    Hauliers will not be doing any more hours than they want to.
    Russ wrote: »
    Either the EU bodies will act in the economic interests of everybody and agree a trade deal. Or they'll act in the interests of discouraging others from leaving by demanding tribute as the price of a deal.

    Will it be alright on the night? No idea. I've no faith.

    Unusual to read a bit of criticism of the EU on here

  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Lyrics by Tim Rice
    Performed by Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage

    Nothing is so good it lasts eternally
    Perfect situations must go wrong
    But this has never yet prevented us
    Wanting far too much
    For far too long

    Looking back
    We could have played it differently
    Won a few more moments
    Who can tell
    But it took time to understand them
    Now at least we know
    We know them well

    Wasn't it good?
    (Oh so good)
    Wasn't it fine?
    (Oh so fine)
    Isn't it madness
    It can't be mine?
    But in the end
    We needs a little bit
    More than us
    More security
    We need our fantasy and freedom
    We know them so well

    No-one in your life is with you constantly
    No-one is completely on your side
    And though we'd move our world to be with them
    Still the gap between us is too wide

    Didn't we know?
    How it would go
    If we knew from the start
    Why are we falling apart?





  • Leorning CnihtLeorning Cniht Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    We'll have all the borders, delays, tarriffs, visas and costs resulting from your decision to leave us (with no attempt to discuss or understand the consequences of leaving).

    To be fair to the Brexiteers, the EU wouldn't discuss any possible future deal before the UK triggered article 50. To be fair to the EU, of course they bloody wouldn't.
    Telford wrote: »
    Hauliers will not be doing any more hours than they want to.

    UK-based hauliers have traditionally complained about trucks from certain EU countries being dangerous. I'd imagine the domestic hauliers' concern is more over tired foreign drivers being even more dangerous due to longer hours, and less over their own operations.


  • Telford wrote: »
    Pragmatism, perhaps, is the order of the day, rather than angst...

    I see that *England* is to relax EU safety rules as regards lorry-drivers' hours over the Christmas period, in order to minimise delays. Hauliers are not too keen on this, as safety is likely to be impaired, so watch out for tired truckers veering from lane to lane on the motorways of England.

    One or two massive pile-ups are all that's needed to bring Kent to a standstill, at the best of times.

    We really are descending into the maelstrom...

    Hauliers will not be doing any more hours than they want to.



    You miss the point. There will no doubt be pressure on haulage companies, and their drivers, to work longer - and therefore unsafe - hours.

  • Alan Cresswell Alan Cresswell Admin, 8th Day Host
    Telford wrote: »
    Pragmatism, perhaps, is the order of the day, rather than angst...

    I see that *England* is to relax EU safety rules as regards lorry-drivers' hours over the Christmas period, in order to minimise delays. Hauliers are not too keen on this, as safety is likely to be impaired, so watch out for tired truckers veering from lane to lane on the motorways of England.

    One or two massive pile-ups are all that's needed to bring Kent to a standstill, at the best of times.

    We really are descending into the maelstrom...

    Hauliers will not be doing any more hours than they want to.
    Hauliers won't be doing more hours than they're allowed. They will probably want to do more hours than that, because getting goods to their destinations as soon as possible gets them paid - and the more deliveries per man hour the more profit.

    This is a big issue here locally. Not far from here, next to the motorway, there are several companies specialising in delivering too and from the rest of Europe. They gather stuff at their yards, then the trucks set off in the evening when there's little traffic and thus fairly predictable journey times. The drivers can get to Dover within their limit of driving without an long break. Their trucks cross the Channel to be picked up by other drivers, and they pick up loads that have come the other way to drive back up the following night after they've had a sleep. Add even an hour to that journey time and the chances of them not being able to complete the drive increase dramatically and the whole business model they work on collapses, and the businesses will need to relocate further south - Carlisle, or maybe even into Lancashire if delays getting onto the ferry are too long.

  • I'm in NZ. The government here has been negotiating with the EU for a trade deal.

    As level playing fields are so important to the EU, I look forward to the EU agreeing to a level playing field with regards to agricultural products, ie, they remove farm subsidies and stop dumping cheap pork and frozen chips on our shores.
  • There does seem to me to be potential for hauliers to cut corners, as it were, in order to try to keep up - but that is where increased potential for accidents occurs.

    The restricted hours laid down by EU law (and to which this country subscribed) are there for a purpose.
  • The restricted hours laid down by EU law (and to which this country subscribed) are there for a purpose.

    Working lorry drivers longer is certainly one way to 'take back control', though it only works on one side of the channel. Incidentally, the lorry park currently doesn't have any permanent toilet facilities.
  • Which particular lorry park (aka Farage Garage) did you have in mind?
    :wink:
  • There does seem to me to be potential for hauliers to cut corners, as it were, in order to try to keep up - but that is where increased potential for accidents occurs.

    The restricted hours laid down by EU law (and to which this country subscribed) are there for a purpose.

    The law will be relaxed for those who don't cause accidents. Same as Emergency serrvices who speed and/or go through red traffic lights

  • Rubbish. Wherever did you get that gem from?
  • Which particular lorry park (aka Farage Garage) did you have in mind?
    :wink:

    The overflow in Kent -- it's also on a flood plain.
  • I thought that might be the one!
    :lol:
  • edited December 2020
    Telford wrote: »
    There does seem to me to be potential for hauliers to cut corners, as it were, in order to try to keep up - but that is where increased potential for accidents occurs.

    The restricted hours laid down by EU law (and to which this country subscribed) are there for a purpose.

    The law will be relaxed for those who don't cause accidents. Same as Emergency serrvices who speed and/or go through red traffic lights

    So not being able to see the future, we un-relax the law for those who cause an accident and prosecute them, leaving drivers who didn't cause an accident while driving long hours, unprosecuted? All fine, except for the victims of the accident.

    I have a friend who has driven class 1 in Europe, in and outside the EU. I don't like his stories of 24hr non-stop trips with match-sticks under the eyelids. Do folks realise just how heavy 44 cubic m of water, are? And if they are travelling at 60mph, what a big deal that is and how hard it is to stop?

    To give you a clue, at work today we scrapped a steel doughnut about 1m dia, 250mm wall thickeness and about 300mm deep. It weighed about 830kg. You're pulled up in traffic and a block of 50 of those things are advancing on you from the rear at 100kph. Do you want the driver to be awake?



  • What we are hearing over here is the squabble is mostly centered on fishing rights.
  • TelfordTelford Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    Rubbish. Wherever did you get that gem from?

    Sorry I did not know I was in the presence of a legal expert.
    Telford wrote: »
    There does seem to me to be potential for hauliers to cut corners, as it were, in order to try to keep up - but that is where increased potential for accidents occurs.

    The restricted hours laid down by EU law (and to which this country subscribed) are there for a purpose.

    The law will be relaxed for those who don't cause accidents. Same as Emergency serrvices who speed and/or go through red traffic lights

    So not being able to see the future, we un-relax the law for those who cause an accident and prosecute them, leaving drivers who didn't cause an accident while driving long hours, unprosecuted? All fine, except for the victims of the accident.

    I have a friend who has driven class 1 in Europe, in and outside the EU. I don't like his stories of 24hr non-stop trips with match-sticks under the eyelids. Do folks realise just how heavy 44 cubic m of water, are? And if they are travelling at 60mph, what a big deal that is and how hard it is to stop?

    To give you a clue, at work today we scrapped a steel doughnut about 1m dia, 250mm wall thickeness and about 300mm deep. It weighed about 830kg. You're pulled up in traffic and a block of 50 of those things are advancing on you from the rear at 100kph. Do you want the driver to be awake?
    The decision to relax the law was not my decision and I do not support it. I don't know why you felt the need to include the last two paragraphs.

  • Gee DGee D Shipmate
    edited December 2020
    BroJames wrote: »
    Russ wrote: »
    Either the EU bodies will…

    You could equally well say Either the UK leaders will act in the economic interests of everybody and agree that free trade requires a level playing field and agree a trade deal. Or they'll act in their own short term political interests, and claim that the only reason the UK can’t have the political and economic unicorn they promised is because of EU intransigence.

    And with much greater substance to that than there is in Russ's post.
  • Telford wrote: »
    Rubbish. Wherever did you get that gem from?

    Sorry I did not know I was in the presence of a legal expert.
    Telford wrote: »
    There does seem to me to be potential for hauliers to cut corners, as it were, in order to try to keep up - but that is where increased potential for accidents occurs.

    The restricted hours laid down by EU law (and to which this country subscribed) are there for a purpose.

    The law will be relaxed for those who don't cause accidents. Same as Emergency serrvices who speed and/or go through red traffic lights

    So not being able to see the future, we un-relax the law for those who cause an accident and prosecute them, leaving drivers who didn't cause an accident while driving long hours, unprosecuted? All fine, except for the victims of the accident.

    I have a friend who has driven class 1 in Europe, in and outside the EU. I don't like his stories of 24hr non-stop trips with match-sticks under the eyelids. Do folks realise just how heavy 44 cubic m of water, are? And if they are travelling at 60mph, what a big deal that is and how hard it is to stop?

    To give you a clue, at work today we scrapped a steel doughnut about 1m dia, 250mm wall thickeness and about 300mm deep. It weighed about 830kg. You're pulled up in traffic and a block of 50 of those things are advancing on you from the rear at 100kph. Do you want the driver to be awake?
    The decision to relax the law was not my decision and I do not support it.

    Right, so the last few posts where you were justifying it were just trolling then?
  • This thread seems to be moving in a Hellish direction. Thank you, Telford.
  • HugalHugal Shipmate
    As we have mentioned working hours, the government will have the right to stop the cap. I can see people working more hours and work life balance, bad as it is for some getting worse.
  • Yes - I know some people consider 60 hours "normal" but my head is saying "that's ten hours a day, Monday to Saturday, so say 8am to 6.30pm allowing for a lunch break so that's leaving for work around 7am and getting back arouns 7.30pm. That's not living. That's existing. And some people talk about 80, 90 hour weeks."
  • It's the usual teaching load - in school from 8:00am to 3:30pm teaching, after school clubs and meetings, leaving at 6pm, if you're lucky, marking, preparation and other stuff at home in the evenings and more at weekends. So 10 hours in school x 10 hours plus of marking and prep at home. Plus travel. It's very easy to get to 70-80 hour weeks.
  • Alan Cresswell Alan Cresswell Admin, 8th Day Host
    It's easy in some professions to get to stupid numbers of hours (in some cases for short periods, in others more or less every week). That it happens doesn't make it right. We should be asking how would we reduce the hours we ask our teachers (and others) to work, rather than saying because teachers work those hour everyone else should be expected to do so as well.

    [as an aside, I've a friend from Japan who's a teacher, and he took up a job in Ireland in part so that he could cut his hours to a mere 70 per week. Japanese high school teaching - get to school to supervise the breakfast club because many parents leave home so early that's needed at 7am. Then teach through 'til 4pm. Then after school clubs and additional classes 'til 7pm. Home to do the teaching prep and marking. Then Saturdays and Sundays running 'voluntary' sports and other clubs most of the day. Add in holiday clubs and extra classes ...]
  • Telford wrote: »
    Rubbish. Wherever did you get that gem from?

    Sorry I did not know I was in the presence of a legal expert.
    Telford wrote: »
    There does seem to me to be potential for hauliers to cut corners, as it were, in order to try to keep up - but that is where increased potential for accidents occurs.

    The restricted hours laid down by EU law (and to which this country subscribed) are there for a purpose.

    The law will be relaxed for those who don't cause accidents. Same as Emergency serrvices who speed and/or go through red traffic lights

    So not being able to see the future, we un-relax the law for those who cause an accident and prosecute them, leaving drivers who didn't cause an accident while driving long hours, unprosecuted? All fine, except for the victims of the accident.

    I have a friend who has driven class 1 in Europe, in and outside the EU. I don't like his stories of 24hr non-stop trips with match-sticks under the eyelids. Do folks realise just how heavy 44 cubic m of water, are? And if they are travelling at 60mph, what a big deal that is and how hard it is to stop?

    To give you a clue, at work today we scrapped a steel doughnut about 1m dia, 250mm wall thickeness and about 300mm deep. It weighed about 830kg. You're pulled up in traffic and a block of 50 of those things are advancing on you from the rear at 100kph. Do you want the driver to be awake?
    The decision to relax the law was not my decision and I do not support it.

    Right, so the last few posts where you were justifying it were just trolling then?
    Sorry. When did I support it? Not me doing the trolling
    Eirenist wrote: »
    This thread seems to be moving in a Hellish direction. Thank you, Telford.
    Why on earth are you thanking me.?

  • DafydDafyd Hell Host
    Telford wrote: »
    Telford wrote: »
    The law will be relaxed for those who don't cause accidents. Same as Emergency serrvices who speed and/or go through red traffic lights
    Rubbish. Wherever did you get that gem from?

    Sorry I did not know I was in the presence of a legal expert.
    There is considerable room for someone to be better informed than a 'person who repeats something they think they heard someone (they don't remember who) say on the telly (they don't remember when)' without qualifying as a 'legal expert'.
    You frequently talk as if you think you have the right to not be disagreed with.

    A moment's thought suggests that it is impossible to relax the law for drivers who don't cause accidents. It is only possible to relax the law for drivers who haven't caused accidents yet.
    Emergency services have sirens to signal that they may override the law and that they take priority. Also, they don't get to override the law for several hours but only in emergencies.

    So your statements are on the face of it highly implausible. Now, it may be that how things look on the face of it are deceiving and matters are in fact so. But as you have a track record of stating confidently and repeatedly things that you think you heard somebody (you don't remember who) say on the telly (you don't remember when), which nobody else can substantiate, you need to provide stronger evidence for your assertions before you can expect them to be taken seriously.
  • BerkeleyBerkeley Shipmate Posts: 39
    I was quite frustrated to listen to Boris Johnson's spin that we are heading for an Australian rather than Canadian deal. The BBC Radio 4 'fact checker' argued that this isn't true even as a more pleasant sounding synonym for a No Deal Brexit since Australia is looking for closer ties with the EU and already has free trade deals with its closest neighbours which we obviously wouldn't.
  • It's easy in some professions to get to stupid numbers of hours (in some cases for short periods, in others more or less every week). That it happens doesn't make it right. We should be asking how would we reduce the hours we ask our teachers (and others) to work, rather than saying because teachers work those hour everyone else should be expected to do so as well.

    [as an aside, I've a friend from Japan who's a teacher, and he took up a job in Ireland in part so that he could cut his hours to a mere 70 per week. Japanese high school teaching - get to school to supervise the breakfast club because many parents leave home so early that's needed at 7am. Then teach through 'til 4pm. Then after school clubs and additional classes 'til 7pm. Home to do the teaching prep and marking. Then Saturdays and Sundays running 'voluntary' sports and other clubs most of the day. Add in holiday clubs and extra classes ...]

    When do people do the things they actually want to do? I work to get money to do things I like; what would be the point if I had no time to do them?

    How do people live like this? I'd go mad. No doubt some people would conclude I'm lazy, despicable and weak.
  • It's the usual teaching load - in school from 8:00am to 3:30pm teaching, after school clubs and meetings, leaving at 6pm, if you're lucky, marking, preparation and other stuff at home in the evenings and more at weekends. So 10 hours in school x 10 hours plus of marking and prep at home. Plus travel. It's very easy to get to 70-80 hour weeks.

    I've never been more grateful that I failed my teaching degree.
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    It's easy in some professions to get to stupid numbers of hours (in some cases for short periods, in others more or less every week). That it happens doesn't make it right. We should be asking how would we reduce the hours we ask our teachers (and others) to work, rather than saying because teachers work those hour everyone else should be expected to do so as well.

    [as an aside, I've a friend from Japan who's a teacher, and he took up a job in Ireland in part so that he could cut his hours to a mere 70 per week. Japanese high school teaching - get to school to supervise the breakfast club because many parents leave home so early that's needed at 7am. Then teach through 'til 4pm. Then after school clubs and additional classes 'til 7pm. Home to do the teaching prep and marking. Then Saturdays and Sundays running 'voluntary' sports and other clubs most of the day. Add in holiday clubs and extra classes ...]

    When do people do the things they actually want to do? I work to get money to do things I like; what would be the point if I had no time to do them?

    How do people live like this? I'd go mad. No doubt some people would conclude I'm lazy, despicable and weak.

    It's a vocation. At least, teaching is. I guess on the other hand, there are many people being abused on the minimum wage (or quite possibly less) who presumably do their job because otherwise they have no money at all. Rather than "less money for stuff they enjoy".
  • How does "vocation" make up for not doing the things you enjoy doing?
  • Telford wrote: »
    Rubbish. Wherever did you get that gem from?

    Sorry I did not know I was in the presence of a legal expert.


    IANAL, but I used to drive Ambulances. I asked where you got this piece of information from. Please provide a link or citation.

  • Alan Cresswell Alan Cresswell Admin, 8th Day Host
    The concept of "vocation" in secular usage is doing something that you are qualified and suited to, with an overtone of it being something you enjoy or get satisfaction from. So, part of the "vocation" argument for long hours is that you're doing what you enjoy therefore you don't need as much extra time for yourself to do what you enjoy.

    I do a small amount of teaching, and would agree that it's something I enjoy, there's something about getting students to work through the subject so that they understand which is deeply satisfying. Hopefully the school will pass the environmental radioactivity course onto me when the current teacher retires and I can do more of that. But, I don't enjoy it enough for me to be satisfied if that was my full time job, and certainly not nearly double normal working hours.
  • KarlLB wrote: »
    How does "vocation" make up for not doing the things you enjoy doing?

    It doesn't, but it's become a handy way to excuse treating people like dirt because they are doing something worthwhile.
Sign In or Register to comment.