Topic: Brexit: "Vultus inanis est et mori in fossa ego sum!"

[So… Howard Philips]

Congrats to Al and Oldfordie for such a detailed analysis of the motor industry.

I bet you not one Cabinet or Shadow Cabinet minister would have one iota of their knowledge.

[The Gulleysucker]

I do remember similar things. I must be old.

It's just come back to me, it was ECMA ...The European Car Manufacturers Association that was driving it at the time

No idea if that body is still in existence.

.....
Personally I think Brexit will cause issues but I don't think they are insurmountable.

Undoubtedly, alternative ways or reversion to old ways must be found or adopted or else it's sink for quite a lot of industry, not just the Auto industry.

Unfortunately the cost is likely going to be considerable and it will inevitably be passed on to the consumers with all consequent effects.

And there's going to be trade wars I fear and I'm not confident we here in the UK are in any way prepared or are capable of winning them.

[ShakaHislop]

I do remember similar things. I must be old.

With regards to 3D printing -I don't think it would solve the JIT problem, you need metal powder to build the parts from, the powder has to come from somewhere. And depending on which parts are to be made, the powder composition has to change to create different material characteristics. It is probably not too dissimilar from machining the parts directly.





Al, I agree the EU is not perfect. I'm still a bit uneasy about having to defend it that much. It is build for the market, not for the people. It is pretty horrible to those outside the EU. However, this EU is still better than no EU. I guess the likes of Corbyn have never been able to get over their opposition to the EU and can't see how much for the better lives across Europe have changed, even if the setup isn't like we would want it.

What would an EU "for the people" look like?

[Red-Soldier]

What would an EU "for the people" look like?

Bit of an expansive question there.

Here's an example of how the EU aren't being very good towards an endangered species:

Indian courts ban multi-dose vials of Diclofenac – another step in the right direction to save Southern Asia vultures from extinction

The terrible consequences of the widespread use of Diclofenac (a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory veterinary drug) to treat domestic cattle in the Indian subcontinent have been largely discussed and documented since the mysterious declines of vulture populations (between 95-99% in less than 20 years) and Diclofenac were linked for the first time in 2003. The fast reaction and combined efforts of NGOs, scientific community and the Governments managed to force a ban on the drug in the region, which resulted in a slowdown of this decline, although numbers of most species were incredibly depleted. The conservation actions undertaken to revert the crisis have now started to show some encouraging results, but the battle is far from over.

https://www.4vultures.org/2017/11/04/the-sanitary-workers-get-some-backup-in-india/

Vultures are declining world-wide, but Europe used to be a safe place. 3 years ago this changed radically when approval was given to the commercialisation of veterinary diclofenac. Today, we launch a new international campaign in Spain, Portugal and Italy that aims to ban the drug that could wipe out Europe’s vultures… just as it has already nearly done in Asia.

https://www.birdlife.org/europe-and-central-asia/news/ban-vet-diclofenac

[redbyrdz]

What would an EU "for the people" look like?

It wouldn't necessarily look very different, but the underlying values would be different. The EU was build to have a political framework for the common market. The four freedoms, the cornerstones of the EU, are there to make the market work. People do not come into it, their only value to the market is their labour, so they are only exist as workers. This is probably the most obvious example, freedom of movement only exists for workers, labour is just a resource. If you don't work, you have no freedom to move. Its capitalism in its pure form.

[oldfordie]

It wouldn't necessarily look very different, but the underlying values would be different. The EU was build to have a political framework for the common market. The four freedoms, the cornerstones of the EU, are there to make the market work. People do not come into it, their only value to the market is their labour, so they are only exist as workers. This is probably the most obvious example, freedom of movement only exists for workers, labour is just a resource. If you don't work, you have no freedom to move. Its capitalism in its pure form.

I think the origiganal concept of FOM was for workers but it just doesn't apply to workers now, if it did then Spain wouldn't have thousands of UK pensioners claiming their right to FOM.
AFAIK, any UK person can move to any EU country and sit on the beach all day if they have the means to afford to live that lifestyle. they can move no questions asked for up to 3 months, they will then have to apply for recidency, if they can show they have health care coverage and money to support themselves then they can live where they want inside the EU.
The 4 freedoms make the single market work.

Barnier said the EU would not shift its own red line on the single market, which he said was “not and never should be seen as a big supermarket; it is economic, cultural and social life, it should be developed in all its dimensions”.

[redbyrdz]

I think the origiganal concept of FOM was for workers but it just doesn't apply to workers now, if it did then Spain wouldn't have thousands of UK pensioners claiming their right to FOM.
AFAIK, any UK person can move to any EU country and sit on the beach all day if they have the means to afford to live that lifestyle. they can move no questions asked for up to 3 months, they will then have to apply for recidency, if they can show they have health care coverage and money to support themselves then they can live where they want inside the EU.
The 4 freedoms make the single market work.

Barnier said the EU would not shift its own red line on the single market, which he said was “not and never should be seen as a big supermarket; it is economic, cultural and social life, it should be developed in all its dimensions”.

FOM is for workers. There are exeptions for those looking for work, students, and pensioners with enough money. Read it up on the EU site, I'd post a link but I'm on my phone.

[Iska]

Every EU National has it for 3 months no matter what they’re doing.  You have it for 5 years if you’re economically active, i.e. a worker, self-employed, a student or self-sufficient (which is how pensioners have it).  After 5 years in a country you’re entitled to reside there permanently.

Anybody using free movement rights beyond the basic 3 months one can bring their family with them.

Anyway the Second Referendum seems to be attracting more support by the day.  I’d say it’s the more likely option now, except that inertia still favours the wrong side.

[ShakaHislop]

It wouldn't necessarily look very different, but the underlying values would be different. The EU was build to have a political framework for the common market. The four freedoms, the cornerstones of the EU, are there to make the market work. People do not come into it, their only value to the market is their labour, so they are only exist as workers. This is probably the most obvious example, freedom of movement only exists for workers, labour is just a resource. If you don't work, you have no freedom to move. Its capitalism in its pure form.

So you would like to see free movement kept, but be made more unconditional (aka the work requirement dropped)? I wouldn't disagree with that. What are the other actual policies you'd like to see implemented to make the EU more to your liking? That's what I'm looking for, rather than arguments about values which to be frank, I find a bit of a cop-out. The EU is what we make of it, just like our local councils and national governments are.

If you believe the UK can be taken in a more left-wing/"socialist" (which has far too broad a meaning these days) through a change in government, despite the fact that you're appealing to the same electorate that has elected Tory governments for the past 3 elections, then I don't understand why you wouldn't believe change in possible in the EU by getting more left-wing MEPs elected, and helping left-wing governments in other countries be elected so they have more representatives on the Commission; European Council and Council of Ministers.

[ShakaHislop]

Bit of an expansive question there.

Here's an example of how the EU aren't being very good towards an endangered species:

Indian courts ban multi-dose vials of Diclofenac – another step in the right direction to save Southern Asia vultures from extinction

The terrible consequences of the widespread use of Diclofenac (a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory veterinary drug) to treat domestic cattle in the Indian subcontinent have been largely discussed and documented since the mysterious declines of vulture populations (between 95-99% in less than 20 years) and Diclofenac were linked for the first time in 2003. The fast reaction and combined efforts of NGOs, scientific community and the Governments managed to force a ban on the drug in the region, which resulted in a slowdown of this decline, although numbers of most species were incredibly depleted. The conservation actions undertaken to revert the crisis have now started to show some encouraging results, but the battle is far from over.

https://www.4vultures.org/2017/11/04/the-sanitary-workers-get-some-backup-in-india/

Vultures are declining world-wide, but Europe used to be a safe place. 3 years ago this changed radically when approval was given to the commercialisation of veterinary diclofenac. Today, we launch a new international campaign in Spain, Portugal and Italy that aims to ban the drug that could wipe out Europe’s vultures… just as it has already nearly done in Asia.

https://www.birdlife.org/europe-and-central-asia/news/ban-vet-diclofenac

A law-making body has made a bad policy decision. So do local councils and national governments, but I don't hear Eurosceptics calling for the British people to break away from those bodies as a result. I find that a lot of the people who claim the EU needs to "reform" or is "undemocratic" are basically put out that the decisions don't always go their way, and we'd be all better off if they spent their time campaigning to reverse what they feel are bad decisions, as the organisation in your post is doing, than campaigning for us to do the political equivalent of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut and leave the EU.

[Riquende]

Gove apparently on TV telling the hard liners not to worry too much about Chequers as it can always be ripped up later. Good job nobody on the continent speaks English or they'd uncover the dastardly scheme!

[ShakaHislop]

Every EU National has it for 3 months no matter what they’re doing.  You have it for 5 years if you’re economically active, i.e. a worker, self-employed, a student or self-sufficient (which is how pensioners have it).  After 5 years in a country you’re entitled to reside there permanently.

Anybody using free movement rights beyond the basic 3 months one can bring their family with them.

Anyway the Second Referendum seems to be attracting more support by the day.  I’d say it’s the more likely option now, except that inertia still favours the wrong side.

London mayor Sadiq Khan calls for second Brexit vote

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45537784

Appearing on BBC One's Andrew Marr Show, Mr Khan was shown comments he made to LBC radio after the Brexit referendum, in which he warned a fresh poll would lead to "even more cynicism" among voters.

He told Marr: "It's really important that this is not a re-run of the referendum but the British public having a say for the first time on the outcome."

Pushed on what voters should be asked in a fresh vote, he said it should be a choice between the government's deal and remaining in the EU.

I understand why people are trying to portray a "People's Vote" and a 2nd referendum/"re-run" as two distinct things, but they aren't really. I'm willing to look past it if it leads to us eventually Remaining but it does feel like yet another example of politicians taking the public for fools. In an ideal world, a senior politican would have the balls to say "yes, it is a re-run and there's nothing wrong with that because a mistake was made the first time"

[Iska]

In an ideal world, a senior politican would have the balls to say "yes, it is a re-run and there's nothing wrong with that because a mistake was made the first time"

If it’s a straight rerun then you have to get people to admit they were wrong first time.  If you pretend it’s a new question then you give them a ladder to climb down, and someone to blame into the bargain (hopefully not the EU for once, lest we end up back here in another decade).  Honesty’s all well and good in the abstract, but this is definitely a time when I’d rather not have it in real life.

[oldfordie]

London mayor Sadiq Khan calls for second Brexit vote

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45537784

I understand why people are trying to portray a "People's Vote" and a 2nd referendum/"re-run" as two distinct things, but they aren't really. I'm willing to look past it if it leads to us eventually Remaining but it does feel like yet another example of politicians taking the public for fools. In an ideal world, a senior politican would have the balls to say "yes, it is a re-run and there's nothing wrong with that because a mistake was made the first time"

If it's a re run of the last referndum then the question on the ballot paper will be the same. the question will be different so it's not a re run of the last referndum.
This would be another referndum asking voters a different question, a different choice.
We might have to have 2 referndums as I can see leave voters going berzerk if the ballot paper has 3 questions.
1 Remain in the EU.
 2 Accept the deal on offer and leave the EU.
 3 Leave the EU with no deal.
IMO. Leave may argue options 2+3 will split the leave vote so it's unfair.
Only way around that is to hold 2 referndums and drop the option with the least votes.
Final referendum would be Remain in the EU or accept deal.
Remain in the EU or leave with no deal.

[Red-Soldier]

A law-making body has made a bad policy decision. So do local councils and national governments, but I don't hear Eurosceptics calling for the British people to break away from those bodies as a result. I find that a lot of the people who claim the EU needs to "reform" or is "undemocratic" are basically put out that the decisions don't always go their way, and we'd be all better off if they spent their time campaigning to reverse what they feel are bad decisions, as the organisation in your post is doing, than campaigning for us to do the political equivalent of using a sledgehammer to crack a nut and leave the EU.

Yeah, I know.  I just gave an example of how the EU is failing an endangered species.  Not sure why you had to add all the rest  of the lecture 

I campaigned strongly for Remain, handed out leaflets, engaged with the public etc.  Possibly did more than yourself 

[rob1966]

If it's a re run of the last referndum then the question on the ballot paper will be the same. the question will be different so it's not a re run of the last referndum.
This would be another referndum asking voters a different question, a different choice.
We might have to have 2 referndums as I can see leave voters going berzerk if the ballot paper has 3 questions.
1 Remain in the EU.
 2 Accept the deal on offer and leave the EU.
 3 Leave the EU with no deal.
IMO. Leave may argue options 2+3 will split the leave vote so it's unfair.
Only way around that is to hold 2 referndums and drop the option with the least votes.
Final referendum would be Remain in the EU or accept deal.
Remain in the EU or leave with no deal.

Big problem with asking them questions alone, is the leavers all still think that even a no deal is a better option. The Brexit supporting fucker who runs Wetherspoons said the other day that we should just leave without a deal as then that allows free trade with everybody.

People need educating on exactly what the option is and unless it is put in black and white the honest pro's and cons, then it will still be a misinformed choice. Before the referendum, I had leavers say to me we will get a Norway type deal, which they honestly believed was better than what we already have 

[ShakaHislop]

If it's a re run of the last referndum then the question on the ballot paper will be the same. the question will be different so it's not a re run of the last referndum.
This would be another referndum asking voters a different question, a different choice.
We might have to have 2 referndums as I can see leave voters going berzerk if the ballot paper has 3 questions.
1 Remain in the EU.
 2 Accept the deal on offer and leave the EU.
 3 Leave the EU with no deal.
IMO. Leave may argue options 2+3 will split the leave vote so it's unfair.
Only way around that is to hold 2 referndums and drop the option with the least votes.
Final referendum would be Remain in the EU or accept deal.
Remain in the EU or leave with no deal.

It may be a different question, but in practice, I'd argue against it being a different choice. Remain vs a deal, or Remain vs no deal is still ultimately Remain vs Leave as it was in 2016. Both do test the nerve of 2016 Leave voters though. Are you desperate enough for Brexit that you'll either risk the potential economic damage of No Deal, or desperate enough to become "a rule taker not a rule maker" for the forseeable future just to make sure Brexit itself happens. A truly different choice, and certainly not one I'm hoping for, would be a deal vs No Deal, with no Remain option.

A 3 question referendum would be a nightmare and pointless, as neither side likes Chequers (the most likely basis for a deal at this point) anyway. Just cut to the chase and do Remain vs No Deal.

[ShakaHislop]

Yeah, I know.  I just gave an example of how the EU is failing an endangered species.  Not sure why you had to add all the rest  of the lecture 

I campaigned strongly for Remain, handed out leaflets, engaged with the public etc.  Possibly did more than yourself

My question wasn't "how is the EU failing an endangered species" so apologies for my own irrelevant response to yours.

I'm not sure why the bit in bold was necessary either.

[oldfordie]

Big problem with asking them questions alone, is the leavers all still think that even a no deal is a better option. The Brexit supporting fucker who runs Wetherspoons said the other day that we should just leave without a deal as then that allows free trade with everybody.

People need educating on exactly what the option is and unless it is put in black and white the honest pro's and cons, then it will still be a misinformed choice. Before the referendum, I had leavers say to me we will get a Norway type deal, which they honestly believed was better than what we already have 

I don't think we have much choice though, theres only 2 ways to sort this mess out and thats for Parliament to admit voters are not going to get the Brexit they voted for so Brexit has to be stopped.
They haven't got the balls to do this, they are arguing people voted for this to happen so we must leave the EU.
The other choice is a referndum on what we know Brexit is now, it's not the easiest deal in history that gives us tarrif free frictionless trading with lots of countries queuing up to sign trade deals, it's not something that will make us financially better off so we can build lots hospitals every week and walk into A+E and be whizzed through as the service will dramiticlly improve.
You are right though, if we do have a referndum then it has to be handled more responsable.
I wouldn't mind if they delayed broadcasting of the debates for scrutiny so they can correct any of the lies or missleading arguments made by either side. or at least get somebody like Jason Hunter to scrutinise for remain, leave can chose whoever they want. they can but in and say stop right their, thats not true and explain the facts on why it's not true.

[Zeb]

Gove apparently on TV telling the hard liners not to worry too much about Chequers as it can always be ripped up later. Good job nobody on the continent speaks English or they'd uncover the dastardly scheme!

Either he's stupid or he's shading the truth. Probably the latter. Any political agreement as part of the Withdrawal Agreement can be torn up. Any legal agreement not so much. That's why Ireland want Northern Ireland to be treated as a legal agreement. It's a good pitch for him for the leadership election though if the headbangers continue to be as dimwitted about this kind of detail as they have been so far.

[Trada]

All the News is saying that Khan said the only way forward is a peoples vote and he can see no other way forward when he fact he said he wants a general election first and if that doesn't happen a peoples vote.

[Lush is the best medicine...]

All the News is saying that Khan said the only way forward is a peoples vote and he can see no other way forward when he fact he said he wants a general election first and if that doesn't happen a peoples vote.

because the Tories have zero reason to call an election, so that point is moot as labour have committed to Brexit if they win an election as per thornberrys comments

[oldfordie]

It may be a different question, but in practice, I'd argue against it being a different choice. Remain vs a deal, or Remain vs no deal is still ultimately Remain vs Leave as it was in 2016. Both do test the nerve of 2016 Leave voters though. Are you desperate enough for Brexit that you'll either risk the potential economic damage of No Deal, or desperate enough to become "a rule taker not a rule maker" for the forseeable future just to make sure Brexit itself happens. A truly different choice, and certainly not one I'm hoping for, would be a deal vs No Deal, with no Remain option.

A 3 question referendum would be a nightmare and pointless, as neither side likes Chequers (the most likely basis for a deal at this point) anyway. Just cut to the chase and do Remain vs No Deal.

If this was just about a yes or no question of leaving or remaining in the EU then we can sort this mess out in no time, accept a Norwegian deal and the major problems are solved. what would leave voters say to that, some would say we never voted for that we voted for this or that. some would say I voted leave but I voted believing we would stay in the single market,am sure you know I could go on why other people voted leave, the hard core leave are dictating what the yes or no Brexit is, they want to define what the vote to leave actually means, that's not democracy,  they haven't the right to do this.
Another referndum wouldn't ask a question of yes or no, the question would be on what Brexit will be, do you want this or that.

[ShakaHislop]

Brexit: PM says 'it's either my deal or no deal'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45543609

According to a Comres survey, 50% of British adults feel the overall impact will be negative, whereas 41% think it will be positive.

When asked about the handling of Brexit negotiations, almost 79% of people polled thought that the government had handled them badly, and 63% thought the EU had handled them badly.

aka 63% are put out because the EU has wiped the floor with the UK in negotiations thus far rather than doing its expected duty for Queen and country by bending over.

[The Gulleysucker]

It's not strictly just about Brexit, more the state of the nation viewed through Walsall, but this series looks like it could be revealing.

Part 1 here ... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2018/sep/17/brexit-breakdown-part-1-why-are-the-tories-winning-walsall

It's undoubtedly a tad lightweight and unscientific, but nevertheless, I found it an interesting if depressing few minutes to watch and listen to though I'd be the first to acknowledge I might be suffering an element of comfirmation bias in how I am viewing it, in it suggesting what I already suspect.

[kavah]

^ Yea, if the Tories are winning in places like Walsall, there is nothing down for us.
The low turnout must have something to do with it, how can Labour mobilize the indifferent.

Clearly the Daily Mail and The Sun (and Facebook news) have done their job very well in the Midlands.

very interesting Gulley, thanks for posting

[The Gulleysucker]

Yes, not wishing to derail the thread but Labour really should be steamrollering the opposition in a place like Walsall and if they aren't, there is little hope really.

As to why they aren't, that's for a different thread, but there was an interesting bit from that woman who ran the newagents saying that no one even believes facebook anymore either.

Now obviously a sample of one is to be viewed with utmost caution, but it could be interesting if that's a commonly held view that hasn't been picked up yet by those who view facebook/social media as a new means to getting a breakthrough over voter apathy and making them engage.

It could be that perhaps this is an early indicator that not only is trust in Politicians of any persuasion but also trust in any media is at an all time low amongst that portion of voters, the ones who aren't signed up to any project and who could perhaps make a real difference in an election.

Edit: And just to add, Putins or third party bots may well have done their job and achieved their objective of sowing this distrust.

[Iska]

there was an interesting bit from that woman who ran the newagents saying that no one even believes facebook anymore either.

Now obviously a sample of one is to be viewed with utmost caution, but it could be interesting if that's a commonly held view that hasn't been picked up yet by those who view facebook/social media as a new means to getting a breakthrough over voter apathy and making them engage.

It could be that perhaps this is an early indicator that not only is trust in Politicians of any persuasion but also trust in any media is at an all time low amongst that portion of voters, the ones who aren't signed up to any project and who could perhaps make a real difference in an election.

That’s very encouraging imo, socially, I take the opposite from it.  It suggests we’re learning to do the internet right again.  It has to lead to a revival of professional media, unless we’re going to be a society where nobody believes in or is interested in anything.  I don’t think we are that place.  Certainly it fits with my own journey, where I realised last year that on some emotive subjects you simply can’t find any information online at all, everything’s propaganda.

To get philosophical about it, it’s one thing that a belligerent Russia is useful for, always having this bogeyman around poisoning things, sometimes literally, to keep our societies from getting complacent and selling absolutely everything off for cheap, whether that’s outsourcing security or our ability to read things critically.  (PS I wrote this before seeing your edit - I think we agree, but on my view the bots ultimately do us a service because if they didn’t take advantage someone else would’ve done.  Unfortunately democracies move slowly and always leave a window for the bad guys to exploit first.)

[oldfordie]

Brexit: PM says 'it's either my deal or no deal'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45543609

aka 63% are put out because the EU has wiped the floor with the UK in negotiations thus far rather than doing its expected duty for Queen and country by bending over.

I think Harold would be a bit pissed off with Johnsons remarks, a arrow in the eyes nothing to laugh at. History lesson Johnson, Battle of Hastings.


Mr Johnson's column in Monday's Daily Telegraph renews his attack on the plans.

He says the Chequers proposals "would mean for the first time since 1066 our leaders were deliberately acquiescing in foreign rule".

[rob1966]

I think Harold would be a bit pissed off with Johnsons remarks, a arrow in the eyes nothing to laugh at. History lesson Johnson, Battle of Hastings.


Mr Johnson's column in Monday's Daily Telegraph renews his attack on the plans.

He says the Chequers proposals "would mean for the first time since 1066 our leaders were deliberately acquiescing in foreign rule".

That is awful language to describe what is going on, what is he trying to do, create civil unrest and bigger divisions within the country? He's one of the c*nts responsible for pushing us into this position, the fucking psycopath.

[The Gulleysucker]

I hope you're right and yes I'd agree, it could be interpreted as an encouraging sign and I'd also tentatively agree with your view on the possible positive effects of bots.

The problem though is in that last sentence, or the implementation of a solution to it, in that I think the size of the window is seriously big and the bad guys have a head start and are not going to give it up anytime soon.

I fear this political miasma will likely last through several election cycles and by then much damage may have been done to the fabric of our society, some irreversable or only reversed at collossal and daunting cost, and in the meantime, a descent into cheap populism with simplistic panaceas (to the disinterested) may well have taken a stranglehold over the body politic.

[Alan_X]

All the News is saying that Khan said the only way forward is a peoples vote and he can see no other way forward when he fact he said he wants a general election first and if that doesn't happen a peoples vote.

And your point is?

[Johnnyboy1973]

Part 1 here ... https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2018/sep/17/brexit-breakdown-part-1-why-are-the-tories-winning-walsall

Love a bit of John Harris

[oldfordie]

That is awful language to describe what is going on, what is he trying to do, create civil unrest and bigger divisions within the country? He's one of the c*nts responsible for pushing us into this position, the fucking psycopath.

It shows you how low politics in this country has sunk now when someone like Johnson is considered popular.
If people really do want to change this country for the better then they should be showing MPs like Johnson the door. he doesn't give a s... about the people in this country, he belives voters are fools so he treats them like fools.

[FlashingBlade]

Question....with the Gordian knot that is Ireland ( and Alexander the Greats solution would have been similar....just build the border and see what happens...why is it assumed it will automatically lead to civil disorder?).....so whats planned for Gibralter?

[oldfordie]

Question....with the Gordian knot that is Ireland ( and Alexander the Greats solution would have been similar....just build the border and see what happens...why is it assumed it will automatically lead to civil disorder?).....so whats planned for Gibralter?

You only have to look at Irelands history to know civil unrest is likley, why do you assume it wouldn't lead to civil disorder?

[naka]

Question....with the Gordian knot that is Ireland ( and Alexander the Greats solution would have been similar....just build the border and see what happens...why is it assumed it will automatically lead to civil disorder?).....so whats planned for Gibralter?

cant wait for this border to be built
I live on the border and any sane man knows that to build it reinforces the partition, we have just spent nearly 25 years trying to smooth that point over with the GFA.

[filopastry]

You only have to look at Irelands history to know civil unrest is likley, why do you assume it wouldn't lead to civil disorder?

If you get a hard border in Ireland and the devolved government still not sitting in Belfast, combined with the UK government being in the DUP's back pocket, it would hardly be surprising if at least some people in the nationalist community started to ask what the hell they are getting out of the GFA

[ShakaHislop]

Jaguar workers put on three-day week until Christmas

About 1,000 workers at Jaguar's Castle Bromwich plant in Birmingham have been moved from a five-day to a three-day week until Christmas.

Jaguar Land Rover said it was making "temporary adjustments to our production schedules" at the factory.

It affects about half the plant's 2,000 workers, who will remain on full pay.

Jack Dromey, the Labour MP for Erdington, blamed "Brexit chaos and the mishandling by ministers of the transition from diesel" for the move.

He tweeted that both issues were a "growing threat" to the plant, which is the main Jaguar factory.

JLR said in a statement it was standard business practice to "regularly review its production schedules to ensure market demand is balanced globally".

"In light of the continuing headwinds impacting the car industry, we are making some temporary adjustments to our production schedules at Castle Bromwich," the carmaker said.

"We are, however, continuing to over-proportionally invest in new products and technologies and are committed to our UK plants, in which we have invested more than £4bn since 2010 to future-proof manufacturing technologies to deliver new models."

Last week, JLR boss Ralf Speth warned the government to get "the right Brexit" or risk big job cuts at the carmaker and wiping out its profits.

The production cutbacks come on the day that Sir Bernard Jenkin, the Tory MP and Brexit supporter, accused Mr Speth of scaremongering with his predictions.

"I'm afraid I think he's making it up. We've had figures made up all the time by the scaremongers in this debate and I'm afraid nobody believes them," he told the BBC's Today programme.

Sir Bernard's comments were described as "embarrassing" by pro-Remain Tory backbencher Anna Soubry.

JLR is owned by India's Tata Motors and employs 40,000 people directly, with another 260,000 working in its supply chain.

In July, Jaguar Land Rover warned that a "bad" Brexit deal would threaten £80bn worth of investment plans for the UK and could force it to close factories.

As well as Castle Bromwich, JLR also has plants in Halewood and Solihull.

Last year, it made more than 600,000 cars, a fifth of which were sold to mainland Europe.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45550025

[WhereAngelsPlay]

And it will only get worse.