Trump/Ukraine, What Will He Do?
News1 min ago
The Uk Government Finally Admits Brexit Is A Disaster
In 2018 Reece-mogg said that there would be no need for checks at Dover; the delays would not be at Dover, they would be at Calais (due to Brexit).
However the UK’s Department for Transport has recently signed a £200,000 yearly contract with RE:ACT (the disaster response charity) to ensure the welfare of lorry drivers gridlocked in Kent, which in the past has seen lorry queues of over 20 miles waiting to reach the ferry port.
So now the UK government is admitting that Brexit is a disaster – enlisting a disaster response charity to help out with Brexit.
From Re:act’s website:-
RE:ACT is a humanitarian charity that rapidly responds to disasters and emergencies...., deploying our highly trained RE:ACT Response Teams as soon as disaster strikes.
However the UK’s Department for Transport has recently signed a £200,000 yearly contract with RE:ACT (the disaster response charity) to ensure the welfare of lorry drivers gridlocked in Kent, which in the past has seen lorry queues of over 20 miles waiting to reach the ferry port.
So now the UK government is admitting that Brexit is a disaster – enlisting a disaster response charity to help out with Brexit.
From Re:act’s website:-
RE:ACT is a humanitarian charity that rapidly responds to disasters and emergencies...., deploying our highly trained RE:ACT Response Teams as soon as disaster strikes.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Hymie. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
From your latest post, "At the last election there was approximately 1240000 SNP voters,29% of whom also voted for Brexit-360000 SNP voters voted for Brexit."
You claimed earlier that "a majority of SNP voters voted for Brexit" or, in other words, more SNP voters voted for Brexit than voted to leave.
If there were 1,240,000 SNP voters and 360,000 of them voted for Brexit then 880,000 voted to remain.
Is 360,000 greater than 880,000 in the real world or is it only in your world?
You claimed earlier that "a majority of SNP voters voted for Brexit" or, in other words, more SNP voters voted for Brexit than voted to leave.
If there were 1,240,000 SNP voters and 360,000 of them voted for Brexit then 880,000 voted to remain.
Is 360,000 greater than 880,000 in the real world or is it only in your world?
Nice try, Hymie.
The “disaster relief” organisation you mention has not suddenly been handed a contract to cope with the “disaster that is Brexit” as you suggest and I see no indication that the government had “finally admitted” to Brexit being a disaster. It might have been useful if you had provided a link of some sort to support your claims. No matter, I’ve found one for you (and anybody else who might wonder what you’re talking about): If you read this article, you may see from it that RE:ACT was handed a small contract last May to provide tea and biscuits to queuing lorry drivers. All that has happened is that contract has been extended.
https:/
However, on a wider note, you may (or perhaps may not) recall that queues of lorries and cars trying to reach ferries at the Channel ports are by no means unusual and were regularly evident long before Brexit and long before the referendum was even announced. This is from as long ago as 1988 (caused by a dispute between P&O and the NUS):
https:/
This is from 2005, which describes changes to “Operation Stack” – the early scheme to cope with queues on the M20):
http://
From December 2008:
https:/
From 2011, describing a “summit” meeting to discuss ways of dealing with the problem:
https:/
This is from 2015 ( a full year before the referendum):
https:/
“For 24 of the past 40 days, the coast bound side of the M20 in Kent has been closed. Thousands of lorries bound for cross-Channel ferries in Dover have sat dormant on the motorway, their journeys paused because of problems with striking workers and immigrants disrupting services to Calais.”
From 2016, a month after the referendum result, describing the French reaction to it (when the UK was a full two years from implementing Article 50):
https:/
Operation Stack was first used in 1996 and in fact queues to cross the Channel from Dover were evident long before then. Whenever anything upsets anybody on the French side of the Channel (a few years ago this was most usually French fishermen blockading Calais and Boulogne because they had not been allowed to catch as many shrimps as they would like) lorries begin to queue in Kent. This time it is the French border people, egged on by their EU masters, upset at our departure from the EU and eager to protect their precious Single Market from contamination. Why you – or indeed anybody – expected anything less is difficult to understand. It would be most unusual for a year to pass without some sort of disruption at the Port of Dover because of French pique.
But as I said, nice try.
The “disaster relief” organisation you mention has not suddenly been handed a contract to cope with the “disaster that is Brexit” as you suggest and I see no indication that the government had “finally admitted” to Brexit being a disaster. It might have been useful if you had provided a link of some sort to support your claims. No matter, I’ve found one for you (and anybody else who might wonder what you’re talking about): If you read this article, you may see from it that RE:ACT was handed a small contract last May to provide tea and biscuits to queuing lorry drivers. All that has happened is that contract has been extended.
https:/
However, on a wider note, you may (or perhaps may not) recall that queues of lorries and cars trying to reach ferries at the Channel ports are by no means unusual and were regularly evident long before Brexit and long before the referendum was even announced. This is from as long ago as 1988 (caused by a dispute between P&O and the NUS):
https:/
This is from 2005, which describes changes to “Operation Stack” – the early scheme to cope with queues on the M20):
http://
From December 2008:
https:/
From 2011, describing a “summit” meeting to discuss ways of dealing with the problem:
https:/
This is from 2015 ( a full year before the referendum):
https:/
“For 24 of the past 40 days, the coast bound side of the M20 in Kent has been closed. Thousands of lorries bound for cross-Channel ferries in Dover have sat dormant on the motorway, their journeys paused because of problems with striking workers and immigrants disrupting services to Calais.”
From 2016, a month after the referendum result, describing the French reaction to it (when the UK was a full two years from implementing Article 50):
https:/
Operation Stack was first used in 1996 and in fact queues to cross the Channel from Dover were evident long before then. Whenever anything upsets anybody on the French side of the Channel (a few years ago this was most usually French fishermen blockading Calais and Boulogne because they had not been allowed to catch as many shrimps as they would like) lorries begin to queue in Kent. This time it is the French border people, egged on by their EU masters, upset at our departure from the EU and eager to protect their precious Single Market from contamination. Why you – or indeed anybody – expected anything less is difficult to understand. It would be most unusual for a year to pass without some sort of disruption at the Port of Dover because of French pique.
But as I said, nice try.
//Bob - Would you mind telling why you think ‘We can’t go back’. There are quite a number of ways by which this disaster can be mitigated, such as by rejoining the Single Market (which we only left on the insistence of the nutters in the ERG). Just doing that would cut the massive paperwork issues that so many companies have found to be unsupportable.//
Well its up to parties to put something about that in there manifestos for the 2024 election. Keirs not pushing for it now
Well its up to parties to put something about that in there manifestos for the 2024 election. Keirs not pushing for it now
//[email protected]
Absolutely right. Well said.//
Oh yes. Absolutely spot on (not):
//…such as by rejoining the Single Market (which we only left on the insistence of the nutters in the ERG)//
Wanting to leave the Single Market is not a symptom of mental illness. A Single Market is an absolutely great idea – good for trade and commerce. The Single Market operated by the European Union is not. It is a method of political control of a number of disparate nations by unelected bureaucrats. Basically: “Abide by all our legislation (whether it relates to trade/commerce or not) or be cast into the wilderness”. The idea of Brexit was to be rid of that control. Remaining in the Single Market and/or the Customs Union would not have seen that.
If the European Union is so bound up in its Federalist ambitions that it would see the hindrance of trade between its members and, for many of them, one of their biggest trading partners, it demonstrates perfectly that their ideology trumps their pragmatism. And so be it. There is no reason why the UK should indulge them in their fantasies.
//Well its up to parties to put something about that in there manifestos for the 2024 election. Keirs not pushing for it now//
And nor is anybody else. As time goes on, people in the UK will realise that the price to be paid for the convenience of the Single Market is far too high. Businesses will get used to filling in the EU’s copious forms in the right colour ink or (more likely, and preferably) they will seek to trade elsewhere.
Absolutely right. Well said.//
Oh yes. Absolutely spot on (not):
//…such as by rejoining the Single Market (which we only left on the insistence of the nutters in the ERG)//
Wanting to leave the Single Market is not a symptom of mental illness. A Single Market is an absolutely great idea – good for trade and commerce. The Single Market operated by the European Union is not. It is a method of political control of a number of disparate nations by unelected bureaucrats. Basically: “Abide by all our legislation (whether it relates to trade/commerce or not) or be cast into the wilderness”. The idea of Brexit was to be rid of that control. Remaining in the Single Market and/or the Customs Union would not have seen that.
If the European Union is so bound up in its Federalist ambitions that it would see the hindrance of trade between its members and, for many of them, one of their biggest trading partners, it demonstrates perfectly that their ideology trumps their pragmatism. And so be it. There is no reason why the UK should indulge them in their fantasies.
//Well its up to parties to put something about that in there manifestos for the 2024 election. Keirs not pushing for it now//
And nor is anybody else. As time goes on, people in the UK will realise that the price to be paid for the convenience of the Single Market is far too high. Businesses will get used to filling in the EU’s copious forms in the right colour ink or (more likely, and preferably) they will seek to trade elsewhere.
-- answer removed --
Latest Posts
Crime Cases Still Using Cassettes
Technology35 mins ago
Horror As 'Man Doused In Bleach' In Busy...
News47 mins ago
Is This Man A Good Pick For Secretary Of...
News67 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.