It has been reported this morning that work on the Fleet Solid Support Ships could go to Spain to silence Gibraltar claims.
First reported by the Daily Record here, it has been claimed that the £1 billion order for the ships is ‘being steered’ towards a Spanish yard in a deal over Gibraltar. The paper reports that:
“Senior GMB officials are furious over reports that the Navantia naval dockyard in the north of Spain has been chosen to build Fleet Solid Support vessels.”
As a point of clarification in response to remarks on social media about this topic, this news (if true) would impact Rosyth and not the Clyde. The Clyde isn’t bidding for this work (Rosyth is), the Clyde has no capacity to build the vessels (Rosyth does) and the Clyde wasn’t hoping for them (Rosyth is). We go into depth on this here.
GMB Scotland Secretary Gary Smith said:
“We have been clear that the contracts for the Royal Fleet Auxiliary vessels hold the key to the transformation of our shipbuilding sector.
Three 40,000-ton vessels would provide years of work for yards like Rosyth, where we are haemorrhaging jobs.”
Smith added: “Our fear is that working class shipbuilding communities have just had their futures sold down the river as a result of grubby Brexit politics. Against the backdrop of a ruinous Brexit, the loss of the RFAs would be an absolute betrayal of the UK shipbuilding sector by the Tory Government.”
Stewart McDonald, MP for Glasgow South and SNP Spokesperson for Defence, told me this morning:
“If UK and Scottish Shipbuilders are overlooked as suggested, then it will represent another betrayal of the workforce from which the Conservatives will not deserve to recover.”
Paul Sweeney, MP for Glasgow North East and All-Party Parliamentary Group for Shipbuilding & Ship Repair Vice-Chair, also told me this morning in reference to a recent debate (which will be explored further down in the article):
“It was telling that the Defence Procurement minister made no reply to the questions raised about the Fleet Solid Support ships in the debate this week and perhaps this is the reason why. The economic case for building the £1Bn FSS programme in the UK is self-evident and it nothing more than laissez faire Treasury dogma that is denying British industry this opportunity when it is the most beneficial option for the British economy and the long-term sustainability of the British shipbuilding industry.”
A Ministry of Defence spokesman said:
“We are required by law to procure the Fleet Solid Support ships through open international competition. We issued formal tender documents to bidders in late 2018. The final decision regarding the winning bid will be made in 2020.”
What’s the gist of the dispute around these support ships?
Former shipyard worker turned MP for Glasgow North East Paul Sweeney had earlier criticised the Government on their stance over the tendering process for these ships during a recent debate on UK sovereign capability. He pointed out:
“The Government’s approach to the fleet solid support ships contract is nothing short of absurd. The decision not to factor the socioeconomic value of defence contracts into the procurement process is economically illiterate and flies in the face of common sense. The Minister and I have batted this back and forth, as I mentioned, and I am sure that in a few minutes he will tell me that it is all about value for money for the taxpayer.
However, that argument falls apart because the contract’s socioeconomic value is not factored in at the procurement stage. The reported cost of the contract is £1 billion, but as studies such as those by the GMB union estimate, keeping the contract in the UK would secure up to 6,500 high-paid, high-skilled jobs, including almost 2,000 shipbuilding jobs that pay about 45% more than the average UK salary. Just think of the difference those jobs could make to the UK economy and to communities across Scotland.
At Rosyth, there is a gap between the completion of HMS Prince of Wales later this year and the expected refit of HMS Queen Elizabeth in 2030. The contract for the fleet solid support ships could ensure that the shipyard runs at smoother capacity during that timeframe. However, as I have said, the Government’s economic illiteracy could well prevent that from happening, leading to much greater inefficiency and costs down the line. I am sure the people of Fife will not let them get away with that. The Government are keen to celebrate the continuous at-sea deterrent, but I would much rather see continuous in-shipyard building across the country. We would far rather celebrate that.
That brings me to the fact that there is clearly no wider industrial strategy not only for the defence sector but for manufacturing as a whole. To use Fife as an example, the Government are refusing to keep the FSS contract in the UK. At the same time, not even 10 miles away, the BiFab yards in Burntisland are sitting there idle because of a lack of contracts. That is another example of the Government’s complete and utter short-sightedness.”
Stuart Andrew, The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence, replied with only a vague allusion to the points made:
“I want to emphasise the importance of the UK’s defence industry, both in delivering world-class military capabilities to our armed forces and in contributing to the UK economy. Last year’s report into the contribution of defence to UK prosperity by my right hon. Friend Mr Dunne showed that defence benefits every single part of the United Kingdom. It is a sector with an annual turnover of £22 billion supporting some 115,000 jobs. Scotland shares in that national success by benefiting directly from every pound spent on our defence, which is in itself the biggest defence budget in Europe.
The report highlighted the range and diversity of the defence industry across the whole of the UK, including in Scotland, and the UK Government’s support for the defence industry in Scotland. Last year, defence spend with industry in Scotland amounted to £1.65 billion, supporting some 10,000 jobs and equivalent to £300 per capita, which is above the UK average.”
The above is some more context on what Paul told me this morning, which was in reference to the recent debate (the full text of which can be found here, but I have repeated Paul’s response below):
“It was telling that the Defence Procurement minister made no reply to the questions raised about the Fleet Solid Support ships in the debate this week and perhaps this is the reason why.
The economic case for building the £1Bn FSS programme in the UK is self-evident and it nothing more than laissez faire Treasury dogma that is denying British industry this opportunity when it is the most beneficial option for the British economy and the long-term sustainability of the British shipbuilding industry.”
What’s the status of Rosyth?
Earlier in the year, the shipbuilding union GMB also reacted to 150 proposed job losses at Babcock Rosyth. The union cited the run down of the Prince of Wales contract and uncertainty around future workload, for example this FSS contract, as a reason for the job losses.
Ross Murdoch, GMB National Officer and CSEU National Chair of Shipbuilding:
“Once again we are paying the price for the Government’s betrayal of UK shipbuilding. Rather than ensure a steady drumbeat of shipbuilding orders that keep the industry alive, the Conservatives seem content to let UK shipbuilding die out in the name of the free market. Appledore is on the brink of closure, Cammell Laird is slashing jobs and now this. When will the Government step in to save our centuries old shipbuilding heritage.”
The Unite union also said the news was a “kick in the teeth”. Steve Turner, the union’s assistant general secretary for manufacturing, said:
“The men and women whose skills built the UK’s two new world-leading aircraft carriers at Rosyth are at risk of being lost for a generation in a blow to the Scottish economy and UK shipbuilding.”
Who is bidding?
It is hoped that the bid will be won by Team UK (a UK consortium consisting of Babcock International, BAE Systems, Cammell Laird and Rolls-Royce).
Overseas shipyards who have been invited to tender for the FSS programme include:
- Fincantieri: 70% owned by Fintecna S.p.A the Italian owned investment agency
- Navantia: 100% owned by the Spanish government
- Daewoo Shipbuilding and Marine Engineering (DSME): received a USD 6billion rescue package from the Korean Development Bank and Export-Import Bank of Korea
Can the UK government decide to restrict this contract to the UK?
Recently Sweeney (and many others from all sides of the Parliamentary divide) criticised the Government for failing to restrict the tendering for Fleet Solid Support Ships to the UK.
This isn’t the first time the Government rationale for tendering Fleet Solid Support Ships overseas criticised, especially with regards to what some have referred to as their “questionable usage” of Article 346.
What is Article 346?
EU law requires most government contracts to be procured via an open, competitive process. The main EU legislation in the defence domain is the Defence and Security Directive 2009/81/EC, transposed into UK law by Defence and Security Public Contracts Regulations 2011.13
However, Article 346 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides for an exemption to the procurement rules where a country considers it to be necessary for national security reasons: “any Member State may take such measures as it considers necessary for the protection of the essential interests of its security which are connected with the production of or trade in arms, munitions and war material”. Article 346 refers to a list drawn up in 1958 by the Council of Ministers of products to which the provisions
During a previous debate on UK sovereign capability, All-Party Parliamentary Group for Shipbuilding & Ship Repair Vice-Chair Sweeney said:
“In the context of major shipyard closures and significant downsizing, whether that is at Rosyth or Appledore, it is bizarre that the Government are quite happy to tender contracts overseas in international open competition.
Under article 346 of the treaty on the functioning of the European Union, the Government could quite easily designate the industry as UK protected. It is entirely at their discretion. Any notion that their hands are tied is bogus.
They could do that, smooth the production cycles and build a firm and stable footprint for UK shipyards, which would enable them to get match fit and then go out into the world and compete effectively for other orders. That is exactly what they do in Italy with Fincantieri, and what they do in France with DCNS. It is exactly what happens in Germany.
I do not understand why other European Union member states can achieve the same objectives much more effectively than us, but we are so holier than thou that it hurts when it comes to the zealous application of these EU rules and we seem to undermine our own industrial base and our prosperity as a result, meaning that communities are broken and skills are lost. Ultimately, we undermine our objective of building a more resilient and effective industrial base to serve our defence industry and, potentially, commercial spin-offs.”
This was also highlighted during the debate in this exchange, prompted by Stuart Andrew, Minister for Defence Procurement, saying the following:
“It is not a warship by definition, for the simple reason that the definition is based on the UK’s requirement to retain the ability to design, build and integrate frigates, destroyers and aircraft carriers for reasons of national security, ensuring that the complex nature of the construct is an important part of it from the very beginning. We will continue to have this argument—unions are coming to meet me very soon to discuss it.”
Sweeney responded:
“The Minister’s last remark about the need to maintain the UK’s sovereign capability to build complex warships being arbitrarily restricted to frigates, destroyers and aircraft carriers, the only reason we can build those ships in the UK today is that the last Labour Government placed an order for an auxiliary ship, the RFA Wave Ruler, at Govan shipyard in 1999, which enabled that yard to continue in operation.
Also, there are five River class batch 2 patrol vessels being built at Govan to sustain production there until the Type 26 kicks in. By utilising those less complex, but none the less complex, warships to smooth the build cycle, we can retain the skills, infrastructure and critical mass we need to build complex warships including frigates, destroyers and aircraft carriers.
We must look beyond that arbitrary restriction and maximise the purchasing power of the Ministry of Defence to deliver UK sovereign capability in the long term. We should broaden our horizons.”
Why do some believe the work should be restricted to the UK?
Unions GMB and the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions (CSEU), also published reports last year outlining why they believe the ships should be classified as warships and why they should be competed domestically. The Unions arguments can be summarised as:
- The FSS should be seen as warships. They are armed and take part in counter-piracy and counter-narcotic missions;
- The Government’s commitment to revitalising domestic naval shipbuilding (as espoused in the National Shipbuilding Strategy) will only be achievable with a steady stream of orders;
- Building the FSS in the UK will help protect the UK shipbuilding industry, protect jobs and retain skills: GMB estimates up to 6,500 jobs could be created or secured, including 1,805 shipyard jobs;
- Rosyth shipyard will have a gap between the completion of HMS Prince of Wales (the second aircraft carrier) in 2019 and the expected refit of HMS Queen Elizabeth (the first aircraft carrier) in 2030, and FSS work could keep the shipyard operational in between these dates;
- The UK will financially benefit from returns to the Treasury in the form of taxes and national insurance contributions and lower welfare payments: GMB estimates £285m of the estimated £1bn contract could be returned to taxpayers this way; CSEU estimates 20% of the contract cost could be returned to the Treasury;
- The Government should factor in the revenue that could be returned to the Treasury when scoring bids between domestic suppliers and foreign competitors;
- There isn’t a level playing field as, the CSEU argues, “many foreign yards are either state owned, or receive significant direct or indirect subsidy… UK yards do not benefit in this way and are therefore at an unfair disadvantage.”
The Trades Union Congress has also assessed the Article 346 exemption argument and argues the Government “has the sole right to determine” what its essential national security interests are.
The TUC claims “other European nations have used the exemption to place orders for similar support ships with their own shipyards since the Directive was introduced.”
What’s next?
December this year will see the formal issue of documentation inviting bids for the design and build contract and in 2020, the contract for design and build is to be awarded.
B…s – wouldn’t stop the Gib clamour anyway
Even ignoring the details and arguments of the EU rules there is no linkage to Gib.
And we should not have to abide by these rules anyway if it suits our security and our economy. But certainly the Treasury want to suck up to the EU. Hammond has been very poor.
There’s no restriction for doing this in the UK, as can be seen by such ships being built in other EU countries, this is just another UK decision that’s passing the blame to the EU.
I think this is totally made up fake news. It sounds implausible and would make no sense at all to either Spain or the UK.
The fact that this contract is out to open tender makes no sense either, Lee. Hasn’t stopped it happening.
On the Spanish side, it certainly makes sense: they’re never getting Gibraltar by maintaining claims that have no support in international law, so at least dropping them this way gets them a nice juicy contract.
On our side, the tragedy we call a government removes a roadblock to Brexit negotiations, which to them is great. Except it’s not Spain or even the EU causing all this mess, it’s the government and Parliament itself. Meanwhile, they go on blissfully ignoring the real world threats they’re constantly being warned about and not funding defence to counter.
So very true short terms prevails as usual in British Political Thinking. I wonder if they will be named after the Spanish Royal Family too… or maybe after ships of the Armada that should gain us an extra year or so of their silence. Difficult not to be cynical.
Open tender does make some sense. The idea that the Spanish would agree to lay down their claims to Gibraltar on the basis that they get a few ship builds is ludicrous. In the world of Fake news this is the perfect story to show how to spot it… It appeals to those that fail to think before they post though and to those that operate on feelings rather than sense, so it is the perfect story to make up in order to get some papers sold.
Open tender would make sense if everyone was competing to offer the lowest price, but given that it’s another fixed price contract for £1bn there’s no actual competition involved (unless I’ve misunderstood the phrase “£1bn contract”). From all the information available to us, to the unions, to the shipbuilders, and to MPs, the question is basically “pay £1bn overseas and lose Rosyth, or pay ~£800mn, sustain Rosyth, and protect thousands of jobs?”
I agree with you regarding fake news. As far as things go, this IS the perfect fake news story: ludicrous enough to get a response, but just believable enough that you can’t discount it immediately. I just hope it is fake news
a Fixed Price Contract does not mean they will not try to get the cheapest price it means that the contract will be agreed for a fixed price (ie the price is known and fixed at time of signing the contract) This just ensures that any over runs etc do not impact on the agreed amount. If a foreign yard offers to build them for £500 million and a UK yard offers to build them for £1.5 billion then it would obviously be best to go with the foreign yard. If the UK yard is only a little bit over the cost of the foreign yard then it would make sense to build in the UK.
It means that foreign yatrd is subsidized. If the Uk consortium come in at 1 Billion pounds, the report by Team provider or and GMB turning the tide give net cost at over 50% clawback, not including the benifits of investment in people and facilites as part of the condition and money staying withingn the UK. if this is true and political, we have no shipbuilding strategy and we may as well forget it. What and who really decline a sector and Country?
I hope this doesn’t happen, if it does then we know the government actually really doesn’t care about ship building in the UK…..
The Tories are still in Thatcher mode Im afraid whereby the myth that industry is not important to our economy still prevails, despite pretty much everyone who isn’t in that out of date mindset says different and that a balanced economy is vital. We will no doubt discover this the hard way when so many of our Finance and even Services jobs start to dissipate abroad over the coming years. Oh and of course it breaks the power of those pesky Unions which though effectively long achieved (apart from railways) I am sure so many in the Government are still convinced is the only thing between us becoming an economic marvel.
Anyone wanting to understand the problems with overly powerful Unions need to revisit the horror that was 70’s UK. Unions have a place but that place is in looking after workers against poor employers rather than running a political party and holding the country to ransom. Militant Unions are bad, moderate unions are good.
Another sellout! What guarantees do we have that IF we give these ship(s) contracts and they are built by the El Tapas nation for us that they, just at the end of shipbuilding just again reclaim their stance on ownership of Gibraltar?! Nothing. It’s like the same situation Kraft made with Cadbury, where Kraft made guarantees that it would not move Cadbury operations out of the UK if the takeover was completed but just a few years later it moved Cadbury operations out of the UK.
When will we ever learn?!
Where has this report come from? Presumably a leak and let’s hope they thoroughly investigate it!
Why are HMG trying to pay off the Spanish ? The people of Gibraltar have made their opinion perfectly clear. Does anyone believe that future Spanish governments would accept that their historic claim of sovereignty is waffle and not continue the current idiotic behaviour ? SMH.
This matter will never ever silence the spanish over the matter of Gibraltar. Anyone who thinks that is living in cuckoo land.
The matter of Gibraltar serves to filter the National governments problems at home away for the period of their internal problems, of which there are many. This is another blind folded attitude by the U.K. government to appease a foreign government who does not like, will never like the U.K. anyone who holidays in Spain is welcomed by a two faced nation. The Spanish DO NOT LIKE THE BRITS, but LOVE OUR MONEY.
The government’s argument is spurious and is making false equivalencies- and the unions and anyone else that cares about British industry should call them out on it.
Article 346 part b states (in full):
“any Member State may take such measures as it considers necessary for the protection of the essential interests of its security which are connected with the production of or trade in arms, munitions and war material; such measures shall not adversely affect the conditions of competition in the internal market regarding products which are not intended for specifically military purposes.”
It makes absolutely no mention of warships, only contracts that are important to national security connected to arms, munitions and “war material”. To then talk about warships is an entirely separate argument. The FSS are important to national security because they allow our warships to operate independently anywhere in the world to further British national interests- they carry war material and should themselves be considered war material as much as an army lorry is. We do not stop considering an army lorry war material because it happens to be carrying medical aid in a disaster zone at a certain point in time, or because it’s being driven and maintained by a reservist/territorial (the closest analogue I can think of for the RFA).
They do not have to be warships to be applicable to article 346 protections, and the government pulling the word warship out of the air is blatant misdirection. I’m tired of it.
The FSS should be built in the UK. If they aren’t going to be built in the UK, then I am less fussed about preferentially choosing Spain, but they’d for sure better completely cease their claims on Gibraltar.
Very good point about the EU law being about security needs and not specifically warships, you should put that in a letter and send it in.
Something that’s also crossed my mind: if they’re only defining warships as frigates, destroyers, and aircraft carriers, where does that leave submarines, or assault ships, or MCMVs? Its such an arbitrary definition that doesn’t reflect the real world at all.
Thanks, if I knew where to send it that it would be read and inform the discussion, I would!
Very fair point, and highlights exactly the stupidity of this “warship clause”; it’s meaningless. I wish I understood why the government as a whole keep using it- as far as I know both Labour and Conservative have? It seems like a willful attempt to let a British industry die. Even the kings of capitalism in America preferentially subsidise the different yards and companies with work, to support a wide industrial base, rather than let an industry whither.
Your own MP is always a good start, it’s their job to represent constituents like you in parliament. Could also try Penny Mordaunt, Portsmouth MP and new DSec. If anyone is going to listen to a plea on behalf of the navy, it’s her
Joe, I agree with your points but I don’t think the unions necessarily “care about British industry”. The people in charge of Britain’s unions are hardcore socialists who’s sole aim is to make any Tory government untenable. Their interest in their members extends only as far as the political and financial power it affords them. These people, and the tactics they employ for political goals, have done as much damage British industry over the years as any of our quisling governments. I wouldn’t ever consider them an ally in a fight for British interests.
Fair point, between them and horrifically arrogant/complacent senior management our domestic mass market auto industry died in a relatively very short period of time.
When will the penny drop in Whitehall, that every project awarded to a foreign builder, is one less opportunity to gain excellence in shipbuilding.
Sorry to be tongue in cheek again, I know it’s risky, but the Penny has just dropped.
I am hoping this is fake news intended to produce an indignant backlash and the reclassification of these ships as warships.
This sort of thing makes me so cross that I almost wish Corbyn gets in and prioritises British Industry.
I just do not get how the Treasury, civil servants, and successive governments hide behind EU rules that they say they are leaving, reducing our industries as a result.
Is there some grand conspiracy to reduce the UK to a province with no clout?
Nuts I know, makes you wonder with some of these decisions.
As for Spain, leave them out of it. This problem is of HMG’s own making.
Daniele, I am convinced that the main reason our political classes are so unexplainable and totally committed to the EU, is that it both reduces their workload and gives them a useful, faceless and unaccountable body to blame all of their own ineptitude on.
I am waiting for the usual comments now about how Corbin is the enemy of defence, despite the current government’s blatant dismantling of national security in the name of profit.
He is another idiot who keeps very bad company, but having witnessed, close up the mess over the last 9 years and the relentless enrichment of the few, can he do worse?
I really don’t know… I read the Manifesto and I like much of it. I then read of his background, and the people in shadow ministerial positions around him, and cringe.
Diane Abbott, responsible for the Security Service? Are we mad?
I then see his refusal to dine with President Trump, a major UK ally, yet he dines with the Chinese President, who’s actions are arguably worse.
As for defence, I watched a clip on Corbyn on BFN – all he mentioned were the surveillance aircraft, which he incorrectly attributed to the RN, the RN “crying out for ships” – fisheries protection vessels, forces housing, and mental health. While all those are important and the last two admittedly badly neglected by successive governments the British Armed Forces need to be rather more than that given our P5, G8 and financial status.
Labour commit to the farcial 2% target too. But would that be spent on housing, wages, or actual military equipment? He made no indication. His shadow defence secretary is equally anonymous.
Added to that his aversion to almost all types of intervention ( though he agreed with East Tymor ) it makes me wonder what would be left of the UK military if his idea of a military comes to pass.
If the UK is to be defence only, what would be left? Would there be need for Aircraft Carriers? Their escorts? Nuclear Submarines? Offensive Fast jets? Armoured vehicles in the army? Paras? Marines? UKSF?
And as for the Falklands, Gibraltar, and the vital sites in Cyprus if those are seen as a nasty remaining sign of British colonialism we can kiss them goodbye, despite their vital role in intelligence gathering.
Happy to be wrong on Corbyn. I like his views on animal welfare, hunting, and the environment, and sure he’s a decent bloke, but boy does he scare me in the defence standing of this country.
Hoping some one on the left can correct me on the above, debunk my fears?
Anyone?
Because deafening silence is pretty damning otherwise.
You’re mostly right Daniele, as a Labour member the thought of Abbot in any ministerial role is frightening, although saying that she is evidently a good MP, any MP who isn’t running for PM to increase a majority by 11k and get over 40k votes, some 75% of total votes takes some doing, she serves her constituents well. But as a top minister, no not for me.
As I have said before a labour government under current leadership won’t be increasing the defence budget, they won’t involve themselves with any foreign intervention unless it’s UN authorised, my honest assessment is defence will stay exactly like it is in regards to numbers, I would be shocked if any so called socialist made redundancies. And the idea that any part of our defence like fast jets, escorts, carriers etc would be dismantled is crazy, not get used? Probably, Corbyn doesn’t care how many ships or jets we have, they are obsessed with the NHS, housing, social care etc, it’s not a problem to him as long as they’re not getting used for conflict he doesn’t agree with, having those assets supports jobs and industry, he has been heavily advised that defence is a sticking point for him with a lot of voters, and he would like to get a second term, like any government does to truly see through their economic and social reform, that won’t get done in 5 years, he knows he needs two terms and any brutal or crazy decision that will be front page news with massive resignations from all quarters would damage him massively.
Going back to what he has been advised, it’s no coincidence that all Labours policy in the manifesto was paid for by tax increases etc, not a cut in the defence budget, now that is an argument for another time in a another forum regarding tax increases ? but the point still stands, Labour as a party, who’s policies get voted for by its members, are committed to renewing trident and keeping the defence budget at 2%, other than foreign intervention is that any different to what we have currently.
And the Falklands and Gibraltar are British, they have democratically voted to remain British, they are not things to be traded or gave away, any labour leader even trying to do otherwise would be finished in government.
And like I said last time we spoke Danielle about this, if labour get in power, and it is a big if, and the leadership go against Party policy and do just one of the things you mentioned, I’ll email you a picture of my cut up labour membership card and my leaving email, and that will be me voting independent.
Ah, Sole, thank you.
Aware of your tax viewpoint as read that elsewhere.
Good effort, points taken.
Would it not look good on a Labour manifesto to appear to attempt to balance the budget by slashing the defense budget and putting the money into the NHS? Yes the military would wither on the vine but if you have no intention of using it why would you worry. Neither main political parties have historically fought over defense because they understand the need – Jeremy does not. Agreed he would not reduce numbers just decimate the capital expenditure thus endangering lives.
Daniele.
Decent bloke? Whilst his twitter army and spin doctors can do enough to get him off the hook. Look at what he doesn’t do.
He’s protest to get suspected IRA member released from prison. Yet has repeated refused to support British service personnel in similar situations. Has he ever gone to funeral of a member of the UK armed forces?
I don’t think much of our politic class full stop but JC’s on another level.
Here is how you shut up Spain: “STFU we have nuke you don’t. Keep agitating and we recognize Catalonia as independent.” Very simple, direct and to the point.
Their handling of the Catalonia event was appalling. Yes… Britain has had a colourful past too… But the fact they want us to give up Gibraltar while at the very same time not wanting to give up Catalonia just screams hypocrisy to me. Very childish in their naval actions around Gibraltar too.
I truly hope this article is fake.
M@
@ Matt The hypocrisy is even worse as Spain maintains sovereign territories in North Africa called Ceuta and Melilla against the locals wishes.
Anyway this whole FSS debacle is utterly shaming …
No, not against the locals wishes.
No.NO.NO. at one of the most important periods in British History we have been cursed with a spineless Prime Minister of more than just historic inadequacy. Her repeated “Brexit means Brexit” assurances were demonstrated to be intentional liies. The Chequers plan revealed she had been conspiring to capiitulate to EU’s demands and had even acted behind the backs of her OWN ministers. Now May’s actions are exceeding honest deceiit. Her active attempts to condemn the UK to inescapable subservience to the EU is betraayal. What do you call a person who, against the explicit will of the majority of British voters, is attempting the surrrender of UK independence to permanent rule by a foreiign power. Dishonourable, Anti Democratic, Liiar or just an old fashioned TRAIITOR.
@John Hampson – Well yes its very easy to throw those trigger phrases around be persoanally abusive and while I agree we have an unacceptable ‘deal’ and in a mess I will not put the blame entirely at her door. She is facing:
* 320+ Remainer MPs (despite most representing Leave Constituencies)
* Remainer Tory MPs like Grieve and Soubry out to wreak revenge on her for getting the sack
* ‘2nd vote’ LibDems and others who are just out to destroy Brexit
* The ERG who are so blinkered and needing a pure Brexit as well as hating the PM they have stupidly handed the levers to the Remainers.
* A Labour Party playing party politics with the ONE non-party issue to gain power.
* And then of course there is the dictatorial EU.
So (and this was her one but major mistake) she felt she had to compromise and in doing so couldn’t please a majority. Our Westminster Remain Parliament are so inept and up their own arses they couldn’t even agree on ANY options even when THEY had total control of the Order Paper. As Littlejohn so often says: “You could not make it up!”
So while you pour vitriol and unwarranted name calling on her you say nothing about the Establishment and political Class that got us into this sh*t state. 420 MPs represent Leave Constituencies so there is a Leave majority but they are the ones screwing the electorate having stood on a ‘Leave’ manifesto. When slimeballs like Owen Smith (58% Leave) and Pixie Balls-Cooper (60% Leave), Soubry 55% Leave) and others defy the electorate that put them there and do all they can to stop Brexit THEY ARE THE TRAITORS! Theresa May has at least tried to get us out but has been defied 3 times by MPs. So at least get the targets for your rather unnecessary abuse right.
Hmmm, oddly there are a few things there that I partially agree with. One of those odd ‘a broken clock strikes correctly twice a day’ moments. Still plenty wrong but what can one expect…
I blame many people but the PM is very high on that ist, Theresa May throwing up crazy red lines at the beginning of the process then triggering Article 50 for short term gain during the party conference season had dire consequences. It made certain that there could be no compromise between Remainers like myself and Leavers like yourself. For example ending Freedom of Movement is totally unacceptable and a rallying cry to politically fight back for many Remainers!
“* 320+ Remainer MPs (despite most representing Leave Constituencies)”
By in large yes the majority of MPs were against the idea of Brexit (good on them imho) but they have never the less spent the last three years trying to get a square peg into a round hole all due to the PM’s red lines and triggering article 50 too early
“* Remainer Tory MPs like Grieve and Soubry out to wreak revenge on her for getting the sack”
I actually think they want revenge on the PM but not so much for the reason you give, they are both angry that the PM for bringing the country to this mess through her intransigence!
“* ‘2nd vote’ LibDems and others who are just out to destroy Brexit”
I prefer to call them true British patriots trying to save our EU citizenship, our influence in the world by continued membership of the most powerful trade block on the planet and saving the Union as that will no doubt break up if the UK leaves the EU. I realise we are never going to see eye to eye on that but such is life
“* The ERG who are so blinkered and needing a pure Brexit as well as hating the PM they have stupidly handed the levers to the Remainers.”
Agree with the first half, listening to the ERG rather than more sensible voices has helped cause this chaos. Nevertheless Remainers are certainly not in control of the situation, actually Remainers were prepared to compromise if staying on the Single Market and keeping FoM was on the table
“* A Labour Party playing party politics with the ONE non-party issue to gain power.”
Pretty much agree with that albeit it should be noted that the leadership of the Labour party are Pro-Brexit against the wishes of their party members and voters
“* And then of course there is the dictatorial EU.”
Yes and no, the EU is forced to be dictatorial in this situation as the UK triggered article 50 too early handing over all power to the EU. That the EU cant dictate to us shows how much leaving the EU weakens the UK!
“So (and this was her one but major mistake) she felt she had to compromise and in doing so couldn’t please a majority. ”
This is where you get things totally wrong! Theresa May and her FAILURE to compromise is why we are in this mess now. As I said for many Remainers we would have bitten our tongues and accepted Brexit as long as we stayed in the Single Market and kept our FoM rights. The PM making it about immigration and throwing up a series of red lines that among other things threatened the Good Friday Agreement is why we are here now!
“Our Westminster Remain Parliament are so inept and up their own arses they couldn’t even agree on ANY options even when THEY had total control of the Order Paper. As Littlejohn so often says: “You could not make it up!””
A remain parliament as you call it that voted through Article 50 revocation too early and have spent three years trying to make it work.
“So while you pour vitriol and unwarranted name calling on her you say nothing about the Establishment and political Class that got us into this sh*t state. ”
Theresa May deserves vitriol for many reasons including her disastrous ‘Hostile Environment’ policy and her total inability to compromise or even show empathy for other views. The ‘Establishment’ is just a bogey man that the Left and Right use to explain away all the things they don’t understand or like.
“420 MPs represent Leave Constituencies so there is a Leave majority but they are the ones screwing the electorate having stood on a ‘Leave’ manifesto. ”
As leavers insufferably like to point out when Remainers say ‘Scotland and Northern Ireland’ majority voted to Remain the EU referendum was a binary vote for the whole nation and whilst it was collated by constituency for ease of processing the result was treated as a whole. It was a VERY NARROW result that to be honest should have led the UK to leave the EU but hug very close by staying in the Single Market and retaining the Four Freedoms including FoM. Failure to compromise by Leavers has pushed Remainers from wanting to compromise and preferring revocation as it currently stands.
“When slimeballs like Owen Smith (58% Leave) and Pixie Balls-Cooper (60% Leave), Soubry 55% Leave) and others defy the electorate that put them there and do all they can to stop Brexit THEY ARE THE TRAITORS!”
They are not traitors, they are MP’s in a parliamentary system and not delegates. They are perfectly entitled to vote with their conscience on such matters and for what they think is best for their electorate. The use of language like ‘Traitors’ is partially why we are in this current mess!
“Theresa May has at least tried to get us out but has been defied 3 times by MPs. ”
Parliamentary system and they are not delegates, our democracy allows them to defy the Prime Minister. There was civil war in this country to ensure MP’s had that right!
” So at least get the targets for your rather unnecessary abuse right.”
I would frankly turn that advice right back on you!
Sorry, May is renown for her intransigence, and for only operating in an echo chamber.
Not the right person to negotiate or bring people together.
You cannot take over three years to get a half assed deal that gives the worst elements of being out of the EU and the worst of being in, then expect everyone to sign up to take joint responsibility to cover your own ineptitude and then unite the country and expect to retain the respect of anyone.
I know that democracy is unpopular with the EU and most of our politicians, but I do feel rather glum when voters say politicians are right to ignore their constituents.
It appears that Gorbachev was correct about the EU when he said we were trying to build the Soviet Union in Western Europe when the electorate support this view.
Gorbachev was wrong! The EU is a vastly more democratic organisation than the UK!
Whilst the UK has an unelected upper chamber and an unelected Head of State that will always remain the case.
@Fedaykin – I am not going to have a point scoring match with you and I will leave others to judge your comments. But I can summarise your (as in Remainer) attitude with which I disagree strenuously with one or two.
Of course you start from the premise that 17.4 Mn people are wrong etc etc, caused a mess etc etc and must be stopped even if that means defying their declared wishes in the biggest electoral event since WWII. Because of course Remainers know better. And this is what has been happening for the last 3 years by various means and in which I include treacherous MPs (OK not traitors). When you stand on a manifesto pledge that says (lets take Pixie Balls-Cooper for example) “I will not vote to block Brexit” and her Labour pledge said they would respect the Brexit vote but then she spends all her time manipulating the House’s ancient procedures to delay, block and even take over the Brexit process that to me is at best duplicitous and probably lying. It was HER manipulation aided and abetted by many (like 350 MPs) that stopped us leaving as British Law states on March 29th. We are now ensnared until October 31st. Please do not tell me MPs are in any way acting honourably. Oh and by the way yes they SHOULD represent and reflect the wishes of those who elect them. Government bends its knee to Parliament but Parliament bends its knee to the people.
Now those two examples:
* “The EU is a vastly more democratic organisation than the UK!”
You are of course having a laugh? When did YOU see the names Juncker, Tusk, Selmayr or Timmermans on a ballot paper? You, being a knowledgeable chap, do of course know the EU Parliament cannot create, amend or deny or repeal ANY EU legislation? There is no government in the EU run by a majority party but their agenda is dictated by the Commission. the words ‘rubber stamp’ come to mind. Just like the UK Parliament can’t amend or repeal EU legislation either (European Communities Act 1972 refers). Only the unelected Commission is the source and arbiter of EU legislation. Please explain the electoral link between me and the EU Commission? And I wouldn’t mention vetoes because Cameron tried that with Juncker and he was still appointed.
* “Remainers [..] would have bitten our tongues and accepted Brexit as long as we stayed in the Single Market and kept our FoM rights”
And right there you show the duplicity that Remainers peddle as ‘compromise’. If you are IN the SM you are IN the EU and CU, ECJ, paying money, losing coastal waters, obeying the CAP and open borders. Getting rid of FoM was a keystone of why people wanted to leave the EU, the SM and the CU. And especially the ECJ that (again) comes with being IN the SM. So basically you are saying:
“Remainers [..] would have bitten our tongues and accepted Brexit as long as we never left the EU”
And the sad thing is you cannot see the duplicity of your argument.
Do not confuse the almighty upcock the PM and her civil servants have made over this (and the role Parliament has played in making it worse) with the right of the UK Electorate to have any decision obeyed. Especially when that £9 Mn leaflet promised it would be. If your argument holds true then can we rerun the Local Elections because I didn’t like the result?
@Chris H
“I am not going to have a point scoring match with you and I will leave others to judge your comments.”
Thankyou, I will respond nevertheless.
“But I can summarise your (as in Remainer) attitude with which I disagree strenuously with one or two.”
Your prerogative in a democracy.
“Of course you start from the premise that 17.4 Mn people are wrong etc etc”
No I don’t, show where I wrote that. I think many of those 17.4Mn had perfectly valid reasons to vote to Leave the EU. Largely the crushing Austerity imposed on them over the previous six years by their own Government and a failure by Politicians and the press to engage with and properly explain what the EU is and its benefits. If you are constantly told via the press and politicians that the EU is the root of all your problems I would say it is perfectly valid to vote to leave. Now I do think that is an ill informed decision but that is a different matter.
“Because of course Remainers know better. ”
No I don’t believe that, I think there were and still are some deeply ill informed Remainers. Wanting to stay in the EU doesn’t make you automatically better.
“And this is what has been happening for the last 3 years by various means and in which I include treacherous MPs (OK not traitors). When you stand on a manifesto pledge that says (lets take Pixie Balls-Cooper for example) “I will not vote to block Brexit” and her Labour pledge said they would respect the Brexit vote but then she spends all her time manipulating the House’s ancient procedures to delay, block and even take over the Brexit process that to me is at best duplicitous and probably lying. It was HER manipulation aided and abetted by many (like 350 MPs) that stopped us leaving as British Law states on March 29th. ”
MP’s foolishly voted to enact Article 50 way too early and as I said have spent the last three years trying to get a square peg into a round hole due to the PM’s rash red lines.
“We are now ensnared until October 31st. ”
Our EU citizenship has been saved until October the 31st giving a chance for this mess to be sorted out. I celebrated as the clock struck 11pm on the 29th of March.
“Please do not tell me MPs are in any way acting honourably. ”
Depends on the MP, the ones acting least honourably imho are those who supported Leave told a whole pack of lies and promised Unicorns and gold for all to further their ambitions to be Prime Minister.
“Oh and by the way yes they SHOULD represent and reflect the wishes of those who elect them. Government bends its knee to Parliament but Parliament bends its knee to the people.”
Not how our Parliamentary democracy works, MP’s are not delegates! They are meant to represent their constituents and make decisions that they think is in the best interest of those constituents. If the constituents disagree they have the right to vote them out at the next election.
“You are of course having a laugh? When did YOU see the names Juncker, Tusk, Selmayr or Timmermans on a ballot paper?”
I have already explained this to you Chris, the process for their election or appointment is freely available for you to read on the EU’s own website. Conceptually it is called indirect democracy and is a very normal political system used in many countries including our own. Show me a ballot paper where I can elect a member of the House of Lords or our Head of State….bricks thrown in glass houses and all that!
“You, being a knowledgeable chap, do of course know the EU Parliament cannot create, amend or deny or repeal ANY EU legislation?”
This is a complex issue, personally I think the EU parliament should have mechanisms to propose legislation. The reason it doesn’t is it would have the effect of reducing the sovereignty of nation states within the EU. Be careful what you wish for. The EU Parliament can amend legislation in process but due to the bi-cameral nature of the EU it largely can’t amend those that have been enacted (there are some exceptions on this since Lisbon). To repeal something makes it legislation and hence the job of the Commission, nevertheless the EU parliament does have mechanisms to push the Council to push the Commission on this.
” There is no government in the EU run by a majority party but their agenda is dictated by the Commission. ”
Nope fundamentally wrong. Firstly it is not the Commission that sets or dictates the agenda, that is the job of the Council of Ministers. Also there are actually political groupings within the EU and how well each grouping does dictates who gets nominated for the Commission. Currently there are nine groupings that are in effect political parties within the European parliament made up of MEPs that represent different ideological parts of the political spectrum. The Current dominant group/party is the ‘European Peoples Party’/EPP of which Donald Tusk is leader. In Poland Tusk is leader of the Civic Platform party. This is an area that concerns me as the vast majority of British citizens have no clue about how the EU parliament works or the political groupings within it. FYI I support the ALDE group in the EU parliament which is a Liberal Centrist group.
“Just like the UK Parliament can’t amend or repeal EU legislation either (European Communities Act 1972 refers).”
Personally as a Federalist I am fine with that. The UK government via the Council can start the process to lobby to repeal any legislation. By in large the vast majority of EU legislation is to our benefit.
“Only the unelected Commission is the source and arbiter of EU legislation. ”
Again the Commission is elected, the process is on their website.
“Please explain the electoral link between me and the EU Commission? ”
Via your MEP. The MEP votes for the Commission.
“And I wouldn’t mention vetoes because Cameron tried that with Juncker and he was still appointed.”
Qualified majority vote for that and EPP won out for the 8th Parliament meaning Junker was in a favoured position.
“And right there you show the duplicity that Remainers peddle as ‘compromise’. ”
It is a compromise to me I am hardly being duplicitous telling you that. I would rather that the UK revoked Article 50.
“If you are IN the SM you are IN the EU and CU, ECJ, paying money, losing coastal waters, obeying the CAP and open borders.”
No it isn’t good which is why I would rather remain, couple of corrections you do get control over Fishing in the EEA and we are not a member of Schengen meaning we don’t have open borders! Try and get into Dover from France without a Passport if you think we don’t control our borders…you will be in for a surprise!
“Do not confuse the almighty upcock the PM and her civil servants have made over this (and the role Parliament has played in making it worse) with the right of the UK Electorate to have any decision obeyed.”
They have been trying to obey it for three years! Not so easy unpicking forty+ years of integration is it!
“Especially when that £9 Mn leaflet promised it would be.”
That leaflet was a disaster for the Remain campaign.
“If your argument holds true then can we rerun the Local Elections because I didn’t like the result?”
That old nugget, sigh. If I don’t like the result I get a chance to vote again at the next Local Government Elections…democracy is not set in stone!
@ Fedaykin – I needed to separate your last comment about the Lords and HM The Queen from your Brexit comments.
We have an unwritten Constitution that is flexible but maintains the elected chamber as supreme – ‘Primacy’. The House of Lords is a revising chamber and cannot, and does not, instigate any legislation other than what may be adopted as Government policy or Private Members Bill. In revising Primary and Secondary legislation the HoL CANNOT defy the elected house which retains primacy. (The Salisbury Convention and the Parliament Act refer). And in all cases Lords Amendments are handed back to the Commons to debate and accept or deny as they choose on third reading. So there is no democratic outrage here. It has worked for centuries. The fact the Lords are not elected is a total red herring used by Remainers when the EU’s legitimacy is in any way challenged. As you just did
Now as to Her Majesty. Well your ignorance of WHY we have an unelected Head of State beggars belief. Cromwell tried the Republic version (called The Commonwealth) after the Civil War by executing Charles I. But he very quickly realised what the country had lost but it took his death to correct the mistake in 1660 – continuity and an independent guardian of our democratic system. So the Monarchy was restored (as in The Restoration) with Charles II under new terms. And for nigh on 360 years our system of the Mother of all Parliaments combined the longest surviving Monarchy has enriched our nation and made us the envy of most of the world.
You dismiss lightly how the Sovereign’s role is interwoven in our democracy. It is BECAUSE she is unelected and therefore non political that she holds our respect. If the Parliament of the day (very much as ours is now) defies the electorate and becomes in some way ‘tyrannical’ then she can (despite the ‘Fixed Term Parliament Act’ prorogue Parliament and hand power back to the people in a General Election. She did just that in Australia in 1975 when she sacked Goff Whitlam, appointed the Opposition leader and after a period while legislation was cleared called a General Election.
The fact that the Military and Police Forces swear allegiance to her and therefore through her to the British people enforces the independence of law enforcement and military power. For the sake of accuracy the Royal Navy having been founded by the Sovereign’s Prerogative sign an attestation or engagement form on entry. The same applies to the Royal Marines.
So the fact that the House of Lords is not elected does not reduce democracy in the UK in any way. Indeed I would argue it enhances it given the Primacy of the Commons. And to somehow bring in the Queen as some liability to our democracy simply isn’t true. Again it enhances it as she is the guardian of it! And name me one Head of State that costs us nothing, contributes some £300 Mn a year from their own estates and adds £ Bns in tourist revenue.
Your trying to deflect the argument away from the paucity of democracy in the EU by criticising the HoL and the Monarchy is no surprise. You are after all a Remainer and can see no wrong in the EU and must defend it by fair means and foul
@Chris H – ahhh I see it is subjective then. That the UK has an unelected upper chamber or head of state is perfectly fine and nothing to take issue with because ‘Cromwell tried it not very successfully’ Centuries ago!
FYI I am well aware of how the House of Commons works and the conventions of the unwritten Constitution, thanks for bringing that up as well as I regard that as a bad thing vs those nations that have a written one.
The only deflection I see is coming from you Chris, your ignorance of how the EU works is amusing. By defending the EU and our membership I am fighting to protect your rights, pity you don’t understand that.
@Fedaykin –
“ahhh I see it is subjective then”
No I made a perfectly objective reply to your very subjective (well hilarious to be honest) comment that “The EU is a vastly more democratic organisation than the UK”.
I then laid out why you are wrong and once again you demonstrate why it is impossible to have an objective debate when you misrepresent what is said by fabricating I justify my argument because of Cromwell. In Fact you can’t even get that bit right. We have an elected House of Commons which has Primacy in all legislative matters. Therefore the fact the House of Lords ( a merely revising chamber) and the fact our Head of State (who plays no part in creating legislation process other than to give Assent) is totally irrelevant. Unlike in the EU where it IS the unelected ‘chamber’ (Commission) that has sole rights to write and repeal legislation.
You say you are “well aware of how the House of Commons works and the conventions of the unwritten Constitution” when you clearly do not and then go into print to prove you do not. Now whether you like it or not is an opinion and therefore subjective.
You then play the superior game with “your ignorance of how the EU works is amusing”. Well prove I am wrong and have a laugh while you do rather than pontificating from on high by answering THIS question:
Which body within the EU has sole rights to write and repeal EU legislation?
Simple question and a simple answer is needed. I know it is the EU Commission. They are not elected and are ‘appointed’. So give me an objective answer. If you understand the concept.
And you close with THIS gem of deception:
“By defending the EU and our membership I am fighting to protect your rights, pity you don’t understand that”
Oh trust me I understand what the game is Remainers are playing. And no you are not doing this for me or anyone else. You are doing this because you lost a referendum. You and all Remainers hated losing and are playing every trick in your sad little book to delay, obfuscate and overturn a democratic decision. Of course you have 350 MPs prepared to help you achieve your disgraceful aims. Do not bullshit me you have altruistic reasons in mind. Its an ego trip and nothing less. NOW the EU gives me no more rights than I have as a British citizen. Indeed I have MORE workers rights for example and UK citizens have had them far longer. The price this country has to pay is not worth what we get out of the organisation and I don’t want to be dragged further into their ‘Political Union’.
Now YOU may be happy to have a foreign power:
* Paid £13 Bn a year
* Arrange our trade deals
* Agree what tariffs British Consumers pay (which go to Brussels not London)
* Open our borders to 450 Mn people unchecked
* Define how our coastal waters and fishing stocks are managed
* Arrange how British farmers operate
* Originate 55% of all our regulations, directives and laws and of course
* Have our Supreme Court not actually being Supreme.
I do not and voted so when asked.
Unlike you I have pride in my country that I served and cannot see what the EU offers that we need in any way. Name me ONE trading arrangement in the world that demands an anthem, a flag, passports, a Parliament, a Supreme Court? I was working in Germany aged 18 in 1963. A stamp in my passport and off I went and THAT is what I call ‘freedom of movement’. I voted to Remain in the EEC in 1975 aged 28 but the EU is NOT about trade. It is about the destruction of the Nation State with power sucked to the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.
I stood up for my country and my rights a British citizen in June 2016 and I WILL have my vote respected regardless of what you and all the other Remainers try to do to stop it. I do not need any assistance from you thank you to protect my rights. Neither you nor the EU can take them away. You defy UK democracy in the name of an undemocratic foreign structure called the EU. The irony is, I am sure, lost on you…
@Chris H I also made a perfectly objective reply correcting your mistakes.
“I then laid out why you are wrong and once again you demonstrate why it is impossible to have an objective debate when you misrepresent what is said by fabricating I justify my argument because of Cromwell.”
You did justify your argument by citing Cromwell. You can’t pick your own version of reality…oh I forgot you regularly do!
“We have an elected House of Commons which has Primacy in all legislative matters. ”
I know that.
“Therefore the fact the House of Lords ( a merely revising chamber) and the fact our Head of State (who plays no part in creating legislation process other than to give Assent) is totally irrelevant. ”
It is a revising chamber where I have no influence over who is in it making amendments to legislation unlike the Commission that is ELECTED by the European Parliament and NOMINATED by the Council of Ministers WHO ARE ALL ELECTED! I would like to have a choice over who is our head of State like most modern nations like Ireland for example…so I think it is VERY relevant!
“Unlike in the EU where it IS the unelected ‘chamber’ (Commission) that has sole rights to write and repeal legislation.”
Again the Commission is ELECTED, I have told you before how that happens is one short Google search away! The Commission writes the legislation but is the EU Parliament that votes it in or out after legislation has been written to change it. Again Chris just a short Google search and all this information is there to read explaining how the EU works from the Parliament to the Council and the Commission!
“You say you are “well aware of how the House of Commons works and the conventions of the unwritten Constitution” when you clearly do not and then go into print to prove you do not. Now whether you like it or not is an opinion and therefore subjective.”
Again I am well aware of how Parliament and our unwritten Constitution works as I have spent many years closely related too and working within our political system. I think we have a dated political system that is in desperate need of reform. Your constant inaccurate statements about the EU and its structures that I have repeatedly explained prove that you yourself haven’t a clue what you are talking about!
“Simple question and a simple answer is needed. I know it is the EU Commission. They are not elected and are ‘appointed’. So give me an objective answer. If you understand the concept.”
The EU Commision is elected I don’t know why you can’t get your head around the process?! They were ‘appointed’ prior to the ratification of the Lisbon treaty. Now they are ‘NOMINATED’ and then the EU Parliament ‘VOTES’ if they want to accept the ‘NOMINATED’ Commission. If you don’t want to understand how the spitzenkandidaten process works that is your funeral!
“Now YOU may be happy to have a foreign power:
* Paid £13 Bn a year
* Arrange our trade deals
* Agree what tariffs British Consumers pay (which go to Brussels not London)
* Open our borders to 450 Mn people unchecked
* Define how our coastal waters and fishing stocks are managed
* Arrange how British farmers operate
* Originate 55% of all our regulations, directives and laws and of course
* Have our Supreme Court not actually being Supreme.”
Yes I am very happy, it is a fantastic deal! We get enormous Soft Power and international clout by being in a Union with our close partners in the EU.
“I do not and voted so when asked.”
Good for you, it is sad that you don’t appreciate all the benefits you listed there but never mind!
“Unlike you I have pride in my country that I served and cannot see what the EU offers that we need in any way.”
I also have pride in my country it is not the preserve of those who voted leave, I just have a different vision of how our nation can make its way in the world. I have also served my own Country, many years of public service.
“Name me ONE trading arrangement in the world that demands an anthem, a flag, passports, a Parliament, a Supreme Court?”
Interesting question, I would need to check but I think there probably are trade agreements that have an anthem and a flag but that is not really an issue here. The EU is not a trade agreement, it is a political Union.
“I was working in Germany aged 18 in 1963. A stamp in my passport and off I went and THAT is what I call ‘freedom of movement’.”
I can’t help it if you don’t understand what ‘Freedom of Movement’ is in the context of the European Union. It is a treasured right and I will fight politically to save it!
” I voted to Remain in the EEC in 1975 aged 28 but the EU is NOT about trade.”
Great stuff, as I just said the EU is not just about trade…I find it funny when Leavers are shocked that Remainers like myself want a Federal Political Union with our European partners and not see that as some form of ultimate evil!
“It is about the destruction of the Nation State with power sucked to the unelected bureaucrats in Brussels.”
The EU Parliament is elected, the Commission is elected and the Council is elected. There are Bureaucrats in Brussels competitively employed to work at the European parliament, a tiny fraction in comparison to the amount employed to work in White hall.
“I stood up for my country and my rights a British citizen in June 2016 and I WILL have my vote respected regardless of what you and all the other Remainers try to do to stop it.”
I respect your vote but I don’t have to agree with it and in a democracy I can campaign for the result of that vote to be changed…funny thing about democracy it doesn’t stop after one vote!
“. I do not need any assistance from you thank you to protect my rights. ”
That is alright I am doing it for free 😉
“Neither you nor the EU can take them away.”
Funny thing to say as you wish to deprive us all of our EU Citizenship rights including Freedom of Movement’
“You defy UK democracy in the name of an undemocratic foreign structure called the EU. ”
Defying democracy by exercising my democratic right to ask for more democracy?…you are a funny one Chris! The EU is democratic, that you think it isn’t is also your subjective opinion based upon as far as I can see a total failure to actually look into how the EU works!
” The irony is, I am sure, lost on you…”
I think irony is the punchline to your life Chris, it makes my day reading through some of the stuff you come up with.
@Fedaykin – I could hardly use Cromwell to justify my argument for a non political Head of State in a Parliamentary Monarchy when he had been DEAD for 2 years before the Restoration! But anyway ….
Now I am out of this as we are never going to agree. There are some who disagree with me but do it in a friendly way with us both trying to extract as much from the debate as possible. You Sir are something else and I am a little tired now of the sanctimonious self righteous attitude so embedded within every Remainer I have met. Try just arguing your point and leave the sarcasm behind? You will find people will engage better. I know you think you are better than me simply for being a Brexiteer. But I fear you confuse me with someone who gives a rats arse about your attitude. I used to but not now.
Toodle Pip
@Chris H
I’m hurt Chris I thought we were having a fun time you spouting falsehoods about the EU and its structures followed by me correcting them!
“You Sir are something else and I am a little tired now of the sanctimonious self righteous attitude so embedded within every Remainer I have met.”
That is alright, I am not as tired with the sanctimonious self righteous attitude so embedded within every Leaver I have met to stop engaging with them.
It is so very hard not to be Sarcastic to you Chris! It is a challenge actually…
” I know you think you are better than me simply for being a Brexiteer.”
I have said it before, I don’t think I am ‘better’ than you Chris just because you are a Brexiter just better informed.
I should also point out you suggested that I lacked ‘pride’ in my nation for being a Remainer. Bricks and glass houses again….
” But I fear you confuse me with someone who gives a rats arse about your attitude.”
Yet you keep responding…you are so easy to yank the chain Chris
Have a nice night 😉
“* A Labour Party playing party politics with the ONE non-party issue to gain power.”
Pretty much agree with that albeit it should be noted that the leadership of the Labour party are Pro-Brexit against the wishes of their party members and voters“
You’re both wrong I’m afraid on that one.
Labour members have always supported the leaderships position on Brexit, which is to respect the result of the referendum and leave the EU. Centrist Blairites like Watson and Umunna, backed up by the Bourgeois latte drinking BBC and Guardian play on polls that labour members support a “confirmary vote” as it’s now called, but never, ever publish the poll results that the same labour members back the leaderships position to leave the EU first, for them a labour government is more important than staying in the EU and rightly so.
You see to most labour members, Brexit is not the centre of the universe, they are sick to the back teeth of it frankly, there is more important domestic issues that need urgently addressed, that are getting neglected because of Brexit.
The labour leadership just defeated the remain blairites last week, when backed heavily by Alistair Campbell and the likes, Watson tried to change labour policy in the European elections, but the NEC voted unanimously to continue to back the leaderships position on Brexit.
That position was in the manifesto in the last election, backed again at conference by members last year, and just confirmed again at NEC.
The remain centrists already got their wish at conference last year when they got a second vote as an option added to labour policy, and since then labour are down 4 points in the polls, that second vote was defeated emphatically in parliament twice.
I’m not sure why hardline remainers think Labour can stick two fingers up to 17.4 million people, win a second referendum that the country or parliament doesn’t want, and magically dance into number 10, its complete lunacy fueled by their own personal politics.
And Chris about the party politics, I don’t think Brexit is a one party issue, currently we have Labour, Conservatives, Lib Dem’s and the Brexit Party, all with different versions of what they think Brexit should be, remember the vote was to leave the EU, not how.
Labour MP’s were voted into parliament on the back of a manifesto that called for a different Brexit than the conservatives so you cannot blame them for trying to do that, although I entirely agree with you that some are not, they’re not respecting the referendum or the manifesto they were elected on and are still trying to block Brexit, glady some have left but some do still remain, Watson and Cooper being the main ones.
Also it’s worth remembering in our political system no opposition has the power to block any legislation in our parliament. With either a majority or working majority the party in government has the numbers to win all votes, even if every opposition voted against it the government still has the numbers, therefore the responsibility lies solely with rebels in government.
@Solesurvivor – While I am not 100% in agreement with all you write I can go along with it as part of the discussion. However (sorry!) I would just point out that there is a world of difference between Labour Party Members and Labour Party Voters and my point was that Brexit was non party political at the time of the Referendum but has been turned into party politics (mainly) by Labour but then there are factions with parties and even factions within factions. Maybe I should have blamed our political class rather than Labour per se?
I cannot be specific but I can point to where Labour Voters shifted their votes and the impact it had.
– 2014 UKIP won a resounding victory in the EU Elections and Labour voters were part of it just from the sheer numbers.
– 2015 when UKIP won the 3rd highest popular vote (bigger than the SNP and LibDems combined) and Milliband got slaughtered it was obvious where Labour voters voted.
– 2016 (while it is an analysis and not factual) East Anglia University was able to show how each Constituency voted. Now contrary to what a certain scribe on here would have us believe I believe the Referendum was a One Person On Vote national vote. However (sorry again!) area pictures can be calculated but are just that – images. And some 60% of Labour constituencies (or 157) voted Leave.
– 2017 and Labour voters return to vote Labour and Corbyn does better. Still only 4 seats more than Brown got but UKIP just empty of votes. The shift can be seen if not accurately quantified.
Yeah I would say the political class has turned it into party politics but I think it was inevitable, with Scotland voting to leave, the SNP were always going to be opposed, the Lib Dems are the Lib Dems so no explanation needed, and of course Theresa May calling the snap election..
“Let us tomorrow vote for an election, let us put forward our plans for Brexit and our alternative programmes for government and then let the people decide.”
“So, tomorrow, let the House of Commons vote for an election, let everybody put forward their proposals for Brexit and their programmes for government, and let us remove the risk of uncertainty and instability and continue to give the country the strong and stable leadership it demands.”
That was an invitation for parties to win seats based on their parties manifesto, with their version of Brexit included, now unless Theresa May is going to base Brexit on the Labour manifesto’s versions of it, you cannot expect Labour to vote for it, they are in opposition doing their job and representing their constituents.
And yes i agree Labour were hemorrhaging votes to UKIP, especially in the working class northern heartlands, this is what is annoying me about Watson and the second vote group within Labour at the moment, millions and millions of Labour or ex Labour voters voted to leave the EU, we cannot overturn the result, it must be respected and followed through.
“Still only 4 seats more than Brown”
Some things don’t change haha, you should judge someone on their predecessor Chris, which was 30 more seats than Milliband, if we are playing by those rules then it’s also 97 more than Major, or 65 more than Churchill, or best of all 108 more than Attlee!
@Solesurvivor – You see THAT is how you counter a remark was probably too clever by half. But I couldn’t resist it!
The fact that surprised me was (as I understand) May won more popular votes than Blair won in his ’97 landslide and yet lost a Tory majority. Mind Sturgeon lost hers as well the year before but that never gets mentioned. As an ex Tory it grieves me to see how that once clear and determined party has drifted off into nowhere land. No discipline and no purpose other than survival. Europe did for Thatcher, Major and Cameron and it will do for May as well.
I happen to think Labour are far more divided in voter land than people realise and it was my campaigning in 2016 that opened my eyes to how Labour Leave voters look at things differently but came up with the same answer and I am in SUFFOLK. Not exactly a Labour heartland.
But Brexit never was about politics and certainly not about Party Politics (apart from the LibDems who have at least always been honest). Right across the North and in the Midlands Labour Leave voters will desert Labour again but this time vote for the Brexit Party. It is now about the disconnect between Parliament and people and basic Democracy.
That’s first past the post for you Chris, in 2015 UKIP got double the popular vote than SNP, nearly half of what Labour got, yet were represented by 2 MP’s, compared to the SNP’s 56 and Labours 252.
Yeah I do think it’s a shame tbh, I would prefer T May to be able to get on with her job and fulfil her promise about just about managing families, I actually believe she meant it because the country has had enough of austerity, but how can she do her job with this going on, like you say it’s Europe that’s done the damage to the party and in more ways than one I think.
Labour voters are heavily divided when it comes to Europe, but I do honestly think there is a growing sense of “just get on with it and get it done” by a growing number of people, certainly people that I speak to anyway.
And yeah I can definitely see that as well, although I have been reading that a cross party deal will be done to counter the Brexit party, will it happen? Who can say in these times, nobody really knows what’s round the corner at the moment.
@SoleSurvivor – Just to emphasise your first set of numbers in fact UKIP (under Farage) got more popular votes than the LibDems and SNP combined and they got 65 seats.
But as they say in the ‘States: “It is what it is …”
Navantia is owned by the Spanish government what an enormous betrayal of British shipbuilders and defence workers. The blue goverment should be put on trial for the biggest betrayal to the defence of the nation and British workers.
Absolute political suicide. No way this is true.
What’s with the defence fake news recently? We’ve had rumours of HMS PoW being mothballed, Chally 2 numbers cut (despite all the hubbub, it all stemmed from one Times article that was flatly denied by the MoD) and now this
Chally 2 numbers have been cut, slashed.
There’s lies going around about further cuts. All the fuss stems from one article in the Times the MoD denies but that doesn’t stop major media outlets from picking it up and running with it
Rosyth should get this contract, keeps the Scottish happy I supose, imagine the headache of moving coulport with all the nuclear weapons and our nuclear submarines from the Clyde! That’s a real headache.
Love it, under this Government the British have:
Handed over millions to terrorists returning from Afghanistan
Handed over Millions to terrorists in Kenya
Handed over British troops to the courts in Ireland whilst letting IRA terrorists go free
Happy to purchase hardware that can be built in the Uk from elsewhere
Run down the military so much that it wont be long before Malta will have a much more powerful military
Happy to hand over billions to Pakistan which currently has a much more powerful military than we do.
Happy to spend millions on false claims of allegations against British troops and let Shiner off with a slapped wrist.
Who would want to join the military today,when the current crowd of MPs prefer the company of those who hate us and who shun the adage of buy British for buy anything but British.
P.S.
All our Ajax IFVs are built in Spain already somebody should remind Parliament of that salient fact.
European defence procurement a la Type 31 relaunch and Boxer purchase we are signed up to destroy our defence industry
Just voted Gavin and Lee up as they said everything I think: fake news and it wouldn’t stop the clamoring anyway.
Its OK Penny will sort this nonsense out, if it is true of course.
She has a picture of Nelson on her office wall – its her own and brought it in after shunning the official art collection offered.
I am expecting great things from her short tenure as Sec Def, after all, there aren’t any better candidates for PM than her so she could be in No 10 by the end of the year!
I noticed she was wearing the Dolphins on her lapel at the Westminster Abbey service for 50 years of the nuclear deterrent today.
She has some class does that lady…
Trying to test HMS Penny’s calibre? Put her on the gunline straight away, perhaps.
Not often I agree with anything any SNP person says but on this Paul Sweeney is dead right. As are the Unions. This Government (driven lets be aware by the anti British and pro foreign civil service) made a catastrophic error in putting the FSS ships out to international tender for 2 simple reasons: 1) We are leaving the EU and therefore can tell them to shove their rules and 2) In any case shipbuilding in every country (except the UK apparently) is considered a vital national security industry.
We had the perfect opportunity to enact the shipbuilding strategy:
* Type 26 building on the Clyde for 2 decades
* Type 31 building on the Mersey for however long
* Type 45 replacement based on T26 hull and built on the Clyde and Mersey
* FSS ships building in Rosyth then using the same hull design two large ‘Albion II’ ships then further RFA ship replacement programme on a steady rate purchase oldest first
* Ramped up investment in scrapping old nuclear subs at Devonport and expand the port for specialist mid life work on all ships
* Any taxpayer funded ship being scrapped should be scrapped here in the UK
* Teeside developed for carrier and large ship maintenance if Portsmouth is not viable
Now while there are some who fail to understand the mathematics of what Sweeney calls the ‘socioeconomic benefits’ (ie lower nett cost, new high skilled jobs, investment in training, local support economies and the UK supply chains) it is utterly shameful that Ministers play the Civil Servants game and peddle their ‘taxpayer cost’ mantras.
As a lifelong Tory (but no more) I am utterly ashamed of what this Government has done in this and other industrial matters and I am really struggling to find anything I can say in their defence. Shame shame shame on every one with Hammond first. Bar Stewards all
What he said. ⬆️⬆️⬆️.
Paul Sweeney is Labour.
@Darren – Fair Cop Guv … meant to add Stewart McDonald. Always happy to be corrected thank you.
The other thing that needs to be taken into consideration is the extra costs that UK firms have imposed on them by policies and these need to be minused off the price. Like energy! when we live in a worls and a digital industry in which every weld seam can be measured modlled and costed, everything can be taken into account now!
The story seems a bit fanciful.
Apart from totally destroying a future new viable UK shipbuilding sector/industry, is this not form of appeasment or/and in a way making our authority and right to Gibraltar look not ligitimate. But after all of this, this stupidest and most undermining of UK industry government (like Blair and the rest too) done something as devastating as this, do we think Spain would change it’s policy towards Gibraltar?. No, it would not!
Wait there, Spain to recieve FSSS to silence Gibraltar claims? So no competition then? All you have to do is threaten and make claims against a soveriegn territory and you get huge shipbuilding contracts (to the detriment of the buying Country who’s yards can quite easily build these ships and invest in the future), that’s how it works is it?
The tories continue to write the longest suicide note in history. It is excrutiating to watch and listen to the ineptitude and the complete lack of any guile, nous or good old fashioned balls in tnis government.. who will replace the hapless and out of her depth May? Boris? Dont make me grin. Anyone who saw the programme on the F.O. can see what a complete cretin the man is. No hidden depth, just a blithering idiot. Any would be statesmen/women in the wings? Take one step forward.
148 C2’s to be upgraded only still with a gun inferior to most tier 1 nations who run an armoured capability. The British Army on it’s website still declares 336 operational tanks!
The trident replacement programme must go. It is beyond logic to have a nuclear arsenal we will NEVER use as a first strike weapon or otherwise.
Restore the army to a credible, offensive level with six armoured brigades with appropriate artillery and attack helicopter support i.e. 3 AAC regiments of 16 apaches apiece.otherwise accept our lot as a land based defence force only, not sending our troops ibto battle in the ridiculous strike brigade concept. A big anti tank stick must always head up a strike brigade, battlegroup or whatever. Its what everybody else does.
IS it April 1st again. If there is any truth in this then we have a Government who are utterly devoid of any backbone or Patriotism . A cringing lot who will crumble against opposition. The Spaniards are laughing at us and we just smile in return
I say , if it is true then as a Conservative since God were lad ill dump then without regret
Has anyone heard of Pallion shipyard Sunderland!? It still exists! Created by Jame Venus the man who created Appledore and Ulsan South Korea Hyundai shipyard. This once the worlds biggest all undercover ship factory is an asset most do not even know about. Whilst it may not be alble to build whole FSSS ships but it could sure start building the relatively simple liquid parrallel midship hull sections (three of). Tow them up the road to Rosyth. Yes people with skills are needed along with investment, but investment comes with guess what…? A number of businesses use the faciltiy like GT projects and Hi-spec engineering who fabricate monster sized digger buckets. I have for many years seen this yard as part of the FSSS build. Pallion Shipyard Sunderland! This Government, apart from screwing up BREXIT on purpose, is allowing UK industry to wither away yet again (Labour did it too). They are not managing decline, because decline does not need to happen, in fact quite the opposite, but they are creating decline themselves, along with their vested interests!
As my Meerkat friends would say…” it’s all so simples”. Best product, best price gets the work. Ideally that should be in the U K but if we can’t compete….
I really wish the MOD would be allowed to make decisions based on defensive needs and not politics. The defence budget is tight and the gaps in capability are growing and yet people want ships to be built in the UK to prop up companies and therefore built at extra cost tightening the budget even further.
The question should be simple, here’s the budget and the timeline, who can build the best ship within that budget/time.
Instead we have this mess where decisions get constantly delayed due to lobbying and due to delays costs escalate and capabilities are cut.
Would i be happy if the deal went to Spain, not overly but if it was the best tender then i would be satisfied in the knowledge that the money is well spent and would suck up the whole Gibraltar thing, its not like they are actually a threat to its sovereignty, they are just paying mind games/PR war.
Then it has to be over 50% cheaper plus the socio impacts and loss to future investment in UK industry to be competitive. If it is over 50% cheaper, Ithen ask who the heck is subsidising them?! Germany italy france and Netherlands build it’s own FSSS ships that are more expensive. But they take other matters into account.
I hope this is not true, but then again with the British Government and heavy industry anything is possible.
Does the UK Government not understand that when an order is placed in a UK shipyard a lot of the monies spent comes back to the treasury. People build ships, people get paid, people pay taxes, people that get paid and pay taxes buy things people that buy things pay VAT.
Ships get built shipyards needs materials, materials cost money VAT is paid, shipyards that needs materials need to get it from manufacturers, manufacturers needs to employ people to produce goods for shipyards, more people get paid, more taxes for the treasury. This reduces unemployment savings on benefit payments.
I think you all get the drift except our blooming Government.
To build these three ships would employ directly in the yards 2000 people for five years, another 4000 would be employed in the supply chain and 2000-3000 indirect jobs would be created. That is 8000-9000 employed. If these people were unemployed that means a loss of taxes including VAT and payment of benefits. Just the benefit total for 9000 at 1000 per month (including housing and council tax payments) over the five year period is £540 million that’s almost two FSS ships.
If the order is paid overseas then that is a pure cost, it is their people that get paid and pay taxes into their treasury.
Why is it that a simpleton like me can understand this but the highly qualified people,highly paid people in government can’t.
So is there a conspiracy or political ideology being followed to do this to British industry over many decades?
It is the only possible answer.
Daniele, conspiracy no, political ideology possibly. Heavy industry possibly means trade unions, trade unions from the Conservative part’s point of view means strikes or not getting into power as trade unions vote Labour. I know that is simplistic but it is what it is. Many Conservative governments have either fallen or have been crippled by strikes.
There is one more issue that might need to be taking into account and again it is the problem of Parliament. Defence expenditure is at the whim of who ever is in power. If we have tomorrow a Labour government with Corbyn at the helm it is possible that the Dreadnought project would be scrapped. However an overseas contract is much more difficult to scrap.
It is time that defence expenditure was put on a ten year program that way projects would be secure, investment into industry could be carried out and everyone will know what they are doing.
Agree with long term defence planning. I’d ringcfence it in law just like the aid budget too.
It’s at the mercy of any new government otherwise.
Remember Daniele, manufacturing and engineering should be allowed to wither and die, the only real positive driver in our economy is the financial sector, what possibly could go wrong?
I know so much of our economy is in services and finance but we should bloody well have both.
Yes. Not only that companies pay taxes pay for energy etc. If the UK gov buy direct from industry material like steel from UK steel makers, it is in their and our interests to do this, plus all UK suppliers, and on and on. Prof Paul Stott of Newcastle University could be right, in which he worries about UK governments not liking this type of sector (because of the past history which is so longh ago now and should not impact on a new generation) and would glady through the baby out with the bath water, again! Not everyone wants to (or can) do retail, bars, leisure, and sell houses.
Surprise F…ing surprise that a UK design house wins the design contract and other protected UK content supplier win contracts (what ever that means), but they get built abroad. No independent UK industrial strategy being in building ships or other! No real maritime Nation either.
The fact this is an open tender means there is apsolultly no chance of this in any way being true. If there was a sniff of it the other bidders would all foul and the whole process would need to start again with a load of court cases against HMG for lost income and costs.
This sort of corruption does not happen in an open tender in nations that don’t have corruption issues…Fake news at its best.
Reports that Type 31 may be scrapped.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/05/07/hopes-cut-price-frigates-navy-dashed-mod-gives-way-250m-per/
Not good if true.
They are needed ASAP to replace the GP T23’s.
The first T26 is still years away.
The T31 / River 2 is needed to free the first line ships ( T45 / T26 ) from constabulary work to concentrate on supporting the carrier and the deterrent.
Not good indeed. Perhaps the good news is that the MOD has accepted that none of the contenders is acceptable. Leander is too small; Meko and Arrowhead are not British and all would be underarmed at the price.
The question is what now? Soldier on with Type 23 and/or a mixed fleet of Type 26 and River 2? Maybe subclasses of the UK hulls we do have ; additonal uparmed River 3s with s 57mm and hangar and 2 or 3 more diesel GP T26s. Would that work?
Maybe we should get Canada and Australia to quote for building us another 5 Type 26?
I read now that HMG has accepted that the costs of equipment transferred onto the T31 from T23 will not be part of the 250 million.
Maybe that will help matters.
Sounds like desperate measures. When you are in a hole the first thing to do is to stop digging. Get the Canadians and the Australians for competitive quotes to build another 5 GP Type 26 for the RN ?
Sorry, but if I wanted speculation rather than facts I’d get my news from Facebook (or one of the many printed news outlets that spin absolute garbage).