Mixed messages.

[Suff]

Osc, I'm not going to comment on the details of a deal I know nothing about. But let me put this in perspective. Every train company in the UK rents their trains from a rolling stock company. Virgin, when it bid for the East Coast line, did not have a single train to run on the lines, neither did any of the competitors. Once they had won the contract, they would then have leased the trains to run on the rails.

From the UK Government website.

Rolling stock leasing companies (ROSCOs) own most of the coaches, locomotives and freight wagons that run on the rails, which they lease to train operating and freight operating companies, in accordance with the requirements for the services the latter wish to operate.

The bigger issue is not that they have no ships, there have been several incidences of ferry companies starting up with re-painted, leased, ships from other lines, or with older ferries bought out from the current companies; it is with the fact that the company has never operated any maritime assets before. That is a bigger issue and one which will have faced significant scrutiny. Notably the press completely ignored that and went for the fantastic headline. Idiots.

I comment from Grayling's statements.

“It’s a new start-up business, government is supporting new British business and there is nothing wrong with that,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

“We have looked very carefully at this business, we have put in place a tight contract that makes sure they can deliver for us. I don’t see any problem with supporting a new British business.”

He said the firm would be ready to deliver services from April and had been “looked at very carefully by a team of civil servants who have done due diligence on the company and reached a view they can deliver”.

The contract is one of three agreements worth a total of £107.7m signed by the government to help ease congestion at Dover by securing extra lorry capacity in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

The key part here is £107.7m Or about one week of putting Brexit related advertising on TV. Of which the lions share is going to a French ferry operator and a Danish ferry operator, of which there can be no doubt they will fulfil on the commitment. I believe the actual number for Seaborne is around £20m.

On the NI border, I certainly said the UK cannot solve this on their own. The EU is the final arbiter on border disputes which involve a non EU border, which the UK will be in a few short days. The UK cannot come to an agreement on an open border in NI without the EU agreement. It is impossible, it doesn't matter what the UK or Ireland say, the EU MUST agree to it.

What the EU has proposed (don't even confuse the Backstop with a UK wish, it is an EU demand), is totally unacceptable to the UK. Therefore the UK needs engagement and negotiation to change it. The UK simply cannot determine what the agreement will be then carry on. Saying that the UK is in disarray because it won't accept the EU "terms" is disingenuous. Yes there is a political war going on right now in the UK, it was always going to happen as the majority of the people want to leave and the majority of the politicians do not.

Right. Figures. Let's do it the simple way then.

Greece was crippled by running the Olympics, as Ireland would be if it tried to do the same, as the economies are roughly similar although the start point in debt is somewhat different. Simply put, the Olympics is now too expensive for any country but the top 30 or so in the world.

The UK could run 10 simultaneous Olympics before the budget starts to break even a bit. Even then, ten of them is less than 1.5 times what the UK government paid to bail out the banks. We should also remember that it paid in €3.8bn to the Irish bailout at the same time too, as well as all the other PIIGS bailouts.

The UK is going to be significantly impacted, in the short term, by leaving the EU. Ireland is also going to be impacted. But Ireland is going to be impacted way, way, more than the UK because it is still dealing with an EU bailout and has austerity in place to keep on producing a budget surplus to support that. The knock on impact of that is going to be significant.

Which is why I say that the NI border is as much a problem for Ireland as it is for the UK. Simply sitting there and saying "we're in the EU and so it won't touch us". That is, quite simply, not a credible or sensible position. That reminds me of the Strawbs song from the 1970's, "You can't touch me I'm part of a Union". I bet Maggie played that song quite a lot, with a smile on her face.

I sincerely hope that someone wakes up soon and smells the coffee in the Oireachtas. Because my SIL married an Irishman and one of my Nephews is Irish. They are both living over in Ireland (not NI), right now. Personally I don't want their lives upset any more than I want mine turned upside down. But I want out of the EU far more than I want comfort for anyone.

[Workingman]

Has anybody threatened to close the border? I must have missed that. And would I be right in thinking that it is not just about trade, goods, economics and money? What about those strange creatures who wander about the place? People! That's them. Don't they count?

Lover the delicious irony of the collapse of the non-ferry, ferry company deal. Where's the incompetent Chris Grayling? He must have some explaining to do, surely? No doubt it will not be his or the equally incompetent government's fault, it will all be down to the EU and the Irish. Let's face it, everything that has gone wrong and is going wrong with Brexit is the EU's fault. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the incompetent Saints of May, Fox, Davis, Raab, Gove, Leadsom, Johnson, Robbins, Banks, Hannan, Rees-Mogg et al; everything that is wrong in the whole Universe is the fault of the EU.

Trains! Olympics?

[cromwell]

Well Osc is right about some of the incompetence. In the UK press Chris Grayling is commonly known as "Failing" Grayling.

I can't help but wonder if some of the incompetence is deliberate though. We are led by a very strange Prime Minister who seems to be very reliant on her advisers - every one of whom is a Remainer. The EU offered us a free trade deal a while ago, but May still plods forward with her "my deal is the only deal" mantra.

The political class of the UK does not want us to leave the EU and so we are where we are. Time running out, no cohesive plan, (and this is entirely the fault of Remainers, because every person involved in these negotiations IS a remainer), and the only option the politicians seem to want is to postpone the date of leaving; to kick the can down the road. Again.

It's become very clear to me that the EU has been a convenient get out for UK politicians. "Oh, we'd love to do something - but it's these EU rules, you see!". They've had an easy ride. The direction comes from Brussels, they just go along. When the time comes that they will have to start actually doing some work and start to run an independent country, they don't want it. Too much like hard work maybe.

[Workingman]

Time running out, no cohesive plan, (and this is entirely the fault of Remainers, because every person involved in these negotiations IS a remainer).

Whoa!

Who promised the referendum? Cameron, under pressure from Tory Brexiters and UKIP. Who ran away after the result? Cameron. Who sprung an opportunistic GE and lost her majority? May. Who invoked A50 without a plan? May. Who bribed the DUP in order to stay in power? May.

None of these things were down to Remainers. The whole train of events had nothing to do with Remainers it was driven by Brexiters and the Tories.

Yes, the Gina Miller case made it that a majority in parliament had to allow A50 to be evoked, but neither Brexiters nor Remainers were ever consulted about the journey to follow, nor were any other political parties. Had there been consultations we might not be in the mess we are in. The fact there were not any is not fault of Remainers, nor to be fair, that of Brexiters, either.

I do admit that Remainers in parliament have muddied the waters more than enough, but what about the Tory Brexit army, the ERG? Haven't they also stirred things up?

I am OK with Remain bashing, it is no problem, but please do not forget the other dark forces involved in the fiasco.

[Osc]

Who bribed the DUP in order to stay in power? May.

To me, that is the worst thing she did - so many people knew what the DUP are, and now an anti-Irish party is the tail wagging the UK government dog. The DUP would happily keep NI stuck in the 1950s and Theresa May's insane pursuit of power at all cost has emboldened them.

Suff, did nobody ever tell you that less is more? For me, your posts are so long that is very difficult to (a) make it through and (b) pick out a salient point on which to comment. I neither have the time nor the concentration to read them all, and it seems to me that a forum such as this is more suited to points being made succinctly, maybe with links to enable the reader to expand their knowledge should they so wish.

I think Donald Tusk is right - whatever about his "special place in hell" comment, there was absolutely no plan should there be a vote for withdrawal, no consideration given to the unwinding of an intertwining web of connections built up in over 40 years of EU membership.

[Workingman]

May has just made a statement to the HoC that MPs will get a vote, not on the 14th as was previously announced, but on the 26th of February.

How this woman can claim not to be running down the clock, and at the same time bullying MPs into accepting her 'unacceptable' deal, beggars belief.

It has also been claimed that she has said that she will repeal the act of parliament allowing changes to international treaties 21 days to pass through said parliament. If that is true then it is pretty sinister.

[medsec222]

I hope Theresa May knows something the rest of us don't know. I would hate to see her continue to stall for time until the last minute, when the choice will be no deal or her deal. As it stands, I can't see any government of any country accepting a backstop which will lock that country into a legal agreement with no unilateral escape clause. And to be completely honest, I don't want to see the UK locked into such an agreement. The way the whole debacle is heading is that we will be leaving the EU on worse terms that we have now. It would be a bitter pill to swallow for all those who had such high hopes of economic prosperity as well as independence from the EU.

[Suff]

Suff, did nobody ever tell you that less is more? For me, your posts are so long that is very difficult to (a) make it through and (b) pick out a salient point on which to comment. I neither have the time nor the concentration to read them all, and it seems to me that a forum such as this is more suited to points being made succinctly, maybe with links to enable the reader to expand their knowledge should they so wish.

I think Donald Tusk is right - whatever about his "special place in hell" comment, there was absolutely no plan should there be a vote for withdrawal, no consideration given to the unwinding of an intertwining web of connections built up in over 40 years of EU membership.

Indeed Osc, But I do try to put all my thoughts, answers, in one post. We could, of course, take that to it's logical conclusion and be like Twitter. A whole discussion in 146 characters.

Links are a great idea, but some of the concepts I try to get over are the analysis of several links and my thought processes as a result of them. There is no point in just writing a few words and posting the links, it would never get the thinking over.

As for leaving without a plan? The plan was to negotiate an exit with the EU. That was always the plan, has always been the plan and is still the plan. When I started in IT, I did 2 years Officer Cadet training in the TA. We had lessons on planning and strategy. The very first thing we were told is that "the first casualty of battle is the plan". Why exactly would the Army teach its officers that? Because the other side has a plan too and you can expect that they will have thought of things you have not.

Now go back two years and start reading the EU presented statements on those so called "negotiations". I would call them Monologue. The UK can have what the EU cares to give it and the EU can take everything it wants.

There was another phrase that Tusk uses in that diatribe about a special place in hell.

Today, there is no political force and no effective leadership for remain

Why would he say that? We're leaving right? Well, apparently, Blair and Clegg and several others went to the EU and said "Just keep being intransigent, make it impossible for May to strike a deal, the government will collapse and we'll do the rest. Don't worry the UK will never leave".

You might have noted that many of the EU "presidents" had been mooting this particular idea for a while now. I note that idea is dead and the EU is full steam ahead on No Deal preparations to give the UK access to the EU markets, deal or no deal.

I submit that everyone had a plan. Leavers, Remainers, EU, my little dog. Nobody's plan has worked out as they were all mutually exclusive. So we are now in a mess and Tusk wants to have a special place in hell..... Well good for him.

One final subject change, but in keeping. Leo Varadkar has been trumpeting about how the EU27 are united as rarely ever seem and the UK will not get what it wants, they will stand behind Ireland.

Varadkar might actually want to cross the line and look at it from the other side. The EU has ALWAYS been united when talking to the UK. It's the only reflex reaction the EU has, saying NO to the UK. It is the biggest single reason for the UK leaving. We don't mistake the solidarity, it has always been there. It is the EU who mistake the UK reaction to it, not the other way around.

[Workingman]

The plan was to negotiate an exit with the EU. That was always the plan, has always been the plan and is still the plan.

Whose plan?

On the Internet and in the media Brexiters up and down the land loudly proclaim "Leave means leave", "Brexit means Brexit", "WTO rules, rule, OK!" They are not negotiation opening gambits, they are demands or statements of what will be. For those people the plan, such as it was, needed no negotiation, it was just to leave. "End of", as they are all so fond of saying.

So once again, whose plan? What percentage of Leavers wanted to negotiate an exit? It certainly was not 100% of them given the above. Which one of the possible negotiated exits was planned for and who did the planning? And what percentage of Leavers were behind the most popular negotiated exit?

It is a fact that 17,410,742 of voters wanted to leave, but it is also a fact that not all Leavers wanted the same thing. And those two things are partly to blame for the mess we are in. It is not all down to Remainers, and never has been.

[Suff]

The plan of the leave campaigns. You will note that every one of them, when asked, every time, said it would be possible for the UK to come to an agreement with the EU on our exit to the mutual benefit.

The Remain leaning MP's, on the other hand, have been consistent in demanding such terms of the EU that it is impossible for the EU to comply.

So let's all get behind the myth. "THERE WAS NO PLAN". Actually the only plan in play, right now, is the one where the MP's who don't want to leave screw up Brexit so badly that neither the UK nor the EU can comply; in the vain and desperate hope that they can stop Brexit and remain in the EU. All the whilst whinging and trying to blame everyone else so that it looks like they didn't actually do it and don't feel the wrath of the very significant number of voters in, every constituency, who voted to Leave.

Because if the truth were told a 12% swing of disaffected Labour voters is more than enough to trash up to 50% of Labour seats.

So we hear the cry "There Was No Plan". Yep, I'll translate. "It doesn't matter if there was a plan or not, we're going to do everything we can to frustrate it and then when people come looking for someone to blame we're going to blame those b'stards who didn't deliver Brexit".

There was always a plan. OK there are those who's plan was simply to leave and deal with the consequences. That is also a plan. Notably the MP's didn't like that plan because they would have had to start, from day1, with preparations for it and there is not enough majority for simply banging out.

Everyone had a plan, several in the UK and ONE in the EU. The phrase "Too many cooks spoil the broth" was never more accurate. Never mind when half the cooks are putting poison in it.

Enough of the "there was no plan" excuse already. The only plan which is relevant, today, is the one which is frustrating every attempt to come to a considered agreement. It has TBLiars grubby little fingerprints all over it. Right down to the attempt to stick it on the very people who are trying to deliver against it. This time there will be no sudden and convenient, "suicide" of in inconvenient key person; too many people know.

What we need is a very simple plan now. It has one element. NO Deal or remove the Backstop and sign the deal in place. It is simple, it has two possible outcomes, just like the referendum, one of which is worse than the other. It is so simple politicians can sell it to their voters and it just requires simple discussions.

Wouldn't that be nice.

But, wait, isn't that what May and her government are trying to deliver?

But no let's all get with the mantra. "THERE WAS NO PLAN". I can hear Blair laughing from here.