That’s a microcontroller sensor I can have delivered from China in a week, for less than a quid all-in. How much of that is postage?
It’s weight/mass probably makes it stupidly cheap to ship and it’s not like China isn’t known for subsidising stuff 🙂
meeting today about radiation sources at my work
thanks to the magical B word, the cost of returning used equipment with Caesium radiation sources, (the kind used in labs and mostly hospitals for radiotherapy etc) back to Germany where they were made has gone from a £6000 fee to a cool £1million thanks to our being on the outside......
the gift that keeps on giving
Just hire a white van and fly tip them at Sellafield.
It's no different from what the water companies started doing when they realised what our Brexit freedoms would allow when purification chemicals were in shortage during peak covid.
Funnily enough, though, they never really stopped afterwards. Nor did they stop paying exec bonuses and dividends...
Freedom, eh?
Unfortunately fly tipping them would have terrible consequences!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goi%C3%A2nia_accident
I dread to think how many of them are in labs and hospitals that will now have to pay a fortune to dispose of them, we also looked at an option in Hungary but the red tape for that was innsumountable
and the above link shows what can happen when a private company goes bust (though much of the fault was with the local authority and courts) but an extra million to decommission them will be in no ones budget
Well the lib dems went from circa 12 MPs to 72 MPs in the last election.
That's a seismic shift, but no one likes to talk about that.
Well the lib dems went from circa 12 MPs to 72 MPs in the last election.
That's a seismic shift, but no one likes to talk about that.
They actually got slightly less votes (but pretty much the same). Not sure I'd class that as a seismic shift.
Unfortunately fly tipping them would have terrible consequences!
Entirely in keeping with Brexit itself then.
👍
Well the lib dems went from circa 12 MPs to 72 MPs in the last election.
That's a seismic shift, but no one likes to talk about that.
They actually got slightly less votes (but pretty much the same). Not sure I'd class that as a seismic shift.
Depends on how your scales are weighted I guess.
An interesting piece in the New York Times about the changing world order :
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/08/world/europe/icc-hungary-us-israel.html
Although the issue is never mentioned anymore one of the principal arguments I heard in support of Remain during the referendum campaign was that EU membership guaranteed protection against the worse excesses of Tory governments. It was never a convincing argument but this drives a horse and coach through it :
“Orban is playing special relations — special relations with the Russia, special relations with Trump, special relations with the Chinese,” said Ivan Krastev, chairman of the Center for Liberal Strategies. “He’s trying to create a story of Hungary being the member of the European Union that can do what they want. ”
“So if somebody wants to invest in a country in the EU, go with Hungary,” Mr. Krastev said. “Because they can do what they want. They can veto sanctions. They can leave the International Criminal Court. They’re kind of the only free spirit in the E.U.”
It also of course undermines the Leave argument that it was necessary to free the UK from the constraints placed on it due to EU membership. Although I am not sure there is any evidence that Hungary doesn't comply with EU economic diktat.
Another interesting point in the article is that apparently Hungary doesn't even see itself as part of a Europe with a globally dominant future, Orban's priority seems to be Asia :
Mr. Orban laid out his grand strategy for Hungary in a wide-ranging and detailed speech last July, in which he outlined his vision of a new emerging world order. As he sees it, Western liberalism has lost and nationalism is back. For the next decades, or perhaps centuries, the dominant center of the world will be in Asia, he predicted.
For a small economy like Hungary, that means ignoring any marching orders from Brussels or Washington to isolate Moscow or Beijing.
So, to summarise… losing 5% of our GDP was worth it because… Hungary
Righto. Glad we’ve got that one sorted
So, to summarise… losing 5% of our GDP was worth it because… Hungary
Righto. Glad we’ve got that one sorted
I think that's the total opposite of what he is saying?
I think the point is more that Hungary stays inside the tent whilst acting ****ishly in seeking special arrangements here and there. Let's call it "cake eatism".
Whether we would want to be a country that takes all the advantages of EU membership whilst being a total pain in the arse to the wider collective is a different argument. Sending them ****s like Farage as MEPs would suggest we did a fair amount of that anyway.
🤷♂️
So, to summarise… losing 5% of our GDP was worth it because… Hungary
You think that is a summary of the New York Times article?
I suggest you read it again.
I'll also add that one of De Gaulle's main reasons for turning the UK down for EU (or whatever its acronym was back then) was the UK's supposed special relationship with the US.
"Ne pleurer pas, milord" as I believe CDG said at the time.
And, when we were in the EU, the likes of Cameron (and especially Blair) mentioned the supposed special relationship about once every hour. Especially when trying to justify joint military action against a country loosely associated with terrorism. One that happened to be unfinished business for the Bush clan.
The UK was never forced to choose. But the Brexiteers went on about Brussels Jackboots, put pictures of brown refugees up and convinced a country to vote away £120bn odd per annum on the basis of 'sovereignty'.
🤣
I think the point is more that Hungary stays inside the tent whilst acting ****ishly in seeking special arrangements here and there. Let's call it "cake eatism".
Ah but Mrs Thatcher her did get us those way back 🙂
and yet more proof that public opinion has changed.
Starmer must drop his srupid and damagining red lines and drop the pretense that we can get better trade wuth the eu without joining the SM and CU
They can leave the International Criminal Court. They’re kind of the only free spirit in the E.U.”,”
article conveniently ignores that Hungary have been penalised for their attacks on rule of law?
Well to vist the UK I now need an ETA (19e), a British passport (whatever that costs) or a certificate of entitlement (£589). That in addition to my French passport. Pre Brexit my free identity card was all that was needed.
Madame is currently in Hamburg with 30 school kids on an exchange, a trip which has replaced her UK trips. Apparently the number of EU students in UK universities has about halved since Brexit and EU school groups were already significantly down before this ETA requirement. The more barriers the fewer visitors you'll have spending their money.
and yet more proof that public opinion has changed
And yet; more and more folks are saying that they'll vote Reform and prefer Nigel over Starmer..?
But Nigel and reform are giving people something to vote for rather than just don't vote reform rhetoric from labour.
You'd have thought lessons might have been learnt from the Brexit vote but it feels more like momentum is building for reform. We are now trapped on this cursed forsaken Island.. doomed to be ruled by Farage.
But Nigel and reform are giving people something to vote for rather than just don't vote reform rhetoric from labour.
You'd have thought lessons might have been learnt from the Brexit vote but it feels more like momentum is building for reform. We are now trapped on this cursed forsaken Island.. doomed to be ruled by Farage.
Chances of a red/yellow/green coalition, or even unofficially standing candidates from each strategically?
There's a clear and present danger the two nasty parties might come up with a simmilar scheme 😐
Well its finally arrived
the day the brexiteers promised us
the sunlit uplands!!
https://www.reaction.life/p/britain-looks-like-brexit
What Britain looks like after Brexit
It’s 24 June, 2025, and Britain is marking its annual Independence Day celebration. As the fireworks stream through the summer sky, still not quite dark, we wonder why it took us so long to leave. The years that followed the 2016 referendum didn’t just reinvigorate our economy, our democracy and our liberty. They improved relations with our neighbours.
The United Kingdom is now the region’s foremost knowledge-based economy. We lead the world in biotech, law, education, the audio-visual sector, financial services and software. New industries, from 3D printing to driverless cars, have sprung up around the country. Older industries, too, have revived as energy prices have fallen back to global levels: steel, cement, paper, plastics and ceramics producers have become competitive again.
The EU, meanwhile, continues to turn inwards, clinging to its dream of political amalgamation as the euro and migration crises worsen. Its population is ageing, its share of world GDP shrinking and its peoples protesting. “We have the most comprehensive workers’ rights in the world”, complains Jean-Claude Juncker, who has recently begun in his second term as President of the European Federation, “but we have fewer and fewer workers”.
The last thing most EU leaders wanted, once the shock had worn off, was a protracted argument with the United Kingdom which, on the day it left, became their single biggest market. Terms were agreed easily enough. Britain withdrew from the EU’s political structures and institutions, but kept its tariff-free arrangements in place. The rights of EU nationals living in the UK were confirmed, and various reciprocal deals on healthcare and the like remained. For the sake of administrative convenience, Brexit took effect formally on 1 July 2019, to coincide with the mandates of a new European Parliament and Commission.
That day marked, not a sudden departure, but the beginning of a gradual reorientation. As the leader of the Remain campaign, Lord Rose, had put it during the referendum campaign, “It’s not going to be a step change, it’s going to be a gentle process.” He was spot on.
In many areas, whether because of economies of scale or because rules were largely set at global level, the UK and the EU continued to adopt the same technical standards. But, from 2019, Britain could begin to disapply those regulations where the cost of compliance outweighed any benefits.
The EU’s Clinical Trials Directive, for example, had wiped out a great deal of medical research in Britain. Outside it, we again lead the world. Opting out of the EU’s data protection rules has turned Hoxton into the software capital of the world. Britain is no longer hampered by Brussels restrictions on sales, promotions and e-commerce.
Other EU regulations, often little known, had caused enormous damage. The REACH Directive, limiting the import of chemical products, had imposed huge costs on manufacturers. The bans on vitamin supplements and herbal remedies had closed down many health shops. London’s art market had been brutalised by EU rules on VAT and retrospective taxation. All these sectors have revived.
Financial services are booming – not only in London, but in Birmingham, Leeds and Edinburgh too. Eurocrats had never much liked the City, which they regarded as parasitical. Before Brexit, they targeted London with regulations that were not simply harmful but, in some cases, downright malicious: the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive, the ban on short selling, the Financial Transactions Tax, the restrictions on insurance. After Britain left, the EU’s regulations became even more heavy-handed, driving more exiles from Paris, Frankfurt and Milan. No other European city could hope to compete: their high rates of personal and corporate taxation, restrictive employment practices and lack of support services left London unchallenged.
Other cities, too, have boomed, not least Liverpool and Glasgow, which had found themselves on the wrong side of the country when the EEC’s Common External Tariff was phased in in the 1970s. In 2016, the viability of our commercial ports was threatened by the EU’s Ports Services Directive, one of many proposed rules that was being held back so as not to boost the Leave vote. Now, the UK has again become a centre for world shipping.
Shale oil and gas came on tap, almost providentially, just as the North Sea reserves were depleting, with most of the infrastructure already in place. Outside the EU, we have been able to augment this bonanza by buying cheap Chinese solar panels. In consequence, our fuel bills have tumbled, boosting productivity, increasing household incomes and stimulating the entire economy.
During the first 12 months after the vote, Britain confirmed with the various countries that have trade deals with the EU that the same deals would continue. It also used that time to agree much more liberal terms with those states which had run up against EU protectionism, including India, China and Australia. These new treaties came into effect shortly after independence. Britain, like the EFTA countries, now combines global free trade with full participation in EU markets.
Our universities are flourishing, taking the world’s brightest students and, where appropriate, charging accordingly. Their revenues, in consequence, are rising, while they continue to collaborate with research centres in Europe and around the world.
The number of student visas granted each year is decided by MPs who, now that they no longer need to worry about unlimited EU migration, can afford to take a long-term view. Parliament sets the number of work permits, the number of refugee places and the terms of family reunification. A points-based immigration system invites the world’s top talent; and the consequent sense of having had to win a place competitively means that new settlers arrive with commensurate pride and patriotism.
Unsurprisingly, several other European countries have opted to copy Britain’s deal with the EU, based as it is upon a common market rather than a common government. Some of these countries were drawn from EFTA (Norway, Switzerland and Iceland are all bringing their arrangements into line with ours). Some came from further afield (Serbia, Turkey, Ukraine). Some followed us out of the EU (Denmark, Ireland, the Netherlands).
The United Kingdom now leads a 22-state bloc that forms a free trade area with the EU, but remains outside its political structures. For their part, the EU 24 have continued to push ahead with economic, military and political amalgamation. They now have a common police force and army, a pan-European income tax and a harmonised system of social security. These developments have prompted referendums in three other EU states on whether to copy Britain.
Perhaps the greatest benefit, though, is not easy to quantify. Britain has recovered its self-belief. As we left the EU, we straightened our backs, looked about us, and realised that we were still a nation to be reckoned with: the world’s fifth economy and fourth military power, one of five members on the UN Security Council and a leading member of the G7 and the Commonwealth. We recalled, too, that we were the world’s leading exporter of soft power; that our language was the most widely studied on Earth; that we were linked by kinship and migration to every continent and archipelago. We saw that there were great opportunities across the oceans, beyond the enervated eurozone. We knew that our song had not yet been sung.
Daniel Hannan is a Conservative MEP and author of Why Vote Leave published by Head of Zeus
What the hell did i just read? That's literally like some Man in the High Castle/alternate timeline fiction, right? Or does he actually believe all of that?
It was a ludicrous prediction/propaganda piece from nine years ago, but it serves well as a prime example to remind us of the misguided bullshit that was being pumped out back then.
I think 'misguided' is being very generous to Hannan.
Misleading is much more like it.
The ****er needs all his teeth knocked out and then fill the void with expanding foam so he can never utter another word again,
I read that as an actual article and was wondering where he'd got this revisionist *!?!?!
No wonder that people were conned when this kind of well written fantasy was there to "balance" the rabble rousing, "had enough of experts", jingoistic bull* that was pandering to the less sophisticated. There really was something for everyone.
The ****er needs all his teeth knocked out and then fill the void with expanding foam so he can never utter another word again,
That article has done the rounds before but obviously today is "the day" and that sentiment ^^ applies to pretty much everyone promoting Brexit.
Reading that bollocks makes me all nostagic about Jamba's contributions to this forum. 🙂
My most recent Brexit bonus is the ETA requirement for us Europeans. Forums confirmed that the app wasn't working for many dual nationals and it was best to use the web version. Not long into the procedure I realised it was going to be easier and a similar cost in the long run to get a British passport. So that's another 150e to add to the tally of what Brexit has cost me.
Faced with the open goal of "Dan Hannan Day", John Crace has an easy win out of it.
🇬🇧🍆💦🇬🇧
Leads to...
💩 in the 🏞
Leads to...
🤮 for anyone unlucky enough to swim in it.
A triumph.
Seem to remember that we have been "the dirty man of Europe" before. Also seem to remember that it was EU rules that improved the quality of water in this country. Makes you think...
When I started with Welsh Water in 1982 one of the first things I was given to do was sampling bathing waters and checking results for compliance. There was a programme of investment in sewage treatment to ultimately put an end to the discharge of untreated sewage from long (and sometimes short) sea outfalls. That had been prompted by EU directives. By the time I left the bathing water sampling points had been reduced in number, and frequency of sampling also reduced. This was "rationalisation" as the industry headed towards privatisation. I left before that shit show which ended up with separation of responsibilites (not a bad thing) and a largely toothless and under resourced environment agency (a bad thing). Most of the damage had been done before Brexit IMO.
The problem was privatising monopoly services where the arguments in favour of privatisation, mainly competition driving efficiency and productivity gains, were absent. Multiple sewage system competing on service and cost just weren't going to happen. It just amounted to adding a layer of cost - paying dividends to shareholders - whilst discouraging costly investments that would never give a financial return.
Happily Welsh Water is back to "not for profit". Hopefully the necessary investments will be resumed.
Most of the damage had been done before Brexit IMO.
Probably, but Brexit directly created the summer/autumn 2021 shortage of purification treatment chemicals that led to the relatively recent legitimising/normalising of dumping untreated sewage in rivers and the sea. So-called emergency measures that then rapidly became the norm as water companies worked out another way to prop up their P&L - and thus exec bonuses and dividends.
Article from 2021...
I retain from the Guardian article is:
“The most sensitive and high-risk watercourses will not be affected and any company planning to make use of this short-term measure must first agree its use with theEnvironment Agency, which will be checking compliance.”
As I said above, toothless and under funded. It's the legislative framework that even when in the EU was very British. You can make all the rules and laws you want but there's absolutely no point if they aren't adapted to the real world, enforced, enforceable and carry dissuasive sanctions. Fines of thousands when there are millions at stake are a joke. Then you have cross directorships and string pulling. Conflicts of interests that mean legal action is supressed (I've lived that, one of the reasons for my resignation). It's not so much a Brexit problem as the corrupt coniving way British society and business (increasingly) work with the complicity of the politicians.
Still, 2 million of us signed a peition in France and that blocked a law allowing the use of some pesticides. 🙂 Pesticides still legal in the EU where the industry lobby groups are just as active as in the UK. You tend to get what the people vote for even when they haven't twigged they're voting against they're own interests - like Brexit.
That quote you mention above...
I have this image of a slightly dribbly mist of piss curling back onto a pair of shoes in a brisk breeze.
Which is ironic, because if it was just piss going into the waterways untreated it wouldn't be half as bad as it is.
One of my regular visits was to the abattoir to try and persuade them not to remove the bucket sieves from the drains when washing down because big lumps of lung or whatever blocked the pumps in the pumping station which then overflowed into the river. People tended to notice the river running red which resulted in me getting alarmed phone calls. It was entertaining recovering "evidence" from the pumps.
Those sort of visible things were often less damaging than the less visible things for which hundreds of dead fish were the first sign.
unfortunately I think the response of many who voted for brexit will be "thats because we didnt do the job properly" and so they will vote for Farage who is denying all responsibility for the mess and confidently announcing it would have been different if he was ****ing things up.
I mean, the article isn't far off saying just that
It’s the Telegraph… I didn’t actually read the article!
The Telegraph:
unfortunately I think the response of many who voted for brexit will be "thats because we didnt do the job properly" and so they will vote for Farage who is denying all responsibility for the mess and confidently announcing it would have been different if he was ****ing things up.
Sad but true. He's still spinning his 'they need us more than we need them' line and claims he's going to renegotiate the whole thing and get a better deal.
I can't think of a single human being on the planet less likely to get a better deal from the EU, but you know... when did the average Brexiteer/Reform voter let a minor inconvenience like reality intrude on proceedings
Daisy Cooper was on the UK radio this morning saying that Labour is missing an open goal by not spelling out to the people the significant effect Brexit has had on the economy. Lewis Goodall didn't interrupt.
But the UK will never get the deal they had.
I just can't fathom it. Labour is getting slaughtered for various reasons, but mainly because the economy is staggering around in a ditch. But they are so terrified of 'betraying brexit' that they have to wait for the 'sovrinty' knuckleheads to realise what they've done to themselves (and everyone else) before they try to start reversing the damage. Show some bloody leadership and do the right thing, even if it means getting turfed out in 2028, because it looks increasingly like that will happen despite trying to appease the idiots and opportunists who still claim to support Brexit.
The price of all that sovereignty that you’ve got sloshing around 🙂
Don’t forget the U.K. still has to pay a few more billion over the next few years to settle up and then a few more billion if they want market access.
Still a few tories got play to play at being PM and Farage got a few quid out of it.
it’s infuriating how little they actually got to the financial obligations they stitched the country up for 🙁
I had a look at a few pages of the original in-out referendum thread. What we're living now was all so predictable and predicted. The Guardian at the time irritated me by claiming to be remain whilst running tittle tattle negative stories of no consequence about European countries in most editions. Sometimes though a columnist was on the money:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jun/13/brexit-supporters-leave-vote-right?CMP=share_btn_tw ]Interesting
That Toynbee article is strikingly prescient
Labour is missing an open goal by not spelling out to the people the significant effect Brexit has had on the economy
Labour voted for it!
Having Corbyn as leader during the referendum only helped the leave side. His inaction & leaving the Tory's to get on with it rather than calling out the whole thing as utterly ridiculous only helped Farage, Johnson & co.
As always, Corbyn represented his own lifelong Brexiteer views, rather than the predominantly pro-EU leanings of his party, his MPs, Labour members and voters.
He enforced 3-line whips for Labour MPs to facilitate Brexit, against their instincts in large part, at every turn
Corbyn has to shoulder a hell of a lot of the responsibility for the mess we’re in.
Not that he ever will, of course. Like all the rest of the people responsible for it, he’s simply shrugged and walked away from the smoldering wreckage
Which was only to be expected from Corbyn who had been consistently anti-EU for the previous 40 years voting against in 75 then against the Maastricht then... I'm sure this kind of list has been linked before but it's a reminder to raise a digit to Your Party and all who sail in that sinking ship:
https://www.markpack.org.uk/153744/jeremy-corbyn-brexit/
Now where was I on that job list... .
Starmer was also a 3-line-whip Brexiter as soon as he was elected leader. Don't put this all on Corbyn.
Starmer was also a 3-line-whip Brexiter as soon as he was elected leader. Don't put this all on Corbyn.
They have to since otherwise they will need to accept responsibility for ****ing the country up and creating the perfect environment for people who had been let down by the centrist governments choosing option c for a hope of a change.
These are the sort of people who will read the account of the "remain" campaign and nod along with it blaming Corbyn for everything without managing to wonder that, just possibly, if your opponents were trying to do an anti elite campaign it might be best not to select your senior staff from the new labour and tory elites or, unfortunately, not even that but their offspring and associates.
It might also need them to think that, as always, Camerons victories help set up the damage for the next time with those who campaigned alongside him especially during the Scottish Referendum campaign ending up damaged by the association.
Then there is the simple fact the media selected who they would follow and that didnt include Corbyn. Which doesnt mean he didnt campaign but just not being one of the London elite like Cameron, Johnson and Farage he didnt get the post.
That is all true. But on this specific point it’s far simpler than that, Corbyn wanted Remain to lose, so he didn’t get in the way of them doing so. It wouldn’t have mattered if the result wasn’t so close. Most people who voted were not swung in any way by Corbyn’s “efforts” during the campaign, or that a Labour leader had historically been so, er, “luke warm” (I’m being charitable) about Europe… but the tiny minority that were matter in such a close call.
Starmer was also a 3-line-whip Brexiter as soon as he was elected leader. Don't put this all on Corbyn.
They have hardly covered themselves in glory since, however at the time they weren't leading the party - so that buck stops with Corbyn.
If I recall correctly, he mostly let the Tories carry out their psychodrama without making any case to remain until the last & it was a grudging yeah it'd be best to stay in the EU.
he mostly let the Tories carry out their psychodrama without making any case to remain until the last & it was a grudging yeah it'd be best to stay in the EU.
No he did campaign but it just didnt get the press attention. Now traditionally the counter argument has been that was all his fault but that seems to have dropped off as the glorious leader Starmer is also struggling with that. Although there are plenty who still somehow manage it.
For the grudging. I would say realistic but again a good example of the press highlighting just a few words. I guess he could have lied through his teeth and claimed it was 12 out of 10 but I am not convinced by that as a plan.
A problem for the remain campaign in general around being realistic about the issues since people can actually see them vs just claiming how glorious leaving would be.
For the grudging. I would say realistic but again a good example of the press highlighting just a few words. I guess he could have lied through his teeth and claimed it was 12 out of 10 but I am not convinced by that as a plan.
You can focus on “one little line”, the truth is much bigger than that… years of what he had said and done before the campaign… and then deliberately going missing, dropping key messages, and being lacking during it. All but the last part of that has come from multiple sources including allies. That last one… well only he can know what happened there… might be just because he’s not very good at campaigning, but I’d rather look at his history… where he has shown to be an energetic campaigner… but against not for Europe.
None of it really matters anymore - Corbyn failed massively on this, but Starmer is just as bad if not worse as he's actually in a position to do something about it.
However - it would appear pointing out the obvious to our electorate while the Tories, Reform & Press are basically shouting you down that you are wrong & throwing shite from the sidelines means the obvious doesn't get through.
But I'm excited that we now have the prospect of trial without a jury & leaving the ECHR, having already had my rights stripped away I look forward to more of them going.