Railroad Forums 

  • Ramifications of "Brexit" for railways

  • Discussion about railroad topics everywhere outside of Canada and the United States.
Discussion about railroad topics everywhere outside of Canada and the United States.

Moderators: Komachi, David Benton

 #1497999  by george matthews
 
David Benton wrote:I wonder if truck and bus drivers will face the same license problem? The Irish border certainly is a complex issue for brexit, and much of the discussions have been about it.
It is being stated that British drivers, of cars and lorries, will need an EU licence as their British driving licence will no longer be valid.
 #1501439  by george matthews
 
I think the political situation in Britain is becoming more complex. Nine Labour MPs have resigned from the party and now sit as Independents. Three Tories also have left their party and sit with the same group. There are rumoured to be several others thinking of changing. It seems still possible that Mrs. May will not be able to get a parliamentary majority for her Brexit plans. There may also be numbers who would vote for a postponement of departure so that actual leaving will not occur on 29 March. Neither of the two main parties is holding together. How far they may break up is still unclear. One factor is that it was not made clear to voters when the referendum on leaving the EU was held that very little material was published about the consequences there would be for leaving. It is now being said that there could be serious disruption of many trades, especially of food but also of components in manufacturing where for example many automobile parts cross the channel in both directions. Without new agreements these trades would become much more expensive. Japanese car factories are already preparing to shut down and relocate to within the EU.

Compared to these problems the effects on rail transport are likely to be fairly trivial.
 #1501453  by David Benton
 
Obviously a very divisive subject , and possibly a no win for anybody.It has certainly shown up the problem with 50 % referendums, if it just passes , you've still got nearly 50 % of the population unhappy with the decision.
 #1501464  by johnthefireman
 
David Benton wrote:Obviously a very divisive subject , and possibly a no win for anybody.It has certainly shown up the problem with 50 % referendums, if it just passes , you've still got nearly 50 % of the population unhappy with the decision.
I think you've put your finger on it there, David. Referenda on major constitutional issues should always have a "super majority", usually 2/3 of the vote, and probably a quroum as well, ie a certain percentage of eligible voters need to vote for it to be legitimate. In an entity such as UK made up of four nations, it could also be argued that all, or a majority, of the four nations need to approve the measure. But as George says, the other problem is that "very little material was published about the consequences there would be for leaving", indeed I would say virtually NO material was published. Nobody, including those in favour of leaving, expected that it would happen, so no plans or expectations or negotiating strategies were in place for it.
 #1501485  by dowlingm
 
The EU has started to publish unilateral "short term" measures for various issues like air transport, so it may be that some "no deal" impacts will be suspended or at least mitigated.
 #1501521  by ExCon90
 
The columnist George Will recently quoted Winston Churchill on Brexit (no indication of what time period or context):
"In my country people can do what they like, but often they do not like what they have done."
 #1504559  by David Benton
 
Interesting times. I thought under the westminster system , if the p.m or ruling party failed to get a majority, the opposition could call for a vote of no confidence in the governing party , forcing a election. I.e the westminster system works on the principle of the governing party having a majority to enable it to govern.
I think this is still the case , maybe the opposition are in no hurry to take over this mess.
Rail related , a protestor spends the night on St Pancras station .
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/30/uk/e ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 #1504577  by johnthefireman
 
David Benton wrote:maybe the opposition are in no hurry to take over this mess.
Indeed. But also, losing a vote in parliament means that a number of government MPs have voted against their own government on that issue. It doesn't automatically mean that they would also vote against the government in a no-confidence motion, although it woiuld be the decent thing to do.
 #1504580  by David Benton
 
Good surmise , John. The only time it came close to this in NZ , it was the threat of not voting for a specific issue that set it off. It would be a major desertion to let it go to a vote.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1984_New_ ... l_election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 #1504587  by george matthews
 
There are new rules about whether a government has to resign and call an election after losing a vote in the Commons. I don't really understand exactly what they are but to defeat the government needs a vote of consequence. At present this seems fairly unlikely. But the situation at present is very complicated. A General Election is certainly one of the possibilities. A Referendum is another possibility. Theresa May seems to have lost control of the situation. A number of people seem to be preparing to stand in a possible election for a new leader of the Tory party - if it is called, that is, if she resigned. She promised to resign if she had won the 4th vote on Brexit last week, but she lost it, and therefore isn't resigning. I don't think anyone understands what is going on.
  • 1
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 15