Discussion:
Did Brexit cause Monarch collapse?
(too old to reply)
MM
2017-10-02 06:36:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med. The British government is having
to charter 30 planes to bring them home free of charge in what will be
UK’s biggest-ever peacetime airlift. The government hopes, however, to
recoup some of the cost to the taxpayer from credit card companies and
other sources. The bill to the taxpayer, however, is going to be
enormous. And then there's the flights booked that will now never take
off. Plus, the almost 3,000 staff who as of this morning are
unemployed.

On the Today programme just now a spokesman said that one of the
reasons for the collapse was that the airline collected fares in
sterling, but had to pay costs for fuel in dollars, and we all know
how the pound has fared since the Brexit referendum.

Therefore, it is quite reasonable to ask, did Brexit cause Monarch to
collapse? Or how likely would it have been for Monarch to collapse if
there had been a Remain vote and conseiqently no fall in the value of
sterling?

The Independent writes: "After 49 years of flying tens of millions of
passengers to Europe and beyond, one of the proudest names in travel
has collapsed -- costing the jobs of 2,750 staff and the holiday plans
of hundreds of thousands of travellers."

If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?

And finally, is what we're seeing now -- with Ryanair and now
Monarch -- is Osborne's predictions coming true, belatedly?

MM

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Vidcapper
2017-10-02 07:18:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med. The British government is having
to charter 30 planes to bring them home free of charge in what will be
UK’s biggest-ever peacetime airlift. The government hopes, however, to
recoup some of the cost to the taxpayer from credit card companies and
other sources. The bill to the taxpayer, however, is going to be
enormous. And then there's the flights booked that will now never take
off. Plus, the almost 3,000 staff who as of this morning are
unemployed.
On the Today programme just now a spokesman said that one of the
reasons for the collapse was that the airline collected fares in
sterling, but had to pay costs for fuel in dollars, and we all know
how the pound has fared since the Brexit referendum.
Therefore, it is quite reasonable to ask, did Brexit cause Monarch to
collapse? Or how likely would it have been for Monarch to collapse if
there had been a Remain vote and conseiqently no fall in the value of
sterling?
The Independent writes: "After 49 years of flying tens of millions of
passengers to Europe and beyond, one of the proudest names in travel
has collapsed -- costing the jobs of 2,750 staff and the holiday plans
of hundreds of thousands of travellers."
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
And finally, is what we're seeing now -- with Ryanair and now
Monarch -- is Osborne's predictions coming true, belatedly?
Do you do *anything* else than trawl the media for bad news, and think
'how can I blame this in Brexit'?

I'm surprised you haven't blamed to Catalan situation on it...
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
Ophelia
2017-10-02 20:12:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med. The British government is having
to charter 30 planes to bring them home free of charge in what will be
UK’s biggest-ever peacetime airlift. The government hopes, however, to
recoup some of the cost to the taxpayer from credit card companies and
other sources. The bill to the taxpayer, however, is going to be
enormous. And then there's the flights booked that will now never take
off. Plus, the almost 3,000 staff who as of this morning are
unemployed.
On the Today programme just now a spokesman said that one of the
reasons for the collapse was that the airline collected fares in
sterling, but had to pay costs for fuel in dollars, and we all know
how the pound has fared since the Brexit referendum.
Therefore, it is quite reasonable to ask, did Brexit cause Monarch to
collapse? Or how likely would it have been for Monarch to collapse if
there had been a Remain vote and conseiqently no fall in the value of
sterling?
The Independent writes: "After 49 years of flying tens of millions of
passengers to Europe and beyond, one of the proudest names in travel
has collapsed -- costing the jobs of 2,750 staff and the holiday plans
of hundreds of thousands of travellers."
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
And finally, is what we're seeing now -- with Ryanair and now
Monarch -- is Osborne's predictions coming true, belatedly?
Do you do *anything* else than trawl the media for bad news, and think
'how can I blame this in Brexit'?

I'm surprised you haven't blamed to Catalan situation on it...

Paul Hyett, Cheltenham

==

Give him time ...
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
James Harris
2017-10-02 07:21:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med. The British government is having
to charter 30 planes to bring them home free of charge in what will be
UK’s biggest-ever peacetime airlift. The government hopes, however, to
recoup some of the cost to the taxpayer from credit card companies and
other sources. The bill to the taxpayer, however, is going to be
enormous. And then there's the flights booked that will now never take
off. Plus, the almost 3,000 staff who as of this morning are
unemployed.
On the Today programme just now a spokesman said that one of the
reasons for the collapse was that the airline collected fares in
sterling, but had to pay costs for fuel in dollars, and we all know
how the pound has fared since the Brexit referendum.
Therefore, it is quite reasonable to ask, did Brexit cause Monarch to
collapse? Or how likely would it have been for Monarch to collapse if
there had been a Remain vote and conseiqently no fall in the value of
sterling?
The Independent writes: "After 49 years of flying tens of millions of
passengers to Europe and beyond, one of the proudest names in travel
has collapsed -- costing the jobs of 2,750 staff and the holiday plans
of hundreds of thousands of travellers."
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
Monarch has been in trouble for years. Compare the following from late 2014.

"How did it come to this? Only nine months ago Monarch was reporting a
return to profit,..." "Despite the hopes of 2013, a market flooded with
cheap airline seats has left Monarch flapping again. It flew nearly 7
million passengers last year but with losses for 2014 running north of
£60m – and a £158m deficit in its pension fund – its future hung in the
balance as its Swiss billionaire owners finally lost patience."

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/sep/25/monarch-airline-prince-pauper
Post by MM
And finally, is what we're seeing now -- with Ryanair and now
Monarch -- is Osborne's predictions coming true, belatedly?
Haha!
--
James Harris
exploited
2017-10-02 07:49:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
oh, here we go
"it was always going to fail" (nothing to do with brexit)

I think at the very least, mays xenophobia alone has made the UK a less
attractive destination

the decline in the pound, drastic, has stopped people going abroad
tim...
2017-10-02 09:49:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by exploited
oh, here we go
"it was always going to fail" (nothing to do with brexit)
I think at the very least, mays xenophobia alone has made the UK a less
attractive destination
the decline in the pound, drastic, has stopped people going abroad
but has caused more people to come here

(though given the range of places that they fly to/from, that's not very
helpful to Monarch)

tim
Jethro_uk
2017-10-02 12:49:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
[quoted text muted]
but has caused more people to come here
which rather misses the entire point of Brexit.

We want *fewer* people coming in. Ideally none.

Certainly none of these nice trained EU nursing staff, when we could have
Filipino ones with the additional (NHS can't use it) £1,000 visa fee.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4919028/Plan-bring-200-nurses-
Filipino-nurses-UK-stalls.html

The irony of the Fail complaining about it, is not lost on me...
James Harris
2017-10-02 13:41:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jethro_uk
Post by tim...
[quoted text muted]
but has caused more people to come here
which rather misses the entire point of Brexit.
We want *fewer* people coming in. Ideally none.
Fewer in unit time, yes. None, no.

Besides, AISI there are two main points to Brexit.

1. Restore sovereignty to the people of the country.

2. Get the UK able to engage with the world again without the middleman.
Post by Jethro_uk
Certainly none of these nice trained EU nursing staff, when we could have
Filipino ones with the additional (NHS can't use it) £1,000 visa fee.
Hopefully we'll only need to "buy-in" nurses for a few years until we
can train up our own. That would be better for the countries we keep
"buying" them from, too.
--
James Harris
Jethro_uk
2017-10-02 14:39:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
1. Restore sovereignty to the people of the country.
Any examples of "lost" sovereignty. That is where not predicated by
treaty ?
James Harris
2017-10-02 15:08:23 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jethro_uk
Post by James Harris
1. Restore sovereignty to the people of the country.
Any examples of "lost" sovereignty. That is where not predicated by
treaty ?
As an example, a party could not get elected on the promise to reform
the CAP.
--
James Harris
abelard
2017-10-04 09:39:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 14:41:31 +0100, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by Jethro_uk
Post by tim...
[quoted text muted]
but has caused more people to come here
which rather misses the entire point of Brexit.
We want *fewer* people coming in. Ideally none.
Fewer in unit time, yes. None, no.
Besides, AISI there are two main points to Brexit.
1. Restore sovereignty to the people of the country.
2. Get the UK able to engage with the world again without the middleman.
Post by Jethro_uk
Certainly none of these nice trained EU nursing staff, when we could have
Filipino ones with the additional (NHS can't use it) £1,000 visa fee.
Hopefully we'll only need to "buy-in" nurses for a few years until we
can train up our own. That would be better for the countries we keep
"buying" them from, too.
not convinced

the philippines thinks of them as an export industry that sends
back hard currencies
--
www.abelard.org
James Harris
2017-10-04 09:51:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by abelard
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 14:41:31 +0100, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by Jethro_uk
Post by tim...
[quoted text muted]
but has caused more people to come here
which rather misses the entire point of Brexit.
We want *fewer* people coming in. Ideally none.
Fewer in unit time, yes. None, no.
Besides, AISI there are two main points to Brexit.
1. Restore sovereignty to the people of the country.
2. Get the UK able to engage with the world again without the middleman.
Post by Jethro_uk
Certainly none of these nice trained EU nursing staff, when we could have
Filipino ones with the additional (NHS can't use it) £1,000 visa fee.
Hopefully we'll only need to "buy-in" nurses for a few years until we
can train up our own. That would be better for the countries we keep
"buying" them from, too.
not convinced
the philippines thinks of them as an export industry that sends
back hard currencies
Accepted.

The importation of workers from poor countries, though, has other
disbenefits than just economics - e.g. children growing up without their
mothers.
--
James Harris
abelard
2017-10-04 09:53:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 4 Oct 2017 10:51:50 +0100, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by abelard
On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 14:41:31 +0100, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by Jethro_uk
Post by tim...
[quoted text muted]
but has caused more people to come here
which rather misses the entire point of Brexit.
We want *fewer* people coming in. Ideally none.
Fewer in unit time, yes. None, no.
Besides, AISI there are two main points to Brexit.
1. Restore sovereignty to the people of the country.
2. Get the UK able to engage with the world again without the middleman.
Post by Jethro_uk
Certainly none of these nice trained EU nursing staff, when we could have
Filipino ones with the additional (NHS can't use it) £1,000 visa fee.
Hopefully we'll only need to "buy-in" nurses for a few years until we
can train up our own. That would be better for the countries we keep
"buying" them from, too.
not convinced
the philippines thinks of them as an export industry that sends
back hard currencies
Accepted.
The importation of workers from poor countries, though, has other
disbenefits than just economics - e.g. children growing up without their
mothers.
accepted :-)
--
www.abelard.org
tim...
2017-10-04 15:05:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jethro_uk
Post by tim...
[quoted text muted]
but has caused more people to come here
which rather misses the entire point of Brexit.
We want *fewer* people coming in. Ideally none.
I meant as tourists

I admit I should have been clearer

tim
Ash Burton
2017-10-02 12:32:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by exploited
oh, here we go
"it was always going to fail" (nothing to do with brexit)
I think at the very least, mays xenophobia alone has made the UK a less
attractive destination
the decline in the pound, drastic, has stopped people going abroad
Not so, there are nearly 1 million future booked Monarch flight
passengers (prepaid) who have had their flights cancelled.

Most airlines hedge their fuel exchange costs anyway, Monarch had been
in trouble for some time before Brexit
n***@gmail.com
2017-10-02 07:50:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Facts are just so inconvenient, aren't they? The passengers are not 'stranded'. They will all be flown home at or near the scheduled time of their Monarch flight, just in a different plane.

Also, it's the Civil Aviation Authority that is chartering the replacement flights, and the CAA's costs are met entirely by those whom it regulates, ie the airlines, not the government or the taxpayer.

Sorry to disappoint you.

But of course it's Brexit's fault. Everything is. Including the weather, Christmas and the Tooth Fairy.
Nightjar
2017-10-02 08:38:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
...Plus, the almost 3,000 staff who as of this morning are
unemployed.
Perhaps Ryanair can offer some of the pilots jobs, to fill in for those
on holiday :-)
On the Today programme just now a spokesman said that one of the
reasons for the collapse was that the airline collected fares in
sterling, but had to pay costs for fuel in dollars, and we all know
how the pound has fared since the Brexit referendum.
Therefore, it is quite reasonable to ask, did Brexit cause Monarch to
collapse? Or how likely would it have been for Monarch to collapse if
there had been a Remain vote and conseiqently no fall in the value of
sterling?...
The base cause will be the dropping load factors 76% in 2016, as
compared to 82.3% in 2015. The falling value of the pound will have been
a factor in that, as foreign holidays have become more expensive, but
terrorism, particularly in Turkey, has also resulted in significant
reductions in passengers numbers.
--
--

Colin Bignell
Fredxxx
2017-10-02 10:20:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Nightjar
...Plus, the almost 3,000 staff who as of this morning are
unemployed.
Perhaps Ryanair can offer some of the pilots jobs, to fill in for those
on holiday :-)
On the Today programme just now a spokesman said that one of the
reasons for the collapse was that the airline collected fares in
sterling, but had to pay costs for fuel in dollars, and we all know
how the pound has fared since the Brexit referendum.
Therefore, it is quite reasonable to ask, did Brexit cause Monarch to
collapse? Or how likely would it have been for Monarch to collapse if
there had been a Remain vote and conseiqently no fall in the value of
sterling?...
The base cause will be the dropping load factors 76% in 2016, as
compared to 82.3% in 2015. The falling value of the pound will have been
a factor in that, as foreign holidays have become more expensive, but
terrorism, particularly in Turkey, has also resulted in significant
reductions in passengers numbers.
I suspect MM will blame the Turkey problem on Brexit too.
Fredxxx
2017-10-02 10:19:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med.
Due you understand the purpose of the ATOL agreement and who underwrites
it? Clearly not.
Post by MM
The British government is having
to charter 30 planes to bring them home free of charge in what will be
UK’s biggest-ever peacetime airlift. The government hopes, however, to
recoup some of the cost to the taxpayer from credit card companies and
other sources. The bill to the taxpayer, however, is going to be
enormous. And then there's the flights booked that will now never take
off. Plus, the almost 3,000 staff who as of this morning are
unemployed.
Given a stronger home holiday market those 3,000 staff will be more than
made up for. I'm sure Ryanair can take the pilots.
Post by MM
On the Today programme just now a spokesman said that one of the
reasons for the collapse was that the airline collected fares in
sterling, but had to pay costs for fuel in dollars, and we all know
how the pound has fared since the Brexit referendum.
Most other sensible airlines buy futures in fuel. The fact they didn't
says more about Monarch that you'll ever understand.
Post by MM
Therefore, it is quite reasonable to ask, did Brexit cause Monarch to
collapse? Or how likely would it have been for Monarch to collapse if
there had been a Remain vote and conseiqently no fall in the value of
sterling?
The Independent writes: "After 49 years of flying tens of millions of
passengers to Europe and beyond, one of the proudest names in travel
has collapsed -- costing the jobs of 2,750 staff and the holiday plans
of hundreds of thousands of travellers."
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
And finally, is what we're seeing now -- with Ryanair and now
Monarch -- is Osborne's predictions coming true, belatedly?
Ryanair's problems are certainly not Brexit but poor mismanagement. The
fact you can't see that says more about a German collaborator with a
German license than you'll ever understand.
R. Mark Clayton
2017-10-02 14:01:01 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med. The British government is having
to charter 30 planes to bring them home free of charge in what will be
UK’s biggest-ever peacetime airlift. The government hopes, however, to
recoup some of the cost to the taxpayer from credit card companies and
other sources. The bill to the taxpayer, however, is going to be
enormous. And then there's the flights booked that will now never take
off. Plus, the almost 3,000 staff who as of this morning are
unemployed.
On the Today programme just now a spokesman said that one of the
reasons for the collapse was that the airline collected fares in
sterling, but had to pay costs for fuel in dollars, and we all know
how the pound has fared since the Brexit referendum.
Therefore, it is quite reasonable to ask, did Brexit cause Monarch to
collapse? Or how likely would it have been for Monarch to collapse if
there had been a Remain vote and conseiqently no fall in the value of
sterling?
The Independent writes: "After 49 years of flying tens of millions of
passengers to Europe and beyond, one of the proudest names in travel
has collapsed -- costing the jobs of 2,750 staff and the holiday plans
of hundreds of thousands of travellers."
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
And finally, is what we're seeing now -- with Ryanair and now
Monarch -- is Osborne's predictions coming true, belatedly?
MM
Low pound follwoing the leave vote was certainly a major factor - this was what caused Laker to go bust decades ago (borrowed in dollars and did not hedge)/

http://news.sky.com/story/why-monarch-is-the-latest-airline-to-go-under-and-more-could-follow-11064471

"the fall in sterling following the Brexit vote, which has pushed up the cost of jet fuel - which is priced in US dollars - for British carriers"

amusingly Monarch had a load of Boeing 737's on order, which will now be cancelled. Their current fleet if Airbus, where as Ryanair's is Boeing, so the pilots just can't change planes without retraining, however the Monarch planes could be leased to Ryanair.

in another Brexit Bonus story: -

Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
James Harris
2017-10-02 14:22:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On 02/10/2017 15:01, R. Mark Clayton wrote:

...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
in another Brexit Bonus story: -
Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
Is that the one that's now going to close in September 2020 instead of
December 2020?
--
James Harris
pamela
2017-10-02 14:51:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
in another Brexit Bonus story: -
Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
Is that the one that's now going to close in September 2020
instead of December 2020?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-39141190

It's interesting how Carwyn Jones (Labour) blames the plant
MANAGEMENT in that story for allowing the workers to have too many
absences, non-performance and develop work practices including
paying staff allowances they are not entitled to. Wow!

It makes a change from Carwyn Jones blaming London for everything
that goes wrong.
James Harris
2017-10-02 18:43:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pamela
Post by James Harris
...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
in another Brexit Bonus story: -
Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
Is that the one that's now going to close in September 2020
instead of December 2020?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-39141190
It's interesting how Carwyn Jones (Labour) blames the plant
MANAGEMENT in that story for allowing the workers to have too many
absences, non-performance and develop work practices including
paying staff allowances they are not entitled to. Wow!
It makes a change from Carwyn Jones blaming London for everything
that goes wrong.
Thanks for posting that info. As you say, it makes a very welcome change
to see a factory's management blamed rather than always hearing that the
government is being told it should bail a company out.
--
James Harris
R. Mark Clayton
2017-10-02 16:29:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
in another Brexit Bonus story: -
Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
Is that the one that's now going to close in September 2020 instead of
December 2020?
--
James Harris
The wind has changed direction.
James Harris
2017-10-02 18:46:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
in another Brexit Bonus story: -
Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
Is that the one that's now going to close in September 2020 instead of
December 2020?
--
James Harris
The wind has changed direction.
Indeed it has. What a certain person called a "Brexit Bonus story:
factory to close early" turns out not to be not about Brexit at all!
--
James Harris
R. Mark Clayton
2017-10-03 12:31:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
in another Brexit Bonus story: -
Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
Is that the one that's now going to close in September 2020 instead of
December 2020?
--
James Harris
The wind has changed direction.
factory to close early" turns out not to be not about Brexit at all!
Of course not. If the Romanians can't come to work in UK factories, well the factory can go to them: -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Romania

last paragraph: -
"In March 2016, it was announced that the Ford EcoSport will be built at the Craiova plant starting from the autumn of 2017"

No connection at all if you are a Brexiteer...
Post by James Harris
--
James Harris
Handsome Jack
2017-10-03 12:43:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
factory to close early" turns out not to be not about Brexit at all!
Of course not. If the Romanians can't come to work in UK factories,
well the factory can go to them: -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Romania
last paragraph: -
"In March 2016, it was announced that the Ford EcoSport will be built
at the Craiova plant starting from the autumn of 2017"
No connection at all if you are a Brexiteer...
Precisely none at all. March 2016 being before the referendum, when
everyone thought the UK would be staying in.

Factories will continue to be moved to cheap-labour economies whether we
stay or remain.
--
Jack
R. Mark Clayton
2017-10-03 15:00:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Handsome Jack
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
factory to close early" turns out not to be not about Brexit at all!
Of course not. If the Romanians can't come to work in UK factories,
well the factory can go to them: -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Romania
last paragraph: -
"In March 2016, it was announced that the Ford EcoSport will be built
at the Craiova plant starting from the autumn of 2017"
No connection at all if you are a Brexiteer...
Precisely none at all. March 2016 being before the referendum, when
everyone thought the UK would be staying in.
Factories will continue to be moved to cheap-labour economies whether we
stay or remain.
Right - so Brexit won't actually stop that as promised (IMO it will greatly accelerate it).

Meanwhile: -

"The construction industry is contracting for the first time in 13 months with builders blaming “Brexit blight”."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/10/03/pound-claws-back-ground-ahead-construction-data-key-tory-speeches/

well the pound dipping down hard after ministers make speeches has been noted in this group before - its the confidence they inspire in business you see..
Post by Handsome Jack
--
Jack
Fredxxx
2017-10-03 20:20:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Handsome Jack
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
factory to close early" turns out not to be not about Brexit at all!
Of course not. If the Romanians can't come to work in UK factories,
well the factory can go to them: -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Romania
last paragraph: -
"In March 2016, it was announced that the Ford EcoSport will be built
at the Craiova plant starting from the autumn of 2017"
No connection at all if you are a Brexiteer...
Precisely none at all. March 2016 being before the referendum, when
everyone thought the UK would be staying in.
Factories will continue to be moved to cheap-labour economies whether we
stay or remain.
Right - so Brexit won't actually stop that as promised (IMO it will greatly accelerate it).
Meanwhile: -
"The construction industry is contracting for the first time in 13 months with builders blaming “Brexit blight”."
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.

That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
MM
2017-10-04 09:14:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.
That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
And Brexiters always find a different reason for blame other than the
real reason, which is Brexit itself.

But you'll never admit it, will you?

MM
Norman Wells
2017-10-04 09:39:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.
That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
And Brexiters always find a different reason for blame other than the
real reason, which is Brexit itself.
But you'll never admit it, will you?
But Brexit might actually help. You see, we only need all the extra
houses we do in order to house the growing population. But why is the
population growing so fast?

"More than half (53%) of the increase of the UK population between 1991
and 2014 was due to the direct contribution of net migration."

http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-impact-of-migration-on-uk-population-growth/

The ability to control our own borders and hence the number of
immigrants we allow in has to be a positive step if we want to reduce
the number of houses we have to build, which most people quite
understandably don't want in their backyards.

And Brexit is a crucial preliminary.
MM
2017-10-05 09:28:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.
That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
And Brexiters always find a different reason for blame other than the
real reason, which is Brexit itself.
But you'll never admit it, will you?
But Brexit might actually help. You see, we only need all the extra
houses we do in order to house the growing population. But why is the
population growing so fast?
"More than half (53%) of the increase of the UK population between 1991
and 2014 was due to the direct contribution of net migration."
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-impact-of-migration-on-uk-population-growth/
The ability to control our own borders and hence the number of
immigrants we allow in has to be a positive step if we want to reduce
the number of houses we have to build, which most people quite
understandably don't want in their backyards.
And Brexit is a crucial preliminary.
The population has been increasing steadily since long before we
started accepting EU migrants. And the trend is now the other way,
with migrant workers becoming fed up being treated as aliens by the
good ole Brits, and leaving for more welcoming cultures.

MM
Norman Wells
2017-10-05 11:17:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Norman Wells
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.
That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
And Brexiters always find a different reason for blame other than the
real reason, which is Brexit itself.
But you'll never admit it, will you?
But Brexit might actually help. You see, we only need all the extra
houses we do in order to house the growing population. But why is the
population growing so fast?
"More than half (53%) of the increase of the UK population between 1991
and 2014 was due to the direct contribution of net migration."
http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-impact-of-migration-on-uk-population-growth/
The ability to control our own borders and hence the number of
immigrants we allow in has to be a positive step if we want to reduce
the number of houses we have to build, which most people quite
understandably don't want in their backyards.
And Brexit is a crucial preliminary.
The population has been increasing steadily since long before we
started accepting EU migrants. And the trend is now the other way,
with migrant workers becoming fed up being treated as aliens by the
good ole Brits, and leaving for more welcoming cultures.
Which, if true, is surely a good thing from the point of view of the
number of houses we have to build that blight our neighbourhoods.
MM
2017-10-06 09:54:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Which, if true, is surely a good thing from the point of view of the
number of houses we have to build that blight our neighbourhoods.
Would you have wanted London to stay the same size it was in 1300?

MM
Norman Wells
2017-10-06 13:19:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Norman Wells
Which, if true, is surely a good thing from the point of view of the
number of houses we have to build that blight our neighbourhoods.
Would you have wanted London to stay the same size it was in 1300?
There are limits to acceptable population density anywhere, and I think
we're well beyond that now here in the UK.

We are only able to grow enough food here to support 60% of the current
population for example. Our roads are clogged, our schools are
overcrowded, and the NHS is struggling to cope. They are the
consequences of over-population.

Of European countries of any significance, only the Netherlands and
Belgium have higher population densities than the UK's, but they're of
course much smaller overall. France has a population density under 40%
of ours, Ireland's is about a quarter of ours, S.Africa about 15%, the
USA about an eighth, New Zealand about 6% and Australia just over 1%.

What is 'best' is a matter of opinion, but I think it's clear we've well
overshot the ideal.
tim...
2017-10-06 14:03:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Post by MM
Post by Norman Wells
Which, if true, is surely a good thing from the point of view of the
number of houses we have to build that blight our neighbourhoods.
Would you have wanted London to stay the same size it was in 1300?
There are limits to acceptable population density anywhere, and I think
we're well beyond that now here in the UK.
We are only able to grow enough food here to support 60% of the current
population for example.
Singapore only manages 10%

seems to do ok in the world

tim
Norman Wells
2017-10-06 14:12:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by Norman Wells
Post by MM
Post by Norman Wells
Which, if true, is surely a good thing from the point of view of the
number of houses we have to build that blight our neighbourhoods.
Would you have wanted London to stay the same size it was in 1300?
There are limits to acceptable population density anywhere, and I
think we're well beyond that now here in the UK.
We are only able to grow enough food here to support 60% of the
current population for example.
Singapore only manages 10%
seems to do ok in the world
And everyone lives in small, cramped, high-rise apartment blocks in a
concrete jungle.

Life's about more than just 'doing ok in the world'.
Fredxxx
2017-10-04 19:50:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.
That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
And Brexiters always find a different reason for blame other than the
real reason, which is Brexit itself.
But you'll never admit it, will you?
No, I freely admit that one result of Brexit might cause a lot of
immigration to go back home. Therefore we might not need the extra homes
and infrastructure.

So yes I admit it. That's precisely why many voted for Brexit, because
of housing shortages and suppressed wages, but you won't admit to that,
will you?
MM
2017-10-05 09:29:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.
That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
And Brexiters always find a different reason for blame other than the
real reason, which is Brexit itself.
But you'll never admit it, will you?
No, I freely admit that one result of Brexit might cause a lot of
immigration to go back home. Therefore we might not need the extra homes
and infrastructure.
So yes I admit it. That's precisely why many voted for Brexit, because
of housing shortages and suppressed wages, but you won't admit to that,
will you?
We've had a housing shortage since Thatcher sold all the council
houses, but prevented councils from building new ones with the money.

MM
R. Mark Clayton
2017-10-05 15:57:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.
That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
And Brexiters always find a different reason for blame other than the
real reason, which is Brexit itself.
But you'll never admit it, will you?
No, I freely admit that one result of Brexit might cause a lot of
immigration to go back home. Therefore we might not need the extra homes
and infrastructure.
So yes I admit it. That's precisely why many voted for Brexit, because
of housing shortages and suppressed wages, but you won't admit to that,
will you?
We've had a housing shortage since Thatcher sold all the council
houses,
So they were left empty after sale or did people carry on living in them?
Post by MM
but prevented councils from building new ones with the money.
Because they were SO wasteful. Consider Grenfell Tower. The [Tory] council spend over £70k per unit refurbishing it - more than the cost of equivalent new build flats in half a dozen places up north (e.g. Liverpool) and the place still burnt like a bonfire :-(

Here in Manchester, the last council houses built only lasted 13 years before they were scheduled to be demolished due to mismanagement after construction.
Post by MM
MM
MM
2017-10-06 09:58:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 08:57:21 -0700 (PDT), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.
That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
And Brexiters always find a different reason for blame other than the
real reason, which is Brexit itself.
But you'll never admit it, will you?
No, I freely admit that one result of Brexit might cause a lot of
immigration to go back home. Therefore we might not need the extra homes
and infrastructure.
So yes I admit it. That's precisely why many voted for Brexit, because
of housing shortages and suppressed wages, but you won't admit to that,
will you?
We've had a housing shortage since Thatcher sold all the council
houses,
So they were left empty after sale or did people carry on living in them?
Councils could no longer let the houses which didn't belong to them,
irrespective of who actually lived in a dwelling after sale.
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by MM
but prevented councils from building new ones with the money.
Because they were SO wasteful. Consider Grenfell Tower. The [Tory] council spend over £70k per unit refurbishing it - more than the cost of equivalent new build flats in half a dozen places up north (e.g. Liverpool) and the place still burnt like a bonfire :-(
They should have spent more to properly equip the tower with fire
doors, sprinklers, and cladding that didn't burn like a Roman candle.
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Here in Manchester, the last council houses built only lasted 13 years before they were scheduled to be demolished due to mismanagement after construction.
That says something about shoddy workmanship, doesn't it?

MM
R. Mark Clayton
2017-10-06 11:41:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 08:57:21 -0700 (PDT), "R. Mark Clayton"
SNIP
Post by MM
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by MM
We've had a housing shortage since Thatcher sold all the council
houses,
So they were left empty after sale or did people carry on living in them?
Councils could no longer let the houses which didn't belong to them,
irrespective of who actually lived in a dwelling after sale.
Do actually read my posts MM!

It was a question - lets suppose the people who bought the council house moved elsewhere - would actually create a vacancy anywhere? In addition frankly if they could afford to buy their council house they no longer needed social housing.

What was a less good idea was not recycling the sale proceeds in to building social housing, but see below about why this did not happen.
Post by MM
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by MM
but prevented councils from building new ones with the money.
Because they were SO wasteful. Consider Grenfell Tower. The [Tory] council spend over £70k per unit refurbishing it - more than the cost of equivalent new build flats in half a dozen places up north (e.g. Liverpool) and the place still burnt like a bonfire :-(
They should have spent more to properly equip the tower with fire
doors, sprinklers, and cladding that didn't burn like a Roman candle.
No MM - if you can build new flats for less than a refurbishment with no land costs then the answer was to spend less, but to spend it better so the refurbishment that included fire doors, sprinklers, and cladding that didn't burn like a Roman candle.
Post by MM
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Here in Manchester, the last council houses built only lasted 13 years before they were scheduled to be demolished due to mismanagement after construction.
That says something about shoddy workmanship, doesn't it?
Nothing wrong with construction - the scum the council put in them, and failed to deal with, trashed them. All in all MCC demolished over 2,000 modern and mostly good quality of their own units during 1995 - 2005 due to "lack of demand", usually because they fell vacant and were severely vandalised, boilers stolen etc. when empty.

They also demolished a lot of terraced housing - some of it slums, but much just badly managed by poor housing associations.
Post by MM
MM
MM
2017-10-07 08:11:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Fri, 6 Oct 2017 04:41:02 -0700 (PDT), "R. Mark Clayton"
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by MM
On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 08:57:21 -0700 (PDT), "R. Mark Clayton"
SNIP
Post by MM
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by MM
We've had a housing shortage since Thatcher sold all the council
houses,
So they were left empty after sale or did people carry on living in them?
Councils could no longer let the houses which didn't belong to them,
irrespective of who actually lived in a dwelling after sale.
Do actually read my posts MM!
It was a question - lets suppose the people who bought the council house moved elsewhere
- would actually create a vacancy anywhere? In addition frankly if they could afford to buy
their council house they no longer needed social housing.
They weren't allowed to move for three years, otherwise they had to
pay back the discount.

They could only afford to buy their council houses because of the
masssive discount on offer to tenants. They wouldn't have been able to
afford houses on the open market.
Post by R. Mark Clayton
What was a less good idea was not recycling the sale proceeds in to building social housing, but see below about why this did not happen.
Post by MM
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by MM
but prevented councils from building new ones with the money.
Because they were SO wasteful. Consider Grenfell Tower. The [Tory] council spend over £70k per unit refurbishing it - more than the cost of equivalent new build flats in half a dozen places up north (e.g. Liverpool) and the place still burnt like a bonfire :-(
They should have spent more to properly equip the tower with fire
doors, sprinklers, and cladding that didn't burn like a Roman candle.
No MM - if you can build new flats for less than a refurbishment with no land costs then the answer was to spend less, but to spend it better so the refurbishment that included fire doors, sprinklers, and cladding that didn't burn like a Roman candle.
No land costs? How does that work? Pull the old, poorly-equipped
towers down first to free up the land? Where would you house the
tenants in the meantime?
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by MM
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Here in Manchester, the last council houses built only lasted 13 years before they were scheduled to be demolished due to mismanagement after construction.
That says something about shoddy workmanship, doesn't it?
Nothing wrong with construction - the scum the council put in them, and failed to deal with, trashed them.
All in all MCC demolished over 2,000 modern and mostly good quality of their own units during
1995 - 2005 due to "lack of demand", usually because they fell vacant and were severely vandalised, boilers stolen etc. when empty.
Why couldn't these dwellings have been sold on the open market? No
takers? If not, why not?
Post by R. Mark Clayton
They also demolished a lot of terraced housing - some of it slums, but much just badly managed by poor housing associations.
I do recall watching a number of documenttaries from the North where
what appeared to be perfectly good houses were being bulldozed. But if
nobody wants to buy or rent them, why are we constantly being told
that we need to build a million homes a year?

MM
Fredxxx
2017-10-05 19:51:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.
That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
And Brexiters always find a different reason for blame other than the
real reason, which is Brexit itself.
But you'll never admit it, will you?
No, I freely admit that one result of Brexit might cause a lot of
immigration to go back home. Therefore we might not need the extra homes
and infrastructure.
So yes I admit it. That's precisely why many voted for Brexit, because
of housing shortages and suppressed wages, but you won't admit to that,
will you?
We've had a housing shortage since Thatcher sold all the council
houses, but prevented councils from building new ones with the money.
Are you saying that if they hadn't been sold councils will have built more?

Are the sort of Remoaner who thinks when you sell a house it
mysteriously disappears?

Are you the Remoaner who is proving your own rule when it comes to
Brexiter/Remoaner intelligence and academic standing?
MM
2017-10-06 09:59:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Most in the construction industry blame red tape and local authority
charges plus the building of schools and other infrastructure for them.
That makes building the houses associated with a development as being
simply uneconomic.
And Brexiters always find a different reason for blame other than the
real reason, which is Brexit itself.
But you'll never admit it, will you?
No, I freely admit that one result of Brexit might cause a lot of
immigration to go back home. Therefore we might not need the extra homes
and infrastructure.
So yes I admit it. That's precisely why many voted for Brexit, because
of housing shortages and suppressed wages, but you won't admit to that,
will you?
We've had a housing shortage since Thatcher sold all the council
houses, but prevented councils from building new ones with the money.
Are you saying that if they hadn't been sold councils will have built more?
Who built the council houses, then?

Ah, yes, it was councils!

MM
Fredxxx
2017-10-03 20:17:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
in another Brexit Bonus story: -
Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
Is that the one that's now going to close in September 2020 instead of
December 2020?
--
James Harris
The wind has changed direction.
factory to close early" turns out not to be not about Brexit at all!
Of course not. If the Romanians can't come to work in UK factories, well the factory can go to them: -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Romania
last paragraph: -
"In March 2016, it was announced that the Ford EcoSport will be built at the Craiova plant starting from the autumn of 2017"
No connection at all if you are a Brexiteer...
The factory was paid for out by EU grants.

Just another reason to leave.
James Harris
2017-10-03 20:28:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
in another Brexit Bonus story: -
Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
Is that the one that's now going to close in September 2020 instead of
December 2020?
--
James Harris
The wind has changed direction.
factory to close early" turns out not to be not about Brexit at all!
Of course not. If the Romanians can't come to work in UK factories, well the factory can go to them: -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Romania
last paragraph: -
"In March 2016, it was announced that the Ford EcoSport will be built at the Craiova plant starting from the autumn of 2017"
No connection at all if you are a Brexiteer...
The factory was paid for out by EU grants.
Sounds as though you mean effectively, since we are a net contributor,
that UK money was used to help move work from the UK to Romania.
Astonishing!
Post by Fredxxx
Just another reason to leave.
Indeed!
--
James Harris
MM
2017-10-04 09:15:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Just another reason to leave.
Are you assuming that Ford will move the factory back to the UK then?

MM
Fredxxx
2017-10-04 19:51:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Just another reason to leave.
Are you assuming that Ford will move the factory back to the UK then?
If tariffs are imposed by the EU and the UK place counter-tariffs on
Ford cars, who knows what Ford will do?
MM
2017-10-05 09:29:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
Just another reason to leave.
Are you assuming that Ford will move the factory back to the UK then?
If tariffs are imposed by the EU and the UK place counter-tariffs on
Ford cars, who knows what Ford will do?
You don't seem too sure, then.

MM
R. Mark Clayton
2017-10-04 10:05:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
in another Brexit Bonus story: -
Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
Is that the one that's now going to close in September 2020 instead of
December 2020?
--
James Harris
The wind has changed direction.
factory to close early" turns out not to be not about Brexit at all!
Of course not. If the Romanians can't come to work in UK factories, well the factory can go to them: -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Romania
last paragraph: -
"In March 2016, it was announced that the Ford EcoSport will be built at the Craiova plant starting from the autumn of 2017"
No connection at all if you are a Brexiteer...
The factory was paid for out by EU grants.
Just another reason to leave.
So no more grants for factories in Merseyside, NI and other regions - good thinking...
Fredxxx
2017-10-04 19:53:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Fredxxx
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by James Harris
...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
in another Brexit Bonus story: -
Ford Bridgened plant to close early (BBC)
Is that the one that's now going to close in September 2020 instead of
December 2020?
--
James Harris
The wind has changed direction.
factory to close early" turns out not to be not about Brexit at all!
Of course not. If the Romanians can't come to work in UK factories, well the factory can go to them: -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Romania
last paragraph: -
"In March 2016, it was announced that the Ford EcoSport will be built at the Craiova plant starting from the autumn of 2017"
No connection at all if you are a Brexiteer...
The factory was paid for out by EU grants.
Just another reason to leave.
So no more grants for factories in Merseyside, NI and other regions - good thinking...
Given the UK government paid for companies to moved from Merseyside and
the like to Eastern Europe at least no more will move.

I'm also sure the UK government will spend the investment money far more
wisely than EU bureaucrats and on more appropriate projects.
MM
2017-10-05 09:30:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Fredxxx
I'm also sure the UK government will spend the investment money far more
wisely than EU bureaucrats and on more appropriate projects.
You mean, not on vanity projects like HS2?

MM
Fredxxx
2017-10-05 19:53:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Fredxxx
I'm also sure the UK government will spend the investment money far more
wisely than EU bureaucrats and on more appropriate projects.
You mean, not on vanity projects like HS2?
Hopefully not:
https://www.globalrailnews.com/2015/07/15/hs2-secures-eu-funding/

I would hope the money could be spent on the NHS instead. Perhaps not
all £350m per week, but a some fraction of it.
harry
2017-10-04 16:10:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med. The British government is having
to charter 30 planes to bring them home free of charge in what will be
UK’s biggest-ever peacetime airlift. The government hopes, however, to
recoup some of the cost to the taxpayer from credit card companies and
other sources. The bill to the taxpayer, however, is going to be
enormous. And then there's the flights booked that will now never take
off. Plus, the almost 3,000 staff who as of this morning are
unemployed.
On the Today programme just now a spokesman said that one of the
reasons for the collapse was that the airline collected fares in
sterling, but had to pay costs for fuel in dollars, and we all know
how the pound has fared since the Brexit referendum.
Therefore, it is quite reasonable to ask, did Brexit cause Monarch to
collapse? Or how likely would it have been for Monarch to collapse if
there had been a Remain vote and conseiqently no fall in the value of
sterling?
The Independent writes: "After 49 years of flying tens of millions of
passengers to Europe and beyond, one of the proudest names in travel
has collapsed -- costing the jobs of 2,750 staff and the holiday plans
of hundreds of thousands of travellers."
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
And finally, is what we're seeing now -- with Ryanair and now
Monarch -- is Osborne's predictions coming true, belatedly?
No it was jihadism.
Most people won't travel to muslim countries any more.
Monarchs main destinations Turkey, Tunisia. Morocco, Egypt.

Plus mad migrants in many EUSSR destinations.
James Harris
2017-10-10 20:44:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med.
...
Post by MM
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
You might find this both disappointing and informative:

From Anna Soubry (Broxtowe) (Con)

As a former Business Minister before the EU referendum, and apparently
as one of the chief “remoaners”, may I make it absolutely clear that the
unfortunate demise of Monarch has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit?

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-10-09/debates/D27444A9-86D6-4E2B-A675-8D7A1DD15FF8/MonarchAirlines
--
James Harris
MM
2017-10-11 09:26:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 21:44:58 +0100, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med.
...
Post by MM
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
From Anna Soubry (Broxtowe) (Con)
As a former Business Minister before the EU referendum, and apparently
as one of the chief “remoaners”, may I make it absolutely clear that the
unfortunate demise of Monarch has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit?
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-10-09/debates/D27444A9-86D6-4E2B-A675-8D7A1DD15FF8/MonarchAirlines
So you found ONE voice! Keep searching those web pages!

MM
James Harris
2017-10-11 09:33:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 21:44:58 +0100, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med.
...
Post by MM
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
From Anna Soubry (Broxtowe) (Con)
As a former Business Minister before the EU referendum, and apparently
as one of the chief “remoaners”, may I make it absolutely clear that the
unfortunate demise of Monarch has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit?
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-10-09/debates/D27444A9-86D6-4E2B-A675-8D7A1DD15FF8/MonarchAirlines
So you found ONE voice! Keep searching those web pages!
Haha, that's your trick. In fact, I found a Remoaner voice which I
thought you would appreciate.
--
James Harris
MM
2017-10-13 09:26:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Wed, 11 Oct 2017 10:33:25 +0100, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by MM
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 21:44:58 +0100, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med.
...
Post by MM
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
From Anna Soubry (Broxtowe) (Con)
As a former Business Minister before the EU referendum, and apparently
as one of the chief “remoaners”, may I make it absolutely clear that the
unfortunate demise of Monarch has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit?
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-10-09/debates/D27444A9-86D6-4E2B-A675-8D7A1DD15FF8/MonarchAirlines
So you found ONE voice! Keep searching those web pages!
Haha, that's your trick. In fact, I found a Remoaner voice which I
thought you would appreciate.
You call it a "trick". I prefer to see it for what it is: ONE voice!

MM

Fredxxx
2017-10-11 19:28:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
On Tue, 10 Oct 2017 21:44:58 +0100, James Harris
Post by James Harris
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at 30
holiday destinations around the Med.
...
Post by MM
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well, it's
not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
From Anna Soubry (Broxtowe) (Con)
As a former Business Minister before the EU referendum, and apparently
as one of the chief “remoaners”, may I make it absolutely clear that the
unfortunate demise of Monarch has absolutely nothing to do with Brexit?
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-10-09/debates/D27444A9-86D6-4E2B-A675-8D7A1DD15FF8/MonarchAirlines
So you found ONE voice! Keep searching those web pages!
There's another here.

There are also articles over the demise of the Middle Eastern
destinations that were the mainstay of Monarch. It was something going
to happen, a result of losing money for years.

But that's not the answer you want to hear and will still pedal your
anti UK crap.
Incubus
2017-10-11 09:35:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by James Harris
Post by MM
This morning 110,000 Monarch Airlines passengers are stranded at
30 holiday destinations around the Med.
...
Post by MM
If Brexit in any way hastened the demise of this airline, well,
it's not too good an advertisement for the future, is it?
From Anna Soubry (Broxtowe) (Con)
As a former Business Minister before the EU referendum, and
apparently as one of the chief “remoaners”, may I make it absolutely
clear that the unfortunate demise of Monarch has absolutely nothing
to do with Brexit?
https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-10-09/debates/D27444A9-86D6-4E2B-A675-8D7A1DD15FF8/MonarchAirlines
MM's magic earplugs appear for news like that, just as they do for
multinationals opening offices in the UK, car manufacturers increasing
production &c.
Loading...