[Three Nine]

Dense - you are bang on the money about Sam not deserving the friendship of his friends. I'm pro-life and I have plenty of friends who are ok with putting children to death in the womb. We're all in the same boat - we're all seasick.

Nigel - the poles in the drs surgery scenario, that's exactly my thought process.

Petejh - my gut routinely tells me to do all sorts of stupid and morally reprehensible things.

Remain people - you dont help your cause by being such patronizing, holier-than-thou cunts. Its so not obvious what the sensible or morally right thing might be to do in this case. I'm voting remain in deference to some people who I think are more clued up/more morally upright than I am, not because its so fuckin clear to me what to do.

[Stu Littlefair]

BTW his point 2 is the best to my mind. Whatever the pros of brexit, leaving the EU would require a whole lot of complex renegotiation of trade deals and a review of almost all our legal framework. I don't trust our current lot of politicians with this task.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rich d]

 I'm voting remain in deference to some people who I think are more clued up/more morally upright than I am,

Fuck me, if I applied that rationale, then nearly every one I've met is more morally upright than me.....

[Stu Littlefair]

Remain people - you dont help your cause by being such patronizing, holier-than-thou cunts.

I might be wrong here but it seems to me that the patronising cunts are addressing one group of leavers, and another group (I.e you and dense) are assuming it's directed at them.

If you don't believe that sizeable chunks of the population are voting leave because they are both bigoted and not that bright you've clearly got your eyes closed.

I'd have thought it obvious this doesn't imply there's no case for leave, or that all leave supporters have the same motivations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Johnny Brown]

Eh? Without the uk on the standards comittee the standards would be a lot worse? To me that says the uk have pushed the standards not the rest of the eu.

Well, for us I mean, doing rope access the IRATA way. Without our input the standards would be different, we would be forced to do things differently. The French make the best kit, but their training is bizarre, it's like a steeplejacks' apprenticeship. If we leave Petzl will keep making the best gear but we won't have any input on what we need.

So without the eu our standards would be better

BS standards in my experience are inferior to EN as they are much lower budget, and susceptible to too much influence from small groups. Ensuring strong representation on the EN standards committee seems to be by far the best for us.

For example, if we were not in the EN the Aberdeen lobby might well have persuaded a BS committee to produce a standard certifying the Stop and Shunt for rope access. But Petzl would not have bothered with type certification, so they would never officially meet it, and they'd refuse to supply them. Meanwhile, DMM would make a new device and ensure it met the EN standard anyway so they could sell it abroad. All this would take several years, cost a fortune and get us nowhere.

[petejh]

Stu, on the standards point, how do countries that aren't in the eu manage this? Switzerland and Norway; and every other country in the world that isn't in the eu?
Also, I'd imagine after 40 years of trading in europe and complying with EN standards, we as a country are as well prepared as anyone to continue doing so no?

That we can sell goods to >20 countries with one standard is a big plus for any manufacturer anywhere in the world who wants to sell to the eu. It doesn't follow that this means it's in every country's interest to be in the eu group.

[Stu Littlefair]

Every other country in the world has to meet them, and doesn't get to set them. This is clearly non-optimal, which is why big countries want to negotiate TTIP type things with the EU.

We are pretty well placed to deal with existing standards, but the big issue is new markets. For example (as heard on R4 this morning), the EU is starting the process of setting standards for selling digital products. This could be a huge market for the UK, which has a big software industry. Now would be an especially bad time to lose the influence we have on what those standards will be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Oldmanmatt]

Stu, on the standards point, how do countries that aren't in the eu manage this? Switzerland and Norway; and every other country in the world that isn't in the eu?
Also, I'd imagine after 40 years of trading in europe and complying with EN standards, we as a country are as well prepared as anyone to continue doing so no?

That we can sell goods to >20 countries with one standard is a big plus for any manufacturer anywhere in the world who wants to sell to the eu. It doesn't follow that this means it's in every country's interest to be in the eu group.

One of my previous incarnations was designing Fire rated bulkheads. Since it was a Dubai based operation, this generally involved getting them certified under several different jurisdictions. A lengthy and arduous process. I have lived and worked both inside and outside the EU and trading outside is harder. For instance, even though there was a UAE standard for these things, we would need either EU or US certification, just to sell to a fellow GCC state a few kilometres away.

All the time I live there, I heard others and my self lamenting that things were so much better in Europe...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Three Nine]

Remain people - you dont help your cause by being such patronizing, holier-than-thou cunts.

I might be wrong here but it seems to me that the patronising cunts are addressing one group of leavers, and another group (I.e you and dense) are assuming it's directed at them.

If you don't believe that sizeable chunks of the population are voting leave because they are both bigoted and not that bright you've clearly got your eyes closed.

I'd have thought it obvious this doesn't imply there's no case for leave, or that all leave supporters have the same motivations.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yeah you're probs right there. I guess I just find it irritating - its a bit like when i'd ask Barrows something about training and he'd look at me as if he couldn't believe anyone could be so stupid as to ask that question.

[Stu Littlefair]

As I find myself saying about Barrows so often, I think that's just his face.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[petejh]

Stu, on the standards point, how do countries that aren't in the eu manage this? Switzerland and Norway; and every other country in the world that isn't in the eu?
Also, I'd imagine after 40 years of trading in europe and complying with EN standards, we as a country are as well prepared as anyone to continue doing so no?

That we can sell goods to >20 countries with one standard is a big plus for any manufacturer anywhere in the world who wants to sell to the eu. It doesn't follow that this means it's in every country's interest to be in the eu group.

One of my previous incarnations was designing Fire rated bulkheads. Since it was a Dubai based operation, this generally involved getting them certified under several different jurisdictions. A lengthy and arduous process. I have lived and worked both inside and outside the EU and trading outside is harder. For instance, even though there was a UAE standard for these things, we would need either EU or US certification, just to sell to a fellow GCC state a few kilometres away.

All the time I live there, I heard others and my self lamenting that things were so much better in Europe...

Many on here have worked outside the EU. You think it's better than the UAE? That's hardly high praise! The only reason anyone in their right mind would choose to live and do business there is the lure of money, simple.

I personally found myself and others saying Canada and New Zealand were better when I lived in each.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[/quote]

[a dense loner]

I wasn't missing the Euro standards point at all Stu, what I meant was if we have a better input ie design/have better ideas than the other countries which it seemed like Johnny was saying, then we would meet the Euro standards immediately, this being lower than the uks. You don't need to boycott eu standards you just have to meet them to trade in the eu.

I know what you mean about putting pressure on bs to do what the big boys want but this would be a failing of a different kind.

[tomtom]

Pete. One of the salient points the Liverpool Prof made in his film was that Britain makes sweet FA nowadays - but it does have its foot (and more) in the EU so we effectively sell access to the EU and its markets by being part of it. I've probably not explained it well but he does in the lecture.

His point re trade deals was that these were actually easy to negotiate - it's the product standards that are a nightmare to work out - especially as there are tens of thousands of them. Of course you could simply adopt/abide by these regs (which would be part of a trade deal) bit then you have no chance to influence or change them.

[a dense loner]

So what? What would happen to us if we couldn't influence or change regs in the eu?

[Stu Littlefair]

Dense, here's a hypothetical scenario: UK software industry is worth >21bn. Suppose we leave and the EU starts the process of negotiating the standards which will apply to digital goods and services. What's to stop them setting interoperability standards which favour, say, German software companies?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tomtom]

Well, let's say that the UK furniture building industry are all geared up to use chemical X in their process.

The EU want to change the furniture making standard so X isn't allowed and you have to use chemical Y instead. This would potentially cost the uk furniture industry millions to re-tool/change their production line.

Outside of the EU we have no choice but to abide with the standard if we want to sell into the EU.

Inside the EU  we can lobby, vote, persuade, get exemptions etc.. And negotiate to hopefully not to get X banned. And thus save money/jobs/hassle for the industry.

[tomtom]

(stu's example is better )

[petejh]

And in your hypothetical example Stu (and TT!) how would the rest of the trading world manage this?

How does Switzerland manage to have such powerhouse industries, without being a member of the EU? According to your arguments it shouldn't be possible should it?

Oh and TT 'save money for industry'. You just claimed UK doesn't have any. You can't have it both ways!

[tomtom]

They have to comply with the EI rather than have the chance (and we have a big influence in the EU) to change to rules to their benefit.

[Johnny Brown]

if we have a better input ie design/have better ideas than the other countries which it seemed like Johnny was saying, then we would meet the Euro standards immediately, this being lower than the uks.

If it's advantageous to have additional BS standards over and above EN then we already do that in some circumstances. But type certification is expensive; any manufacturer will do the EN first, and you can't get EN by default by just meeting a BS. So generally the BS is filling a gap not competing with the EN.

The ISO's recent move to Australia has apparently not worked out and their influence is waning globally; most of the world now looks to the EN standards as the global standard. Even Australia has a law stating that if an established standard exists and is good then Australia should adopt it instead of writing their own. Mostly they use ENs; the same will be true in many countries. ENs are also mostly way ahead of the US ANSI's, making them more likely to follow our lead.

Norway have set up a decent rope access system but it is basically an attempt to keep Norwegian jobs for Norwegians; most techs and companies end up using IRATA as well - techs to keep in work, companies to get enough staff. And of course they rely on EN equipment standards but have no input. There is very little potential for growth for them.

The standards thing is the only thing I'm well informed about, and I'm basically voting remain on this single issue. I can see the same issues will be played out across many industries. If you don't have a voice, you are unable to lead and must always play catch up. As Stu says, it's highly likely that those with influence may move to actively exclude you.

[Oldmanmatt]

Stu, on the standards point, how do countries that aren't in the eu manage this? Switzerland and Norway; and every other country in the world that isn't in the eu?
Also, I'd imagine after 40 years of trading in europe and complying with EN standards, we as a country are as well prepared as anyone to continue doing so no?

That we can sell goods to >20 countries with one standard is a big plus for any manufacturer anywhere in the world who wants to sell to the eu. It doesn't follow that this means it's in every country's interest to be in the eu group.

One of my previous incarnations was designing Fire rated bulkheads. Since it was a Dubai based operation, this generally involved getting them certified under several different jurisdictions. A lengthy and arduous process. I have lived and worked both inside and outside the EU and trading outside is harder. For instance, even though there was a UAE standard for these things, we would need either EU or US certification, just to sell to a fellow GCC state a few kilometres away.

All the time I live there, I heard others and my self lamenting that things were so much better in Europe...

Many on here have worked outside the EU. You think it's better than the UAE? That's hardly high praise! The only reason anyone in their right mind would choose to live and do business there is the lure of money, simple.

I personally found myself and others saying Canada and New Zealand were better when I lived in each.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[/quote]

I have also lived in Canada (Halifax and St Johns) and nearly stayed there too. It is an excellent place. But their labour laws leave something to be desired (only two weeks annual leave when I was there) and their natural resources make the economy a very different fish.
I have also lived in the US, much of my teens in San Jose. I was stationed in Port Canaveral for just over a year in my twenties and I worked in Universal Shipyards in Thunderbolt (Savannah)  for almost two years. I'm aware you (and Dense) think I'm trying to be a wise-ass, or showing off, but that is not what I'm intending (the apparent arrogance is a function of the way I write/speak, I'm not that bad in person and I've never intentionally called anyone an idiot or intended to be insulting).

Of course my life experiences influence my views and saying "I think x/y/z because..." seems like a perfectly reasonable form of debate. I certainly haven't abandoned any friendships because of this issue and  (as I said on FB) I actually think the UK could be ok out of the EU. And it won't be painless, almost everyone agrees with that. I just don't get why some people seem to find the EU so objectionable. As far as I can see, the advantages outweigh the negatives. The out argument seems to be heavy on the jingoistic nationalism and light on tangible benefits. Not so much the points raised here, as I said before I've seen far more reasoned argument for out on this thread than anywhere else, but in the media as a whole.

So, we are discussing why we intend to vote the way we will and I'm genuinely interested in what you all think. I'm not particularly interested in trying to change anybody's mind, it will make sod all difference after all. I'm not averse to changing my own mind, given suitable evidence, however much I may come across otherwise. 

Dense, the surgery joke, was a joke and the whole subject was raised (I thought) as an example of (again) confirmation bias. As it happens, my GP really is Hong Kong Chinese and one of our nurses is Polish, there is also a Romanian nurse in the practice (as was the midwife when my son was born). Our tenants, two doors down, are a Polish dentist and his family. There are, in my kids school, Romanian, Russian, Chinese, Polish, Filipino, Italian and Bulgarian; that I know of and a whole bunch of foreigners I can't even guess at. My kids think it's normal (there are ~300 kids in that school). You wouldn't guess at the parents nationality by listening to the children either, I've often been surprised to find out that some of the kids aren't English.

So I look around at this multicultural, wonderful, country we live in and I don't see it as a problem. I know, for instance, that I am of Italian descent. And of Norman French. And Dutch. Oh and there's a Scottish  line there too. Still got cousins (umpteen times removed) in Malta.
Now, I'm not saying that anyone here has been the slightest bit racist, but the leave campaign has been, massively, contingent on peoples fears of the foreigner. And I genuinely think this is wrong. I also think it is a backwards looking trend, which is pissing into the wind of human progress.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[tomtom]

Another good point made by the Liverpool Prof was that the Uk civil service is geared up to make 2 trade deals a year (each can take years) - if we leave the EU we have to negotiate ALL our trade deals/terms as all of ours are via the EU. That sounds like more than a couple of years work to me...

[petejh]

Or to put it another way you're suggesting the civil service would remain doing things in the same way it did when we were part of the EU, if the country left the EU. That would be more than a bit silly wouldn't it? I'm no head of civil service but here's an idea - change with the demands of the situation.

[petejh]

This argument that Stu and TT and others are making about us 'having a good deal of influence in the EU to change things (standards etc) for our benefit'. How true is this really? Honest question. There are a lot of other countries in the EU all with their own interests - we can't steamroller over everyone else. How successful has the UK been in changing 'things' for our benefit? How did Cameron get on with his renegotiated deal? It wasn't a great success as far as I can tell. What evidence is there to support this assertion that we have all this influence in EU law-making? Crucially - who decides what new laws to make?

[Fultonius]

Or to put it another way you're suggesting the civil service would remain doing things in the same way it did when we were part of the EU, if the country left the EU. That would be more than a bit silly wouldn't it? I'm no head of civil service but here's an idea - change with the demands of the situation.

So...what, hire all those other suitably experienced civil service trade deal negotiators who are just waiting for this opportunity?  How is going to train them? Do you really think there's any chance of that going quickly and smoothly?