New BBC soap

In message , Andy Burns
writes:
J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

I was in favour of joining the Common Market, though too young to
actually vote at the time.

I wasn't aware of it happening until it happened, and the visible sign
of it to me was the different colour price tickets in the supermarket
when VAT went on 'luxury' foods.

I remember at some point in the '70s - not sure if it was EEC, VAT, or
something else - when the price of a Mars Bar actually dropped - quite
significantly (I have memories of 4p to 3p, but that seems very low even
allowing for inflation).
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)[email protected]+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

All change is not necessarily improvement, but all improvement is change.

On 26/07/2019 10:12, charles wrote:
In , Indy Jess John
wrote:
On 25/07/2019 23:34, Pamela wrote:
On 21:04 25 Jul 2019, Indy Jess
wrote:

On 25/07/2019 20:27, Pamela wrote:
On 17:53 25 Jul 2019, Indy Jess
wrote:

The existing electronic facilities at Lowestoft are well proven and
will work for the Irish border. That is why the EU insisted it
wouldn't work, so that it couldn't be mentioned in the "agreement".

Lowestoft isn't an external border of the EU. Nowhere in the world
nor in Boris's wildest dreams is anything like the required
ultra-high tech border in operation. It's pure unicorns in sunny
uplands. A fantasy.

Of course Lowestoft is an external border of the EU. Britain is
currently part of the EU and container ships from both EU countries
and the rest of the world arrive in Lowestoft. It has a high tech
border in operation, and has done for many years.

You can hunt unicorns if you like; I deal in facts.

Jim

Out of interest, have you got a link describing Lowestoft's procedures
and equipment? Google has nothing. Can you post some of the facts you
deal in.

Strange that Lowestoft's aleged ultra-high tech customs and border
equipment is not going to be deployed to solve the NI border problem at
a stroke. Maybe that's because Lowestoft doesn't have lorries coming
from abroad along a road which is what characterises the NI border.

It was described in the TV news when it was proposed as an alternative
to the Irish Back-stop and the EU negotiator said it wasn't good enough,
and Theresa May swallowed that lie whole. Effectively it consists of
records from the port of what went on which transport out of the port
and ANPR cameras that track the lorries that take the goods away, and
those lorries go through customs checks away from the port to that there
are no traffic jams. It adds about 10 minutes to the average time a
"duty free" EU delivery takes.

Lowestoft is a "container port", it doesn't deal with loose loads, and it
doesn't deal with people or coaches full of people.

Nevertheless the EU have privately recognised that the process is good
enough, so why should we worry.

Jim

In message , Ian Jackson
writes:
In message , "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
writes
[]
I have also, on the whole, _approved_ of many of the
rules/laws/whatever that have come out of the (E)EC since then
(especially technical harmonisations, which most people don't notice):
in particular, most of the ones our silly media like to highlight have
something sensible underneath them (and in many cases the excesses are
complete inventions of the media - well illustrated by the "British
Sausage" episode of "Yes [Prime] Minister"). I like to _hope_ that
sensible collaboration will continue after Brexit - we were joint
members of, for example, various standards bodies before joining.

Those who haven't already done so might be in danger of becoming more
enlightened (as well as amused) if they have a look at some of the
myths about what the EU has imposed on us (although a few of actually
do have a grain of truth). The Google link is here.
https://1clickurls.com/KY5f48B

Which expands to
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=eu...6&gws_rd =ssl
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)[email protected]+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

All change is not necessarily improvement, but all improvement is change.

On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 10:12:26 +0100, charles
wrote:

In article , Indy Jess John
wrote:
On 25/07/2019 23:34, Pamela wrote:
On 21:04 25 Jul 2019, Indy Jess
wrote:

On 25/07/2019 20:27, Pamela wrote:
On 17:53 25 Jul 2019, Indy Jess
wrote:

The existing electronic facilities at Lowestoft are well proven and
will work for the Irish border. That is why the EU insisted it
wouldn't work, so that it couldn't be mentioned in the "agreement".

Lowestoft isn't an external border of the EU. Nowhere in the world
nor in Boris's wildest dreams is anything like the required
ultra-high tech border in operation. It's pure unicorns in sunny
uplands. A fantasy.

Of course Lowestoft is an external border of the EU. Britain is
currently part of the EU and container ships from both EU countries
and the rest of the world arrive in Lowestoft. It has a high tech
border in operation, and has done for many years.

You can hunt unicorns if you like; I deal in facts.

Jim

Out of interest, have you got a link describing Lowestoft's procedures
and equipment? Google has nothing. Can you post some of the facts you
deal in.

Strange that Lowestoft's aleged ultra-high tech customs and border
equipment is not going to be deployed to solve the NI border problem at
a stroke. Maybe that's because Lowestoft doesn't have lorries coming
from abroad along a road which is what characterises the NI border.

It was described in the TV news when it was proposed as an alternative
to the Irish Back-stop and the EU negotiator said it wasn't good enough,
and Theresa May swallowed that lie whole. Effectively it consists of
records from the port of what went on which transport out of the port
and ANPR cameras that track the lorries that take the goods away, and
those lorries go through customs checks away from the port to that there
are no traffic jams. It adds about 10 minutes to the average time a
"duty free" EU delivery takes.

Lowestoft is a "container port", it doesn't deal with loose loads, and it
doesn't deal with people or coaches full of people.


Coaches of people don't matter. UK and Eire have free movement of
people for nearly a century now. Since UK and Eire are not in Schengen
area then travellers from the EU can't get into Eire unless they
satisfy the same requirements as they would have to satisfy to get
into the UK. Hence there is no need to "people check" across the NI
Eire border.

--
brightside S9

In message , Indy Jess John
writes



The EU will try any trick in the book to prevent us leaving, and
finally we have a Prime Minister who isn't stupid enough to fall for it.

Or they will simply tell us to accept to present proposed agreement - or
bugger off.


--
Ian

"charles" wrote in message
...
In article , Indy Jess John
wrote:
On 25/07/2019 23:34, Pamela wrote:
On 21:04 25 Jul 2019, Indy Jess
wrote:

On 25/07/2019 20:27, Pamela wrote:
On 17:53 25 Jul 2019, Indy Jess
wrote:

The existing electronic facilities at Lowestoft are well proven and
will work for the Irish border. That is why the EU insisted it
wouldn't work, so that it couldn't be mentioned in the "agreement".

Lowestoft isn't an external border of the EU. Nowhere in the world
nor in Boris's wildest dreams is anything like the required
ultra-high tech border in operation. It's pure unicorns in sunny
uplands. A fantasy.

Of course Lowestoft is an external border of the EU. Britain is
currently part of the EU and container ships from both EU countries
and the rest of the world arrive in Lowestoft. It has a high tech
border in operation, and has done for many years.

You can hunt unicorns if you like; I deal in facts.

Jim

Out of interest, have you got a link describing Lowestoft's procedures
and equipment? Google has nothing. Can you post some of the facts you
deal in.

Strange that Lowestoft's aleged ultra-high tech customs and border
equipment is not going to be deployed to solve the NI border problem at
a stroke. Maybe that's because Lowestoft doesn't have lorries coming
from abroad along a road which is what characterises the NI border.

It was described in the TV news when it was proposed as an alternative
to the Irish Back-stop and the EU negotiator said it wasn't good enough,
and Theresa May swallowed that lie whole. Effectively it consists of
records from the port of what went on which transport out of the port
and ANPR cameras that track the lorries that take the goods away, and
those lorries go through customs checks away from the port to that there
are no traffic jams. It adds about 10 minutes to the average time a
"duty free" EU delivery takes.

Lowestoft is a "container port",

That’s not what wiki says
\https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Lowestoft

it doesn't deal with loose loads, and it doesn't
deal with people or coaches full of people.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote in message
...
In message , charles
writes:
In article ,
The Marquis Saint Evremonde wrote:
"[email protected]" posted

You can buy loads of vacs that more than the 620W EU limit on household
vacs too.

Just search for commercial vacuums.

What is the purpose of the EU limit then?

to comply with the Climate Hange policy and reduce energy consumption.

Not only that: to reduce _unnecessary_ energy consumption, where vacs were
sold based purely on the amount of power they _consumed_.

What perhaps was missing was the introduction of a requirement for a more
effective measurement - like the one, which most of us haven't noticed
(though probably more in these 'groups than the general public!), that
lightbulbs should carry a lumen rating. Some sort of "amount of suck" or
something. It would be more difficult, and ideally should give details of
how that varies with fill level.

And how well the head turns that into cleaning the carpet etc.

On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 20:00:29 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

That¢s not what wiki says
\https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Lowestoft

These are ALL UK newsgroups you are trolling in you clinically insane
85-year-old trolling senile Australian asshole!

--
"Anonymous" to trolling senile Rot Speed:
"You can **** off as you know less than pig **** you sad
little ignorant ****."
MID:

On Fri, 26 Jul 2019 20:13:42 +1000, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


What perhaps was missing was the introduction of a requirement for a more
effective measurement - like the one, which most of us haven't noticed
(though probably more in these 'groups than the general public!), that
lightbulbs should carry a lumen rating. Some sort of "amount of suck" or
something. It would be more difficult, and ideally should give details of
how that varies with fill level.

And how well the head turns that into cleaning the carpet etc.

I'd like to clean your senile head out with a bullet, you 85-year-old
trolling senile piece of Australian ****!

--
Sqwertz to Rot Speed:
"This is just a hunch, but I'm betting you're kinda an argumentative
asshole.
MID:

"Ian Jackson" wrote in message
...
In message , Indy Jess John
writes



The EU will try any trick in the book to prevent us leaving, and finally
we have a Prime Minister who isn't stupid enough to fall for it.

Or they will simply tell us to accept to present proposed agreement - or
bugger off.

And Boris will be free to bugger of with a no deal brexit and the EU will
get to like that or lump it.