Referendum is a load of crap.!!

[Lucysgirl]

I'd like to debate the future prospects for our innovative and skilful workforce concerning our aircraft industry if we were no longer part of the EU.

We already have a market outside of the EU for the precision parts that we manufacture and supply for Drones (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles = UAVs).

My concern is for the workers at nearby Broughton and Wales who manufacture the wings for the Airbus where about 40,000 jobs are reliant on the few thousand skilled people who actualy design/manufacture the wings.

We used to design and manufacture aircraft ourselves until money became scarce in early/mid 1960s. Aircraft designers and allied tradesmen lost their jobs and many went abroad in the resulting brain drain. It was about that time that one company had designed Concord but couldn't find the money to produce it in the UK. However, we belonged to the European Coal and Steel Community that had been set up after WWII and it was via this connection that the government turned to France to join us in manufacturing what eventually became Concorde with an E. After we joined what was the Common Market we continued partnering other European Countries in designing and manufacturing various high cost aircraft. In fact my son in law was posted from England to the continent in the 1980s to work on a then current aircraft computer system. Since that time the European Coal and Steel Community has been incorporated into the EU.

Europe doesn't farm out any work, it looks inward. Therefore, my concern is that if we left the EU only the member nations would be invited to take part in the design/manufacture of aircraft. This doesn't hold a very rosy future for 40,000 jobs.

I'd like to hear the latest buzz on the Broughton/Wharton grapevine

[Margaret Pilkington]

Rena, I cannot answer this question that you pose, but what i can tell you is that when tenders were being sought for rolling stock for the railways Siemens(Germany) and Bombardier(Derby UK)both submitted their tenders.......who do you think was awarded the contract?
It wasn't the Derby firm.....this was because Siemens got some form of sunsidies from their government to make their tender more attractive(the playing field was tilted to make the ball roll their way)........so being in the EU did not help us there.

I do believe that if our products are good enough then there will be markets outside of the EU for them....and as it stands we currently buy far more from the EU than they buy from us.
The current deal for the wings of the Airbus only gives these plants about 2 years of guaranteed work...so after that they would be looking for something else anyway.

If the government can squander 9 million on a propaganda leaflet that isn't worth a light then maybe they should be looking at backing some of the industries in this country...but that would take some working at....some proactive thinking..... and I can't really see many thinkers in the current set up.....they all seem to want to take the line of least resistance.

[Barrie Yates]

Originally Posted by Lucysgirl

Therefore, my concern is that if we left the EU only the member nations would be invited to take part in the design/manufacture of aircraft. This doesn't hold a very rosy future for 40,000 jobs.

I'd like to hear the latest buzz on the Broughton/Wharton grapevine

The manufacture of the wings/tailplane etc requires very large, very complicated and therefore very expensive machinery. To set up another plant with the same, or similar equipment would be totally prohibitive with regard to cost and the expertise to operate such equipment. Airbus could not afford any increase in the cost of the Airbus series which is in a very competitive market and the same applies to the engines - you cannot just change the engines from one manufacturer to another without serious design changes and current orders will, for the large part, specify Rolls Royce engines.
Another example of the Remain Fear Factor - guesswork and lies.
I don't suppose many people know that the EU gave China a loan of over Eu800M some years ago - specifically for the development of iron and steel production - no surprise that the Remain have kept quiet about that.

[Lucysgirl]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Rena, I cannot answer this question that you pose, but what i can tell you is that when tenders were being sought for rolling stock for the railways Siemens(Germany) and Bombardier(Derby UK)both submitted their tenders.......who do you think was awarded the contract?
It wasn't the Derby firm.....this was because Siemens got some form of sunsidies from their government to make their tender more attractive(the playing field was tilted to make the ball roll their way)........so being in the EU did not help us there.

I do believe that if our products are good enough then there will be markets outside of the EU for them....and as it stands we currently buy far more from the EU than they buy from us.
The current deal for the wings of the Airbus only gives these plants about 2 years of guaranteed work...so after that they would be looking for something else anyway.

If the government can squander 9 million on a propaganda leaflet that isn't worth a light then maybe they should be looking at backing some of the industries in this country...but that would take some working at....some proactive thinking..... and I can't really see many thinkers in the current set up.....they all seem to want to take the line of least resistance.

I remember the railway fiasco, brought about because Gordon Brown stood up in Parliament and announced the new policy that all government contracts would be awarded to companies that submitted the lowest tender. Thank goodness this policy changed when the Coalition came into power.

I'm pretty sure that one of Germany's steel companies was/is part owned by the German government despite the EU regulations about nationalisation. I don't know if it was Siemens though. I'll bet my bottom dollar that if one of their large companies had a downturn, the German Government would organise some sort of handout. As for the foreign owned Bombadier company. Earlier this year it announced it's having to downsize due to the vagaries of the stockmarket.

Turning to the point you raised about the aircraft industry. Coincidentally a new statue of Margaret Thatcher has been made but there's one important element missing - her handbag. During strife of the Callaghan & Foot governments the value of the £Pound had dropped which meant high inflation. When Thatcher came into government 1979 she had to bring in some money. She successfully handbagged the ministers at a Common Market meeting then stood up and told us that she'd given our revolutionary newly designed jump jet to America because we couldn't afford to manufacture it - but they had agreed for the UK to manufacture and provide aircraft parts. In the event the only orders that the Yanks sent us was to Guest, Keen & Nettlefold. When I worked for a heavy engineering company in the 1950s-60s that company only provided us with nuts and bolts :-(
I'm surprised we still have an aircraft industry after it was decimated in the 1960s after a couple of knockbacks that were publicised My late cousin worked on the TSR-2 bomber, which would have been the first supersonic aeroplane - it cost the taxpayer £Billions and was plagued with problems - the blueprints were eventually destroyed. I'm wandering off the point now but I used to get really fired up at the thought of us -v- the USA ( = "the big boys"). Late 60s- early 70s we'd (as in GB) had got an order from Australia for several aircraft - which was cancelled when the yanks went back to them & offered to sell them the same number of similar aircraft plus several others thrown in FOC. Again, when they discovered we were looking for buyers for the first supersonic passenger plane the Concord, they (and the Russians with an imaginery Concordski) went around the world trying to get orders for a plane they said they had already designed - actually they eventually had to admit they couldn't get it off the drawing board.

[Lucysgirl]

Originally Posted by Barrie Yates

The manufacture of the wings/tailplane etc requires very large, very complicated and therefore very expensive machinery. To set up another plant with the same, or similar equipment would be totally prohibitive with regard to cost and the expertise to operate such equipment. Airbus could not afford any increase in the cost of the Airbus series which is in a very competitive market and the same applies to the engines - you cannot just change the engines from one manufacturer to another without serious design changes and current orders will, for the large part, specify Rolls Royce engines.
Another example of the Remain Fear Factor - guesswork and lies.
I don't suppose many people know that the EU gave China a loan of over Eu800M some years ago - specifically for the development of iron and steel production - no surprise that the Remain have kept quiet about that.

Thanks for the comprehensive answer Barrie. Much appreciated.

Although, as I thought up the question of the aeroplane wings myself, I didn't have to rely on anyone's "Fear Factor".

[cashman]

Don't reckon that many listen to the Fear Factor? though quite a few follow the Balloon Factor.

[Less]

Originally Posted by cashman

Don't reckon that many listen to the Fear Factor? though quite a few follow the Balloon Factor.

Is that where someone gives their over inflated opinions in one post and all it takes is one little prick that knows what they are talking about to burst that bubble?

[Barrie Yates]

One point that no-one yet seems to have mentioned in the media is the attitude of Nicola Sturgeon and her best friend AS.
NS has publicly stated that she and the SNP will support Remain, in addition she is on public record as saying that if the UK votes to leave she & the SNP will hold another referendum to split from the UK (which is one of the main policies of the SNP), and remain as a member of the EU.
Fairly obvious then that NS & the SNP should vote to leave the EU, strengthening the Brexit vote, thereby triggering a referendum to split Scotland away from the UK, or does she actually realise that the majority of Scots would not support her aims of an independent Scotland?

[cashman]

Probably no-one mentioned cos she aint worth listening too?

[DaveinGermany]

Originally Posted by Barrie Yates

she is on public record as saying that if the UK votes to leave she & the SNP will hold another referendum to split from the UK (which is one of the main policies of the SNP), and remain as a member of the EU.

That was always the wee ginger toms ambition & the threat of Brexit is an ideal excuse for the ginger binter to have another dig at "They English Bar'sterts!"

[Exile on Spencer St]

What?
Vote Leave and get out of the EU and get rid of Scotland?
BOGOF!

[Exile on Spencer St]

It gets even better!
According to this weekend's FT, we could also get rid of Cameroon with a vote LEAVE.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Exile on Spencer St

It gets even better!
According to this weekend's FT, we could also get rid of Cameroon with a vote LEAVE.

I know it sounds terrible but i would prefer him to be run oer.would make a good news bulletin

[Margaret Pilkington]

Now some goon politician in France says we will be like Guernsey or Jersey if we leave Europe....we are bigger and better in the EU than out of it.
Better for whom? Not us that is for sure.

[cashman]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

Now some goon politician in France says we will be like Guernsey or Jersey if we leave Europe....we are bigger and better in the EU than out of it.
Better for whom? Not us that is for sure.

Well i quite like those 2 places, i'll settle fer that.