BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Quite a coincidence that those posts were on page 1958!focuszing723 said:Jan 13 1958, 9,000 scientists of 43 nations petition UN for nuclear test ban
I will stop there, because there are lots more and I can see some opposition to my posting of interesting facts in 1958.1 -
They aren't: it's just a fund to which people apply. You have suggested that somehow the UK can do that 'better'. That's irrelevant. We've established that we've left the EU, and as a consequence Horizon. The choice is between the UK government funding stuff and the UK government not funding stuff and right now we are doing the latter. WGAF what the EU would or wouldn't have done - we're not in the EU or Horizon.Stevo_666 said:
Why would the EU picking our winners for us be better?rjsterry said:
And we're back to the idea that governments can pick winners. I know you believe that implicitly everything associated with the EU is not as good as the UK. You don't need to keep reiterating it. There is just now less money to spend on research. At the moment there is no plan to replace Horizon spending. Maybe at some point in the future a government will rectify this but it's clearly not happening at the moment.Stevo_666 said:
It is relevant because we get to decide. The amounts going forward will also depend on what we decide. There a pattern emerging here...rjsterry said:
Where the money is coming from is irrelevant. There's just less of it.Stevo_666 said:
I'm sure we are capable of funding academic research ourselves - and making the decision on who and what to fund - rather than handing the money over to the EU and allowing them to decide who is worthy of funding.rjsterry said:
UK academic research started getting cancelled almost as soon as we left as the funding was cut. EU universities were then suing UK institutions for crashing joint research projects part way through. This was all pre-covid. I mean maybe this will all turn around but it seems unlikely given we don't actually have a Chancellor at the moment and they've already had several years to put something in place.Stevo_666 said:
It's a dirty job, but somebody in Cake Stop has to do it.rjsterry said:
Ever the optimist.TheBigBean said:
It's reducing its size (no UK contributions) and only funding research in the EU. As a result it is harder for UK-EU scientific research to take place. Science loses. The EU may be hoping that lots of scientists move to the EU, but they move in the other direction (as the UK will start funding science) or simply not collaborate.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Science is losing. That is the point of the fund. No one is winning.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
It's been the case for a while. Sadly, it's another case of the nose needing reattaching.briantrumpet said:Seems there are consequences to not playing ball. And yes, it might be the EU playing hardball, but I'd not expect them to extol the virtues of pulling up the drawbridge.
Still, who needs lefty academics?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/05/eu-scraps-115-grants-uk-scientists-academics-brexit-rowBritish scientists and academic researchers have been dealt a blow after 115 grants from a flagship EU research programme were terminated because of the continuing Brexit row over Northern Ireland.
One academic said he was “relieved” to be exiting the country and feared the UK was going down a “dark path” like Germany in the 1930s.
One hundred and fifty grants were approved for British applicants after the then Brexit minister, David Frost, successfully negotiated associate membership of the £80bn Horizon Europe programme but most will now be cancelled.
Beneficiaries in the UK were told by the European Research Council (ERC) that unless associate membership had been approved by 29 June, the grants would not be available unless the researchers moved their work to a European institution.
Ratification of the membership has been in abeyance because the UK has not implemented the Brexit trading arrangements agreed under the Northern Ireland protocol.
With the deadline passed, it has emerged that just 18 of the 150 academics will take up the grants but must move to an EU institution to get the funds.
What are the EU losing? Seems to me that they are gaining from this; the loss is all the UK's - economically and skills-wise.
Can you not accept that the UK is in % terms the far bigger loser? The EU were never going to roll over (pointed out, ad nauseam) in the face of the UK asserting it could have all the benefits of EU membership without any of the responsibilities. Why should they fund a nation that is doing all it can to distance itself from the EU?
THis is merely the consequence of the chimera of 'sovereignty' being pursued with a religious zeal.
Is it? Isn't it just moving to the EU?1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
I voted to remain, but I was somewhat surprised initially at the dogmatic positions adopted by both sides when there was mutually beneficial (in non-political terms) middle ground to be found. But I am a pragmatist by nature and don't really get the ideological aspect of politics in the same way I don't get religion or people refusing to vote for the best "Not Tory" candidate in the 2019 GE because they were from the "wrong" Not-Tory party, and thus splitting the Not Tory vote to allow the Tories in.rick_chasey said:
I think it works on the assumption of "if collaboration is in everyone's best interest, then why should brexit stop that as it's in everyone's interest to collaborate" which rather misses the point of the EU and indeed Brexit.surrey_commuter said:
I find it very odd that to this day people don't get that you are either a member of the EU or you are a 3rd countryrick_chasey said:
Fairly sure I got called a scaremonger for suggesting that this would be an outcome of Brexit back in the day.TheBigBean said:
Yes, the EU explicitly committed to working with the UK to let it join horizon. It was spelt out.briantrumpet said:.
TheBigBean said:
It's reducing its size (no UK contributions) and only funding research in the EU. As a result it is harder for UK-EU scientific research to take place. Science loses. The EU may be hoping that lots of scientists move to the EU, but they move in the other direction (as the UK will start funding science) or simply not collaborate.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Science is losing. That is the point of the fund. No one is winning.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
It's been the case for a while. Sadly, it's another case of the nose needing reattaching.briantrumpet said:Seems there are consequences to not playing ball. And yes, it might be the EU playing hardball, but I'd not expect them to extol the virtues of pulling up the drawbridge.
Still, who needs lefty academics?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/05/eu-scraps-115-grants-uk-scientists-academics-brexit-rowBritish scientists and academic researchers have been dealt a blow after 115 grants from a flagship EU research programme were terminated because of the continuing Brexit row over Northern Ireland.
One academic said he was “relieved” to be exiting the country and feared the UK was going down a “dark path” like Germany in the 1930s.
One hundred and fifty grants were approved for British applicants after the then Brexit minister, David Frost, successfully negotiated associate membership of the £80bn Horizon Europe programme but most will now be cancelled.
Beneficiaries in the UK were told by the European Research Council (ERC) that unless associate membership had been approved by 29 June, the grants would not be available unless the researchers moved their work to a European institution.
Ratification of the membership has been in abeyance because the UK has not implemented the Brexit trading arrangements agreed under the Northern Ireland protocol.
With the deadline passed, it has emerged that just 18 of the 150 academics will take up the grants but must move to an EU institution to get the funds.
What are the EU losing? Seems to me that they are gaining from this; the loss is all the UK's - economically and skills-wise.
Can you not accept that the UK is in % terms the far bigger loser? The EU were never going to roll over (pointed out, ad nauseam) in the face of the UK asserting it could have all the benefits of EU membership without any of the responsibilities. Why should they fund a nation that is doing all it can to distance itself from the EU?
THis is merely the consequence of the chimera of 'sovereignty' being pursued with a religious zeal.
Is it? Isn't it just moving to the EU?
I'll not disagree that science loses, but, as I say, you can't expect the UK's isolationist stance to have no consequences. Blame it on Brexit, if you like: the EU didn't choose that course of action, that was the UK's choice, and the ramifications were either spelt out or implicit.
By the end of the negotiations though I was practically cheering on the EU side given the insults spewing forth and the lack of good faith from the UK side.0 -
I'm not aware of any big funding programmes with countries in (say) North America or Asia Pacific but nobody has ever accused us of being insular for that reason. Mind you, the EU doesn't do that either so may the EU is being insular, ignoring the rest of the world like good Little Europeans?briantrumpet said:.
Stevo_666 said:
It is relevant because we get to decide. The amounts going forward will also depend on what we decide. There a pattern emerging here...rjsterry said:
Where the money is coming from is irrelevant. There's just less of it.Stevo_666 said:
I'm sure we are capable of funding academic research ourselves - and making the decision on who and what to fund - rather than handing the money over to the EU and allowing them to decide who is worthy of funding.rjsterry said:
UK academic research started getting cancelled almost as soon as we left as the funding was cut. EU universities were then suing UK institutions for crashing joint research projects part way through. This was all pre-covid. I mean maybe this will all turn around but it seems unlikely given we don't actually have a Chancellor at the moment and they've already had several years to put something in place.Stevo_666 said:
It's a dirty job, but somebody in Cake Stop has to do it.rjsterry said:
Ever the optimist.TheBigBean said:
It's reducing its size (no UK contributions) and only funding research in the EU. As a result it is harder for UK-EU scientific research to take place. Science loses. The EU may be hoping that lots of scientists move to the EU, but they move in the other direction (as the UK will start funding science) or simply not collaborate.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Science is losing. That is the point of the fund. No one is winning.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
It's been the case for a while. Sadly, it's another case of the nose needing reattaching.briantrumpet said:Seems there are consequences to not playing ball. And yes, it might be the EU playing hardball, but I'd not expect them to extol the virtues of pulling up the drawbridge.
Still, who needs lefty academics?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/05/eu-scraps-115-grants-uk-scientists-academics-brexit-rowBritish scientists and academic researchers have been dealt a blow after 115 grants from a flagship EU research programme were terminated because of the continuing Brexit row over Northern Ireland.
One academic said he was “relieved” to be exiting the country and feared the UK was going down a “dark path” like Germany in the 1930s.
One hundred and fifty grants were approved for British applicants after the then Brexit minister, David Frost, successfully negotiated associate membership of the £80bn Horizon Europe programme but most will now be cancelled.
Beneficiaries in the UK were told by the European Research Council (ERC) that unless associate membership had been approved by 29 June, the grants would not be available unless the researchers moved their work to a European institution.
Ratification of the membership has been in abeyance because the UK has not implemented the Brexit trading arrangements agreed under the Northern Ireland protocol.
With the deadline passed, it has emerged that just 18 of the 150 academics will take up the grants but must move to an EU institution to get the funds.
What are the EU losing? Seems to me that they are gaining from this; the loss is all the UK's - economically and skills-wise.
Can you not accept that the UK is in % terms the far bigger loser? The EU were never going to roll over (pointed out, ad nauseam) in the face of the UK asserting it could have all the benefits of EU membership without any of the responsibilities. Why should they fund a nation that is doing all it can to distance itself from the EU?
THis is merely the consequence of the chimera of 'sovereignty' being pursued with a religious zeal.
Is it? Isn't it just moving to the EU?
You're right, there is.
Insularity."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Couldn't have put it better myself.rjsterry said:
WGAF what the EU would or wouldn't have done - we're not in the EU or Horizon.Stevo_666 said:
Why would the EU picking our winners for us be better?rjsterry said:
And we're back to the idea that governments can pick winners. I know you believe that implicitly everything associated with the EU is not as good as the UK. You don't need to keep reiterating it. There is just now less money to spend on research. At the moment there is no plan to replace Horizon spending. Maybe at some point in the future a government will rectify this but it's clearly not happening at the moment.Stevo_666 said:
It is relevant because we get to decide. The amounts going forward will also depend on what we decide. There a pattern emerging here...rjsterry said:
Where the money is coming from is irrelevant. There's just less of it.Stevo_666 said:
I'm sure we are capable of funding academic research ourselves - and making the decision on who and what to fund - rather than handing the money over to the EU and allowing them to decide who is worthy of funding.rjsterry said:
UK academic research started getting cancelled almost as soon as we left as the funding was cut. EU universities were then suing UK institutions for crashing joint research projects part way through. This was all pre-covid. I mean maybe this will all turn around but it seems unlikely given we don't actually have a Chancellor at the moment and they've already had several years to put something in place.Stevo_666 said:
It's a dirty job, but somebody in Cake Stop has to do it.rjsterry said:
Ever the optimist.TheBigBean said:
It's reducing its size (no UK contributions) and only funding research in the EU. As a result it is harder for UK-EU scientific research to take place. Science loses. The EU may be hoping that lots of scientists move to the EU, but they move in the other direction (as the UK will start funding science) or simply not collaborate.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Science is losing. That is the point of the fund. No one is winning.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
It's been the case for a while. Sadly, it's another case of the nose needing reattaching.briantrumpet said:Seems there are consequences to not playing ball. And yes, it might be the EU playing hardball, but I'd not expect them to extol the virtues of pulling up the drawbridge.
Still, who needs lefty academics?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/05/eu-scraps-115-grants-uk-scientists-academics-brexit-rowBritish scientists and academic researchers have been dealt a blow after 115 grants from a flagship EU research programme were terminated because of the continuing Brexit row over Northern Ireland.
One academic said he was “relieved” to be exiting the country and feared the UK was going down a “dark path” like Germany in the 1930s.
One hundred and fifty grants were approved for British applicants after the then Brexit minister, David Frost, successfully negotiated associate membership of the £80bn Horizon Europe programme but most will now be cancelled.
Beneficiaries in the UK were told by the European Research Council (ERC) that unless associate membership had been approved by 29 June, the grants would not be available unless the researchers moved their work to a European institution.
Ratification of the membership has been in abeyance because the UK has not implemented the Brexit trading arrangements agreed under the Northern Ireland protocol.
With the deadline passed, it has emerged that just 18 of the 150 academics will take up the grants but must move to an EU institution to get the funds.
What are the EU losing? Seems to me that they are gaining from this; the loss is all the UK's - economically and skills-wise.
Can you not accept that the UK is in % terms the far bigger loser? The EU were never going to roll over (pointed out, ad nauseam) in the face of the UK asserting it could have all the benefits of EU membership without any of the responsibilities. Why should they fund a nation that is doing all it can to distance itself from the EU?
THis is merely the consequence of the chimera of 'sovereignty' being pursued with a religious zeal.
Is it? Isn't it just moving to the EU?
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The trouble is we are not replacing Horizon with anything at all, let alone something better.Stevo_666 said:
Couldn't have put it better myself.rjsterry said:
WGAF what the EU would or wouldn't have done - we're not in the EU or Horizon.Stevo_666 said:
Why would the EU picking our winners for us be better?rjsterry said:
And we're back to the idea that governments can pick winners. I know you believe that implicitly everything associated with the EU is not as good as the UK. You don't need to keep reiterating it. There is just now less money to spend on research. At the moment there is no plan to replace Horizon spending. Maybe at some point in the future a government will rectify this but it's clearly not happening at the moment.Stevo_666 said:
It is relevant because we get to decide. The amounts going forward will also depend on what we decide. There a pattern emerging here...rjsterry said:
Where the money is coming from is irrelevant. There's just less of it.Stevo_666 said:
I'm sure we are capable of funding academic research ourselves - and making the decision on who and what to fund - rather than handing the money over to the EU and allowing them to decide who is worthy of funding.rjsterry said:
UK academic research started getting cancelled almost as soon as we left as the funding was cut. EU universities were then suing UK institutions for crashing joint research projects part way through. This was all pre-covid. I mean maybe this will all turn around but it seems unlikely given we don't actually have a Chancellor at the moment and they've already had several years to put something in place.Stevo_666 said:
It's a dirty job, but somebody in Cake Stop has to do it.rjsterry said:
Ever the optimist.TheBigBean said:
It's reducing its size (no UK contributions) and only funding research in the EU. As a result it is harder for UK-EU scientific research to take place. Science loses. The EU may be hoping that lots of scientists move to the EU, but they move in the other direction (as the UK will start funding science) or simply not collaborate.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Science is losing. That is the point of the fund. No one is winning.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
It's been the case for a while. Sadly, it's another case of the nose needing reattaching.briantrumpet said:Seems there are consequences to not playing ball. And yes, it might be the EU playing hardball, but I'd not expect them to extol the virtues of pulling up the drawbridge.
Still, who needs lefty academics?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/05/eu-scraps-115-grants-uk-scientists-academics-brexit-rowBritish scientists and academic researchers have been dealt a blow after 115 grants from a flagship EU research programme were terminated because of the continuing Brexit row over Northern Ireland.
One academic said he was “relieved” to be exiting the country and feared the UK was going down a “dark path” like Germany in the 1930s.
One hundred and fifty grants were approved for British applicants after the then Brexit minister, David Frost, successfully negotiated associate membership of the £80bn Horizon Europe programme but most will now be cancelled.
Beneficiaries in the UK were told by the European Research Council (ERC) that unless associate membership had been approved by 29 June, the grants would not be available unless the researchers moved their work to a European institution.
Ratification of the membership has been in abeyance because the UK has not implemented the Brexit trading arrangements agreed under the Northern Ireland protocol.
With the deadline passed, it has emerged that just 18 of the 150 academics will take up the grants but must move to an EU institution to get the funds.
What are the EU losing? Seems to me that they are gaining from this; the loss is all the UK's - economically and skills-wise.
Can you not accept that the UK is in % terms the far bigger loser? The EU were never going to roll over (pointed out, ad nauseam) in the face of the UK asserting it could have all the benefits of EU membership without any of the responsibilities. Why should they fund a nation that is doing all it can to distance itself from the EU?
THis is merely the consequence of the chimera of 'sovereignty' being pursued with a religious zeal.
Is it? Isn't it just moving to the EU?1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
The stated plan is to roll out the replacement after the summer. You may not believe that.0
-
Stated plan is pretty meaningless in the context of this government.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
With regards to your first point the fact that you can not cherry pick is fundamental to the EU. The fact that we attempted to cherry pick and boast about it shows that we are pr1cks or monumentally stupid.wallace_and_gromit said:
I voted to remain, but I was somewhat surprised initially at the dogmatic positions adopted by both sides when there was mutually beneficial (in non-political terms) middle ground to be found. But I am a pragmatist by nature and don't really get the ideological aspect of politics in the same way I don't get religion or people refusing to vote for the best "Not Tory" candidate in the 2019 GE because they were from the "wrong" Not-Tory party, and thus splitting the Not Tory vote to allow the Tories in.rick_chasey said:
I think it works on the assumption of "if collaboration is in everyone's best interest, then why should brexit stop that as it's in everyone's interest to collaborate" which rather misses the point of the EU and indeed Brexit.surrey_commuter said:
I find it very odd that to this day people don't get that you are either a member of the EU or you are a 3rd countryrick_chasey said:
Fairly sure I got called a scaremonger for suggesting that this would be an outcome of Brexit back in the day.TheBigBean said:
Yes, the EU explicitly committed to working with the UK to let it join horizon. It was spelt out.briantrumpet said:.
TheBigBean said:
It's reducing its size (no UK contributions) and only funding research in the EU. As a result it is harder for UK-EU scientific research to take place. Science loses. The EU may be hoping that lots of scientists move to the EU, but they move in the other direction (as the UK will start funding science) or simply not collaborate.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Science is losing. That is the point of the fund. No one is winning.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
It's been the case for a while. Sadly, it's another case of the nose needing reattaching.briantrumpet said:Seems there are consequences to not playing ball. And yes, it might be the EU playing hardball, but I'd not expect them to extol the virtues of pulling up the drawbridge.
Still, who needs lefty academics?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/05/eu-scraps-115-grants-uk-scientists-academics-brexit-rowBritish scientists and academic researchers have been dealt a blow after 115 grants from a flagship EU research programme were terminated because of the continuing Brexit row over Northern Ireland.
One academic said he was “relieved” to be exiting the country and feared the UK was going down a “dark path” like Germany in the 1930s.
One hundred and fifty grants were approved for British applicants after the then Brexit minister, David Frost, successfully negotiated associate membership of the £80bn Horizon Europe programme but most will now be cancelled.
Beneficiaries in the UK were told by the European Research Council (ERC) that unless associate membership had been approved by 29 June, the grants would not be available unless the researchers moved their work to a European institution.
Ratification of the membership has been in abeyance because the UK has not implemented the Brexit trading arrangements agreed under the Northern Ireland protocol.
With the deadline passed, it has emerged that just 18 of the 150 academics will take up the grants but must move to an EU institution to get the funds.
What are the EU losing? Seems to me that they are gaining from this; the loss is all the UK's - economically and skills-wise.
Can you not accept that the UK is in % terms the far bigger loser? The EU were never going to roll over (pointed out, ad nauseam) in the face of the UK asserting it could have all the benefits of EU membership without any of the responsibilities. Why should they fund a nation that is doing all it can to distance itself from the EU?
THis is merely the consequence of the chimera of 'sovereignty' being pursued with a religious zeal.
Is it? Isn't it just moving to the EU?
I'll not disagree that science loses, but, as I say, you can't expect the UK's isolationist stance to have no consequences. Blame it on Brexit, if you like: the EU didn't choose that course of action, that was the UK's choice, and the ramifications were either spelt out or implicit.
By the end of the negotiations though I was practically cheering on the EU side given the insults spewing forth and the lack of good faith from the UK side.
I don't get the sentiment in your last para as that failure makes us all poorer0 -
I think the "why wouldn't they want to collaborate as there is net benefit for everyone" argument really misses the "the EU must be better for its member than for its non members" argument.
Existentially, former members can't have it as good or better. As soon as they do, the EU falls apart. So if you believe in the value of the EU, and it is demonstrably valuable, then why would you jeopardise that? Not least when the scale of the cost of making a former member uncomfortable is trivial compared to the cost of the risk of the union disolving?
We know this argument to be true as even Brexiters understand this - under the delusion that if they make Brexit work, they can fulfil their ultimate aim which is the collapse of the EU.
Alas, the practical reality is that being a big economy in Europe and not being part of the SM and CU prohibits success.0 -
The "fundamental to EU" is an example of political ideology / dogma. It's a choice. The EU bends its rules quite happily when it chooses to.surrey_commuter said:
With regards to your first point the fact that you can not cherry pick is fundamental to the EU.wallace_and_gromit said:
I voted to remain, but I was somewhat surprised initially at the dogmatic positions adopted by both sides when there was mutually beneficial (in non-political terms) middle ground to be found. But I am a pragmatist by nature and don't really get the ideological aspect of politics in the same way I don't get religion or people refusing to vote for the best "Not Tory" candidate in the 2019 GE because they were from the "wrong" Not-Tory party, and thus splitting the Not Tory vote to allow the Tories in.rick_chasey said:
I think it works on the assumption of "if collaboration is in everyone's best interest, then why should brexit stop that as it's in everyone's interest to collaborate" which rather misses the point of the EU and indeed Brexit.surrey_commuter said:
I find it very odd that to this day people don't get that you are either a member of the EU or you are a 3rd countryrick_chasey said:
Fairly sure I got called a scaremonger for suggesting that this would be an outcome of Brexit back in the day.TheBigBean said:
Yes, the EU explicitly committed to working with the UK to let it join horizon. It was spelt out.briantrumpet said:.
TheBigBean said:
It's reducing its size (no UK contributions) and only funding research in the EU. As a result it is harder for UK-EU scientific research to take place. Science loses. The EU may be hoping that lots of scientists move to the EU, but they move in the other direction (as the UK will start funding science) or simply not collaborate.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
Science is losing. That is the point of the fund. No one is winning.briantrumpet said:TheBigBean said:
It's been the case for a while. Sadly, it's another case of the nose needing reattaching.briantrumpet said:Seems there are consequences to not playing ball. And yes, it might be the EU playing hardball, but I'd not expect them to extol the virtues of pulling up the drawbridge.
Still, who needs lefty academics?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/jul/05/eu-scraps-115-grants-uk-scientists-academics-brexit-rowBritish scientists and academic researchers have been dealt a blow after 115 grants from a flagship EU research programme were terminated because of the continuing Brexit row over Northern Ireland.
One academic said he was “relieved” to be exiting the country and feared the UK was going down a “dark path” like Germany in the 1930s.
One hundred and fifty grants were approved for British applicants after the then Brexit minister, David Frost, successfully negotiated associate membership of the £80bn Horizon Europe programme but most will now be cancelled.
Beneficiaries in the UK were told by the European Research Council (ERC) that unless associate membership had been approved by 29 June, the grants would not be available unless the researchers moved their work to a European institution.
Ratification of the membership has been in abeyance because the UK has not implemented the Brexit trading arrangements agreed under the Northern Ireland protocol.
With the deadline passed, it has emerged that just 18 of the 150 academics will take up the grants but must move to an EU institution to get the funds.
What are the EU losing? Seems to me that they are gaining from this; the loss is all the UK's - economically and skills-wise.
Can you not accept that the UK is in % terms the far bigger loser? The EU were never going to roll over (pointed out, ad nauseam) in the face of the UK asserting it could have all the benefits of EU membership without any of the responsibilities. Why should they fund a nation that is doing all it can to distance itself from the EU?
THis is merely the consequence of the chimera of 'sovereignty' being pursued with a religious zeal.
Is it? Isn't it just moving to the EU?
I'll not disagree that science loses, but, as I say, you can't expect the UK's isolationist stance to have no consequences. Blame it on Brexit, if you like: the EU didn't choose that course of action, that was the UK's choice, and the ramifications were either spelt out or implicit.
By the end of the negotiations though I was practically cheering on the EU side given the insults spewing forth and the lack of good faith from the UK side.
I don't get the sentiment in your last para as that failure makes us all poorer
Re the last para, this was simply a reflection of how far culturally and morally I found myself from the UK government. My "cheering" made no difference to the outcome, obviously! Had I been negotiating for the UK side I would have done my very best for the UK.
1 -
Peter Hitchens with his finger on the pulse of todays news!!
We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
ddraver said:
Peter Hitchens with his finger on the pulse of todays news!!
Peter Hitchens, of course, desperate for Starmer to commit to rejoining the EU so he can accuse him of wanting to thwart 'the will of the people' and of 'surrender'.
Whenever I see anything about Peter Hitchens, I recall this debate betwen him and his brother Christopher, and mourn the loss of the sensible and cleverer brother.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngjQs_QjSwc 0 -
Possibly good news as it takes votes away from the main challenger to the Tories and gives them to a fringe party.ddraver said:Peter Hitchens with his finger on the pulse of todays news!!
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I like the one who got water boardedbriantrumpet said:ddraver said:Peter Hitchens with his finger on the pulse of todays news!!
Peter Hitchens, of course, desperate for Starmer to commit to rejoining the EU so he can accuse him of wanting to thwart 'the will of the people' and of 'surrender'.
Whenever I see anything about Peter Hitchens, I recall this debate betwen him and his brother Christopher, and mourn the loss of the sensible and cleverer brother.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngjQs_QjSwc0 -
Well Boris is going now, what does this mean for Brexit negotiations?0
-
davebradswmb said:
Well Boris is going now, what does this mean for Brexit negotiations?
Oh, I thought that Brexit was done?1 -
-
Gove will be back in government almost immediately. Any Conservative PM would be daft to leave him on the back benches.rick_chasey said:Has anyone from vote leave survived intact? I guess Raab.
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Which bit do you disagree with?kingstongraham said:
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Good point for late 2024 I suppose.rick_chasey said:"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Re-enter campaign starts today...
We're in danger of confusing passion with incompetence
- @ddraver0 -
The idea that Labour voters will be moving to vote Lib Dem in the next election in order to get back into the EU, and that would make a coalition more likely. It's utter, utter nonsense.Stevo_666 said:
Which bit do you disagree with?kingstongraham said:
It's especially nonsensical when it's in the middle of an article about how great the first past the post system is.
The rest of the article is "don't threaten me with a good time", however.0 -
So in short, the bit between the headline and the bottom of the page 😁kingstongraham said:
The idea that Labour voters will be moving to vote Lib Dem in the next election in order to get back into the EU, and that would make a coalition more likely. It's utter, utter nonsense.Stevo_666 said:
Which bit do you disagree with?kingstongraham said:
It's especially nonsensical when it's in the middle of an article about how great the first past the post system is.
The rest of the article is "don't threaten me with a good time", however.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
-
ddraver said:
"The Protocol isn't working!"0 -
It was Raver who posted the move to vote Lib Dem - read the tweet he posted above. I merely commented on the implications, so have a word with DDR.kingstongraham said:
The idea that Labour voters will be moving to vote Lib Dem in the next election in order to get back into the EU, and that would make a coalition more likely. It's utter, utter nonsense.Stevo_666 said:
Which bit do you disagree with?kingstongraham said:
It's especially nonsensical when it's in the middle of an article about how great the first past the post system is.
The rest of the article is "don't threaten me with a good time", however.
Nor did I say it would make a coalition more likely.
Have another read."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
.
If the idea is bol1ocks, then any implications are meaningless.Stevo_666 said:
It was Raver who posted the move to vote Lib Dem - read the tweet he posted above. I merely commented on the implications, so have a word with DDR.kingstongraham said:
The idea that Labour voters will be moving to vote Lib Dem in the next election in order to get back into the EU, and that would make a coalition more likely. It's utter, utter nonsense.Stevo_666 said:
Which bit do you disagree with?kingstongraham said:
It's especially nonsensical when it's in the middle of an article about how great the first past the post system is.
The rest of the article is "don't threaten me with a good time", however.
Nor did I say it would make a coalition more likely.
RTFP...
Did you really consider your post to have risen to the level of a thesis that i was referring to? Sorry.
Your post wasn't bol1ocks, just pointless because it was built on bol1ocks.
0
