...Should Thames-Link Train Order have gone to Germany?

[Guest]

...NO,of course NOT! While a Derby Company was able to foot the order to satisfactory standards there is no way any EU order to the contary should be obeyed.Yesterday's News I know,but why should Britain be the only Nation to adhear to such EU Directives when everyone else clearly ignores them? Your thoughts...

[2LO]

Firstcapitalthamesconnectlink is rivalled by the tube's Jubilee Line for being one of the most unreliable public transport "services" in or around London. The railways should never have been privatised in the first place, the all too obvious result of which led to the 'outsourcing' of everything to the cheapest suppliers with no regard to the damaging social effects.

"Nothing can now be done" seems to be the mantra employed by all in government. Are there private interests involved, one asks. . .

[french frank]

...NO,of course NOT! While a Derby Company was able to foot the order to satisfactory standards there is no way any EU order to the contary should be obeyed.Yesterday's News I know,but why should Britain be the only Nation to adhear to such EU Directives when everyone else clearly ignores them? Your thoughts...

You mean a company which has a base in Derby? The works are owned by Bombardier Transportation (HQ in Berlin), a wholly owned subsidiary of Bombardier Inc. (HQ in Montreal). It seems that 1,400 jobs may be lost in Derby, but Siemens will create 2,000 jobs in Tyne & Wear making components, even though the building of the trains will take place in Germany.

By sticking to EU rules, the UK is free to accept the best deal, whereas favouring a 'home' company over a 'foreign' one may mean paying over the odds for a lesser product.

Seemingly ...

[Flosshilde]

why should Britain be the only Nation to adhear to such EU Directives when everyone else clearly ignores them? Your thoughts...

Not according to this piece in the Guardian - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...policy-buffers. They just understand the rules better, & don't just look at the bottom line.

favouring a 'home' company over a 'foreign' one may mean paying over the odds for a lesser product.

Again, based on the comments in the article above, the initial cost might be higher, but on-going costs (eg maintenance) might be lower. & the social costs are not insignificant.

[Mahlerei]

I heard a report earlier that suggested lay-offs would have been necessary even if Bombardier had won the Thameslink order. A sad state of affairs, certainly, but hardly uncommon in this globalised marketplace.

'Twas amusing to hear some twit berating the government for setting a bad example by driving Toyotas. As it happens Toyotas are built here and the company employs a significant number of people at its UK plants.

[scottycelt]

Well, everything I buy these days seems to be made in 'communist' China. Our days are long gone as a big manufacturing nation and it looks like the USA is now going the same way.

There is a heck of a lot of foreign investment in the UK, including an ever-increasing Chinese quota, so it works both ways, surely.

The government was right to go for what it considered to be the best deal, and, let's face it, the Germans are likely to deliver on time!

We British actually do very well out of the EU, getting all the benefits of being part of the biggest economic bloc in the world, while, unlike most others, still having control of our own national economy.

There is nothing to stop us becoming as efficient and productive as those pesky Germans if the necessary will of both management and labour were really there ...

[rauschwerk]

It's by no means solely a question of EU directives. See the first letter in this morning's Independent.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/letters/letters-perspectives-on-uk-manufacturing-2308085.html

[MrGongGong]

I expect to hear a load of delusional UKIP nonsense blaming the EU for all of this
strange that other EU countries seem to be able to use the EU to strengthen their national and regional distinctiveness whereas we in the UK seem to only use it as a buck passing destination

[Norfolk Born]

It was my understanding that, cost apart, the German-built trains were also actually considered superior in terms of design, reliability, performance and environmental impact. Or don't such things matter?

[Panjandrum]

It was my understanding that, cost apart, the German-built trains were also actually considered superior in terms of design, reliability, performance and environmental impact. Or don't such things matter?

I vote we get the Germans to run the trains. At least the blessed things would then be punctual.

[Norfolk Born]

A Dutch company, Abellio, is one of three candidates for the Greater Anglia franchise.

[Dave2002]

I vote we get the Germans to run the trains. At least the blessed things would then be punctual.

Dig up Mussolini eh! (I know he was Italian, but that's supposed to be one of his achievements.)

[gradus]

The loss of almost all our heavy engineering capacity - trains following the sad example of ships - is tragic and governments of both parties have been utterly useless in defending them. Manufacturing of all kinds is needed in order to provide a potentially huge source of employment, exports and economic growth and we are in danger of losing what little remains of our skills base.
We should build our own trains and get back into ship building. How much longer before the penny drops?

[Freddie Campbell]

...Many Thanks for All Responses- each valid in it's own way!

[Simon]

I don't want to get involved here, as the Guardian article has got it right this time, but I just need to nail scotty's usual rose-tinted view of the EU:

We British actually do very well out of the EU, getting all the benefits of being part of the biggest economic bloc in the world, while, unlike most others, still having control of our own national economy.

That's probably the most ridiculous comment to have been made so far on this MB. The cost, not only to "we British", but to almost all the other countries of the EU, of a further tier of unelected bureaucrats over and above our own national civil services is immense. When one factors in the fact that thes meddlesome nonentities, with their fat salaries (recently increased again, you remember!) engorged expense accounts and gold-plated pensions are part of an organisation that is so corrupt, wasteful and inefficient that it's accounts have not been passed by the auditors for the past twenty years, there is no rational reason for the people of Europe to keep paying in their billions any longer.

Sadly, we - who pay - don't get a say in it. Because the ones who gain from it - the Kinnocks and their ilk - are the ones with the power to say whether we stay in or out. And if you're a politician and can look forward, when you retire or lose your seat, to a cushy mumber in Brussels or Strasbourg, you're going to go for it, if you are as selfish as most politicians seem to be.

As far as Britain is concerned, we get zilch for our billions. The money that could improve elderly care, help with better hospital services or provide better resources for vulnerable children, goes to prop up wasters in Greece, Or olive oil crooks in Spain.

And they've screwed up our farms. And wrecked our fishing industry. And caused havoc with their silly judgements on yooman rites - from yet more unelected crackpots.

In fact, despite the trillions wasted, Britain has not benefited in one single, specific, identifiable way from membership of the EU. The sooner the whole flawed edifice collapses the better for every ordinary Brit. And Frenchman. And German!