Facebook Data, Leave Overspending And Lies About Brexit And Airbus

8
1348

There’s rather more than just a little of a coordinated campaign going on here. We’ve Carole Cadwalladr pursuing the varied Leave campaigns for overspending in the referendum campaign. Last week she told us that the overspend she’d identified of 10% – note, she had identified, not independent proof – was the greatest affront to our democracy since the Lords voted down the old age pension. Or something suitably apocalyptic. There has been very much less emphasis on how the Remain campaign seemed to be doing much the same thing. Except with larger amounts of money if rumour is to be believed.

It’s as if there’s a concerted campaign going on to delegitimise that referendum result – you know, the one that went the wrong way – so as to bolster the case for ignoring said inconvenient result. But of course this is Britain, such things don’t happen, do they?

Well, actually, consider Airbus for a moment. In a moment we shall

Quite the most interesting thing about all of this – and the similar complaints about Trump’s use of Facebook – is the manner in which much the same use of much the same data and processes was applauded when Obama did it. Almost as if it’s not the what but the who which matters – not the mark of a country under the rule of law that.

But let us take a look at Airbus. For this is showing the gross hypocrisy under way here. From the same paper, The Observer:

It doesn’t take long for Katherine Bennett’s frustration to boil over when the issue of Brexit is raised. “It’s not as easy as Jacob Rees-Mogg thinks,” said the boss of Airbus UK. “We don’t just export cheese or cider to another country.

“We have parts that go back and forth to different countries to be worked on – sometimes several times. That is why frictionless borders are important.”

Airbus has been at the centre of a political storm since it warned last month that it could quit the UK if it leaves the EU single market and customs union without a transition deal.

Well, no, it didn’t warn it would quit, it said it might not invest further. And no, you don’t pick up aircraft wing manufacture and dump it into another country. If you could then everyone would be making them in China, obviously. But we do have here this big story about how Brexit is the evil which could lead to one of the world’s leading manufacturers fleeing the tinpot nationalism (cont pg 94)….

Well, yes. We might think of that as being a little bit of propaganda really. At which point, this in the Telegraph:

Airbus bosses are furious after the Government spurred them to publish a dire forecast of the impact of Brexit before handing a prize £2bn RAF contract to US rival Boeing without a competition.

The Telegraph has learnt that last month’s bombshell warning from Airbus that it could be forced to leave the UK came after discussions with senior Remainer ministers preparing for the Chequers summit.

Remainers lent upon Airbus to make their bloodcurdling warning, the quid pro quo – Airbus thought so at least – was £2 billion of taxpayers’ money.

And yet it’s that claimed 10% overspend on the Leave campaign that is the scandal, is it?

Quite the finest arguments I know of for leaving the European Union are the tactics being used to keep us in. Who in buggery wants to stay in an organisation that will act like this? Who wants to be ruled by those without even the honour of thieves, to pay the bribes promised?

8
Leave a Reply

avatar
4 Comment threads
3 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
5 Comment authors
Quentin VoleJohnSpikePatBloke on M4 Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Bloke on M4
Guest
Bloke on M4

The whole push is for this “people’s vote”.

One of the few reasons I’m backing the Chequers plan is that it gets us the fuck out. Parliament will vote it through. There won’t be a “people’s vote”.

That’s the single most important thing because the remainers are then faced with the prospect of having to spend a ton of energy getting us back in. Which they know won’t happen. So, what happens then? Well, they stop fighting for it and accept that Westminster is all they get. At which point, they’ll start calling for more power to return to Westminster.

Quentin Vole
Guest
Quentin Vole

It’s looking increasingly unlikely that the Chequers plan will have sufficient support in Parliament. I’m no longer sure whether this is a good thing or not (which I guess is at least one of its objectives met).

Pat
Guest
Pat

Could be a touch of the lefts and rights.
Perhaps someone was considering Airbus with the provision of jobs and tax revenues in the UK as the clincher. Someone else talked Airbus into hinting at a withdrawal. First someone reacted to the news that there might be no British jobs or taxes by giving the contract to Boeing. Result- Remain get their ridiculous scare story, Airbus get screwed. Likely the Boeing is a slightly better plane or it wouldn’t have worked out this way.
And perhaps in future corporations will be a bit more shy about telling lies on behalf of politicians.

Spike
Member

So, after engaging Airbus in a bit of electioneering treachery, government made the Boeing decision completely on its merits? Another possibility is that competing treachery won out.

Spike
Member

“We have parts that go back and forth to different countries to be worked on – sometimes several times. That is why frictionless borders are important.” — This was not the case before customs union, nor was it impossible to assemble an airplane before customs union.

If government should mandate inspection of all materials that pass between the second story and the third story of the manufacturing plant, managers would obviously redesign the assembly process to minimize these transitions, not vacate the third story entirely!

Quentin Vole
Guest
Quentin Vole

Somehow Boeing manages to utilise components built in the UK and Japan without either country having to submit to the diktats of an unelected body. Must be a miracle, I guess!

John
Guest
John

Actually there is no comparable Airbus product to the Boeing one, the RAFs airborne radar planes need replacing. The Boeing Wedgetail being the chosen aircraft, rather than the non-existent Airbus aircraft.

John
Guest
John

Actually there is no comparable Airbus product to the Boeing one, the RAFs airborne radar planes need replacing. The Boeing Wedgetail being the chosen aircraft, rather than the non-existent Airbus aircraft.