7 ms·

> the EU project that the UK helped design before losing access to due to Brexit how can you lose access if you already paid for it? who negotiated this? i ass

by kmlx 6y ago

> the EU project that the UK helped design before losing access to due to Brexit how can you lose access if you already paid for it? who negotiated this? i assume a politician. a business person would have either asked for a cash payment or sued.

maltelandwehr 6y ago
They did not „already pay for it“. Think of the EU like a gym. Only because the gym bought a treadmill with your membership fees from last year, does not mean you get to keep access to that treadmill once you decide to terminate your gym membership.
- kmlx 6y ago
  what if i was also involved in scoping out the requirements for that purchase and/or also involved in designing certain features? i think we can all agree the EU is pretty far away from the concept of a gym. when't the last time your gym imposed rules that had a direct consequence on your life?
  - Someone 6y ago
    For most members of a gym, I guess that would be today. Most gyms require members to abide by various coronavirus-triggered regulations (including, in quite a few countries, the rule “don’t enter the gym”)
  - dillonmckay 6y ago
    Like closing for a pandemic?
  - moomin 6y ago
    Try skinny-dipping in the pool sometime.
kmlx 6y ago
from another article in the more reputable FT (https://www.ft.com/content/a1da90e8-8869-4740-b5eb-d8c6339d8e2f https://www.ft.com/content/a1da90e8-8869-4740-b5eb-d8c6339d8...) > The company, which originally intended to offer affordable internet services to the remotest parts of the planet, has 74 satellites in orbit and plans for several hundred more. OneWeb also has a significant advantage in that it has priority on broadcast spectrum over SpaceX’s Starlink, a rival low-earth satellite internet service, people close to the subject said. In April, OneWeb approached the UK government for a £500m loan as part of a wider $2.2bn financing from private investors. However, the government has decided on an equity investment to preserve its influence. The company is regulated by the UK’s Ofcom, but its management is largely American. Its satellites are also manufactured in Florida in a joint venture with Airbus. It has promised to repatriate manufacturing to the UK. The government’s potential participation in a OneWeb bid has been the focus of fierce opposition in some parts of the space industry, which had hoped to win positions on a Galileo-style navigation project. Critics have dismissed the low-earth technology as unproven and fraught with risk. However, a deciding factor appears to have been support from US defence officials who have told the government they do not want the UK to develop a replica of the GPS system. A low-earth navigation service would complement the US system and offer extra resilience to US allies, say several parties close to the subject. ---- so yeah, as always, it's actually more complicated than it seems. this is why i usually tend to steer far away from the guardian or other general purpose newspapers, they never offer the full picture.
- pbhjpbhj 6y ago
  >However, the government has decided on an equity investment // Presumably a choice to invest in a private company would go through parliamentary debate, or have public study papers. Can anyone link them?
  - pjc50 6y ago
    Good luck with that, this government is allergic to accountability. There are three references in Hansard: https://hansard.parliament.uk/search?searchTerm=oneweb&partial=False https://hansard.parliament.uk/search?searchTerm=oneweb&parti... - previous reference to investing £18m in March 2019 (Chris Skidmore, under Theresa May, mentions ESA; before the "cut all ties to Europe" moment) - same page https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-19/debates/E3FCCEE9-CB5F-4D1A-A2E4-581F129AFE40/UKSpaceIndustry?highlight=oneweb#contribution-141ADEEB-3169-4E6A-AF13-2ADFEF1A2104 https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-19/debates/E3F... references £92m for a "domestic alternative to Galileo", not specifically linked to oneweb - Vicky Ford mentions them in the context of "my local company Teledyne e2v is working in Leeds, where it is making the highly engineered filters, switches and converters that are critical technology for the OneWeb group of satellites" https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-01-15/debates/634CCF88-39CE-429A-9850-FCFD5D386376/SpaceIndustryBill(Lords)?highlight=oneweb#contribution-C13BC628-85F4-4E36-9F87-2356B5521AA2 https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-01-15/debates/634... - brief namecheck from Ed Vaizey I suspect the actual "tender" process will be resistant to FOIA under grounds of "commercial confidentiality".
simonh 6y ago
Sue for what? Britain agreed to exclude non-EU countries from the PRS service and governance of the system, in fact I'm sure we were one of the countries insisting on it in order to secure our companies involvement, but then we decided not to be an EU country any more. There's no point blaming anyone else for the obvious consequences of that. Anyway we're only excluded from some aspects of the project, not all of it. Of course I'd prefer that Britain stay a strong part of the project, but I think that about our involvement in all of the EU's projects we used to be a key part of, not just Galileo. That's a big part of why I didn't want to leave the EU, but I lost that argument and we're leaving, and that's fine. It was a democratic decision and I'm content to abide by it. What's disappointing is the bile and fury from so many Brexiteers about having to accept the painful but inevitable consequences of that. To them I say buck up, this is the path you chose. There's no point whining about it now.
- kmlx 6y ago
  thanks! good points. i agree with you in spirit. it's probably my business bias that i see politicians and politics in an unfavourable light.
- moomin 6y ago
  Also, sue in what court? One of the big problems with leaving the EU is that we no longer have access to the ECJ when we have a dispute with the rest of the EU.
  - simonh 6y ago
    Oh we're still pretty much just as subject to the ECJ as we ever were. All disputes with the EU concerning treaties or trade agreements with the EU are adjudicated by the ECJ, whether the claimant is a member of the ECJ or not. Any legal dispute with the EU over the terms of our leaving will be adjudicated by the ECJ, and the terms of any trade agreement we make with the EU will be adjudicated by the ECJ, as they are for any other country. What has changed is that as we are no longer members of the EU, we will no longer appoint a justice on the ECJ panel of judges, or have any of our people working there and representing our interests, outside our role as external claimants.
Mindwipe 6y ago
It's a project that requires significant ongoing costs for maintenance and running. The UK has decided that it won't pay towards that any more and will subsequently lose access to the non-public parts. Which seems pretty reasonable?
moomin 6y ago
To answer your question (which has been downvoted for reasons I don't really understand): Galileo is a EU project. It's only available to EU members. The UK contributed heavily and helped shaped it, but it was never meant to be usable by non-EU states, and you've got to be signed up to various agreements that could be summarized as "being in the EU". Legally, it belongs 100% to the EU. So, could we have negotiated an ongoing part of Galileo? Yes, probably, but it would have involved a longer negotiating period and a number of compromises and continuing engagement with EU institutions. None of these were calls the government were prepared to make. Instead, they didn't even ask and just walked away from the project. Needless to say, this is just a microcosm of the many things you have to accept if you take an absolutist stance on EU engagement.
- kmlx 6y ago
  thanks. i agree with your stance. i do wonder if there's more going on behind the scenes. i enjoyed yanis varoufakis' book on the inner working of the EU, even considering the bias and all. then again, ockham's razor...
barkingcat 6y ago
The UK can sue itself for pulling out of the EU, which is what triggered this series of events.
- C1sc0cat 6y ago
  If it comes to it pass a bill of attainder against those financers that promoted Brexit. Post Brexit and after we leave the HRC - I think that might be possible. A bill of attainder is where parliament just declares you guilty and its of to the Tower with you.

by kmlx 6y ago

maltelandwehr 6y ago

They did not „already pay for it“. Think of the EU like a gym. Only because the gym bought a treadmill with your membership fees from last year, does not mean you get to keep access to that treadmill once you decide to terminate your gym membership.

kmlx 6y ago
what if i was also involved in scoping out the requirements for that purchase and/or also involved in designing certain features? i think we can all agree the EU is pretty far away from the concept of a gym. when't the last time your gym imposed rules that had a direct consequence on your life?
- Someone 6y ago
  For most members of a gym, I guess that would be today. Most gyms require members to abide by various coronavirus-triggered regulations (including, in quite a few countries, the rule “don’t enter the gym”)
- dillonmckay 6y ago
  Like closing for a pandemic?
- moomin 6y ago
  Try skinny-dipping in the pool sometime.

kmlx 6y ago

from another article in the more reputable FT (https://www.ft.com/content/a1da90e8-8869-4740-b5eb-d8c6339d8e2f https://www.ft.com/content/a1da90e8-8869-4740-b5eb-d8c6339d8...) > The company, which originally intended to offer affordable internet services to the remotest parts of the planet, has 74 satellites in orbit and plans for several hundred more. OneWeb also has a significant advantage in that it has priority on broadcast spectrum over SpaceX’s Starlink, a rival low-earth satellite internet service, people close to the subject said. In April, OneWeb approached the UK government for a £500m loan as part of a wider $2.2bn financing from private investors. However, the government has decided on an equity investment to preserve its influence. The company is regulated by the UK’s Ofcom, but its management is largely American. Its satellites are also manufactured in Florida in a joint venture with Airbus. It has promised to repatriate manufacturing to the UK. The government’s potential participation in a OneWeb bid has been the focus of fierce opposition in some parts of the space industry, which had hoped to win positions on a Galileo-style navigation project. Critics have dismissed the low-earth technology as unproven and fraught with risk. However, a deciding factor appears to have been support from US defence officials who have told the government they do not want the UK to develop a replica of the GPS system. A low-earth navigation service would complement the US system and offer extra resilience to US allies, say several parties close to the subject. ---- so yeah, as always, it's actually more complicated than it seems. this is why i usually tend to steer far away from the guardian or other general purpose newspapers, they never offer the full picture.

pbhjpbhj 6y ago
>However, the government has decided on an equity investment // Presumably a choice to invest in a private company would go through parliamentary debate, or have public study papers. Can anyone link them?
- pjc50 6y ago
  Good luck with that, this government is allergic to accountability. There are three references in Hansard: https://hansard.parliament.uk/search?searchTerm=oneweb&partial=False https://hansard.parliament.uk/search?searchTerm=oneweb&parti... - previous reference to investing £18m in March 2019 (Chris Skidmore, under Theresa May, mentions ESA; before the "cut all ties to Europe" moment) - same page https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-19/debates/E3FCCEE9-CB5F-4D1A-A2E4-581F129AFE40/UKSpaceIndustry?highlight=oneweb#contribution-141ADEEB-3169-4E6A-AF13-2ADFEF1A2104 https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-03-19/debates/E3F... references £92m for a "domestic alternative to Galileo", not specifically linked to oneweb - Vicky Ford mentions them in the context of "my local company Teledyne e2v is working in Leeds, where it is making the highly engineered filters, switches and converters that are critical technology for the OneWeb group of satellites" https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-01-15/debates/634CCF88-39CE-429A-9850-FCFD5D386376/SpaceIndustryBill(Lords)?highlight=oneweb#contribution-C13BC628-85F4-4E36-9F87-2356B5521AA2 https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-01-15/debates/634... - brief namecheck from Ed Vaizey I suspect the actual "tender" process will be resistant to FOIA under grounds of "commercial confidentiality".

simonh 6y ago

Sue for what? Britain agreed to exclude non-EU countries from the PRS service and governance of the system, in fact I'm sure we were one of the countries insisting on it in order to secure our companies involvement, but then we decided not to be an EU country any more. There's no point blaming anyone else for the obvious consequences of that. Anyway we're only excluded from some aspects of the project, not all of it. Of course I'd prefer that Britain stay a strong part of the project, but I think that about our involvement in all of the EU's projects we used to be a key part of, not just Galileo. That's a big part of why I didn't want to leave the EU, but I lost that argument and we're leaving, and that's fine. It was a democratic decision and I'm content to abide by it. What's disappointing is the bile and fury from so many Brexiteers about having to accept the painful but inevitable consequences of that. To them I say buck up, this is the path you chose. There's no point whining about it now.

kmlx 6y ago
thanks! good points. i agree with you in spirit. it's probably my business bias that i see politicians and politics in an unfavourable light.
moomin 6y ago
Also, sue in what court? One of the big problems with leaving the EU is that we no longer have access to the ECJ when we have a dispute with the rest of the EU.
- simonh 6y ago
  Oh we're still pretty much just as subject to the ECJ as we ever were. All disputes with the EU concerning treaties or trade agreements with the EU are adjudicated by the ECJ, whether the claimant is a member of the ECJ or not. Any legal dispute with the EU over the terms of our leaving will be adjudicated by the ECJ, and the terms of any trade agreement we make with the EU will be adjudicated by the ECJ, as they are for any other country. What has changed is that as we are no longer members of the EU, we will no longer appoint a justice on the ECJ panel of judges, or have any of our people working there and representing our interests, outside our role as external claimants.

Mindwipe 6y ago

It's a project that requires significant ongoing costs for maintenance and running. The UK has decided that it won't pay towards that any more and will subsequently lose access to the non-public parts. Which seems pretty reasonable?

moomin 6y ago

To answer your question (which has been downvoted for reasons I don't really understand): Galileo is a EU project. It's only available to EU members. The UK contributed heavily and helped shaped it, but it was never meant to be usable by non-EU states, and you've got to be signed up to various agreements that could be summarized as "being in the EU". Legally, it belongs 100% to the EU. So, could we have negotiated an ongoing part of Galileo? Yes, probably, but it would have involved a longer negotiating period and a number of compromises and continuing engagement with EU institutions. None of these were calls the government were prepared to make. Instead, they didn't even ask and just walked away from the project. Needless to say, this is just a microcosm of the many things you have to accept if you take an absolutist stance on EU engagement.

kmlx 6y ago
thanks. i agree with your stance. i do wonder if there's more going on behind the scenes. i enjoyed yanis varoufakis' book on the inner working of the EU, even considering the bias and all. then again, ockham's razor...

barkingcat 6y ago

The UK can sue itself for pulling out of the EU, which is what triggered this series of events.

C1sc0cat 6y ago
If it comes to it pass a bill of attainder against those financers that promoted Brexit. Post Brexit and after we leave the HRC - I think that might be possible. A bill of attainder is where parliament just declares you guilty and its of to the Tower with you.