Hot Air

[carmanmemoranda]

Perhaps.

And you see that as a benefit?

It is not guaranteed to be a benefit, you do accept that?

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Yes it is. You no longer have that right.

Pre brexit you could do what you liked, now you need a visa which you may not get or may be withdrawn. There is a big difference.

Obviously it is difficult to understand for some.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

I think it is more that, based on the facts (a mixture of those agreed and those determined in court) - i.e that an extremely prominent businessman, who said Brexit would benefit the UK economically, moves his HQ to Singapore shortly after Brexit - it is possible that an honest commentator could have formed the opinion that James Dyson has "screwed the country". But the judge also said that "the honest commentator does not have to be logical and he does not have to be evidence-based". It seems to be a very broad test.

And the article was not forced to be retracted, or any forced apology made?

So the point that was made, stands.

Mirror won, Dyson lost

 

[carmanmemoranda]

So we got there in the end although it appears seems a bit of a ball ache to you (perhaps not to someone who's lined themselves up with a well renumerated job) but we as British citizens with the pre requisite paperwork have a right to work in an EU country.
The bit you dont understand I can understand you wanting to turn a blind eye to it, a lot of do. Best get all them resources out of Africa on the cheap eh.

1 easy example.

Can you nip over next week and do some work for me please.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

It wasn't for lack of trying! The judge complained about the voluminous evidence and correspondence. And then he wrote this about the relocation:

118. The very point being made.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

I'm happy that Britain remains independent.

That's already a big enough benefit.

We were independent before?

In what way do you think differently?

 

[JonathanM]

118. The very point being made.

I'm not completely sure what you mean. So, just to be clear about what I am saying. In para 118, the judge is only ruling that it is a fact that Dyson moved its global head office to Singapore. The judge did not decide that James Dyson was a hypocrite or that he "screwed the country".

 

[motorbiking]

I wonder how much he spent on his legal case and why his lawyers thought it was a good idea to go to court if they couldn't prove this serious harm

As I said. I thought it was pretty weak. Maybe they listened more to the sound of the opening of his billionaire wallet than the strength of arguments.

Since the defamation act. Defamation has been very hard to prove.

 

[motorbiking]

And the article was not forced to be retracted, or any forced apology made?

So the point that was made, stands.

Mirror won, Dyson lost

The point that was made does not stand.

The judge has not added any weight to the opinion. It’s still just opinion, honestly held does not make them fact. The facts were factual, the opinion was ignored and the serious harm wasn’t proven. Simples.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

The point that was made does not stand.

The judge has not added any weight to the opinion. It’s still just opinion, honestly held does not make them fact. The facts were factual, the opinion was ignored and the serious harm wasn’t proven. Simples.

Of course it stands.

It wasn't retracted or any forced apology.

 

[motorbiking]

So what ? Apologies mean nothing in law.

Opinion is just that.

 

[Notch7]

I'm happy that Britain remains independent.

That's already a big enough benefit.

We always were independent.

 

[Notch7]

So if I have visa saying I can work in a particular EU country, have I right to work there or not?

You don’t have a visa
So you dont have a right to work in any EU country

 

[Notch7]

You mean those rights which had strings attached?
You best read what he said again, which was ' Brits no longer have the right to live, work, or retire in 27 countries '
Which is not true as I've demonstrated.

It is true.

If you have to apply for a visa, you don’t have an automatic right to work.

Each of the 27 countries has its own visa requirements

and You can’t stay more than 90 days out of 180 days.


as usual you are wrong

 

[Notch7]

Like how you defend having a closed shop policy, they're good at it where trading with third world countries are concerned

Obviously you’ve never heard of Everything But Arms or generalised scheme of preferences.

EBA: “A trade preferential scheme adopted in 2001 for the 49 least developed countries. It grants duty- and quota-free access for almost all products, except arms and ammunition.”

GSP: “The EU’s Generalised Scheme of Preferences (GSP) was first introduced in 1971, with the EU playing a leading role in establishing a policy of unilateral trade preferences for poverty reduction and development that has since been mirrored by most industrialised economies”


heres A tip for you Gant: try learning some facts so you can challenge your prejudices