back to article Galileo, here we go again. My my, the Brits are gonna miss EU

The House of Commons Select Committee for Science and Technology yesterday hauled UK government bigwigs in to explain themselves in light of the latest round of Galileo handbag-swinging. However, anyone hoping to see Minister for Defence Procurement Guto Bebb, Head of Cyber and Space Policy Nick Ayling, or UK Space Agency …

  1. Jess

    Brexit means Brexit

    Who would have thought that becoming a third country means we have to play by the same rules as all other third countries?

    1. ArrZarr Silver badge
      Unhappy

      Re: Brexit means Brexit

      From the leavers opinions, they consider Britian to be such an economic powerhouse that we should get special treatment á la the US and China, being able to keep our fingers in such pies that would be closed to less glorious nations.

      1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

        Re: Brexit means EDF!

        That's the European Defence Force. Which pro-EU types said would never happen, but is. Much to the disappointment of the US. I mean NATO. But we'd still be a part of NATO, and seem to have been invited to participate in the EDF. Which means there'd need to be some co-ordination between multinational EU forces. Even if that means a EUrocrat follows ours along with a pram to make sure their nav toys get put back in it.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          NATO...

          no serious ordnance would rely on Galileo most use a rather nice laser (for INS)

          Galileo works "in combination" with GPS and is rather easy to block again not something you want in modern warfare

          the ONLY good thing is that it increases the accuracy for things like your car, tank and the ambulance Navigation system when NOT at war

          which is pretty important considering the truck that takes sick people to hospital actually SAVES LIVES

          (requires the PRS)

          lets see how the EU gets on when it see's the NATO operations...

          1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

            Re: NATO... And the German car industry.

            the ONLY good thing is that it increases the accuracy for things like your car, tank and the ambulance Navigation system when NOT at war.

            I wonder if leaving the EU means we can have personal tanks? Or even APCs? But I digress. So Galileo always had a bit of a problem of being a solution in search of a problem. Like vehicle navigation. But that's been working just fine using GPS and other systems. So the EU's had goes at promoting road charging, and wouldn't you just know it but Galileo was the solution for that! Meanwhile, Galileo rolled on, absorbing large amounts of money and still being !GPS.

            Of course if the EU waves money at contractors to work on the project, companies will take the pork. But why would we need Galileo, when other alternatives are available and good enough for most government work? Then again, a lot of politicians are easily impressed and not very tech savvy. Easier to say it's like your phone's map, only better! and take the pork than explain stuff like laser gyros or the way an ICBM can see stars.

            1. Roland6 Silver badge

              Re: NATO... And the German car industry.

              >So Galileo always had a bit of a problem of being a solution in search of a problem.

              Err no!

              Galileo was squarely aimed at the growing commercial market for GPS, and thus addressing clear deficiencies in the US military first GPS system. However, given how things have progressed since then, we can ask whether Galileo still has a market.

              Additionally, Galileo was about whether Europe should have a space industry or simply buys in space technology developed elsewhere. To some extent the same applies to why Airbus exists - European aerospace industry; many at the time thought it was just the French being awkward, and not wanting to buy aircraft from Boeing...

              1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

                Re: NATO... And the German car industry.

                Galileo was squarely aimed at the growing commercial market for GPS, and thus addressing clear deficiencies in the US military first GPS system. However, given how things have progressed since then, we can ask whether Galileo still has a market.

                Those questions were asked years ago, not long after the project kicked off. First it was to be a PFI gig, and access sold to willing customers. There were even Enron-like revenue projections, with Enron-style revenue recognition problems. Then it became 'nationalised' and a money pit because despite there only being one true EU, various member states argued, so it was delayed, and the cost grew, and grew.

                Additionally, Galileo was about whether Europe should have a space industry or simply buys in space technology developed elsewhere.

                That kinda happened. So a firm in Surrey built Galileo satellites. The EU member in good standing Switzerland supplied the clocks.. Which started failing. So after 40bn Euros or so of public funding, there's just about a full constellation of partially faulty flying clocks.. With limited possibility of new satellites being funded, or launched from that well-known part of Europe, Guyana.

                Other launch options are now available, especially if you consider the possibility of using lower cost cube-sat designs that could be launched just-in-time, and allow for easier replacement if an enemy has ASATs.. Which for the style of conflicts we've had recently is unlikely. But then those conflicts probably also don't need cm accuracy unless commanders want to make sure their Hesco walls are perfectly square. And if you're delivering 40kt of instant sunshine, +/- a few metres is probably good enough for government work. For other deliveries, it might be nice to know where your missile is, but unless the targets have been thoroughly surveyed, GPS or Galileo won't help you hit them.

                1. HxBro
                  Mushroom

                  Re: NATO... And the German car industry.

                  The question is, will it allow me to get more accurate readings of where the delivery driver is with my latest online purchase, the map usually says they are the other side of town and I'm 75th delivery today, yet when I go to the toilet thinking, "I've got time", as soon as I'm mid flow the door bell goes and it's the delivery driver!

              2. Mike Richards

                Re: NATO... And the German car industry.

                Airbus was originally proposed by Hawker Siddeley, Breguet and Nord to rationalise construction of a single airliner rather than having three competing planes each taking an uneconomically small share of the market. The name itself came from Hawker Siddeley. In 1966, the three founding partners were Sud Aviation (now Aerospatiale), Arbeitsgemeinschaft Airbus (Deutsche Airbus) and HS. The memo of understanding was signed by the UK, France and Germany in 1967.

                The UK then had one of its usual fits of incompetence and withdrew in 1969, fortunately for the sake of UK aerospace, HS was allowed to continue wing design as a partner outside of the formal consortium. The UK rejoined as a formal partner in 1979 when British Aerospace bought a 20% share in the company.

            2. JohnG

              Re: NATO... And the German car industry.

              The fundamental problem with using GPS for anything important is that it is a US military system and the US government/military may decide to turn off the commercial signal locally, regionally or globally, to mitigate some perceived threat. The same can be said of GLONASS.

          2. Lars Silver badge
            Happy

            Re: NATO...

            "Galileo works "in combination" with GPS".

            No it's independent on GPS.

            1. Uffish

              Re: NATO...

              But you could use it in combination with glonass and gps. Might even help with accuracy if things got tricky and all of them were set to random dither mode. Would the average of three falsified positions be closer to the real position? I don't know and I don't care, it's to hot to care.

          3. Chrisni

            Re: NATO...

            Long range ordinance (cruise missles etc) use Satellite based navigation systems for most of the journey (assisted by other onboard systems) before switching to terminal guidance systems.

            You can block satellite navigation signals only over relatively short distances, as it involves literally blasting out static on the same radio frequencies to over-power the signal, so Galileo for military uses is still an important keystone to move EU countries away from solely relying on the US owned GPS system (Russia by contrast has it's own GLONASS system).

          4. Afernie

            Re: NATO...

            "Galileo works "in combination" with GPS and is rather easy to block again not something you want in modern warfare"

            No, you wouldn't want it modern warfare, because it isn't for modern or any other kind of warfare. Galileo is *interoperable* with GPS, GLONASS, etc. It does not rely on GPS, and is not, nor was it ever a military system.

        2. BebopWeBop Silver badge

          Re: Brexit means EDF!

          In the incarnation proposed - supported by the UK - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1032336.stm

        3. Roland6 Silver badge

          Re: Brexit means EDF!

          "That's the European Defence Force. Which pro-EU types said would never happen, but is. Much to the disappointment of the US.",

          Don't see why the US should be disappointed:

          "Recent conflicts in the Balkans have increased pressure, mainly from Washington, on Europe to make greater independent defence provisions."

          [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1032336.stm ]

          1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

            Re: Brexit means EDF!

            Don't see why the US should be disappointed:

            NATO=US+EU. Plus expanded definition of 'North Atlantic' to cover expansion.

            EDF=EU+US, if the US is invited to participate.

            The Balkans isn't necessarily a good example given it included a US commander demanding we attack Russians who'd occupied an airport. Libya may be a better example, ie French lead with the US dragged in under duress. And has left a liberated Libya, free from the tyranny of Gadaffi.. And now back to running slave markets, Barbary style.

          2. Potemkine! Silver badge

            Re: Brexit means EDF!

            Don't see why the US should be disappointed

            1) Because it won't be in charge and won't have a word to say.

            2) Because it will have consequences on materials. If European countries start

            (at last!) to take seriously military matters into their own hands, they will favor buying european stuff rather than american ones. A lot of money won't flow to the US anymore.

      2. TVU Silver badge

        Re: Brexit means Brexit

        "From the leavers opinions, they consider Britian to be such an economic powerhouse that we should get special treatment á la the US and China, being able to keep our fingers in such pies that would be closed to less glorious nations"

        There is this grand delusion going on that the UK still has the British Empire and that it has a huge economy the size of Japan's when the reality is that the UK is in GDP world ranking freefall thanks to Brexit and Leave votes and that it will end in 7th place behind both France and India, i.e. the UK is becoming a less important nation economically.

        The question then becomes, "How will the UK fund this new Galileo me too system?"

        The UK's already spending £110 billion on (Chinese owned) HS2 so the only payment option is yet more of those Brexit magic unicorn currency units.

    2. macjules Silver badge

      Re: Brexit means Brexit

      "Minister for Defence Procurement Guto Bebb"

      Has someone in the House of Commons started using Star Wars names for ministers, by any chance? I think that we should be told.

      1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
        Unhappy

        "Minister for Defence Procurement Guto Bebb"

        Yes I think he's a real person.

        1. hplasm Silver badge
          Holmes

          Re: "Minister for Defence Procurement Guto Bebb"

          "Yes I think he's a real person.

          Jedi or Sith?

          1. WolfFan Silver badge

            Re: "Minister for Defence Procurement Guto Bebb"

            "Yes I think he's a real person.

            Jedi or Sith?

            Gungan.

          2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
            Unhappy

            Re: "Minister for Defence Procurement Guto Bebb" Jedi or Sith?

            He's a politician.

            His allegiance is..... flexible.

          3. weegie38

            Re: "Minister for Defence Procurement Guto Bebb"

            He's a Tory - do you really need to ask?

          4. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: "Minister for Defence Procurement Guto Bebb" / Jedi or Sith?

            currently Humpty-Dumpty, i.e. both (at least until he finds out with absolute certainty, which way the power blows)

        2. Stoneshop Silver badge
          Headmaster

          Re: "Minister for Defence Procurement Guto Bebb"

          Yes I think he's a real person.

          [ ] integer - not a politician

          [ ] complex - a scientist, probably

          [x] real - none of the above

    3. David 164 Bronze badge

      Re: Brexit means Brexit

      Most leavers have low levels of interests in these subjects as a consequence of having a very low level IQ.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Brexit means Brexit

        "Most leavers have low levels of interests in these subjects as a consequence of having a very low level IQ."

        That's not fair. Most gamers know there is a huge difference between intelligence and wisdom.

      2. Polardog

        Re: Brexit means Brexit

        Rubbish, get your head out of your ass.

        can't see this is all bluff and bluster. If it does end up meaning we go our way, so be it. I have every faith our engineers will come up with a quirky British way of doing it and end up being superior, as always.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Brexit means Brexit

          Of course, just unfortunately it won't be built by engineers. It will be built by business. So expect a) design work - that would be BAE outsourced to it's Indian design office. b) Construction - well South Korea are really cheap and they beat Germany so... and c) Launch - North Korea have a few rockets they don't need any more thanks to the orange haired one, and it's near where they are being built, and not forgetting d) management consultancy provided by some superannuated Brexiteer's Cayman Islands tax efficient Irish subsidiary.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Brexit means Brexit

        Most remainers have low levels of interests in these subjects as a consequence of having a very low level IQ.

        FTFY

    4. Hans 1 Silver badge
      Unhappy

      Re: Brexit means Brexit

      Worse off than third countries ... some third countries have agreements in place ... UK? Not one!

      So, at this point, us Brits can do two things:

      1. blame ourselves

      2. blame ourselves

      Brexit referendum that figure had at least halved. Direct job losses would be measured in the hundreds.

      Hundreds of jobs? Why is this even news?

      Airbus: 14 000 DIRECT jobs in the UK, 100 000 more contractors and subcontractors.

      BMW, Honda, Bank of America several 100 thousands of jobs ...

      You lot cry for mere hundreds ?

      Brexit means Brexit means any industry that exports to EU (80% of British exports) will move to EU-land.

      UK-based Rolls-Royce Holdings (aviation engines) can barely compete with CFM, Pratt&Whitney, and GE with EU-based airliners, let alone third countries airlines, how are they gonna cope with tariffs ?

      Us Brits are totally deluded if we think we can survive one minute with 80% of our exports, half of our lucrative banking sector gone to EU-land. It is that serious, Airbus, BMW, and Honda have only come forward now because they did not want to impede the negotiation, but the utterly DELUDED government left them no choice .... you think Airbus, BMW, Honda, etc, etc, etc are happy to have to move their factories onto the continent ? No, but without customs union, that "simply will have to happen".

      Now you are gonna blame the EU, the commission, the European Parliament, the deluded British PM ....

      With Brexit, the UK has no leg to stand on. Brexit means the UK's economy will be worse off than any African economy one can think of ... because you have high wages, no industry, no services no nothing left - guess what, takes an expert to predict that, but experts, who needs experts, we have our national Nigel Farrage, who kepot claiming "Don't listen to experts" - he will make it happen ...

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

      2. Polardog

        Re: Brexit means Brexit

        80% of British exports go to the EU?

        Rubbish, total fabrication.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Brexit means Brexit

          I upvoted, because I took it for sarcasm (or clickbait). If meant as genuine comment, sorry folks. I would hope ALL commentars have got at least 5/10 level of sarcasm on the scales measured, when registered, but...

      3. Polardog

        Re: Brexit means Brexit

        https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmfaff/writev/commonwealth/com04.htm

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Brexit means Brexit

          > https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmfaff/writev/commonwealth/com04.htm

          The only mention of 80% in that, is this line:

          "An overwhelming proportion of the world’s GDP growth between 2003 & 2050 – nearly 80 per cent – will occur outside of Europe, the United States and Canada."

          Doesn't seem relevant?

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Brexit means Brexit

        you forgot all those Japanese car manufacturers, who settled in the UK just because they love and respect the ex-empire so much so they wanted to give us a helping hand and employed thousands in those job-stricken parts of the UK.

    5. Only me!
      Meh

      Re: Brexit means Brexit

      May be it does.....but the EU expect the UK to pay for all the projects they were involved with., so the Eu gets it.....this we pay and get nothing? Leave is leave, but to me leave is take what you paid for.......stay in you keep what you paid for and what you will pay for........mmmm

    6. gypsythief

      Re: Brexit means Brexit

      Who would have thought that becoming a third country

      Who would have thought that becoming a third world country...

      FTFY

      Personally I'm dreading the 10 year recession followed by an irrelevant economy more than the lack of access to Gallileo...

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Brexit means Brexit

        Personally I'm dreading the 10 year recession followed by an irrelevant economy more than the lack of access to Gallileo...

        Well, better leave the EU before it happens, then!

  2. codejunky Silver badge

    Fgs

    Why do we need to make one? The EU want one as they try to appear important or something and not relying on the US one yadda yadda etc. Yes there would be some amusement to put our own up around the same time as their heavily delayed and expensive vanity project but how is it better to send up own own expensive vanity project?

    There would be more value to giving that money back to the economy (reduce tax) and running the country while the EU ignores its crises. If politicians really want to get one over the EU we dont need to make our own satellite system we just need to leave the EU.

    And all of this is over fears of hundreds of jobs. How does that move the needle in an economy with full employment and if remain is to believed foreigners leaving the country (either as minimum wage labour or successful and highly contributing depending on the portrayal).

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Fgs

      How could tax be reduced by not having our own GPS system? This is a new big toy which requires new money.

      The UK could lose 100 here, 14,000 there at Airbus, 100,000 jobs supporting the 14,000, then the car industry and replace it with full employment of Deliveroo drivers but I don't think that'll get the tax receipts back up to where they were, or help the deficit.

      1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

        Re: Fgs

        The UK could lose 100 here, 14,000 there at Airbus, 100,000 jobs supporting the 14,000

        "could" being the word here. The UK is the 8th largest manufacturing economy in the world, it's sad to see people who think that they only way we can create jobs is by waiting from crumbs from the EU's table. With pessimism like that at home we'll be screwed with or without Brexit.

        1. Dan 55 Silver badge

          Re: Fgs

          it's sad to see people who think that they only way we can create jobs is by waiting from crumbs from the EU's table.

          Who's talking about waiting for crumbs from the EU's table (is Airbus is part of the EU?). If you cast your mind back to the news from yesterday, industry has said jobs will be jeopardised if the UK does not stay in the single market and customs union or have some kind of hitherto unknown agreement which looks and works exactly the same yet somehow isn't.

          1. Domquark

            Re: Fgs

            "is Airbus is part of the EU?"

            Sort of, yes. Airbus's majority shareholder is the French Government at 11.1%. Gesellschaft zur Beteiligungsverwaltung is also a major shareholder (11%) and associated with the German Government. So anything the French and German Governments say, Airbus will do.

        2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Fgs

          "The UK is the 8th largest manufacturing economy in the world"

          Currently. But to what extent does that depend on being a member of the EU? Once we aren't in the EU then that component, whether you measure it in jobs or contribution to GDP will be lost. Not necessarily immediately but eventually.

          I assume the Brexit theory is that all that will be replaced and more from the RoTW. Even if it is (a dubious proposition) how long does the theory calculate that will take as opposed to how long it takes the losses to occur?

          1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

            Re: Fgs

            I assume the Brexit theory is that all that will be replaced and more from the RoTW. Even if it is (a dubious proposition)

            Why so? There are 27 other countries in the EU, most smaller than the UK, but 170+ in the RoTW. While many of those 170 are tiny with no money there are plenty which are big enough to be good trade partners.

            You're right, there is a lot we don't know about how things will play out when we're outside the EU, but frankly I'll take my chances on that. I think that staying in the EU and hoping everything will come up roses is an even more dubious proposition, and we have historical evidence to rely on for that.

            I do find it saddening that so many people refuse to even consider that there could be a better future, and are happy to leave everything in the hands of someone else. It's almost a religious attitude, "God (or the EU) will provide, we should be grateful for what we get".

            Sorry, but I don't believe in a benevolent God, nor in a benevolent EU.

            1. Adair

              Re: Fgs

              'I do find it saddening that so many people refuse to even consider that there could be a better future, and are happy to leave everything in the hands of someone else. It's almost a religious attitude' - that may be what you think, but back in reality the vast majority of 'Remainers' harbour no such delusions, they are simply aghast at the stupidity of 'Brexit'.

              'Brexit' - how to leave something functionally useful without a plan, without a clue, and without sufficient support to make it viable without years of backbiting, recrimination, undermining and sullen refusal to co-operate.

              'Brexit' is an object lesson in how not to leave a massive trading bloc in which one has been intricately entwined and involved in running (for some divisive insubstantial nostalgic self-serving dream).

              1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                Re: Fgs

                in reality the vast majority of 'Remainers' harbour no such delusions, they are simply aghast at the stupidity of 'Brexit'.

                Fair enough. The majority of Brexiteers harbour no delusions about the future of the EU, we're simply aghast at the stupidity of Remain.

                1. Adair

                  Re: Fgs

                  'Fair enough. The majority of Brexiteers harbour no delusions about the future of the EU, we're simply aghast at the stupidity of Remain.' - should I assume that you do not understand that 'Brexit' has nothing to do with leaving the EU in a considered, well supported manner involving comprehensive planning and with clear and substantive evidence as to why leaving will be so much better than remaining - that might be a perfectly rational and intelligent thing to do, but we don't know, that discussion and exploration has never been had.

                  So far as I am aware very few 'Remainers' consider the EU perfect, by any stretch of the imagination. They generally seem to feel that there is far more to be gained by constructive membership than by leaving in a chaotic and ignorant manner.

                  1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                    Re: Fgs

                    that 'Brexit' has nothing to do with leaving the EU in a considered, well supported manner involving comprehensive planning and with clear and substantive evidence as to why leaving will be so much better than remaining

                    Ah, you mean the same planning and evidence that we had when the politicians signed us up to the EU in the first place in 1992? "Let's build a political union, it'll be soooo good ".

                    They generally seem to feel that there is far more to be gained by constructive membership

                    They've been singing that song for 25 years, and what did we get? An EU that is ever-more autocratic and suffering more and more under the rise of anti-EU populism, yet the only solution the "constructive membership" can come up with is "we need MORE EUROPE, that will fix everything".

                    The leaders of the EU are deluded autocrats living in denial in their own little world, dreaming of running their European Empire, and completely unable to see that the ordinary people are less and less happy about it. There's nothing constructive in that behaviour.

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Fgs

                "backbiting, recrimination, undermining and sullen refusal to co-operate". Sounds like most Remoaner's attitudes to me.

            2. Giovani Tapini Silver badge

              Re: Fgs

              [Why so? There are 27 other countries in the EU, most smaller than the UK, but 170+ in the RoTW. While many of those 170 are tiny with no money there are plenty which are big enough to be good trade partners.]

              That's all very well, however we will have to jump over about 25% of the planet to get to them. Snubbing our local trading partners.

              You don't see people from Glasgow doing their weekly shop in Bournemouth Tesco for the same reason, even if Petrol is a bargain. The cost of sale (i.e. the benefits of going that far) and the added time & costs of transport make a lot of possible trade unrealistic in practise.

              The art of the possible, has not been translated into the art of the realistic, or likely yet, and I think we still need to harden up for more disappointments to come.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Fgs

                [Caveat - I voted remain rather than for Brexit]

                I don't see that we are snubbing our local trading partners, just that we are democratically choosing not to be part of a future EU superstate - which is the stated goal of some of the significant bureaucrats currently running the E.U, and given that Britain and the EU's desired end goals don't seem to currently align, it is actually right that we are leaving now, even though I'm sure that will be painful in the short term.

                I get that the E.U. wants to make life as painful as possible for Britain in the short term to discourage anyone else from leaving, but I think that this is a high risk strategy, since it makes them seem like thugs, and not many people want to be governed by thugs.

                Wanting to keep satellite tech in the UK is a good thing, so building a alternative to Galileo seems like a reasonable choice, as long as we ensure that the work stays in the UK, except for the launches of course, I would ask Elon to help with those.

                1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
                  Unhappy

                  so building a alternative to Galileo seems like a reasonable choice,

                  Got any idea how many satellites it takes to maintain GPS?

                  How big they are?

                  How much they cost to launch?

                  No?

                  A f**kload of money.

                  A competent undergrad in Applied Physics could whip up a nav system architecture.

                  It's implementation that's a massive PITA.

                  1. imanidiot Silver badge

                    Re: so building a alternative to Galileo seems like a reasonable choice,

                    @John Smith 19

                    GPS uses 24 for full time coverage over the entire globe, the current constellation consists of 30 with a few spares planned to launch in the coming years, in polar orbits, with 3 to 4 per orbit, and orbital planes separated by about 60 degrees. Galileo will also consist of 30 operational sats, in 3 orbital planes. For both of these systems you'd be able to lose about half of them without losing coverage completely. You might have a gap in guidance every now and then, but that's about it.

                    About the size of a smallish bus/largeish van, not including the solar panels but can probably be built smaller

                    Launch costs depends largely on the launch provider. I'd expect to pay something around 15 to 20 million per sat for a launch on SpaceX vehicle. With some smart mission planning you could probably go for a multi-sat launch so you'd need one launcher per orbital plane. If using Ariane, Soyuz or a ULA offering probably about another 5 to 10 million per sat extra. With a similar constellation to Galileo, launch cost could thus be between 450 and 900 million. In other words, not shockingly expensive compared to the rest of the project cost. Not really a fuckload of money for a government nowadays.

                    I agree with the statement on implementation though.

                  2. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: so building a alternative to Galileo seems like a reasonable choice,

                    "Got any idea how many satellites it takes to maintain GPS?"

                    For global coverage, 24 plus spares in orbit - at least 26.

                    "How big they are?"

                    Not very big now.

                    How much they cost to launch?

                    A very rough estimate, 4 satellites plus one launch, circa $500 million

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Fgs

                  "building a alternative to Galileo seems like a reasonable choice, as long as we ensure that the work stays in the UK, except for the launches of course, "

                  Interesting.

                  Replace UK with EU and the above sentence makes a similar amount of sense.

                  Therefore, the EU deleting the non-EU UK from future work on Galileo is the appropriate choice, as well as the choice mandated by the rules the UK insisted on.

                  1. Roland6 Silver badge

                    Re: Fgs

                    >Replace UK with EU and the above sentence makes a similar amount of sense.

                    Not quite, there is one other change, the launches take place from French Guiana, that is considered to be part of the EU. [https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/vat/eu-vat-rules-topic/territorial-status-eu-countries-certain-territories_en ]

                3. Ucalegon

                  Re: Fgs

                  "since it makes them seem like thugs, and not many people want to be governed by thugs"

                  I see your point but in fairness they will merely apply their own rules to the letter. We may feel that to be unfair but merely sticking to your own rules, that we helped write, written before we even had a referendum is not really all that thuggish.

                4. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Fgs

                  while I generally agree with you on all points, including Galileo replacement for the UK (and I also voted remain), there's this issue that the cost of single-handed sat system is going to be a huge financial burden for one country that just broke off a large trading bloc and doesn't have a clue (other than bluffing), how to reinvent itself.

                  Actually, I'm more worried now than 2 years ago, because I have this vague feeling our best pal Trump has settled on a policy of disrupting - everything. Not because he's stupid, but because creating rifts hurts weaker competitors more than it hurts the US. And the UK, on its own, is a weak country, having just got rid of its one and only asset, i.e. EU membership. When (not if, but when) we get no good deal with the US, others, and the EU shows us the middle finger too, less powerful players will watch from the sidelines - and will have taken note when we come to negotiate with them. People who think India or China would WANT to trade with the UK on favourable terms (favourable to us), are truly dilusional, we have NOTHING to offer. Worse still - we have NO PLAN.

              2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                Re: Fgs

                You don't see people from Glasgow doing their weekly shop in Bournemouth Tesco

                No, they do it in Amazon. "the added time & costs of transport make a lot of possible trade unrealistic in practise." - Jeff Bezos seems to disagree.

                1. Philippe

                  Re: Fgs

                  "the added time & costs of transport make a lot of possible trade unrealistic in practise", and this is why Amazon is a logistic powerhouse with distribution centres all over the country.

              3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
                Unhappy

                "You don't see people from Glasgow doing their weekly shop in Bournemouth Tesco "

                There you go again, with you're logic, and you well thought out analogies.

                But Leavers are "Taking back control" and that's far more important for some reason (which they cannot really explain, it just is).

              4. ToddRundgrensUtopia

                Re: Fgs

                No, but you see people from Glasgow and Bouremouth buying their petrol locally when it's produced in Pembrokeshire or Merseyside. Your green beans, usually come from Egypt, Spain, Peru or central america, where is the sense in that from your logic? Oh and when we leave those said beans will be CHEAPER to buy as not covered by the CAP, which fucks over third world producers for EU farmers, nice!

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Fgs

                  Mmm - Glaswegian beans - would those be battered and fried? Might climate have something to do with this? And I didn't realise the CAP subsidised Peruvian bean growers. Maybe they can grow beans cheaply in Peru, but I look forward to buying my Scottish beans for one week of the year at extra expense. Oh wait.. I can't.. there's no one to pick them, and Scotland's independent....

              5. Domquark

                Re: Fgs

                Bull!

                Remember your words when you are having your Tea or Coffee (China/India/Africa/South America/Caribbean). Or a nice bit of chocolate (South America/Africa). Or light your gas fire/cooker (North Sea/Middle East). Or start your petrol/diesel vehicle (The Americas/Africa/Middle East). None of these products come from EU/Europe.

                The UK established trade routes centuries ago with countries all over the planet. Are you seriously suggesting that to recreate a trade route - which began when sail was the only means of propulsion - is impossible nowadays? Absolute rubbish.

            3. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Fgs

              "Sorry, but I don't believe in a benevolent God, nor in a benevolent EU."

              no you believe in a benevolent boris,fartage,cleggy and maybot

              sold on a bed of fucking lies

              1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                Re: Fgs

                no you believe in a benevolent boris,fartage,cleggy and maybot

                Taking the issue seriously, I see.

                sold on a bed of fucking lies

                And you think the EU isn't? Wake up, smell the coffee.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Fgs

                  That would be French coffee.

            4. tiggity Silver badge

              Re: Fgs

              I don't believe in a benevolent EU, but the EU folk (as evidenced in brexit "negotiations") can run rings around the epsilon semi morons in the UK government.

              UK flips (with the odd exception) between Con & Lab control, the benefit of the EU is number of members giving a more moderating effect so get less "extreme" policies due to (semi) consensus system

              So, as an example, we have relatively clean rivers and beaches mainly due to EU regs - with e.g. a government espousing a burn the red tape scenario what would the chances have been of regs that cost industry money (as they cant just flush noxious stuff into the drains) - as that mindset gives no value to clean rivers, wildlife, recreation benefits.

              1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                Re: Fgs

                the benefit of the EU is number of members giving a more moderating effect so get less "extreme" policies due to (semi) consensus system

                Or to put it another way, no-one has actual control so we just get mediocrity and stagnation, since the only thing people can agree on is doing what is "mostly harmless". I don't see that as a positive.

                1. Dr Dan Holdsworth Silver badge

                  Re: Fgs

                  What we get from the EU is actually slightly worse than this. The EU's lawmaking process is slightly corrupt in that anyone with deep enough pockets can covertly influence lawmakers there. This has already been done, to the extent that EU law favours large companies over smaller ones.

                  Since as anyone with the slightest knowledge of how an economy grows can tell you that most economic growth comes from small companies growing into slightly larger small companies, then any legal framework that disadvantages the small fry still further is going to have an inhibitory effect on economic growth.

                  This is already happening right across the EU, hence economic growth is stalling everywhere. When Britain leaves, the EU's central command will aim to make up the funding shortfall not by cutting their outgoings, but by levying a tax. This will stall growth still further. Put simply, the EU is showing every sign of descending into a long, slow and drawn-out death of its own making.

                  1. Rob D.
                    FAIL

                    Re: Fgs

                    @Dr Dan H

                    > This is already happening right across the EU, hence economic growth is stalling everywhere ... the EU is showing every sign of descending into a long, slow and drawn-out death of its own making.

                    BS called - https://data.oecd.org/chart/5dnL. That's the OECD data on the EU 28 and if facts count in this debate, rather than made up stuff to suit whatever crud is being trucked out today, it's pretty obvious that growth rates across the EU are broadly unchanged over the last few years - not stellar and with some struggling, but generally steady after recovering from the 2008 crash era

                    Oh, and almost at the bottom of the pile for the last couple of years - the glorious United Kingdom. No idea why that could be happening though but maybe that same forensic, analytical approach could be applied to determine if it's actually the UK looking more like it is heading for a long, drawn out something (decline rather than death) of its own making.

                    1. codejunky Silver badge

                      Re: Fgs

                      @ Rob D.

                      "it's pretty obvious that growth rates across the EU are broadly unchanged over the last few years - not stellar and with some struggling, but generally steady after recovering from the 2008 crash era

                      Oh, and almost at the bottom of the pile for the last couple of years - the glorious United Kingdom. No idea why that could be happening though"

                      I can answer that. When the recession hit the UK and US reacted to it, the EU didnt. The US and UK bounced out of recession, the EU started doing anything when they were almost in deflation. The US and UK have full employment and are growing based on the current capabilities in this world, while the EU is trying to catch itself up and trying to fix its economy.

                      The result is that the EU has a load of unemployed they made unemployed and of course will grow as those people get back into work. We could have EU growth rates, but first we must put a lot of people out of work and trash our economy.

                      1. Rob D.
                        Facepalm

                        Re: Fgs

                        > I can answer that.

                        Please do because you didn't, instead choosing to point out what was happening in other countries which is nice for them but doesn't explain our declining GDP growth prospects.

                        EU countries may have pulled out of recession slower, but they are now in a more normal growth range, not some abnormally inflated post-recession bounce kind of growth. So why, with our primary export market in an improved but normal state of growth and the UK economy already in decent shape come 2016, is the UK economy now at the bottom end of the range?

                        Hint: It isn't rocket science and something happened in 2016.

                        1. codejunky Silver badge

                          Re: Fgs

                          @ Rob D.

                          "Please do because you didn't, instead choosing to point out what was happening in other countries which is nice for them but doesn't explain our declining GDP growth prospects."

                          ohhh you missed it. Thats probably because your expecting it to be doom, gloom, AHHHHH. It is not. Let me point you to it- "The US and UK have full employment and are growing based on the current capabilities in this world". That is why US/UK growth is slow.

                          "EU countries may have pulled out of recession slower, but they are now in a more normal growth range"

                          Which is a problem. They should be in rocket fuelled, someone put a firework up their ass, amazing growth. They have a lot of people put out of work and unable to get into work and we are a decade on from the recession! That is abysmal and its a good job the US and UK didnt go through that. Everyone they add the workforce should improve their growth and yet they have loads of unemployed and low growth. That is pathetic mismanagement and nothing but mismanagement is to blame (the EU were slow to react to the recession).

                          "So why, with our primary export market in an improved but normal state of growth and the UK economy already in decent shape come 2016, is the UK economy now at the bottom end of the range?"

                          Full employment, wage rises, inflation, an economy returning to normal. That is why. Because we are restoring back to normal after the largest recession since the 1930's. If you think we are in bad shape you must think the EU is almost dead in the water.

                      2. Anonymous Coward
                        Anonymous Coward

                        Re: Fgs

                        We could have EU growth rates, but first we must put a lot of people out of work and trash our economy. Ahh the Maggie Thatcher option. Yay. Let's do that! It seems to be likely to work. Once Airbus, Jaguar, BMW and the City have gone, any way will be up.

                  2. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Fixed that for you

                    The UK''s lawmaking process is slightly corrupt in that anyone with deep enough pockets can covertly influence lawmakers there. This has already been done, to the extent that UK law favours large companies over smaller ones.

            5. John Smith 19 Gold badge
              FAIL

              we don't know..how..things will play out when..outside the EU, but..I'll take my chances on that.

              And you thought every other man, woman and child in the UK would be OK with that as well.

              I'm sure they will all thank you in the years to come.

              No doubt all Leave voters will proudly state "Yes, I did my bit" (to drop the £ Vs the Euro by 8.75%, and drop the UK economy in the s**t).

              Or maybe you'll just slink away, realizing you've been played like "A banjo at an Ozark hoedown"

              1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

                Re: we don't know.how.things will play out when.outside the EU, but.I'll take my chances on that.

                No doubt all Leave voters will proudly state "Yes, I did my bit"

                I doubt it. You'll more likely find that nobody actually voted leave and the referendum outcome is explained away as a strange statistical anomaly.

            6. Len Silver badge
              Meh

              Re: Fgs

              Of course there are plenty of trading partners in the RotW that are potentially worth trading with. The problem is that the UK is not very good at making stuff that other people want to buy, hence our massive trade deficit.

              Some of the world's biggest exporters (Germany, France, Netherlands, Italy) are part of the EU and benefit from the many hundreds of trade agreements that the EU has with RotW countries. Germany and China have a 'special relationship' based on the massive mutual trade between the two.

              If one were to create an ideal strategy to leave the UK one would first turn the UK into an exporting powerhouse that outperforms the Germany, France, Netherlands, Italy etc. and only then decide to go it alone. It would then be able to try and negotiate new trade deals from a position of strength, instead of the current position of weakness.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Fgs

                The problem is that the UK is not very good at making stuff that other people want to buy,

                That must be why it's top export partners are the US and Germany. Incidentally the UK is Germany's 3rd-largest export market (same value as China) so there's plenty of good reasons to maintain that trade as well.

                1. Rob D.
                  Facepalm

                  Re: Fgs

                  > there's plenty of good reasons to maintain that trade as well

                  This is true. And in the same breath, how much of Germany's business relies on export to other EU countries and export/import to/from non-EU countries? Germany's leaders and business leaders have already acknowledged multiple times that Brexit will hurt Germany, but nowhere near an extent that means Germany will not protect the integrity of the EU as an economic and political organisation even at the expense of German business with the UK.

                  More generally UK exports to the EU are about 12-15% of our economy, while exports to the UK from the EU are about 3% (might have been 4%), so even in the EU, Germany's influence in protecting Germany's self-interest with UK trade will only go so far anyway.

                  This is not a game of pick one anti-EU/pro-Brexit factoid and assume that it is the trump card to all the other issues that all the EU countries are weighing up. The fact is that it doesn't matter how much trade Germany does with the UK - the UK leaving will be damaging to both Germany and the EU but the damage is less important than protecting the EU for the remaining 27.

                  1. Dan 55 Silver badge

                    Re: Fgs

                    Taking gold and services out of the equation, UK physical exports to the EU are estimated to be 50% of all of the UK's physical exports. If the UK is not in the single market and customs union, that's going to be quite a hit.

                    Revealed: How gold takes the shine off Britain's trade figures

            7. Philippe

              Re: Fgs

              Trade doesn't work on number of countries but share of world trade of these countries.

              The EU has free trade agreements in place with 72 countries representing 75% of global trade. We're losing access to all that, if and when we leave the EU.

              It will take years to rebuild it. Nobody is saying it's impossible, we're just saying that the negative impact will be felt instantly and the positive one will take years to materialise, maybe about a generation.

              The EU has got its fair share of issues but we know how to navigate them, the other guys, not so much.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Fgs

                The EU has free trade agreements in place with 72 countries representing 75% of global trade. We're losing access to all that, if and when we leave the EU.

                We don't lose access to any of it, we just have to do business under WTO rules until (and if) we want to negotiate other deals. Contrary to many people's belief, WTO exists to facilitate trade, not to prevent it, and the default tariff levels are far from prohibitive. The only business that we may lose is that with EU countries, since the EU will take steps to make UK trade as expensive and difficult as it can, so that Bexit fails. It will be interesting to see how, say, German car workers react to that if they lose one of their biggest export markets because of the EU. Popcorn time...

                1. Rob D.

                  Re: Fgs

                  > It will be interesting to see how, say, German car workers react to that if they lose one of their biggest export markets because of the EU.

                  Where does this myth that German car workers somehow believe the UK is more important than the EU come from? If we think the great UK public was even passingly informed about Brexit before the actual vote, you can bet your bottom euro that German car workers are pretty well aware of what happens if/when the UK leaves and why their corporate leaders are basically saying the EU is more important than the UK.

                  Germany exports about 1 in 7 of the cars it makes to the UK. Post-Brexit, absent a relevant deal, tariffs could kick in meaning that Germany will still export about 1 in 7 of its cars to the UK initially, and anyone buying one in the UK will pay the extra on the purchase price. While cars made in the UK will cost more in the EU as well as more to make in the UK.

                  What exactly are car workers in Sunderland, Coventry, Luton and other factories saying about Brexit now? They are the ones in the firing line, not the German car workers.

                  1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

                    Re: Fgs

                    Germany exports about 1 in 7 of the cars it makes to the UK. Post-Brexit, absent a relevant deal, tariffs could kick in

                    Except that it would then switch to exporting cars to the UK from its US plants.

                    Or was Britain's plan to introduce 25% tariffs on American imports as part of the goal of global free trade

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Fgs

                  >It will be interesting to see how, say, German car workers react to that if they lose one of their biggest export markets because of the EU. Popcorn time...

                  The rate of increase in the Chinese market is greater than the overall UK market.

                  The UK is still a valuable market, but Volkswagen sold ~200,000 cars in the UK in 2017. It sold more than 460,000 in December 2017 in China - an annual increase of 17% (from 3.9m to 4.1m = ~200,000).

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: Fgs

                    I imagine if I was a German car worker, I'd rather Brexit hadn't happened. I might be annoyed at not selling my BMW to the UK (assuming anyone in the UK has a job and the wheelbarrow to cart the devalued £ to the dealer). I would probably console myself with a) selling cars to Belgium rather than letting them buy Sunderland built Nissan b) learning Chinese and get in there before we finish working out where Boris is hiding this week and c) selling off my UK plants to a spiv who will asset strip it, bankrupt it and leave the government to pick up the pensions (c.f. Rover etc)

                3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
                  Unhappy

                  It will be interesting to see how, say, German car workers react

                  Since the UK's about 6.73% of the rest of the EU's turnover , while the EU is 50% of the UK's export I'd say the German auto workers won't really give a f**k.

                  The British auto workers OTOH may give a f**k.

              2. JohnG

                Re: Fgs

                "The EU has free trade agreements in place with 72 countries representing 75% of global trade."

                Are you sure? I counted 35 FTAs in force and those include territories like "Akrotiri and Dhekelia" (British bases in Cyprus), "EU's Overseas Countries and Territories", "Palestinian Authority", etc. There's no way that these 35 add up to 70% of global trade. I'm fairly sure that the trade of USA, China, Japan and Hong Kong add up to over 25% of global trade and the EU doesn't have FTAs with any of them.

            8. Rob D.
              Thumb Down

              Re: Fgs

              > I do find it saddening that so many people refuse to even consider that there could be a better future, and are happy to leave everything in the hands of someone else.

              I do find it saddening that some people are unable to recognise that rationally pointing out the impending harm for the country as a direct, predictable and unavoidable result of Brexit in the planned form (sign A.50 ASAP to avoid what happens when the blather is seen through, then see if we can cobble together some fantasy that the EU will buy in to as a favour to the special UK within the two years available) is not the same as giving up trying to get people to see sense.

              Let's start with the economic impact of geographically close markets versus geographicaly remote markets, the various studies in this area (go find them, there are plenty to read or listen to, but start with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_geography if unsure or try the LSE), the nature of trade deals and trading regions, and the reasons why the bulk of economic opinion is indicating that trade with RotW will not mitigate the impact of leaving the EU, unless either we have the kind of economic collaboration of a Norway-model (and stop being so Middle England about it all) or don't bother leaving the EU on these terms.

              Or we can spit the dummy again about not getting what we want when we ask for fantasy stuff or when anyone points out what is really going to happen, eventually leave, then negotiate a Norway-style trade agreement with the EU in a few years time after our economy has lagged by a few percentage points, our stock has gone down a bit for negotiation, and the EU federalists have run riot absent the UK to moderate.

            9. MonkeyCee Silver badge

              Re: Fgs

              "Why so? There are 27 other countries in the EU, most smaller than the UK, but 170+ in the RoTW. While many of those 170 are tiny with no money there are plenty which are big enough to be good trade partners."

              Indeed, but since 163 of those countries have trade agreements with the EU, we are ALREADY trading with them.

              So unless those last 7 are going to be a major change, no real factor there.

              Now if EU regulations/trade agreements are preventing some massive trading advantage, I'd love to hear it. But all I've seen are some fairly petty suggestions, minor agriculture isn't going to make much difference.

              But once we leave the EU, we no longer have those trade agreements. So we have to negotiate with each and every one of them. If you think the EU negotiations are hard (and whining about EU playing hardball is ludicrous) wait until the USA and China start in on us.

              And you can't blame the EU for it either (I know this is the norm) as they have been quite happy to just carve off a UK sized chunk of the current trade agreements, and everyone keeps the current arrangements. Turns out that no-one else at the WTO agrees.

            10. phuzz Silver badge

              Re: Fgs

              "Sorry, but I don't believe in a benevolent God, nor in a benevolent EU."

              Instead you believe that the rest of the world will be benevolent.

              At least with the EU we know we're going to get, for example, contracts to build Galileo satellites because we're helping to pay for it. There's not much chance of getting a contract to build GPS or Beidou satellites, and that low chance doesn't go up if we leave the EU.

            11. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: Fgs

              "I do find it saddening that so many people refuse to even consider that there could be a better future, and are happy to leave everything in the hands of someone else."

              Isn't that exactly what you're doing where "someone else" is ToTW?

              The really saddening thing that so many people refuse to consider that as long as we're a member of the EU the EU isn't actually "someone else", it's something of which we're a part.

              We shouldn't really be looking at the EU as a trading partner but, for any large and many specialist small businesses, as the home market. The disruption of losing such a great proportion of their home market is such that many businesses are likely to go down the tubes or relocate before they can benefit from any great bonanza the RoTW could provide.

            12. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Fgs

              > God (or the EU) will provide, we should be grateful for what we get

              The irony being, of course, that the UK used to be a major policy maker in the EU and have been decisive in shaping much of EU law.

            13. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Fgs

              Oh yes - all those countries in the 'Rest of the World' that we can do deals with... oh wait, I just meant the big countries....and of course they will give us great trade deals.. so so much better than the trade deals that we already get by being members of the EU... beautiful beautiful trade deals

              For our top 50 trading partners - 18 are EU countries, one is EEA and one is in a customs union with the EU. That leaves 30 counties - 22 of which have, or are negotiating, trade deals with the EU. We might get similar deals, we are really unlikely to get better deals (because might means muscle). That leaves 8 great trade deals with countries that we do 15% of our trade with. But hey, the world loves Burberry and Werthers Originals, so it will all work ou fine.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Fgs

                >Instead it's a Ponzi scheme where the new entrants pay the pensions for the old ones. That sort of system always has problems as membership changes.

                The world might love Werther's Originals, but they are German - manufactured in Halle and headquartered in Berlin.

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Fgs

                  The world might love Werther's Originals, but they are German - manufactured in Halle and headquartered in Berlin.

                  I think we could have guessed that from the name, but what has it to do with MEP pension schemes?

            14. This post has been deleted by its author

          2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
            Coat

            I assume the Brexit theory is that all that will be replaced and more from the RoTW.

            Oh it won't be a problem.

            The (rest of the) EU only takes 50% of the UK's exports.

            <bj>

            Replacing that if the swinny Eurcrats cut up rough will be child's play to the country of <list of various British achievements>

            </bj>

        3. Chuunen Baka

          Re: Fgs

          The UK has become increasingly reliant on inward investment. Johnny Foreigner builds stuff here for, yes, a large internal market but also to export to Europe. That investment is stalling, multi-nationals are relocating to Euroland. Manufacturing is a global concern and will decline in an insular UK.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Fgs

            That investment is stalling, multi-nationals are relocating to Euroland.

            No actually, much as the Guardian would like to believe so that isn't actually happening. There has been a drop in immediate new investment due to the uncertainty over Brexit, that is normal, but no significant disinvestment yet.

            1. Dan 55 Silver badge

              Re: Fgs

              There has been a drop in immediate new investment due to the uncertainty over Brexit, that is normal, but no significant disinvestment yet.

              For Brexit Tories, the hard border is too hard a question

              By the end of last year, OECD figures show foreign direct investment down by half on the average seen from 2012 to 2015 and by 90% on the bumper inflow of funds seen in 2016.

          2. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: Fgs

            @ Chuunen Baka

            "That investment is stalling"

            Sorry but I have to chop off that bollocks there-

            http://www.continentaltelegraph.com/economy/the-uk-moves-into-the-wider-world/

            Or as Roland6 would point to-

            https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/03/uk-inward-investment-is-at-a-record-high-so-why-has-almost-no-one-reported-it/

            https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jun/11/germany-france-uk-foreign-investment-brexit-ey

            https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/04/07/why-foreign-investment-into-britain-remains-so-strong

            *Roland6 I am assuming you are ok with me sharing the links you provided from the other topic.

            1. Roland6 Silver badge

              Re: Fgs

              @codejunky - re: link sharing - yes I'm okay as the figures and analysis do make interesting reading.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Fgs

              Foreign investment in Britain is strong because the pound is weak. I wonder why?

          3. John Smith 19 Gold badge

            That investment is stalling, multi-nationals are relocating to Euroland.

            Of which the UK is working very hard to no longer be a part of.

            Funny how this works, isn't it?

          4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: Fgs

            " Johnny Foreigner builds stuff here for, yes, a large internal market but also to export to Europe."

            Close but not close enough. For stuff built in the UK as a member of the EU, the EU is the internal market.

        4. MonkeyCee Silver badge

          Re: Fgs

          "The UK is the 8th largest manufacturing economy in the world"

          It was the 7th in 2015. 8th in 2017. $555 Bn to $480 Bn in two years.

          Now, what major political decision happened then?

          For comparison France went from $455 Bn to $500 Bn and Germany went from $982 Bn to $1100 Bn in the same time frame.

          The way you have manufacturing jobs is being part of an integrated supply chain and being the best at what you do.

          Since being in the EU based supply chain requires being in either the single market, the EUCU or a CU for the goods in question. None of which appear to be on offer from either of the political parties.

          Oh, and while we sell 50% of goods to the EU, we sell 80% of our services there. If we can't agree on goods, no way will we agree on services.

        5. David 164 Bronze badge

          Re: Fgs

          Then the UK will need to invest tens of billions in all type of manufacturing projects because that the only way government can make sure the money is invested in the UK and in the areas it wants in the UK and not shuffle off to some offshore tax haven.

          Investing on such a scale goes against every instinct the Tories have.

        6. Dr_N Silver badge

          Re: Fgs

          >The UK is the 8th largest manufacturing economy in the world,

          But after the first 5 there's a reeeeeeeeal big drop off.

          1. Roland6 Silver badge

            Re: Fgs

            >But after the first 5 there's a reeeeeeeeal big drop off.

            According to this HMG briefing paper (interesting read), I would have put the "reeeeeeeeal big drop off" after the first 2...

            http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN05809/SN05809.pdf

          2. rmason Silver badge

            Re: Fgs

            @Dr_N

            Indeed.

            We were the seventh largest pre 2016.

            Go GB!

        7. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Fgs

          > The UK is the 8th largest manufacturing economy in the world

          For now. And that's having access to the largest¹ market in the world.

          ¹ By some measures.

        8. HolySchmoley

          Re: Fgs

          "it's sad to see people who think that they only way we can create jobs is by waiting from crumbs from the EU's table."

          Absolutely!

          We ('we'?) can also wait for crumbs from China's, India's, Brazil's, Mexico's... *all* the tables that drop crumbs for the sort of manufacturing powerhouse that a certain Iron Lady sacrificed for 'service' industries'.

        9. Hans 1 Silver badge
          Facepalm

          Re: Fgs

          "could" being the word here.

          If the UK is in the customs union OR UK strikes a deal with the EU (which the EU DOES NOT WANT, WHY WOULD THEY ????) You are right ... guess what ? UK does not want customs union and the EU does not want a deal - why ? because EU lose if they enter a deal and UK are a bunch of arrogant idiots who think all their is due. Crikey, I thought bone was thick ....

      2. codejunky Silver badge

        Re: Fgs

        @ Dan 55

        "How could tax be reduced by not having our own GPS system? This is a new big toy which requires new money."

        It requires paying for to build it. Now or later there is the requirement to pay up. Take the value of that and reduce taxation by about it and it returns the money to the economy. Considering the UK takes a very large portion of the economy in tax there is certainly room to reduce what it takes.

        @ }{amis}{

        "There is not much point in having a nuclear arsenal if we can only aim it when the yanks say its ok."

        I do agree that seems to be the wet dream the EU is having but that is the same collection of countries crying because Trump expects them to meet their obligations for defence and not to rely on the US to keep the children safe. It would be amusing watching the EU try to tackle a military force without the approval of the yanks, quite simply the EU's dream of being big or important is as amusing as the child wearing a cape. As soon as they pissed off the Russians the EU ran crying to the US and that is unlikely to change any time soon (EU will probably have collapsed before then).

        @ Phil O'Sophical

        "it's a useful bargaining position"

        I did not think of that possibility! Nice catch. Not sure it will be good enough to deal with the EU's nose cutting exercise but interesting idea.

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Fgs

          EU's nose cutting exercise? Have you got a mirror handy?

          1. codejunky Silver badge
            FAIL

            Re: Fgs

            @ Doctor Syntax

            "EU's nose cutting exercise? Have you got a mirror handy?"

            No they have borrowed it

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Fgs

          >It requires paying for to build it. Now or later there is the requirement to pay up. Take the value of that and reduce taxation by about it and it returns the money to the economy. Considering the UK takes a very large portion of the economy in tax there is certainly room to reduce what it takes.

          You are not getting it. This is a new toy. Taxes would need to be raised to pay for it (or money borrowed), but not having it would not result in lower taxes. Much like the Brexit Bonanza for the BHS, the Armed Forces, Police, etc, etc, etc.

          1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
            Unhappy

            Much like the Brexit Bonanza for the NHS, the Armed Forces, Police, etc, etc, etc.

            And rocking horse droppings. And stripey paint..

        3. HolySchmoley

          Re: Fgs

          "... because Trump expects them to meet their obligations for defence and not to rely on the US to keep the children safe"

          Ah! That's why DT's doing it - to keep the children safe! Nothing to do with an adolescent ego after all!

          1. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: Fgs

            @ HolySchmoley

            "Ah! That's why DT's doing it - to keep the children safe! Nothing to do with an adolescent ego after all!"

            Actually the US (before Trump) did it to create a border against the communists. Those guys that were worse than Hitler and made their peoples lives so hard, assuming they lived.

            Trump said the US cannot be expected to stump up all the cost of that protection we still like to have in place for mutual safety of Europe. He probably said it partly due to his ego but also because certain NATO members have been failing to meet their obligations.

            "Where the UK leads the EU might follow. Maybe."

            That is actually one of the existential crises that EU presidents are aware of! Brexit could cause others to leave too and possibly break up the EU.

        4. HolySchmoley

          Re: Fgs

          "... the EU's nose cutting exercise"

          Where the UK leads the EU might follow. Maybe.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Fgs

        But at least Johnny Foreigner will be gone, which is what Brexit is all about.

    2. }{amis}{ Silver badge
      Headmaster

      Re: Fgs

      Why do we need to make one?

      The same reason why we went with the French and chipped in with Galileo in the first place.

      There is not much point in having a nuclear arsenal if we can only aim it when the yanks say its ok.

      1. Thoguht Silver badge

        Re: Fgs

        There is not much point in having a nuclear arsenal if we can only aim it when the yanks say its ok.

        Actually Galileo only operates by the consent of the US military. If they say turn it off, it has to be turned off otherwise they reserve the right to take out the constellation.

        Strictly speaking, it also only operates by the consent of the Chinese military due to international RF spectrum allocation rules.

        1. S4qFBxkFFg

          Re: Fgs

          "Actually Galileo only operates by the consent of the US military. If they say turn it off, it has to be turned off otherwise they reserve the right to take out the constellation."

          This is WAY out there (and not just literally) - see https://allthingsnuclear.org/lgrego/does-a-high-altitude-asat-test-make-sense

          Navigational satellites are extremely valuable - "taking out" someone else's invites them to immediately do unto your own satellites (the capability to launch one is not that far removed from the capability to shoot one down). Even if there is no retaliation, you really don't want debris in those nice high orbits.

          I honestly think the US would consider using nuclear weapons on someone before they try shooting at Galileo (or GLONASS/Beidou).

          1. Thoguht Silver badge

            Re: Fgs

            This is WAY out there

            You can quote all the random websites you want, but this is settled US policy and has been for decades. In practice of course they would try jamming first if the EU doesn't comply as it's a lot cheaper than a missile, but nevertheless it is a fact that the US reserves the right to destroy any navigational aids, satellite based or not, if they are being used by an enemy.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Fgs

              "You can quote all the random websites you want, but this is settled US policy and has been for decades. In practice of course they would try jamming first if the EU doesn't comply as it's a lot cheaper than a missile, but nevertheless it is a fact that the US reserves the right to destroy any navigational aids, satellite based or not, if they are being used by an enemy."

              On the other hand, they probably don't have a large stock of anti-satellite missiles, and priority is likely to be given to hostile reconnaissance and intelligence satellites, which are both an immediate threat and generally in lower, easier to reach orbits.

              The initial (and possibly only) attacks against a GNSS are likely to be jamming, spoofing, and strikes on ground based communication and control installations.

          2. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Fgs

            By initiating a military space command Trump has already started on this.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Fgs

          "Galileo only operates by the consent of the US military. If they say turn it off, it has to be turned off otherwise they reserve the right to take out the constellation."

          I think the USA backed away from that position and now retain the right to jam Galileo locally/regionally (but not within the EU).

      2. Dr Stephen Jones

        Re: Fgs

        Are you expecting us to be at war with the USA any time soon?

        If so Galileo is worth every penny.

        1. James Ashton

          Re: Fgs

          Are you expecting us to be at war with the USA any time soon?

          The issue is not being at war with the US but being at war with someone with whom the US doesn't want you to be at war. Remember the Suez Crisis or, more recently, if the US was feeling more pro-Argentina and less pro-UK than in the 80s. Having Galileo means there's one less rug the US can threaten to pull out from under the EU in the future.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Fgs

            " if the US was feeling more pro-Argentina and less pro-UK than in the 80s"

            In fact, there was a pro-UK and a pro-Argentina faction in the US State department. In the end the latter group won, but it could well have gone the other way.

            In that case, the UK would not have received upgraded Sidewinders, and Argentinia would probably have got both the better missiles and the instructions for properly fusing their bombs for low level attacks. Most of the bombs that hit British ships supporting the landing did not explode, for lack of those technical details, and the missile upgrade may have been a major factor in UK success in air to air combat as only the upgraded missiles had all aspect homing.

            Similarly refueling and basing would likely have not been granted.

          2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

            Re: Fgs

            "Remember the Suez Crisis or, more recently, if the US was feeling more pro-Argentina and less pro-UK than in the 80s."

            FWIW, it took some arm twisting to get the US to let us use their airbase on our island of Ascension. They were initially refusing to allow access until Maggie twisted Ronnies arm by basically saying "it's OUR fscking island"

        2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Fgs

          "Are you expecting us to be at war with the USA any time soon?"

          With an increasingly isolationist USA it's not unreasonable to consider that we (or the EU) could be at war without them.

        3. David 164 Bronze badge

          Re: Fgs

          Trump is already launch trade wars with everyone in the world. An he hardly a person we can rely on for anything.

      3. idiotsavant

        Re: Fgs

        You don't need GPS to aim nuclear missiles. They typically use a combination of inertial guidance and star sighting. So we can still nuke people after Brexit, even if the US says no! Of course, if relations got that bad the USN would be shadowing our missile boats from the minute they left Faslane and could likely just sink them.

        From the Wikipedia page on the Trident navigation system:

        "It is an Inertial Guidance System with an additional Star-Sighting system (this combination is known as astro-inertial guidance), which is used to correct small position and velocity errors that result from launch condition uncertainties due to errors in the submarine navigation system and errors that may have accumulated in the guidance system during the flight due to imperfect instrument calibration. GPS has been used on some test flights but is assumed not to be available for a real mission. "

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Fgs

          You don't need GPS to aim nuclear missiles.

          Even if you did the civilian accuracy is plenty good enough, it's not like 100m either way will make much difference. The military precision is more useful for things like drones.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Fgs

            "Even if you did the civilian accuracy is plenty good enough, it's not like 100m either way will make much difference. The military precision is more useful for things like drones."

            The controller of any GNSS can introduce random or systematic errors in the timing signals or satellite locations, while leaving the encrypted military signal accurate. A 500 m miss against a nuclear hardened military target is a miss.

            Sloppy targeting use useful for city busting, less so for a number of other targets like C&C facilities and launch silos.

        2. JohnMurray

          Re: Fgs

          Pretty sure that if the "red button" is pressed, without approval of the yanks, a little sign will pop-up: "please speak nicely to POTUS"

      4. tiggity Silver badge

        Re: Fgs

        Anything that reduces the chance of UK launching its (admittedly fairly feeble) nukes is a good thing IMHO

      5. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Fgs

        "There is not much point in having a nuclear arsenal if we can only aim it when the yanks say its ok."

        In the event of a real war GPS would be one of the first things to get knocked out. Our weapons system uses inertial guidance and star sighting not GPS and they can be launched / targetted independently by each boat even if the entire UK was destroyed.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Fgs

          So - we obviously aren't going to nuke Russia, USA, France or China (suicidal) so who are we going to nuke? Surely we aren't going to nuke a non-nuke power, I think that's sort of not allowed? But knowing that, when I'm a cloud of radioactive dust drifting gently on the jet stream, my country is going to make sure a few billion other people have a quick and painless death in a nuclear fireball because we have star sights makes me feel so much better.

          I have always dearly hoped that the nukes are actually inflatable dummies, and the money used by the Admiralty to finance their coke and hookers habits, because once we use them, we have so lost.

      6. Stoneshop Silver badge
        Boffin

        Re: Fgs

        There is not much point in having a nuclear arsenal if we can only aim it when the yanks say its ok.

        With nuclear stuff I doubt that it would matter much if one was a couple of miles off, and as it would probably trigger MAD (from more than two adversaries, as it is now) there's not that much need for extreme precision anyway. The US and USSR managed fine (for particular values of 'fine') without GPS precision for decades that way.

        It's the conventional guided missiles that you want to fly in the bathroom window, then down the stairs and into the storage cupboard that need it.

        1. Pedigree-Pete
          Joke

          Re: Fgs

          @Stoneshop "fly in the bathroom window, then down the stairs and into the storage cupboard that need it." you're trying to kill that Leopard I was advised to beware of....PP

      7. Fibbles

        Re: Fgs

        There is not much point in having a nuclear arsenal if we can only aim it when the yanks say its ok.

        The nukes are on ICBMs. That's Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile. I'm all for our own GPS system but the nukes don't require it.

    3. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      Re: Fgs

      Why do we need to make one?

      We don't, but if we can put together a credible plan showing that it's possible to do so, with newer technology, in about the same timeframe as Galileo, it's a useful bargaining position. Something along the lines of "you can be petty and exclude us, but it's pointless, we can do it ourselves. Wouldn't it make more sense to work together?".

      1. johnaaronrose

        Re: Fgs

        The assumption that Galileo will be put back by approx 5 years due to Britain leaving the EU is an assumption based on no evidence.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Fgs

          "The assumption that Galileo will be put back by approx 5 years due to Britain leaving the EU is an assumption based on no evidence."

          Given that Galileo is only a couple of satellites short of a full constellation launched, I suspect it is another UK-centric delusion.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Fgs

          "The assumption that Galileo will be put back by approx 5 years due to Britain leaving the EU is an assumption based on no evidence."

          Within the Galileo programme, there was some confusion about the "Brexit clauses", introduced into the draft contracts by the EC, shortly after the Brexit vote i.e. can we award contracts to British companies or not? The EC gave a clarification in the negative early this year. The problem is that the incumbent British suppliers for certain contracts have considerable unique experience and this would not be quickly replaced in other EU27 suppliers. EU27 suppliers would not be able to simply employ the British employees formerly working for British companies because their EU clearances would no longer be valid after Brexit.

          Worse still, Galileo currently has some serious problems relating to security and many of the people/companies engaged in addressing these issues are British.

      2. Pen-y-gors Silver badge

        Re: Fgs

        @Phil O'Sophical

        if we can put together a credible plan showing that it's possible to do so, with newer technology, in about the same timeframe as Galileo, it's a useful bargaining position.

        That's an amazingly big IF! A credible plan from the UK government? They have demonstrated time and time again they are incapable of a credible plan for going to buy a Mars bar at the Spar on the corner.

        And with new technology? That would be the wheel, I assume?

        In the same time-frame as Galileo? Or possibly by 2134.

        1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: Fgs

          That's an amazingly big IF! A credible plan from the UK government?

          True, although I'd hope that industry with a financial stake in the game would provide direction.

          They have demonstrated time and time again they are incapable of a credible plan for going to buy a Mars bar at the Spar on the corner.

          Their usual plan for that is "send someone to do it, we'll pay". Works for me.

          And with new technology? That would be the wheel, I assume?

          Galileo was designed over 10 years ago, and is already many years late. A lot has moved on in space technology since then, as the boys in Surrey can tell you. Add that to launches via Space-X instead of Ariane and you have plenty of scope for new and cheaper technology. Stop being so glass-half-empty!

          1. keith_w

            Re: Fgs

            This assumes that the US will allow Space-X to launch your satellites for you. It may be necessary to build a British launch facility near the equator - possibly Belize (formerly British Honduras), which could use the investment.

            1. WolfFan Silver badge

              Re: Fgs

              This assumes that the US will allow Space-X to launch your satellites for you. It may be necessary to build a British launch facility near the equator - possibly Belize (formerly British Honduras), which could use the investment.

              Nah. Too small, too near the Guatemalans. Remember, they didn't want to become independent in the first place until after HM Gov parked a few Harriers and some Gurkhas there, the better to keep the Guatemalans on their side of the border. Back when HM Gov first started making noise about 'granting' independence, Guatemala famously found an old Spanish map which proved, proved, PROVED that most of Belize was theirs, stolen by perfidious Albion, and even more famously waited for the ink to dry before waving it around. If perfidious Albion starts building a rocket base there the Guatemalans will explode. HM Gov doesn't have any more Harriers and can't afford to hire the number of Gurkhas which will be necessary. Guatemala ain't impressed by Tommy Atkins; short Nepalese hillmen with big knives and bad attitudes, now, those scare 'em.

              If HM Gov wants a rocket site, then they'd do better to pick Barbados or Jamaica or Trinidad or Guyana, though Guyana has problems with old Spanish maps whose ink recently dried (Venezuela) plus old Dutch maps (Suriname) and even old Portuguese maps (Brazil, though they really don't care) which all together account for about 175% of Guyana's land area, some parts being claimed by two of the above, and at least one section by all three. Better Jamaica or Barbados or Trinidad, though Trini and Little England are kinda small, too. The Bajans would be proud to come to the rescue of the Mother Country (Little England...) but the Trinis and the Yardies would want cash, lots of it. And, given MayNot's recent Windrush wheeze, the heads of some Tory MPs and cabinet ministers on stakes. Or just Amber Rudd tied to the exhaust bell of the first rocket launched from the new facility. (Hmm. A possible selling point to The Great British Public.) Ah, yes, I can see it now... the Caribbean Rocket Port, located on scenic Manzanilla Bay, in the far east of beautiful Trinidad! Access to Port of Spain and Piarco International Airport via Eastern Main Road and the Churchill-Roosevelt Highway! Southern security by the crocodiles in the swamp to the south, eastern security by the sharks in the bay. It'd be perfect!

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Fgs

              "This assumes that the US will allow Space-X to launch your satellites for you. It may be necessary to build a British launch facility near the equator - possibly Belize (formerly British Honduras), which could use the investment."

              Britain will still be a full member of ESA after Brexit - we can just ask ESA. They are always happy to have some more work/cash.

            3. Mike Richards

              Re: Fgs

              There's a Black Arrow rocket in the Science Museum and doesn't Leicester have a Blue Streak standing around doing nothing? By jove, we can have a space programme again!

      3. David 164 Bronze badge

        Re: Fgs

        Germany and France will likely fight dirty an tell Airbus, which they control not to bid on the contract, which means alternative facilities will need to be built an companies establish to build the system. Also there no guarantee others won't play silly buggers when we try and find rockets to launch the system on.

      4. Lars Silver badge
        Happy

        Re: Fgs

        "Wouldn't it make more sense to work together?". Yes, but why leave the EU to do that.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Fgs

          Yes, but why leave the EU to do that.

          You mean "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer"?

      5. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Fgs

        "...it's a useful bargaining position."

        I think it is a bit more than that. In EU27, their position is that control of Galileo's PRS needs to be entirely within the EU and that it would take a treaty change to allow the UK to be involved as a non-EU state i.e. it will never happen. If the British military need to be certain of the PRS system, what the EU is suggesting is inadequate.

        Anyway, the Galileo facilities at Swanwick, Falkland Islands, Ascension, etc. are to be moved (at some considerable cost to the EC - these are huge contract changes).

        Interestingly, Britain will continue to be a member of the European Space Agency (which is not an EU organisation) and ESA happens to be the design authority for Galileo. ESA would not be averse to assisting the UK in building an alternative to Galileo.

      6. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Fgs

        > Something along the lines of "you can be petty and exclude us, but it's pointless, we can do it ourselves. Wouldn't it make more sense to work together?"

        That makes sense, but is also about as ironic as it gets.

        The current Brexit farce is the UK government clearly demonstrating it's willingness to "work together" with the other countries in the EU.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Fgs

          The current Brexit farce is the UK government clearly demonstrating it's willingness to "work together" with the other countries in the EU.

          There's a world of a difference between "work together" and "be controlled by", as any manager can tell you.

    4. Teiwaz Silver badge

      Re: Fgs

      Why do we need to make one? The EU want one as they try to appear important or something and not relying on the US one yadda yadda

      rely being the operative one here.

      Who would 'rely' on Russia, China or rapidly unreliable U.S.A? They might decide to block it over tariffs....then not, then maybe....

      The idea of 'building our own'? I hope any such project fares better than most gov. IT or the recent emergency services communication project.

      Maybe the commonwealth can chip in....?

      1. Dan 55 Silver badge

        Re: Fgs

        The Commonwealth already has one (IRNSS). Perhaps we could ask them nicely?

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Fgs

          "The Commonwealth already has one (IRNSS)."

          It relies on geosynchronous satellites and has limited geographical coverage.

          1. Dan 55 Silver badge

            Re: Fgs

            It relies on geosynchronous satellites and has limited geographical coverage.

            So much like the Great British Patriotic Flying Brexit Pork Barrel will if it's catapulted into orbit then.

            1. werdsmith Silver badge

              Re: Fgs

              I say resurrect the Decca Nav system, or rent LORAN C off the USA.

              After all where would hte EU be if it weren't for the Harrison clock?

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Fgs

                > After all where would hte EU be if it weren't for the Harrison clock?

                Probably still in Europe.

            2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: Fgs

              "So much like the Great British Patriotic Flying Brexit Pork Barrel will if it's catapulted into orbit then."

              It would have to be even smaller, otherwise those nasty EU nations might be able to use it. No problem, a Brexit navigational system will go round in very small circles.

          2. Raj

            Re: Fgs

            It has ‘limited geographical coverage’ because it’s not a commonwealth or global system by design . IRNSS is the Indian Regional Navigational Satellite System. Like the Chinese Beidou system, it’s India’s homegrown navigational satellite system, created after the US blocked access to accurate GPS signal in the past, leading them to decide the only way forward was a homegrown system .

        2. Daniel 18

          Re: Fgs

          "The Commonwealth already has one (IRNSS). Perhaps we could ask them nicely?"

          The Commonwealth doesn't have one, India has one.

          If you ask nicely and permit increased immigration they might let you join in... but it is a regional system with coverage of the area containing targets for their nuclear missiles.

          I'm pretty sure the UK is farther away, and likely wants coverage for different target areas.

          1. Raj

            Re: Fgs

            "The Commonwealth doesn't have one, India has one.

            If you ask nicely and permit increased immigration they might let you join in... but it is a regional system with coverage of the area containing targets for their nuclear missiles."

            The current IRNSS system is indeed regional. It was conceptualized after GPS access issues during the 1999 Kargil War. Budget allocations started 2006, and satellite launches started in 2013.

            It became operational in Spring 2018 with the launch of the 7th satellite IRNSS-1I in April, and covers India along with an area extending 1500km around it. The total cost so far is approx $340 million for the project, 7 sats and launchers (PSLV-XL).

            It will be expanded to a global network of 24 satellites, probably by the mid 2020s.

      2. Kernel Silver badge

        Re: Fgs

        "Maybe the commonwealth can chip in....?"

        Maybe we might have ........... if you'd remembered the Commonwealth all those years ago when you were soooo keen to jump into Europe and disavow all knowledge of those of us in distant parts of the world.

        So for now, feel free to suck it it up and suffer.

        1. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: Fgs

          @ Kernel

          "Maybe we might have ........... if you'd remembered the Commonwealth all those years ago when you were soooo keen to jump into Europe and disavow all knowledge of those of us in distant parts of the world."

          This is something that really pisses me off, and not against you. We were dragged into the EU at the cost of our sovereignty and so our links to the world. On behalf of us who are against the EU and doing our best to get our country out of that sinking ship I would like to say sorry and I hope the damage to our reputation does not stain us for too long.

          Please remember that some of us were dragged against our will. So much so that the politicians would never let us vote as the majority were against joining the political project.

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

    5. johnaaronrose

      Re: Fgs

      Currently, the USA GPS is accurate to aboubt 5 metres for the public signal; Galileo will be accurate to 1 metre for the public signal. The Ordnance Survey app's function is consequently often inaccurate by about 1 mile on a 10 mile trail.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Fgs

        My GNSS, which uses both GPS and GLONASS, consistently achieves 3m accuracy.

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Fgs

      Having our own, more advanced GPS variant isn't such a bad idea for a couple of reasons. First and foremost, there is no guarantee that we would in future still be able to use any of the existing GPS-like systems, not least because there is no reason to suppose that the EU its self will be particularly long-lived as a political entity.

      Secondly, US politics seems to be disappearing down a parochial, inward-looking rabbit hole. Trump is of this ilk, if more rational than some US politicians. Should some future terrorist decide to use Galileo to attack the USA in some manner, there is no reason to think that a future US government might not consider Galileo a threat to their national security, and start doing nasty things to the Galileo satellites.

      As such, having our own system would be fairly useful, especially as a UK government would be fairly keen to kowtow to any and all US government pressure regarding selectively fuzzing GPS systems...

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Fgs

        "Trump is of this ilk, if more rational than some US politicians."

        What a terrifying thought.

    7. HolySchmoley

      Re: Fgs

      "How does that move the needle in an economy with full employment"

      I guess you haven't noticed the definition of 'full employment' sliding down the muddy 'gig economy' slope.

      As Mr. Spock might have said, "It's employment, Jim, but not as we know it".

      Perhaps a forum inhabited by hard-of-thinking / big-of-soundbiting politicians is a more comfortable stamping ground for those who can't keep up with understanding difficult concepts?

      1. codejunky Silver badge

        Re: Fgs

        @ HolySchmoley

        "I guess you haven't noticed the definition of 'full employment' sliding down the muddy 'gig economy' slope."

        Something those Europeans wish they could get instead of being kept from employment due to the Euro. The unemployment state in this country being the lowest since 1975. You can cry its 'gig-economy' but the EU doesnt even have that going for them (or their unemployment stats wouldnt be so bad).

        "Perhaps a forum inhabited by hard-of-thinking / big-of-soundbiting politicians is a more comfortable stamping ground for those who can't keep up with understanding difficult concepts?"

        Its up to you. If you keep posting here you might learn something.

  3. }{amis}{ Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    Better than average returns??

    Politics aside I have to point out that as ministerial toy sets go at least another sat-nav system will at least be useful and will defiantly foster real work in the UK space sector.

    Given that HS2 is at £55.7 Billion and counting, even if the £3 Billion is out by an order of magnitude it'll still be cheaper and more useful.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

      When Airbus, BMW, Nissan, Honda, Toyota, Hiachi, all the Financial Institution in the City and a host more all leave our sinking ship because of BREXIT we won't be able to afford the $3B for the Galileo replacement let alone HS2/HS3 or even repairs to the M1.

      There simply won't be the Tax Income to fund anything at current tax rates.

      We probably won't be able to pay off the EU not that we'll be getting anything more than a kick in the balls from them anyway.

      The BREXITeers will be playing the same old tune of 'Everything will be fine don't worry' as we go cap in hand to the IMF for a loan that won't ever be repaid.

      Never mind we voted for this self destruction and we are all in it together apart from the likes of Boris and chums including Farage who'll be off to sunnier climes as soon as the shit really starts to hit the fan if not sooner.

      But everything will be fine. Won't it?

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. Dan 55 Silver badge

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          It is as if 48% are the clever ones, and 52% are the stupid ones.

          Perhaps the 52% could come up with some kind of explanation about the warnings from business and industry about Brexit. If it's "fuck business", maybe they could elaborate on that a bit more for the rest of us?

          Is the EU being awkward ?. Yes it is - just see it for what the EU is.

          If you want to be part of the club you have to accept the rules. If you opt out of the rules, you can't use the club facilities. It's as easy as that. Rules are how 28 different countries get along and how disputes between them are resolved. One country, as much as it thinks it's special, can't ignore that fact.

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

            1. Dan 55 Silver badge

              Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

              So, if we are not in the club, why should we keep on paying for the future facilities ?

              Sorry, didn't you want to have your cake and eat it?

              It is an integer in the interval [0,1], and here is a hint. It ain't 1.

              It ain't 0 either. There has been more than one warning.

              1. This post has been deleted by its author

                1. werdsmith Silver badge

                  Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                  It is about receiving goods PAID for.

                  The UK contractors have been paid for the work done according to their contracts.

                  The problem is they are not getting any more contracts, and there is no money coming back because the net cost of brexit is a massive multi-tens of billions the the EU.

                  You don't get any more Pyrrhic than brexit.

                  1. David 164 Bronze badge

                    Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                    Most of them aren't own by Britain, they are own by foreign companies or even worst own by companies effectively control by foreign governments both only care about themselves. They have no loyalty to the UK and will move to where the work is, which Airbus has already announce it will do for Galileo. The UK only tool to fighting this is really deny export licenses for technology on security grounds but that so anti business that Tories funders are unlikely to be happy with the tories doing this and could well withdraw there funding for the Tories, even if that risk Corbyn getting in.

                    Tories really are the worst party you could imagine to implement a successful Brexit as everything you need to do a successful Brexit goes directly against core Tory ideology.

                2. David 164 Bronze badge

                  Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                  That not how being a club member works. If you join a club and then help build a clubhouse, you can't throw a tantrum leave and expect to be able to take the bit of the club house you built with you, it just not how it work. An no person in there right mind would think it would work like that.

                3. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                  "Else, we want our money back, to offset the payments for things we will not be receiving, but will still be paying for."

                  Like the pensions for people who worked for you during your four decades as an EU member?

                  Must be nice to walk away from your obligations when you are in a bad mood.

                  1. This post has been deleted by its author

                  2. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                    Like the pensions for people who worked for you during your four decades as an EU member?

                    You mean the MEPs? They worked for themselves, they did sweet FA for us. If they'd had a properly organised pension scheme they'd have paid for their own pensions with their contributions. Instead it's a Ponzi scheme where the new entrants pay the pensions for the old ones. That sort of system always has problems as membership changes.

                    1. Dave Schofield

                      Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                      >Instead it's a Ponzi scheme where the new entrants pay the pensions for the old ones. That sort of system always has problems as membership changes.

                      Just like the State Pension in the UK then?

            2. David Webb

              Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

              On the 52% and the warnings - how many of the warnings have actually come true ???

              You mean the warnings about what will happen after Brexit? How many have come true? Technically none because Brexit has not occurred yet, we're still part of the EU. Now that wasn't so hard to work out, ask another easy question.

              1. codejunky Silver badge

                Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                @ David Webb

                "You mean the warnings about what will happen after Brexit? How many have come true? Technically none because Brexit has not occurred yet,"

                Now that is wrong. We had the prediction of a recession the day of the result if we vote out. Didnt happen. The follow up prediction was its due to art50 not being signed, it happened and still no recession. Now its in some nebulous future because one will happen and they can claim that.

                While Osborne and Carney did argue against it because of brexit the currency did fall, inflation rise, base rate increase and house price rises slowed. That was also accepted by leave too but not as a bad thing because it is the aim of the treasury and BoE since 2008 and both Osborne and Carney have continued with that goal. So remain have a correct prediction but while it is called economic recovery they framed it as a bad thing because of the remain campaign.

                1. This post has been deleted by its author

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                    >The vitriol of people who are against brexit is perplexing.

                    >I expect no one using this site has been affected by the EU.

                    >There are a lot of people affected by the EU policies - and they voted accordingly.

                    I live in South Yorkshire, which is one of the 10 poorest regions of the Northern EU - one of nine currently in the UK. Hundreds of millions of pounds of EU money has been spent (and is still being spent) to recover from the economic Armageddon unleashed by closing the coal mines and the effects on the supporting industries (and shops, pubs, restaurants, etc). This has transformed old abandoned industrial areas into housing estates, nature reserves and industrial parks and estates resulting in the generation of well over 10,000 jobs.

                    Conservative governments do not support the region as it is safe Labour seats. Labour do not support the region, as its safe Labour seats.

                    This is one area that should be very grateful to the EU, but still voted 68% Leave.

                    1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

                      Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                      Hundreds of millions of pounds of EU money has been spent

                      Maybe so, but for every £1 of "EU" money spent in the UK, we paid £1.50 to the EU, since the UK is a net contributor.

                      Countries like Ireland can reasonably claim that they got money from the EU, but the UK cannot.

                    2. Anonymous Coward
                      Anonymous Coward

                      Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                      "I live in South Yorkshire, which is one of the 10 poorest regions of the Northern EU - one of nine currently in the UK. Hundreds of millions of pounds of EU money has been spent (and is still being spent) to recover from the economic Armageddon unleashed by closing the coal mines and the effects on the supporting industries (and shops, pubs, restaurants, etc). This has transformed old abandoned industrial areas into housing estates, nature reserves and industrial parks and estates resulting in the generation of well over 10,000 jobs."

                      The problem that was behind much of the Brexit vote was that companies took this EU money to develop business in areas like this where exisitng industries had been shut but when they opened the new facilities rather than employing local people who no longer had tradition industries to employ them they brought in new workers from Eastern Europe ... Ithere's one of the warehouse operations in the Yorkshire coal area (? may be Asos) which is a prime example where the new jobs were only advertised in eastern europe. Laws were able to be changed to prevent/limit this but the damage had been done.

                      1. This post has been deleted by its author

                        1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
                          IT Angle

                          ..everyone.. not hold(ing) their views are {racist, little Englanders, stupid, right wing, gullible}

                          Is that an implied AND or an implied OR in that set?

                          I can see either option working.

                      2. Anonymous Coward
                        Anonymous Coward

                        Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                        >The problem that was behind much of the Brexit vote was that companies took this EU money to develop business in areas like this where exisitng industries had been shut but when they opened the new facilities rather than employing local people who no longer had tradition industries to employ them they brought in new workers from Eastern Europe ... Ithere's one of the warehouse operations in the Yorkshire coal area (? may be Asos) which is a prime example where the new jobs were only advertised in eastern europe. Laws were able to be changed to prevent/limit this but the damage had been done.

                        ASOS did advertise jobs locally and continually from before they opened at Park Springs (I get the local newspaper so recall seeing the adverts) and continue to advertise - including signs outside recruiting for XPO logistics and on the local buses. IIRC originally, they wanted warehouse staff and call centre staff, but that is now just warehouse staff.

                        However, advertising jobs does not mean that there were enough applications and the lack of suitable applicants (from an area with relatively high unemployment) did result in having to recruit in Romania and other eastern countries.

                        It is not easy work (one employer tried to set fire to the warehouse while still inside), and relatively low paid, so not popular with the locals and there was a lot of problems when they tried to start a union.

                        I think they want good, hard-working, non-complaining staff for not much above minimum wage and at least a few locals would rather be on benefits than work there.

                        1. This post has been deleted by its author

                          1. Anonymous Coward
                            Anonymous Coward

                            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                            the British people ALSO profit(ed) from EU migration, first by lower prices, and second by businesses spending money. Even if it means a fat British businessman (exploiting cheap EU labour, and not employing those eager British youth) - buys a flashy UK-assembled car and fills up locally - this (indirectly) benefits the local population. Same when the food generated through cheap EU labour gets sold in the UK and exported elsewhere. Did I mention taxes (those that the clever UK system allows to be paid in the UK, rather than the one that it lets be unpaid?). All this, and probably other elements have helped the "UK economy".

                            And coming back to this cheap labour, this is capitalism for you. And I mean YOU, not only those mystical business owners. You buy cheaper, if you can, and sell more expensive, if you can, be it a product or service that you purchase - or sell. I can easily see that, with the UK actually actively blocking cheaper labour, would have had no positive effect on the UK economy, i.e. with higher wages, the UK products would have been less competitive against others - with all the implications this has for UK economy.

                            1. This post has been deleted by its author

                        2. Anonymous Coward
                          Anonymous Coward

                          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                          I think they want good, hard-working, non-complaining staff for not much above minimum wage and at least a few locals would rather be on benefits than work there.

                          Clearly the benefits are too generous.

                          1. This post has been deleted by its author

                            1. Anonymous Coward
                              Anonymous Coward

                              Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                              As has been happening since the early 2000's, the race to the bottom means people who are born here and have no where else to go, who are bottom of the ladder, have an utter sh!t life.

                              Get your head out of Lord Rothmere's (French) a$£e and look around. The powers that wanted Brexit like low wage, no security, gig economies. They do not have your interests at heart. Or perhaps you really believe that free trade with India and China will mean higher wages than free trade with Denmark and Germany?

                              1. This post has been deleted by its author

                                1. H in The Hague Silver badge

                                  Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                                  "Look at Greece - the people have suffered severely under the EU - the Government may have been bailed out, but the people were treated disgustingly."

                                  It strikes me that has to do more with the general weakness of the Greek economy than with the EU. As far as I'm aware the country has few natural resources and successive governments don't seem to have been that effective (get the impression there's a lot of tax avoidance). Without seamless access to EU markets and EU support for poorer areas their economy would probably be in an even worse state. And without a bail out the country would have gone bust - that doesn't help "the people" either. Please explain how they would be more prosperous outside the EU and without its support.

                                  1. This post has been deleted by its author

                                    1. H in The Hague Silver badge

                                      Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                                      "The EU cooked the books to get Greece into the Euro."

                                      Errmm, thought it was the Greeks who allegedly committed the creative accountancy.

                                      1. This post has been deleted by its author

                                      2. Anonymous Coward
                                        Anonymous Coward

                                        Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                                        "The EU cooked the books to get Greece into the Euro."

                                        Errmm, thought it was the Greeks who allegedly committed the creative accountancy.

                                        Was there anyone except the Germans, and possibly the Dutch, who didn't have to cook the books to meet the convergence criteria? They really should just have named the currency the Neue Marke.

                                  2. Anonymous Coward
                                    Anonymous Coward

                                    Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                                    the reasons for Greek problems have been known and the EU kind of should be blamed for pretending it's not their problem, when - in the end - it turned out to be. But then, on the other hand, if they do try to sugges solutions, you have semi-pathetic, semi-well-meaning voices in the affected country screaming about EU dictatorship, and German (Nazi) rule, etc.

                                  3. codejunky Silver badge

                                    Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                                    @ H in The Hague

                                    "Without seamless access to EU markets and EU support for poorer areas their economy would probably be in an even worse state"

                                    Unlikely. All that did was open the rich EU to loan money to the poor EU to buy from the rich EU and then when the crash occurred the rich EU was badly exposed in loans they should not have made nor accounted for the risk. As a result the debt that should have been wiped out immediately by default and the necessary deflation of the Greek currency was not allowed, the ECB bought the debt on taxpayer money that is now lost (but they wont admit it) and will be held over the Greeks for a long time when it should be immediately written off. The Greeks still stuck in an awful currency which is overvalued for their country and so inflicting continued damage while being told to suck it up and beaten down every time bailout negotiations occur.

                                    "And without a bail out the country would have gone bust "

                                    Without being in the EU the situation might not have happened. Didnt they build a rail system that could never pay for itself with EU loans. Now the EU owns Greece, as we see every 'negotiation'.

                                    "Please explain how they would be more prosperous outside the EU and without its support."

                                    It would have done what has been proven to work time and time again instead of being forced into the opposite.

                      3. Anonymous Coward
                        Anonymous Coward

                        Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                        bringing in workers from East Europe (and the resentment it created) as an argument for voting brexit is what I always find hilariously hypocratic. I mean, WHO profited from those cheap labourers? (other than themselves, to a tiny degree, given the shitty money they were paid?) It was their employers who were making tidy money and, sorry folks, the indigineous population, aka the Brits, who enjoyed lower prices (relatively) and higher standard of living (relatively), while they couldn't be fucked to pick up their own strawberries when they could sponge on life-long benefits and moan about bloody foreigners taking away their jobs. Now we can build our own sat system, pick up our strawberries and wipe your own sorry bottoms in the golden wrinkly age, brexit means brexit, eh? I wonder who's to blame? Ah, but of course, the bloody EU!

                        1. This post has been deleted by its author

                    3. Anonymous Coward
                      Anonymous Coward

                      Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                      Up vote because I am a Yorkshire emigrant, soon to be a UK emigrant due to job relocation to Ireland who are still in Europe for those that don't know.

                      1. This post has been deleted by its author

                        1. H in The Hague Silver badge

                          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                          "How many jobs have already gone to Europe or other - because the UK company was bought out by another company ?"

                          I rather get the impression that when a UK company gets bought by an overseas investor that generally saves and creates jobs in the UK. Look at the car industry: Jaguar Land Rover, Rolls Royce, Mini and Dennis Eagle have all benefitted from significant investments by their overseas owners, without which they might have gone under with massive job losses. Unfortunately these companies have very complex supply chains across the Channel, and also exort a large part of their production so the UK leaving the single market is likely to hit them (and their UK suppliers and contractors) very hard.

                          "What may happen is that new opportunities will arise due to the restrictions of the EU being lifted from the UK."

                          Could you mention some of those restrictions? Something specific? Which markets/opportunities will they provide access to?

                          1. This post has been deleted by its author

                            1. Roland6 Silver badge

                              Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                              @AC - re: "Incorrect to have a impression.."

                              I don't get the connection between the first part of your comment and the second, which is a shame as the first part made a good point.

                              1. This post has been deleted by its author

                  2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

                    Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                    "I expect no one using this site has been affected by the EU."

                    This isn't a US site. The UK has been part of the EU for a long time, longer than many el Reg readers have been pushing air in and out. It's simply part of the way the UK relates to the world, the way it conducts trade, the way it earns money to pay wages and pensions. How on Earth can that not affect every one of the UK population?

                  3. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                    I'm still a remainer.

                    I have already seen work moving from the UK to Europe as a direct result of Brexit. I don't see much coming the other way, unless you consider a joint Indian-German Steel company owning our means of production as well as being our largest car manufacturer. I'd rather buy a Peugeot than another Jag or Land Rover.

              2. ToddRundgrensUtopia

                Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                Because Webby babe, we were told bad things would happen as soon as we voted to leave. I assume that isn't too difficult for you either?

            3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

              "On the 52% and the warnings - how many of the warnings have actually come true?"

              Please read the following very carefully and try very hard to understand it.

              The warnings apply to what will happen when we leave the EU and EU trade arrangements no longer apply.

              We have not yet left the EU.

              Until we do the EU trade arrangements still apply.

              1. codejunky Silver badge

                Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                @ Doctor Syntax

                "The warnings apply to what will happen when we leave the EU and EU trade arrangements no longer apply."

                Or when the next recession hits (approximately per decade is the business cycle) the cretins will be jumping on it 'look look brexit is bad waaaa'. Then there will be those who 'predicted' it (just like the previous 2 recessions predicted by remain, 0 materialised).

              2. This post has been deleted by its author

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                  >The EU is a failed organisation.

                  If the EU does fail, then the resulting global depression will make the Credit Crunch look like a boom time. Being out of it, irrespective of the benefits of Brexit, will not be a buffer as continental supply chains collapse.

                  1. Anonymous Coward
                    Anonymous Coward

                    Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                    If the EU does fail, then the resulting global depression will make the Credit Crunch look like a boom time.

                    That all depends on what you mean by fail. The most likely way the EU will fail is that some smaller members will go bankrupt, the euro will drop, and Germany will walk away with whatever remains. That will be generally survivable for other countries, at least for those not in the EU.

          2. Giovani Tapini Silver badge
            Boffin

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            [It is as if 48% are the clever ones, and 52% are the stupid ones.]

            but that's about right if you assume half the population is of below average intelligence. The problem is that nobody agrees which half they are in...

          3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
            Unhappy

            One country, as much as it thinks it's special, can't ignore that fact.

            Now you're just being silly.

            I'm sure many other countries think Britain is "special" following the Brexit vote.

            As in "Special needs" of course.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: One country, as much as it thinks it's special, can't ignore that fact.

              As in "Special needs" of course.

              That's the politically-correct way of saying "handicapped". By the remainers.

        2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          "Is the EU being awkward ?. Yes it is - just see it for what the EU is."

          Oddly enough, if you ask the EU they'd almost certainly say the same about the UK. What's more, they'd be able to point out that Brexit was the UK's idea.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            Oddly enough, if you ask the EU they'd almost certainly say the same about the UK.

            It's a little different. The UK wants a good trading relationship with the EU. The EU wants UK trade to collapse so that they can dance on the grave shouting "EU, Fuck Yeah!". Not quite the same preferred outcome.

            1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

              Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

              "The UK wants a good trading relationship with the EU."

              I've seen nothing of that in the govt's Brexiteers. They seem to want a no customs union Brexit and I don't quite see how that gets categorised as a good trading relationship.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                no customs union Brexit and I don't quite see how that gets categorised as a good trading relationship

                It works for our trade with all the non-EU countries. No union doesn't mean no agreement, or no trade.

        3. werdsmith Silver badge

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          Is the EU being awkward ?. Yes it is - just see it for what the EU is.

          It's the job of the negotiators working on behalf of the EU to get the best deal it can for its members and that's what it's doing. It just so happens that the EU has all the aces, kings, queens and all the cards that add up to 15 and 21.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            It's the job of the negotiators working on behalf of the EU to get the best deal it can for its members and that's what it's doing.

            No, it's the job of the EU to get the worst deal it can for the UK without upsetting its members too much, and that's what it's doing.

            It just so happens that the EU has all the aces, kings, queens and all the cards that add up to 15 and 21.

            It also thinks it owns the casino, and can slip a 5th ace out when it needs to.

        4. werdsmith Silver badge

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          "Fed up with the remain people using the politics to present an assessment of the EU behaviour."

          Nobody is using politics to do anything like that. The situation has arisen due to the choice of some.

          But the really mad thing here is that all of this stuff was easy, blindingly obviously predictable before the vote.

          How could anybody not see it?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            But the really mad thing here is that all of this stuff was easy, blindingly obviously predictable before the vote.

            Of course it was, no-one should have expected the EU to behave any differently to the way it is doing.

            But you don't gain freeedom without standing up to a bully and taking the odd beating.

          2. David 164 Bronze badge

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            Many people did and try to raise them during the campaig, I did, and why I'm patriotic, I couldn't vote leave for the simply reason the leave campaign had no answers to these questions and even if they did have the answers they weren't in a position to implement those answers because they weren't the government.

        5. Spanners Silver badge
          Pirate

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          It is as if 48% are the clever ones, and 52% are the stupid ones.

          We are not that stupid. Brexit was voted for by 37.5% of the electorate. The rest of us either voted "FFS No" or for that electoral favourite Apathy. Both signs of being cleverer than those who voted for national economic seppuku.

        6. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          "Fed up with the remain people using the politics to present an assessment of the EU behaviour. It is as if 48% are the clever ones, and 52% are the stupid ones."

          well with every passing day, it becomes more obvious that the 52% are fucking idiots

        7. Joel 1

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          "It is as if 48% are the clever ones, and 52% are the stupid ones."

          It is as if 34.74% chose one thing, 37.46% chose the other, and the remaining 27.80% were unconvinced by either side's argument.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            the remaining 27.80% were unconvinced by either side's argument

            So they went for "meh, do what the hell you want". And then people claim that the ones who voted (either way) are the fucking idiots?

        8. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          > It is as if 48% are the clever ones, and 52% are the stupid ones.

          Hmm, let's see, shall we?

          From: https://extranewsfeed.com/50-dumb-fuck-reasons-for-leaving-the-eu-66a40c72c1da. Click the link for more:

          2. “Because of all the EU laws that we have no say in.”

          “Name one.”

          “There’s loads. Too many to list.”

          “Name one.”

          “…” (Caller to LBC radio station)

          5. “It [Sunderland] already is [a giant jobcentre]. That’s why I voted Leave, to put everyone else in the shit like us.” (Twitter)

          6. “To stick it to the toffs.”

          9. “Because the EU closed the coalmines.”

          11. “Because I had the hump.”

          12. “Because now our lads will get out of prison, ‘cos there will be jobs for them.”

          18. “Because I’ve lived here all my life and when I was growing up, that street over there was filled with shops.” (TV documentary)

          19. “To stop the Muslims immigrating here.” [Migration is unrestricted within the EU. But individual nations are responsible for setting their own limits on immigration from non-EU countries, such as those where the majority of citizens are Muslims. Leaving the EU will have no direct effect on the number of Muslims coming to the UK.]

          26. “To annoy my wife.”

          33. “Because there’s too many Pakistan [sic] people in Glasgow.” [I repeat: EU membership has no bearing on immigration from outside the EU.]

          35. “Because EU taxes are making our petrol more expensive than everywhere else in Europe.” [No, those would be taxes imposed by the UK’s government. The EU plays no part in setting national tax rates.]

          36. “To send them women in the headscarves back home. One of them stole my mother’s purse.”

          38. “Because I’m scared of black people. They’re so physical.” (Mother-in-law of member of Facebook group) [The mechanism by which leaving the EU will rid the UK of black people is unclear.]

          46. “Because they sold off the water, gas and electricity.” [Once again, that would be the work of the UK government, not the EU.]

          47. “Because I couldn’t decide, and my boyfriend voted Remain.”

          48. “Because schools are no longer allowed to hold nativity plays in case they offend Muslims.” [Utter crap.]

          50. “Because they never vote for us in Eurovision.”

          58. “Because there’s too much traffic in Sittingbourne.”

          63. “So all the fucking Chinks will leave.”

          64. “Because the ensuing recession is going to bring house prices down, and I can’t afford to buy a house.”

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            The list is quite ironic, but also kind of painful. While some reasons given seem just made up for the sake of argument, and just about 100% are there to prove the point, i.e. brexiters are idiots (well, if not morons), this is a cheap shot. While a lot of people votes on those and very similar reasons, and yes, you could argue this makes them idiots, or "lazy buggers", the list is a manipulation, because the condensation of such quotes serves to underline the divisions and polarise the views (you're either with us, or against us, you're either a (smart) remainer or a (stupid) brexiteer.

            There are, after all, some valid reasons to vote FOR brexit (I voted to remain, by the way), one being that when people voted "in", they now realize that the current EU is no longer what they voted to be in. If I was an original in-voter in 1973, I would be VERY upset by the direction the EU is taking, and I would feel VERY resentful, that I voted for "x" and now the "x" has slowly, but surely been morphing into "y". Yeah, well, that's progress for you, but then, you don't like when your bank keeps changing your original terms and conditions to the supposedly better good. Yeah, sure, they keep sending you those letters with miniscule font about the 32667th change to the terms and you keep sending back your objections, which they ignore sending you the 32668th change, because not enough other customers object (because they can't be asked to read small print, because it doesn't bother them, because they agree with changes, whatever).

            Sadly, no genuine concerns were voiced in the pre-voting period, because, as has always been the case, polarisation and division, and simple "truths" is what wins votes.

        9. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          Usually there are 4% clever people and 96% not so clever.

          How many Europeans can speak english?

          How many English can speak a foreign language, or even speak english correctly?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            Usually there are 4% clever people and 96% not so clever.

            How many Europeans can speak english?

            How many English can speak a foreign language

            You make an excellent point. If it weren't for the cleverness and success of those original English merchants in making English the language of international commerce and interchange we might all have to learn lots of languages. Even, heaven forbid, French!

            Well done the clever English.

      2. codejunky Silver badge

        Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

        @AC

        "The BREXITeers will be playing the same old tune of 'Everything will be fine don't worry' as we go cap in hand to the IMF for a loan that won't ever be repaid."

        This is an interesting insult to throw. Primarily because the IMF is currently bailing out the EU who went cap in hand in their bailing out of Greece for loans which will never be repaid. The second part of interest is the EU is also playing the rune of 'Everything will be fine don't worry' when they are not shouting about their existential crisis.

        1. Dan 55 Silver badge

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          Sorry, did you say the IMF is bailing out the EU and the EU is bailing out Greece? It doesn't work like that.

          1. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            @ Dan 55

            "Sorry, did you say the IMF is bailing out the EU and the EU is bailing out Greece?"

            No. If you remember there was a recession in which the EU didnt react to very well and it is an ongoing problem for them. When it happened Greece was hit hard and needed to follow standard IMF protocol of default, devalue and take temporary loans. The problem of course being that terrible currency the Euro which the EU didnt want to accept was screwed and so bought the private loans, and bailed out Greece along with the IMF as a joint action.

            If that is complicated lets try it this way- The EU currency is the Euro. Greece is in the EU and Eurozone. IMF is bailing out the Euro when they bail out a Euro country in the Euro. I promise its really not difficult to understand.

            1. BigSLitleP Silver badge

              Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

              "The EU currency is the Euro. Greece is in the EU and Eurozone. IMF is bailing out the Euro when they bail out a Euro country in the Euro"

              As previously stated, it doesn't work like that. The Euro has different interest rates in different countries, meaning it behaves differently in different countries. Just because Greece is failing doesn't mean France or Germany are and doesn't mean the Euro is either. So the IMF is only bailing out Greece, not the EU.

              Or is that too complicated for you?

              1. codejunky Silver badge

                Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                @ BigSLitleP

                "Just because Greece is failing doesn't mean France or Germany are and doesn't mean the Euro is either"

                The Euro is the Euro which is of course over all those countries. That is why the Euro is undervalued and overvalued all at the same time depending where you are. In Greece for example the Euro is overvalued and needs to fall, something the ECB tries to do by buying bonds from creditworthy (overvalued) countries. The effect brings down the Euro (see that EUR on exchange rates? Thats the Euro. Not Euro for one country or other but the Euro). As the Euro falls it is a stimulus, which is freaking terrible because it makes Germany more undervalued and so increased trade(for the undervalued currency) which pulls the Euro back up (see that EUR thing again. Only one).

                One suggestion to the economic crisis for the EU was a 2 speed Euro aka 2 currencies. You see that EUR they trade in? They never split it. There is 1 currency in the currency area and part of that area being bailed out by the IMF is the same EUR being bailed out by the IMF and reaches the same problem as above.

                Otherwise Greece would have its own currency which then would not affect the EUR, but it does.

                1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

                  Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                  "The Euro is the Euro which is of course over all those countries. That is why the Euro is undervalued and overvalued all at the same time depending where you are."

                  On that we can agree. We were wise to stay out. After all we seem to find it hard to set interest rates that work properly for the whole of the UK. For the whole of England, in fact. That's not a great reason to cut off a large part of out home market, however, and hope that some surge of export trade will magically replace it.

          2. Philippe

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            Don't be too harsh on him. He's a Brexiter. Everything is simple or someone else fault for a Brexiter

        2. Philippe

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          On which planet does the IMF is buying out the EU?

          The IMF together with the EU provided funds to some of the bails out to Greece, they are not part of the latest round of financial support, as Greece is now considered officially saved.

          1. codejunky Silver badge

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            @ Philippe

            "On which planet does the IMF is buying out the EU?"

            Bailing not buying. The planet is a bluish one called earth. Welcome.

            "The IMF together with the EU provided funds to some of the bails out to Greece"

            Thank you for agreeing the IMF bailed them out. So therefore showing the EU was being bailed out by the IMF. As I said to the other guy, it aint difficult to understand.

            "as Greece is now considered officially saved."

            Eh-what-now? That is a comical statement but no it isnt.

            1. Dan 55 Silver badge

              Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

              Thank you for agreeing the IMF bailed them out. So therefore showing the EU was being bailed out by the IMF. As I said to the other guy, it aint difficult to understand.

              So if a country uses US dollars as their official or pegged currency (say, a dollarized South American one), and the IMF bails it out, is that bailing the US out?

              1. codejunky Silver badge

                Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                @ Dan 55

                "So if a country uses US dollars as their official or pegged currency (say, a dollarized South American one), and the IMF bails it out, is that bailing the US out?"

                So if a country not US gets bailed out is that bailing out the US? Is that seriously your comparative question?

                If the IMF bailed out California then yes and that would be an equivalent example.

                1. Dan 55 Silver badge

                  Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                  So if a country not US gets bailed out is that bailing out the US? Is that seriously your comparative question?

                  Yes, it is seriously my comparative question.

                  Each euro nation state has their own bonds, debt, and so on even though they use the same central bank to emit money and set interest rates.

                  So really, if you're arguing that bailing out Greece is bailing out the EU, then bailing out a dollarized economy is also bailing out the US.

                  And that's before we get to the bit about the EU not being a nation state.

                  If the IMF bailed out California then yes and that would be an equivalent example.

                  Why? Geography?

                  1. codejunky Silver badge

                    Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                    @ Dan 55

                    "Yes, it is seriously my comparative question."

                    That is where you do not understand then.

                    "Each euro nation state has their own bonds, debt, and so on even though they use the same central bank to emit money and set interest rates."

                    They have the shared currency EUR and it is one, singular only. They have tight rules over their economic policies and are chained to the same interest rates/source of money. They do not control their own currency, that is what the Euro entails, giving up your own currency to have the shared currency.

                    "So really, if you're arguing that bailing out Greece is bailing out the EU, then bailing out a dollarized economy is also bailing out the US."

                    Not exactly. As I said a direct comparison would be the IMF bailing out California, that is bailing out the US. The dollar being used (supply and tax) in the US. Some countries unofficially use the dollar but if you dump more dollar there how much of it interacts with the US? It is not as simple and could have effects on the US if that was to happen maybe depending.

                    Bailing out Greece to finance its Euro debt to the ECB and Euro banks is bailing out the Euro. Greece is not cut off from that Euro system it is in fact directly feeding into it.

                    "And that's before we get to the bit about the EU not being a nation state."

                    Eh? EU currency is Euro we are discussing the bailout of the Euro particularly a section of the Euro area directly interacting with the Euro area.

                    "Why? Geography?"

                    Not Geography, currency area. The economic area of that currency from issuer to country returning it to the issuer.

                    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

                      Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                      They have the shared currency EUR and it is one, singular only.

                      As do dollarized economies.

                      They have tight rules over their economic policies

                      You mean they shouldn't run a deficit.

                      and are chained to the same interest rates/source of money. They do not control their own currency, that is what the Euro entails, giving up your own currency to have the shared currency.

                      They have a shared central bank setting the interest rate, as do dollarized economies.

                      Not exactly. As I said a direct comparison would be the IMF bailing out California, that is bailing out the US.

                      No, that would be bailing out Californian bonds.

                      Eh? EU currency is Euro we are discussing the bailout of the Euro particularly a section of the Euro area directly interacting with the Euro area.

                      No backpedalling.

                      Quote 1: "Primarily because the IMF is currently bailing out the EU who went cap in hand in their bailing out of Greece for loans which will never be repaid."

                      Quote 2: "Thank you for agreeing the IMF bailed them out. So therefore showing the EU was being bailed out by the IMF. As I said to the other guy, it aint difficult to understand."

                      Not Geography, currency area. The economic area of that currency from issuer to country returning it to the issuer.

                      Once again, if a country dollarizes its economy, it becomes part of the dollar currency area.

                      You're arguing that bailing out a country is bailing out another country (or, in the EU's case, bailing out a supranational legal entity, if that were possible). I'm using the example of a dollarized economy to show that is not true.

                      1. codejunky Silver badge

                        Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

                        @ Dan 55

                        "As do dollarized economies"

                        ok

                        "You mean they shouldn't run a deficit."

                        So you do understand that they are chained to the same restraints over the euro area. The same would apply within the US but not as much for economies unofficially using the dollar internally.

                        "They have a shared central bank setting the interest rate, as do dollarized economies."

                        Ok. And the states in the US use that money interacting with the central bank, the interaction being to varying degrees outside the US aka a weaker effect unless it suddenly got dumped onto the US economy (which would then hit as stimulus to the US and the FED would likely react by unwinding QE even faster). If the dollars stay away from the US supply of money the FED wont really care about it.

                        "No, that would be bailing out Californian bonds."

                        And would that put more USD in the US? Which of course would be devaluing the currency (QE/stimulus) which would be affecting the US as a whole. If its just locals swapping the money for assets in California then that is California taking on debt owed to the people.

                        "No backpedalling."

                        I aint. You made a pointless statement "EU not being a nation state". Its not back pedalling to point out you are saying something fairly pointless to the discussion. We are talking about the currency area which is the EU's currency area. Please tell me you know that?

                        "Once again, if a country dollarizes its economy, it becomes part of the dollar currency area."

                        And I am saying kinda maybe depending on circumstances. In a place where they just need a currency to trade with each other then no not really. They are not paying tax to the US, those dollars pretty much vanishing from the US as they are used internally. A currency pegged to the dollar then bailed out would no longer be pegged to the dollar, that is self explanatory (or if bailed out to keep the peg is likely dooming the economy but not affecting the US). If the place uses the dollar and gets bailed out, what are they bailed out in? The US controls the dollar. I am not sure where you are stuck.

                        "You're arguing that bailing out a country is bailing out another country"

                        No! That is not what I am arguing. Bail out France is not bailing out the UK. Bail out the GBP and you bail out the UK. Bail out the EUR and you bail out the EUR, these effects are the point of the bailout. The US dollar is slightly more difficult as it is often used internally in economies where their official currency went to pot.

                        "I'm using the example of a dollarized economy to show that is not true."

                        Try the UK instead of the US then. Bail out Scotland, or Wales or NI or England. The GBP goes down. Put more GBP in the system and the GBP falls. That is the intention of doing it.

      3. Nifty

        Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

        "When Airbus, BMW, Nissan, Honda, Toyota, Hitachi, all the Financial Institution in the City and a host more all leave our sinking ship because of BREXIT"

        BMW, Nissan, Honda, Toyota, Hitachi will all want to stay manufacturing in the UK so as not to be penalised by the tariffs that the USA and others place in EU built cars, in retaliation for the 10% EU car tariffs that we are currently bound by. But needn't be going forward.

        As for he Financial Institution in the City:

        http://www.cityam.com/288069/german-asset-managers-call-unhindered-access-city-post

        If the EU had been on a trajectory to genuinely freer trade and a socially viable set of intra-EU migration rules, we could easily have stayed in. It was not to be.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

          "10% EU car tariffs"

          As Trump has just imposed 20% tarrifs on European cars coming into the US (on the basis that US previosuly imposed no tariff but EU had a "protectionist" 10% tariff) then it appears that the German auto-makers have suddenly decided that they'd much prefer it if the EU and US went to 0% tariffs on cars.

          1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            Fortunately a post Brexit UK will be welcomed into USA free trade arms with no tarrifs - unlike those evil Canadians

          2. Roland6 Silver badge

            Re: HS2 and the Galileo replacement

            >(on the basis that US previosuly imposed no tariff but EU had a "protectionist" 10% tariff)

            The US and EU agreed WTO tariffs on cars were: 10% on US car imports into the EU and 2.5% on Eu cars imported into the US.

            Given the EU's stated position (wrt cars and other goods) in the TTIP negotiations was: "The EU wants to remove these duties and other barriers to trade, such as lengthy administrative checks, that increase the cost of trade in goods." You do have to wonder just where Trump is coming from with his usage of the national security loophole to impose a much higher tariff, rather than doing some face-to-face negotiation.

            I suspect part of the problem is that Trump is using techniques that wouldn't be out of place in the pre-fight showboating, baiting and audience-rousing at wrestling contests...

            Interestingly, it does seem that whilst he is grandstanding, accusing US companies like Harley-Davidson of being "un-American" for considering overseas manufacturing, and wanting EU auto-makes to be "un-European" and open factories in the US, the EU28 are playing a slightly different game...

            [See https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/22/us/politics/donald-trump-tariffs-trade-war.html ]

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Better than average returns??

      even if the £3 Billion is out by an order of magnitude

      We just work out what the EU stiffed us for in terms of lost Galileo work, and subtract it from the "brexit bill".

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Better than average returns??

      "£3 Billion is out by an order of magnitude it'll still be cheaper and more useful"

      What is the scenario where you think it will be of use? Any phone you buy will be able to use GPS from the US, Russia, China and the EU. It can do so because the silicon and software loaded into it when it was made in China. What's in it for the manufacturer to also include the effort needed to support any UK based system? It just isn't needed. It's stuff all use for the military too. What's being discussed only covers the UK so you can't make any use of it to carry out a precision bombing mission elsewhere in the world.

      1. }{amis}{ Silver badge
        Terminator

        Re: Better than average returns??

        What is the scenario where you think it will be of use? Any phone you buy will be able to use GPS from the US, Russia, China and the EU.

        You answered your own question, all sat nav system's accuracy depends on the number of satellites it can see at any given time the more the better.

        It looks like the industry is trying to make self-driving cars the next tech unicorn, I can tell you for free that reducing the positional error for that gig by even 10% is a big deal, and I am sure that there are thousands of existing uses for any GPS style system that would benefit from another ~30 satellites no matter who owns them.

        And that's before we get to the real reason why these systems are built in the first place, modern military tactics and kit all revolve around precise positioning.

        At this point having your own geolocation system for you forces is pretty much a requirement to be considered a tier 1 threat.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Better than average returns??

          "modern military tactics and kit all revolve around precise positioning."

          Excellent! So you think a GPS enhancement that just covers the UK adds value? Who are you planning on bombing with this increased accuracy?

          "It looks like the industry is trying to make self-driving cars the next tech unicorn" ......

          And for them to work they can't rely on super high GPS positional accuracy otherwise they will all crash under the first bridge they encounter. GPS is need to give them a rough position on there map, after that they are on their own and need to rely on their onboard sensors. Increasing your map relative positional accuracy from 2m to 1.5m has little tangible value.

          1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

            Re: Better than average returns??

            Increasing your map relative positional accuracy from 2m to 1.5m has little tangible value.

            And increasing it from 2m to 2cm relies on local beacons which you can use with any GNSS system on your own territory.

          2. Roland6 Silver badge

            Re: Better than average returns??

            " GPS is need to give them a rough position on there map, after that they are on their own and need to rely on their onboard sensors. Increasing your map relative positional accuracy from 2m to 1.5m has little tangible value."

            I think many haven't come across the articles and forums around the web that provide examples where there are significant discrepancies between GPS position, map position and real-world position. The discrepencies can be such that in last years Tour du France, on one mountain section, the GPS map positional data had Chris Froome cycling in empty space, when clearly from the TV feed he was on the road...

            1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

              Re: Better than average returns??

              the GPS map positional data had Chris Froome cycling in empty space, when clearly from the TV feed he was on the road...

              Obviously a fake video! :-)

  4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    "On the latter figure, Bebb smiled wryly and suggested the committee not believe everything they read in the papers."

    I think they knew that already. It always works out more expensive. In fact, there's a sort of Hofstadter's law at work on MoD cost estimates.

  5. W Donelson

    Theresa May's Tory Brexit plans, direct from Looney Tunes!

    - "How to jump off a cliff without falling."

  6. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    the government remained optimistic

    Due diligence. We've heard of it. Actually we haven't? What is it?

  7. Ian K
    WTF?

    Minister for Defence Procurement, Guto Bebb

    "Guto Bebb"?

    'fess up Reg, you're sneaking in a Star Wars name and seeing if anyone notices.

    1. ToddRundgrensUtopia

      Re: Minister for Defence Procurement, Guto Bebb

      Both Guto and Bebb are welsh!

  8. Disgruntled of TW
    Facepalm

    Nose, face, bite ...

    Sad that the EU is taking this approach. There are many agreements which do not depend on membership of the EU, and this feels like a spiteful baby/bathtub response with no benefit to the EU other than a bargaining chip as we exit.

    1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Vulch

      Re: Nose, face, bite ...

      During the initial Galileo negotiations one EU member insisted on a clause excluding non-EU states from access to certain capabilities of the system. Would you like to have a guess which one it was?

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Remember my name, FAME! Remember, remember, remember...

          Hi Shadmeister,

          You think it's being "spiteful" to let someone get hoisted by their own petard?

          And perhaps the EU expects the UK to contribute on the basis it agreed to contribute on those terms in the first place?

          Regards,

          Anonymous Coward.

          P.S. I know the name's already listed above the post, but I'm concerned I might not get the attention I deserve if I don't add this cutesy gimmick. Hope that's okay with you, Shadmeister.

          P.P.S. Shame that Bombastic Bob got the randomly-PUTTING-things-in-CAPS gimmick first, isn't it?

          1. This post has been deleted by its author

      2. Dr Stephen Jones

        Re: Nose, face, bite ...

        "During the initial Galileo negotiations one EU member insisted on a clause excluding non-EU states from access to certain capabilities of the system. Would you like to have a guess which one it was?"

        Let me guess. Is it one with a powerful space lobby, a history of shafting the UK, and a lot of runny cheese?

        1. ArrZarr Silver badge
          Joke

          Re: Nose, face, bite ...

          Actually, it's the one with a powerful space lobby, a history of shafting the UK and a lot of cheddar cheese.

        2. BigSLitleP Silver badge

          Re: Nose, face, bite ...

          It was the UK that made the rules and now your complaining because the EU is following the rules that we asked them to implement? They are not being spiteful, you guys are in cake-and-eat-it land.

    3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Nose, face, bite ...

      "There are many agreements which do not depend on membership of the EU, and this feels like a spiteful baby/bathtub response with no benefit to the EU"

      That might be true of a lot of agreements. In this particular agreement it is, however, a condition of the Galileo project that the UK particularly wanted so spite doesn't come into it. Beware of what you wish for; you might get it.

  9. Joe Harrison Silver badge

    Getting a bit ridiculous

    There are six satellite navigation systems already and now the UK wants to add a seventh. Space is big but really all that stuff flying around, traffic could start getting difficult.

    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: Getting a bit ridiculous

      Not that difficuly on account of space being really big. So the space between satellites being high. Give or take dodging space junk, which may increase if the SHTF in any big way.

      But we're meant to be technologists. So there are 6 competing satnav systems. The original being GPS, which had it's SA mode to degrade accuracy. Geeks being geeks, and accurate navigation being really useful, came up with a variety of solutions to improve accuracy. So differential GPS, WAAS, A-GPS etc. So having 6 different satnav systems means you should be able to come up with something that can use multiple sources + INS to figure out how precisely lost you are. Which also means you've got more resilience if one or more signal sources is lost, and could probably also detect/prevent spoofing.

      That would probably cost a lot less than designing & launching our own satellite. Especially as we'd also need to design, build and fit suitable navigation systems to use the signal(s) as well. Plus to be really secure, we'd need an independent way to launch LEO navsats for coverage or replace any that have been kinetically degraded. I'm guessing that trying to install a UK navigation system into say, an F-35 and integrate that would be.. expensive.

    2. heyrick Silver badge

      Re: Getting a bit ridiculous

      I wouldn't hold your breath. The UK has plenty of form when it comes to shitty badly implemented half assed contacts that spiral way over budget...

  10. adam payne Silver badge

    This is, of course, due to the fact that the UK will not be permitted to take part in, and certainly not bid on, anything to do with the sensitive security and encryption components used in the Galileo satellite navigation constellation.

    My shiny thing and you can't play with it.

  11. smudge Silver badge
    Stop

    Lawyers will grow fat

    Furthermore, the delay in Galileo caused by UK withdrawal could result in the UK's version being operational at roughly the same time – mid-2020s, according to Bebb.

    Given the decades of development of Galileo, that can surely only be achieved by massive reuse of Galileo IPR?

    I foresee legal battles.

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Lawyers will grow fat

      Airbus also gave this warning:

      And, for the longer term, the Airbus warning about “repatriating competencies and patents” was an unsubtle reminder that it – and not the UK – owns much of the intellectual property used in aircraft design and manufacture

      Airbus raises range of fears in brutal Brexit assessment

  12. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    Has anyone come up with any objective criteria which could be agreed by both sides by which we could say, within a reasonable number of years, whether Brexit has succeeded or failed economically?

    1. codejunky Silver badge

      @ Doctor Syntax

      "Has anyone come up with any objective criteria which could be agreed by both sides by which we could say, within a reasonable number of years, whether Brexit has succeeded or failed economically?"

      I dont think anyone has to be honest. Probably because the EU sets the bar so low that any objective criteria would almost certainly lead us out of the EU.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: @ Doctor Syntax

        "Probably because the EU sets the bar so low that any objective criteria would almost certainly lead us out of the EU."

        Just the attitude I worry about. If the UK GDP had dropped by 50% of pre-referendum level you'd still point to this or that and proclaim a success.

        How about we can agree it's a success if UK GDP rises by 5% and a failure if it falls by 5% in 5 years, relative to pre-referendum level and adjusted for any overall change in world GDP? Or maybe a 5% increase or decrease in balance of trade? Or some measure of living standards or employment? Personally I'd be delighted if, by some such measure, Brexit were to be proclaimed a success. Delighted but astonished.

        Remember the Yes Prime Minister episode where any proposal was to be accompanied by failure standards? Somehow that never caught on in real life government or political circles. What a pity.

        1. codejunky Silver badge

          Re: @ Doctor Syntax

          @ Doctor Syntax

          "Just the attitude I worry about. If the UK GDP had dropped by 50% of pre-referendum level you'd still point to this or that and proclaim a success."

          Really? Why?

          "How about we can agree it's a success if UK GDP rises by 5% and a failure if it falls by 5% in 5 years, relative to pre-referendum level and adjusted for any overall change in world GDP?"

          Why? What will the world look like in 5 years? Will the EU still be going by then and if so will they be dragging the world down with their economic crisis? Will there be a full blown trade war? What fantasy do you have in your head for the world in 5 years and unless you are clairvoyant that is all it is.

          "Personally I'd be delighted if, by some such measure, Brexit were to be proclaimed a success"

          Then you would have to do something I have yet to see by remainers in these forums and understand what a success is. For example heading towards normalising the economy (increase core inflation, increasing the base rate, as the brexit vote delivered) is a good thing. When an idiot cries about the fall in currency you slap them with fact. You also need to recognise failure, such as the EU's high unemployment and economic mismanagement. If you cant then you will always think things are bad no matter how wrong you are factually.

          This is why I repeat myself a lot on these forums because I am correcting the same mistakes, the same doom and gloom interpretations of success and the same championing of failure.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: @ Doctor Syntax

            >This is why I repeat myself a lot on these forums because I am correcting the same mistakes, the same doom and gloom interpretations of success and the same championing of failure.

            Just out of interest. Can you confirm what your qualifications and relevant experience in global economic theory are please? Just so that we can be certain that you are:

            a). an expert.

            b). Not just some random guy off the internet that keeps repeating half-baked idea as gospel.

            1. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: @ Doctor Syntax

              @AC

              "Can you confirm what your qualifications and relevant experience in global economic theory are please?"

              No. Can you confirm your alias (not even your name, just the account you post from)?

          2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: @ Doctor Syntax

            "Really? Why?"

            I think the rest of your post answers that question quite well.

            1. codejunky Silver badge

              Re: @ Doctor Syntax

              @ Doctor Syntax

              "I think the rest of your post answers that question quite well."

              Your lack of a crystal ball? Your arbitrary targets? Or your not sure what is a success or failure? I can see the last one matching up but I want to be sure.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: @ Doctor Syntax

          "How about we can agree it's a success if UK GDP rises by 5% and a failure if it falls by 5% in 5 years, relative to pre-referendum level and adjusted for any overall change in world GDP? Or maybe a 5% increase or decrease in balance of trade? Or some measure of living standards or employment? Personally I'd be delighted if, by some such measure, Brexit were to be proclaimed a success. Delighted but astonished."

          The problem is that a lot of the long term damage will be slower growth.

          If the economy grows by 5% over ten years after Brexit, the Brexiteers will claim victory, regardless of the likelihood of 15% growth or more over the same time period without Brexit.... despite the 10%+ hit to GDP.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Has anyone come up with any objective criteria which could be agreed by both sides by which we could say, within a reasonable number of years, whether Brexit has succeeded or failed economically?

      Before the referendum UK growth was slightly ahead of that in the EU. I'd suggest that a tolerable Brexit would be maintaining that level of growth, and a good Brexit would be exceeding it and widening the gap with the EU.

      Economic failure would probably be EU growth exceeding UK growth over, say, 10 years, but I'd also make that conditional on EU populist parties not continuing to grow. That would concern me more than plain economic issues.

    3. Red Bren

      As no one has come up with any objective criteria which could be agreed by both sides of the government as to whether Brexit has even happened, I would say no.

  13. arctic_haze Silver badge

    Hosted by its own petard

    The very reason EU wanted its own navigation system was that the US refused to give military grade signal to its allies. Britain worked hard on making rules which make it impossible to give such a high-quality data to third countries. Now iit is a third country. Need I to say anything more?

  14. Alister Silver badge
    Thumb Up

    Great headline!

    It scans and everything...

    1. GIRZiM Bronze badge
      1. Alister Silver badge

        Re: Great headline!

        Yes, thanks, I was aware.

        In fact I was watching the film with my daughter this weekend, but don't tell anyone...

        1. GIRZiM Bronze badge

          Re: Great headline!

          There's a film!?

          I knew there was a musical.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Lets just get on with it . . . .

    Nigel Farage has got on with it and got himself a German passport (allegedly)

    Jacob Rees-Mogg is getting on with it moving his hedge fund out of the UK.

    John Redwood (remember him?) is getting on with it raising his clients to move their assets out of the UK.

    With confidence like that I'm surprised the Remainers aren't dancing in the streets.

    1. tiggity Silver badge

      Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

      Don't forget Lawson (Nigel) getting French citizenship

      1. H in The Hague Silver badge

        Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

        "Don't forget Lawson (Nigel) getting French citizenship"

        He's hardly my friend (pro-Brexit climate change denier) but I think your claim is incorrect. As far as I'm aware he's applied for a "carte de sejours" (spelling?) which I gather is something like the UK Indefinite Leave to Remain.

        Something which only becomes relevant now that freedom of movement for UK nationals is about to end. :(( Which I find v upsetting as many of my friends and colleagues and their children and myself have benefitted from that freedom. Particularly upsetting for the young Brits I know who grew up in NL and could have gotten an NL passport (while retaining their UK nationality) but didn't bother with that as they already had an EU passport - now they're truly stuffed. I am v p**** off with wealthy older folk like Lawson who have benefitted from freedom of movement, etc. and are now denying that to others.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

          he's applied for a "carte de sejours" (spelling?) which I gather is something like the UK Indefinite Leave to Remain.

          A Carte de Sejour is essentially a residence permit, which fulfils the requirement for carrying ID when you don't have a French ID card. I got mine when I moved to France pre-EU, it was valid for 10 years. US citizens got one that was valid for 5 years. When I renewed mine the replacement had indefinite validity. My (British) wife recently tried to renew hers and was told that they weren't doing that now, because the government offices that issue them were short-staffed and they were too busy. It wasn't Brexit-related.

          Overall it's not especially useful, since (unlike an ID card) it is clearly marked as not usable as ID for travel purposes, but it can come in handy when a bank or similar organization asks for proof of ID.

          1. Dr_N Silver badge

            Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

            >Overall it's not especially useful, since (unlike an ID card) it is clearly marked as not usable as ID for travel purposes, but it can come in handy when a bank or similar organization asks for proof of ID.

            So it IS useful then.

            Unless you want to carry your passport and an EDF bill around as your proof of address.

            Cartes de sejours were valid ID for travel in Schengen up until the recent post-Paris & Nice terror attack travel security changes.

            It will also be very useful after brexit as it is, in fact, an adjunct to you passport and will get you back into France with less hassle.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

              Cartes de sejours were valid ID for travel in Schengen

              Technically once you were in Schengen you didn't need any documents to travel around the zone, since there were no borders, so having a Carte de Séjour was irrelevant. Once France re-established border controls then ID was again required, and a Carte de Séjour is not sufficient. French government websites are quite explicit, it is not a valid travel document.

              It will also be very useful after brexit as it is, in fact, an adjunct to you passport and will get you back into France with less hassle.

              It won't make any difference, the only required document is a passport and the rules for that are defined by treaties far older than the EU. I've never been asked for my Carte de Séjour at any border. I tend to use it when someone wants me to leave a "Pièce d'identité", say for ski or bike rental, mostly because I'd be less worried about it getting lost than I would about my drivers licence.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

          Was this the same Lawson that wrecked the economy in the 1980's and who now holidays in England because he lives in France most of the time?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

        He's not currently applying for French citizenship.

        He's applying for a titre de sejour. And as an EU citizen he has the automatic right to one.

        A right that will be deleted for UK citizens and something that he has campaigned for.

        The hypocritical old ****.

        Still at least he doesn't hold a Belize passport like some Leave.EU campaign leaders.

        Nothing speaks English patriotic fervour like holding a Central American second passport.

        1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

          And as an EU citizen he has the automatic right to one.

          A right that will be deleted for UK citizens and something that he has campaigned for.

          He won't have a right to it, but that doesn't mean he can't get one post Brexit, he just has to ask. Like non-EU citizens who want to come to France do.

          It's a common remainer misconception that being in the EU is the only thing that makes living in another EU country possible. It doesn't, it simply makes it easier. Post-Brexit, any UK citizen will still be perfectly entitled to ask for a residence permit in any EU country. The only change will be that the country can say "no'. And why should countries not be able to say "no"?

          1. Dr_N Silver badge

            Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

            Phil O'Sophical>He won't have a right to it, but that doesn't mean he can't get one post Brexit,

            You're right Phil. Rich old people who are already receiving a big fat pension and live in a Chateau probably will not have an issue getting a carte de sejour after brexit.

            It's a common brexiter misconception that having all your rights removed by your compatriots will just mean you've got a few extra forms to fill. But as so many are of pensionable age it would be difficult for them to understand that for some people work, education & pension rights are now over.

            But hey, there are still the shits 'n' giggles as all the deep technical and social issues that'll arise from brexit finally dawn on its architects. I honestly can't wait to enjoy the next few years.

            "Brexit means brexit!" That is the soundbite that just keeps on giving in all aspects of this and all the subsequent catastrofucks brexit will so obviously lead to.

            Enjoy!

            1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
              Unhappy

              so many..of pensionable age..difficult..to understand..some people('s)..rights are now over

              True.

              I wonder if people will look back on Brexit and think "Yeah, that's the time when the old betrayed the young by depriving them of their future for some bu***hit fantasy."

              Actually the only real dividing line I found when I asked my British friends how they voted was this.

              The Remainers were all Graduates. None of the Leavers had a degree, although I'd say they could have all earned one.

              Beyond that no markers for age, ethnicity or gender.

              1. codejunky Silver badge

                Re: so many..of pensionable age..difficult..to understand..some people('s)..rights are now over

                @ John Smith 19

                I wonder if people will look back on Brexit and think "Yeah, that's the time when the old betrayed the young by depriving them of their future for some bu***hit fantasy."

                I dont know. I expect it will be one of those things brushed under the rug like Euro supporters who pretty much vanished once eurosceptics were proven right. I am wondering how the EU will be remembered depending on its time in existence. Will it survive long enough and do enough good to outweigh the damage it has inflicted? And will it be remembered as a positive attempt that lost its way or just a fleeting thought to be forgotten like the USSR.

                "Actually the only real dividing line I found when I asked my British friends how they voted was this.

                The Remainers were all Graduates. None of the Leavers had a degree, although I'd say they could have all earned one."

                I found a similar line (with few outliers) in my social circle. Students and recent graduates supported remain while those who work or at least have some life experience tended toward leave. I dont try to infer anything from that EU wise though. But as with you age, ethnicity and gender didnt seem to make a difference.

                1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
                  FAIL

                  things brushed under the rug..Euro supporters..vanished once eurosceptics were proven right.

                  WTF are you talking about?

                  In what way have eurosceptics been "proved right" ?

                  Does this have any more meaning than "Taking back control" (A slogan that can mean whatever you want it to mean. IOW it's actually meaningless) or "Brexit means Brexit," a tautology along the same lines as "Blue is Blue" or "Rain is Rain." Also pretty much meaningless.

                  I will qualify my comments. All the graduates I'd spoken too did degrees on subjects with relevance to the 21st century, where any essays they wrote actually had to relate to the real world, not simply demonstrate (like English, History or Classics) that you could write elegant (but meaningless) bu***hit. Those were the degrees of respectively Gove, Rees-Mogg and Johnson (Farage apparently didn't do a degree).

                  1. codejunky Silver badge

                    Re: things brushed under the rug..Euro supporters..vanished once eurosceptics were proven right.

                    @ John Smith 19

                    "In what way have eurosceptics been "proved right" ?"

                    Based on your previous comments I assume you are not opening with a joke although it sounds like one. The Euro has been a colossal failure and inflicted serious damage on Europe. That is why the label eurosceptic vanished because we were right when there was talk of imposing the EU currency on our country. Please tell me you know about/remember that.

                    "All the graduates I'd spoken too did degrees on subjects with relevance to the 21st century"

                    So? The point I made about your anecdotal evidence is it didnt stack against my anecdotal evidence, the difference being I am not trying to draw conclusions from it. But to compare the people I encountered had anything from no degree, sociology degree all the way to doctors of hard science. It made little difference, those who had any experience of working and living tended toward leave, those who were recent graduates of anything were for remain with few outliers.

                    The mistake to make is to think voting leave was uneducated. Invoking politicians as a reason to vote one way or the other reduces the intelligence of the debate to XFactor, with unsavoury characters on either side.

                    Moving away from tribal or boy band politics and instead looking at the facts and issues the EU debate becomes worth something.

              2. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: so many..of pensionable age..difficult..to understand..some people('s)..rights are now over

                You're really desperate to find any excuse that fits with your convictions that leavers didn't know what they were doing, aren't you. I have a feeling that life is going to be such a disappointment to you.

                The Remainers were all Graduates. None of the Leavers had a degree, although I'd say they could have all earned one.

                Ah, the old "my friends told me so" argument. I have a degree (I'm a chartered engineer). I support leave.

                And how does "Beyond that no markers for age, ethnicity or gender." fit with "that's the time when the old betrayed the young"?

                1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      With confidence like that I'm surprised the Remainers aren't dancing in the streets.

      Like most politicians it's a case of "Do what I say, not what I do."

      JRM and Redwood may be delusional little Britain fantasists, but they aren't actually stupid.

      That's what makes them dangerous.

    3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

      "With confidence like that I'm surprised the Remainers aren't dancing in the streets."

      Why? It's no cause for jubilation.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

        "Why? It's no cause for jubilation."

        I really didn't think I needed the sarcasm indicator. Or are you sarcasm-ing me?

        It's too hot and my brain is frying.

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

          "I really didn't think I needed the sarcasm indicator."

          There seems to be a line of thought that Remainers actually want Brexit to fail. That needs to be made clear to them. Thank you for providing an opportunity.

          "It's too hot and my brain is frying."

          You're not alone.

          1. heyrick Silver badge

            Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

            "There seems to be a line of thought that Remainers actually want Brexit to fail."

            No, we don't want it to fail, we just expect it to because it's basically insanity gone somewhere to happen, and we're not quite so delusional that we're content to accept the "it'll all turn out alright" lies when they are told by people moving their assets of of harm's way.

            1. This post has been deleted by its author

              1. Roland6 Silver badge

                Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

                >"We had EU agreement for projects ... without any political union.

                We had trade deals with the EU without political union."

                We could have them again! Remember M.Thatcher only joined the EU so that the UK had a seat at the table that controlled the Single Market & Customs Union and thus could protect UK interests. Unfortunately, it is the Conservative hardliners who think and want leaving the 'EU' to include leaving the Single Market and Customs Union among other things.

                1. This post has been deleted by its author

                  1. Roland6 Silver badge

                    Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

                    >The EU are dictating that we MUST have political union to have a trade union.

                    It is T.May and her team who have linked the two together and decided that a trade union such as being in the EEA/"Norway" option etc. isn't Brexit enough...

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

                  Remember M.Thatcher only joined the EU

                  Do remainers have any clue at all about the EU?

                  Thatcher did not join the EU, and had she still been PM at the time I doubt if she would have done so. It was John Major that signed Maastricht, without a referendum because all the opinion polls showed that he would have lost it if he'd called one.

              2. heyrick Silver badge

                Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

                "We had trade deals with the EU without political union."

                It's called EFTA. But that's already been dismissed because it has...the word "European" in the title?

                1. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

                  It's called EFTA. But that's already been dismissed because it has...the word "European" in the title?

                  No, it's being dismissed because Norway said "no". They don't want the UK taking over EFTA.

            2. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

              No, we don't want it to fail, we just expect it to

              And so you do nothing to help it succeed, and become part of the problem.

              1. Anonymous Coward
                Anonymous Coward

                Re: Lets just get on with it . . . .

                Ahh - so when it fails it's all us remainers' fault. Brexiteers: basically the 50 something guy who told his wife that he doesn't love her any more and wants a divorce. And is now moaning because it turns out that she has a better lawyer than him, and gets the house, car and custody of the dog, and is about to find out that the 20 something secretary in his office who 'flirted' with him at the Xmas party actually think's he is an old has-been, and is so not interested in his balding pate and beer belly. But none of it is his fault, if only his wife had been reasonable!

  16. Pen-y-gors Silver badge

    Bottom line?

    UK contribution to Galileo £1 billion or so - for which we get jobs and full access to a new GPS system.

    UK contribution to to UK GPS system? Govt say £3-5 billion, so in reality that probably means £9-15 billion. Timescales? Lets check the timescales for other Govt IT projects and see how they're going. Universal credit?

    The late delivery does help though. They can plant the saplings in the Magic Money Forest now and they'll be about ready to harvest when the rockets are due to launch.

  17. Herring` Silver badge

    We're gonna build our own satellite navigation system. With blackjack, and hookers.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Just outsource it to India, they have a space program so I heard and it is what the government tends to do.

    1. Graham Newton

      And India has working launch sites unlike the UK.

      1. Raj

        India already has an operational sat nav system as well .

  19. Roland6 Silver badge

    "the UK's version being operational at roughly the same time – mid-2020s".

    I wonder if that assumes work starting before the UK actually leaves the EU and thus in true UK government style, the relevant contracts being awarded to EU27 domicile companies...

  20. Will Godfrey Silver badge
    Unhappy

    Forget the politicians

    What about us real people?

    I visit friends in Europe quite frequently. Without exception their first question is whether I will still be able to get over to see them, and whether they will be able to visit me. I have to say in all honesty that I don't know.

    These days I don't give a toss about the exchange rate, business investment and political control. I want to be able to enjoy time with my friends, wherever they may be.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Forget the politicians

      I visit friends in Europe quite frequently. Without exception their first question is whether I will still be able to get over to see them, and whether they will be able to visit me. I have to say in all honesty that I don't know.

      Of course you will, if you have a passport. Why on earth should that change? You really think that not being in the EU will prevent you from visiting EU countries? That, I'm afraid, is just more remainer FUD.

      All that is likely to change is that if you wish to actually move to live in an EU country, or take up work there, is that you'll have to ask first & do more paperwork. Much as would be the case if you wanted to go to the 160-odd countries that aren't in the EU.

      The world is a small place these days, a British passport lets you visit 118 countries without a visa, a furtther 33 give you an automatic visa on arrival, and 47 require a visa in advance.

      1. Roland6 Silver badge

        Re: Forget the politicians

        Of course you will, if you have a passport. Why on earth should that change? You really think that not being in the EU will prevent you from visiting EU countries? That, I'm afraid, is just more remainer FUD.

        This is a bit like that other piece of non-joined up thinking: freedom of movement and EU workers in the UK. Brexit (as it currently stands) won't actually stop EU workers from working in the UK, it will just change the rules, specifically they will now be treated in the same way as people from Non-EU countries arriving in the UK. So if you voted Brexit in the belief leaving the EU would stop EU workers coming to the UK, you were mistaken, and if you voted remain and now believe that Brexit will prevent EU workers from working in the UK, you too were mistaken...

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Forget the politicians

          So if you voted Brexit in the belief leaving the EU would stop EU workers coming to the UK, you were mistaken, and if you voted remain and now believe that Brexit will prevent EU workers from working in the UK, you too were mistaken...

          Of course, which is why the whole remainer idea that this was about immigration is complete nonsense. Brexit is about political control and economics, and trying to label leavers as racists or xenophobes just demonstrates their lack of understanding of reality.

          Not to mention that the status of existing expatriate EU citizens was one of the first things that was agreed in the Brexit negotiations last year.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Forget the politicians

            Maybe it wasn't all about immigration - but one thing is sure, if those who did vote on immigration grounds hadn't, leave would have lost. And the political control and economics arguments were and are based on fantasy. No country is an island - we are tied to the world in all sorts of economic, political and social ways. The idea that 'independent' decisions by un-elected Westminster bureaucrats will be qualitatively different to decisions we made as part of the EU is pure fantasy. Except we lose the counterweight of an essentially social democratic Europe that actually cared about the environment and workers rights, and get left to the mercy of Rees Mogg's brand of 'I'm alright because Daddy was sensible enough to get rich' capitalism

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Forget the politicians

        >Of course you will, if you have a passport. Why on earth should that change? You really think that not being in the EU will prevent you from visiting EU countries? That, I'm afraid, is just more remainer FUD.

        Chances are we will still be able to visit. There is at least a good chance we will need a Visa to enter Schengen. I strongly suspect some groups of Brits will land on the day after leaving to suddenly be asked for papers they didn't previously need and be escorted back to the UK.

        1. Roland6 Silver badge

          Re: Forget the politicians

          >I strongly suspect some groups of Brits will land on the day after leaving to suddenly be asked for papers they didn't previously need and be escorted back to the UK.

          You are omitting a key detail: the UK are leaving the EU, so the day after - unless T.May gets agreeement, UK passport holders (Strictly) won't be able to use the EU passport holders channel...

          Given how long we've been using the EU passport holders channel, I expect it will be some years before travellers on "autopilot" stop using the EU passport holders channel...

          1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

            Re: Forget the politicians

            You are omitting a key detail: the UK are leaving the EU, so the day after - unless T.May gets agreeement, UK passport holders (Strictly) won't be able to use the EU passport holders channel

            I wouldn't bet on that. Those channels are usually labelled "EU, EEA, CH, CD" and it would be trivial to add UK to that. The UK gets many visitors from the EU and it would clearly be better to maintain a similar channel at the UK border for their convenience, so reciprocal arrangements with the EU would be logical. After all, it's exactly the same passport check, you can still join the "All passports" channel with an EU passport, I frequently do if the queue is shorter. I would also expect that people travelling on British Islands passports (Channel Islands, IOM) which are not EU passports, still use the EU channel today without problems.

            Of course, if the EU decides to be petty and force UK citizens into the "other" lane, as Brexit punishment, the UK may have to play tit-for-tat.

        2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

          Re: Forget the politicians

          There is at least a good chance we will need a Visa to enter Schengen.

          Funny how no-one holds the Schengen plans for a visa (required even for non-Schengen EU members) up as a demonstration of xenophobia. It seems that only anti-EU people can be guilty of that.

          I strongly suspect some groups of Brits will land on the day after leaving to suddenly be asked for papers they didn't previously need and be escorted back to the UK.

          If it's anything like the electronic visa systems used by other countries today (US, Canada, India, etc) it will be detected before you get on your plane/boat. When you're denied entry it's the airline or ferry company which is on the hook for getting you back home, so they generally like to check before you board.

          1. Dr_N Silver badge
            Stop

            Re: Forget the politicians

            >Phil O'Sophical If it's anything like the electronic visa systems used by other countries today (US, Canada, India, etc) it will be detected before you get on your plane/boat.

            In the case of the US, are you confusing visas with their electronic travel authorisation system for visa free travel? In most cases a "visa" still means sending off your passport and getting a visa put in it.

            Be careful, there are brextremist commentards who also get visa free travel confused with EU freedom of movement. So double confusion could occur!

            1. Raj

              Re: Forget the politicians

              "In the case of the US, are you confusing visas with their electronic travel authorisation system for visa free travel? In most cases a "visa" still means sending off your passport and getting a visa put in it."

              No, there is such a thing as an electronic visa that combines the ESTA mechanism with visa issuance. It involves an online registration, uploading your passport bio page and a picture in scanned form, and paying a fee. You get your approval or denial by email and you print the approval notice and carry it with you.

              India has updated its immigration systems to process pretty much the entire world this way, for tourism and medical visitors. You no longer send out a passport anywhere. That's only done for longer and more specialized visit types, that don't apply to the vast majority of the visitors.

            2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

              Re: Forget the politicians

              In the case of the US, are you confusing visas with their electronic travel authorisation system for visa free travel? In most cases a "visa" still means sending off your passport and getting a visa put in it.

              I was being careless with the terminology, true. An ESTA, like the Canadian ETA, is an electronic recogition that in some cases a visa requirement can be waived, so in a sense it's an explicit non-visa that serves as a visa!

              There are electronic visas, though. Turkey, India, and a number of middle-eastern and asian countries issue them, no need to send away a passport.

  21. David 164 Bronze badge

    Where the 5 to 10 billion pounds coming from?. Hammond have already stated their no extra money for other departments and the MOD is already struggling to pay for all of it current equipment on order for it.

  22. Jeyell

    Galileo, Galileo, Galileo...frig no-go.

    C'mon ED!

    1. Excellentsword (Written by Reg staff)

      Re: Galileo, Galileo, Galileo...frig no-go.

      You come on. We've mined Bohemian Rhapsody to exhaustion.

  23. Milton Silver badge

    Delusional Brexiters

    We want to leave nasty old Europe, whine, lie, snivel, whine

    But we thought we could keep all the good bits, whine, lie, snivel

    So let's blame Europe for our own moronically fucking stupid decisions, snivel, lie, whine

    There's a phrase for the endlessly deceitful, imbecile Brexiters: You made your bed. Now lie in it.

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      You made your bed. Now lie in it.

      Sadly, they made everybody else's bed as well.

      And it's lumpy and the legs are likely to collapse at any minute.

      Meanwhile they've f**ked off to the local Hilton (what, did you think the likes of JRM, Redwood, Lawson or Farage use Travel Lodge?) for a decent years rest from their labors.

  24. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
    FAIL

    Heres the

    one thing that fascinates me

    About this whole eu or not eu question.

    Airbus threatened to pull the wing making plant out of the UK and re-locate it to somewhere (most likely France) in europe.

    11 000 jobs gone.. poof.

    Only thing that makes me wonder is..... Airbus will stop recieving wings on brexit day. so unless they get on building the new wing plant PDQ they're going to have rather a lot of airplanes with no wings (and thats before you get into things like training the new workforce, and qualifying the plant to produce wings that dont fall apart on the ground or in the air).

    And that airbus are quite happy to have stuff made for them in China and the US.

    Its an attempt to get the twats in charge to actually work out a deal before the date (mind you I wouldn't trust the tories to be able to hold a piss up in a brewery, and the EU to be able to even FIND the brewery in first place... which is why they want Galileo in the first place)

  25. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    On the side of a big red shiny bus:

    "Losing access to Galileo due to BRexit will cost us £20bn. That's £20bn that could have gone to the NHS."

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Unhappy

      hat's £20bn that could have gone to the NHS."

      Or £-384m per week.

  26. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    BRexiters dig their own grave

    The problem with BRexiters is that not once has any of them provided an argument that may be reasonable or accurate.

    In a sane world, the more a BRexiter argues their case, the less popular it would become.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: BRexiters dig their own grave

      The problem with BRexiters is that not once has any of them provided an argument that may be reasonable or accurate.<

      And that differ from remainers how? All they can come up with is whining about how it's all going to change, with crazy ideas about what they won't be able to do after Brexit. Have you even read the current Brexit agreements that have already been signed with the EU?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: BRexiters dig their own grave

        Have you even read the current Brexit agreements that have already been signed with the EU?

        The downvotes would suggest that the answer is "no". Unsurprising, facts are such a drag.

  27. Lars Silver badge
    Happy

    Exiting the European Union Committee | Guy Verhofstadt MEP

    Guy Verhofstadt explains in detail the reality regardinh Galileo and what the UK can do.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOvQI6kkeMs

  28. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Direct job losses would be measured in the hundreds

    no matter, there'll be THOUSANDS of jobs left in the agricultural industry, since Poles and Romanians and other undesirables no longer bother! Also, those currently involved in galileo-related UK jobs will be relieved to know that agricultural opportunities come with splendid re-location and world-class accommodation opportunities in campter vans. Rooms with a view, no less!

    but, sarcasm aside, yes, UK will need its own sat system, which means there will be (some) jobs, and those jobs will be paid from the taxes collected from Brits. Unlike NHS funding and care for the elderly, which will NOT come from new taxes, but from them savings on EU money we've bled for years for NOTHING.

    but sarcasm aside (2), UK will need its own sat system. At least, to be able to launch them nukes in more or less the right location, eh?

  29. Dave 15

    remarkably simple

    Dont give them the slab of cash remainer May wants to , slap massive import duties on BMW, Merc, Renault and Citroen, put a 75% content made in Britain requirement on ALL tax payer funded purchases with an automatic 5% ratchet every 2 years (so in 10 years 100% UK made), all overseas aid in UK goods and services, put our own satellites up, scrap the order for F35s and Typhoons and go back to building our own, set up a commercial airline manufacture here (again) and have landing prices at UK airports treble if you arent using a UK built plane. In short, stop arsing around and realise we HAVE to start making stuff and standing on our own feet. 40 years of destroying British industry has bought us unemployment, an unaffordable trade deficit and enormous social issues. Hiding the damage by pretending that house price inflation is somehow GDP has led to major housing problems so sort that out with a single flat benefit and single flat tax. The benefit will NOT be enough to live in London so you will have to move... same as I as a tax payer funding benefits have had to move further and further away from work to find somewhere affordable. The single tax would probably be best on property .... a few hundred per square foot should probably do it with relief for manufacturing plant, greater releif if they are exporting and relief for productive farm land.

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      WTF?

      remarkably simple

      <yoda>

      The British people are. Yes.

      Elect the government they deserve I think. For forty or more years, yes.

      </yoda>

      Here's the thing. A bunch of ex PSB politicians have listened to a bunch of ex PSB bankers and believed that financial services is the only thing the UK can really do instead of investing (IE spending money) on education (does the UK have the sh***est foreign language courses in the EU as well? I think so) and encouraging manufacturing on a long term basis.

      This has f**k all to do with Europe. Let me repeat. F**k all to do with Europe.

      It is entirely a problem (like the Home Offices p**s poor handling of immigration issues) that is

      Made In Britain (TM).

      By Britons

      For Britons.

      Let me suggest the real difference between the UK relationship with the US and EU.

      With the EU it's impossible for UK politicians and civil servants to kid themselves "They're just an extension of us." With the US that delusion is possible, even when they tell the UK exactly what to do. But then brown nosing the school bully is no doubt a skill many ex PSB's possess.

  30. Torchy

    With what we know through our involvement in it and the refusal to allow us to use it I propose that we brick it by scrambling the encryption software that we wrote.

    It is called taking the football home.

    1. H in The Hague Silver badge

      "I propose that we brick it by scrambling the encryption software that we wrote."

      Not software you wrote. Software successful private companies wrote under contract. Or are you an extreme left-winger who wants to nationalise industry? Incidentally if your proposal was put into practice, no UK software company would ever get an overseas contract again - another great way to f*** British businesses. You are Boris Johnson and I claim my five pounds.

  31. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Unhappy

    If calling Leave voters "Banjos" seems a bit harsh..

    1) Well Linton Crosby did play you like one with that "Taking Back Control (C Linton Kwesi Crosby 2017) bo***cks didn't he?

    2) Realizing you've been played is the first step to not being played again.

    3) Thinking out the answer for yourself is the only true freedom anyone has. But remember, thinking without including all the facts you don't want to think about is simply confirmation bias.

  32. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Passports

    So will Gatwick have to rebuild their passport and immigration hall to allow all the UK passport holders returning from their European holidays from next year?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Passports

      No. Don't be silly.

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Maybe the UK

    Can join up with the U.S. instead.

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      FAIL

      Can join up with the U.S. instead.

      Well we know there are enough stupid people in the UK who think that would be a great idea.

      Of course they don't realize that a UK ruled by Lord High Chancellor Rees-Moog (I think that's got the right sort of historical ring to hit for his liking) would look like a Communist state to Trumps presidency.

      But heay they voted Brexit by a 13/12 majority so getting them to believe actually being the 51st state would be child's play.

      Amazing what happens when you hollow out an education system to kill critical thinking and the ability to do your own research, is it not?

      1. codejunky Silver badge

        Re: Can join up with the U.S. instead.

        @ John Smith 19

        "High Chancellor Rees-Moog (I think that's got the right sort of historical ring to hit for his liking) would look like a Communist state to Trumps presidency."

        Communism was a failed experiment of socialism. Rees-Mogg being a traditional conservative and right wing doesnt sound like a socialist so would be very unlikely to try communism. Not to defend the guy, just to point out the mistake.

        "But heay they voted Brexit by a 13/12 majority so getting them to believe actually being the 51st state would be child's play."

        How is that better or worse than being the 28th state of a political block that is falling apart? At least we share a common language with the US, and outlook on law, and economic competency. So instead of laughing at joining the US it might be better to question how being tethered to the EU is a good thing or somehow better.

  34. Sujan Azad Parikh

    "Most leavers have low levels of interests in these subjects as a consequence of having a very low level IQ."

    That's not fair. Most gamers know there is a huge difference between intelligence and wisdom.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019