dieseldave:
Carryfast:
Regardless of the merits of the idea at best it sounds unworkable.While I think the Brexit vote was on the basis that we wouldn’t be subject to any EU imposed directives to be applied retrospectively with any EU laws being reviewed starting with a clean sheet in that regard.Anything other than that won’t be Brexit at all but something else.Let alone maintaining any directives imposed after the vote to leave.While all the signs are that May is a typical lying Con who’s saying one thing to appease the Brexit vote while doing the exact opposite in playing for time to keep us shackled to Juncker’s rule.Which ironically also explains the split in UKIP’s ranks which Farage needs to get a grip on.
OK Carryfast, that’ll do for the politics please, otherwise you’ll end up derailing this topic. 
I thought that the question regarding the credibility of any ‘EU’ ‘consultation’, regarding any directive,either retrospective or let alone being issued from this point in time,would be subject to the political argument how is it possibly justified if we’re leaving the EU. 
Carryfast:
dieseldave:
Carryfast:
Regardless of the merits of the idea at best it sounds unworkable.While I think the Brexit vote was on the basis that we wouldn’t be subject to any EU imposed directives to be applied retrospectively with any EU laws being reviewed starting with a clean sheet in that regard.Anything other than that won’t be Brexit at all but something else.Let alone maintaining any directives imposed after the vote to leave.While all the signs are that May is a typical lying Con who’s saying one thing to appease the Brexit vote while doing the exact opposite in playing for time to keep us shackled to Juncker’s rule.Which ironically also explains the split in UKIP’s ranks which Farage needs to get a grip on.
OK Carryfast, that’ll do for the politics please, otherwise you’ll end up derailing this topic.
I thought that the question regarding the credibility of any ‘EU’ ‘consultation’, regarding any directive,either retrospective or let alone being issued from this point in time,would be subject to the political argument how is it possibly justified if we’re leaving the EU.
You thought wrong.
Not the first time.
End off
hahaha, I bet Carryfast was the life and soul of any Xmas party at the last company he worked for back in the ■■? ! whenever that was …
Ignoring whether its a Eu rule or UK rule, there hasnt been anyone yet said its a bad idea in principle. Sure, not easy to enforce, but the idea hasnt got anyone shouting about “civil rights” etc. Past Saturday night now, maybe it`ll get past the Sunday lunchtime session too?
Carryfast:
dieseldave:
Carryfast:
Regardless of the merits of the idea at best it sounds unworkable.While I think the Brexit vote was on the basis that we wouldn’t be subject to any EU imposed directives to be applied retrospectively with any EU laws being reviewed starting with a clean sheet in that regard.Anything other than that won’t be Brexit at all but something else.Let alone maintaining any directives imposed after the vote to leave.While all the signs are that May is a typical lying Con who’s saying one thing to appease the Brexit vote while doing the exact opposite in playing for time to keep us shackled to Juncker’s rule.Which ironically also explains the split in UKIP’s ranks which Farage needs to get a grip on.
OK Carryfast, that’ll do for the politics please, otherwise you’ll end up derailing this topic.
I thought that the question regarding the credibility of any ‘EU’ ‘consultation’, regarding any directive,either retrospective or let alone being issued from this point in time,would be subject to the political argument how is it possibly justified if we’re leaving the EU.
Carryfast,
I’ll put this simply for you…
You mentioned “May,” and “Junker” and “Farage,” all of whom are absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand. 
For my 2p worth (on this topic at hand ) I think that, once we’ve fully Brexited, EU Directives and Regulations will have no effect on UK domestic transport. However, if the vehicles being discussed in this topic have to go to Euroland once any new Regulation comes into force, I’d imagine that they’d have to comply with any applicable European rules.
There you go Carryfast, there’s how to post ON TOPIC and without bringing the price of fish, politics or politicians into it. 
OVLOV JAY:
If they get brought into scope, and that’s a big if, cue a load of exemptions to cover builders etc, leading to a load of white van man types sign writing vans to look like trades people. Personally I don’t think it could ever work, as the fraction of white vans on long haulage is quite small.
Don’t think it really matters about whether its a van on long distance or more pertinently a courier type operation of which there are many, regulating them is probably going to happen, if not by the EU then by the DVSA, more than likely in a mirror image to what the EU do. As I suspect the EU drivers hours rules will be legislated into a domestic drivers hours rules for large commercial vehicles, and while their doing that, how easy is it going to be, to make it cover all commercial vehicles, then make a long list of exemptions
So for those out there, who like a friend of mine, seriously believed that we would be using HGV’s on Transilt van style log books, or actually no hours recording what so ever, this may be a bitter pill to swollow
muckles:
I think the DVSA threatened that they would be considering bring vans under the same or similar O’licence regulations that larger vehicles have, due to the general state of maintenance and overloading of many of the ones they check.
And having spent 5 years staying in lodgings used by various builders and other trades I’ve heard some of the hours they’ll drive before and after a job.
And then you have this proliferation of 3.5t curtainsiders running round Europe, it’s no wonder that various authorities are looking at regulation of them.
The big question will be how to regulate them, vans in general are used very differently from trucks. we have a van at work and it’s used for a mixture of long distance jobs and quick trips round the corner and during a day it can be used by many people.
If it was brought into the UK, do you think the government would increase the size of the DVSA to cope with the extra work of checking all the operators of these vehicles?
I really do doubt they would actually be able to enforce any driving law regarding vans. There are so many uses for vans that both fall in and out of the scope of the driver regs. My mate is a plumber and has one of those little French car/van things. He uses it for work as well as personal use, how would that be enforced. A lorry is a commercial vehicle used for one thing, transporting goods from A to B, a van is also a commercial vehicle but its also a personal means of transport so it has many uses.
eddie snax:
OVLOV JAY:
If they get brought into scope, and that’s a big if, cue a load of exemptions to cover builders etc, leading to a load of white van man types sign writing vans to look like trades people. Personally I don’t think it could ever work, as the fraction of white vans on long haulage is quite small.
Don’t think it really matters about whether its a van on long distance or more pertinently a courier type operation of which there are many, regulating them is probably going to happen, if not by the EU then by the DVSA, more than likely in a mirror image to what the EU do. As I suspect the EU drivers hours rules will be legislated into a domestic drivers hours rules for large commercial vehicles, and while their doing that, how easy is it going to be, to make it cover all commercial vehicles, then make a long list of exemptions
So for those out there, who like a friend of mine, seriously believed that we would be using HGV’s on Transilt van style log books, or actually no hours recording what so ever, this may be a bitter pill to swollow
Or we just come under AETR regs,
Some drivers seem a bit delusional when it comes to changing drivers hours.
Going back to log book when electronic means are available and already fitted in trucks, is as likely as your average teenager giving up their mobile and using a public phone box.
And they mostly think any changes will be to the benefit of the driver, when more likely in the unlikely event of changes it will be to benefit the employers.
Radar19:
muckles:
I think the DVSA threatened that they would be considering bring vans under the same or similar O’licence regulations that larger vehicles have, due to the general state of maintenance and overloading of many of the ones they check.
And having spent 5 years staying in lodgings used by various builders and other trades I’ve heard some of the hours they’ll drive before and after a job.
And then you have this proliferation of 3.5t curtainsiders running round Europe, it’s no wonder that various authorities are looking at regulation of them.
The big question will be how to regulate them, vans in general are used very differently from trucks. we have a van at work and it’s used for a mixture of long distance jobs and quick trips round the corner and during a day it can be used by many people.
If it was brought into the UK, do you think the government would increase the size of the DVSA to cope with the extra work of checking all the operators of these vehicles?
I really do doubt they would actually be able to enforce any driving law regarding vans. There are so many uses for vans that both fall in and out of the scope of the driver regs. My mate is a plumber and has one of those little French car/van things. He uses it for work as well as personal use, how would that be enforced. A lorry is a commercial vehicle used for one thing, transporting goods from A to B, a van is also a commercial vehicle but its also a personal means of transport so it has many uses.
If it did happen I think any enforcement would be part of other investigations, either after a a serious accident or HSE investigation the business, where a trades person was injured or killed on site and they look at the time spent traveling to and from work to see if fatigue might have played a part.
I think it makes sense, talking about “one hitters”, these guys are very famous for.
I think builders, people who use vans for private use, etc could be covered under similair registration as is done on Horseboxes, scaffolders, recovery vehicles etc.
A new type of smart tachograph, related personal to the driver dongle could avoid the need to operate any tachograph, just record driving and other.
Location via GPS.
Every company who use their vehicles for hire and reward, or for their own transport, including mini buses, should be able to produce all the records.
I think it will add substantial road safety.
dieseldave:
Carryfast:
dieseldave:
Carryfast:
Regardless of the merits of the idea at best it sounds unworkable.While I think the Brexit vote was on the basis that we wouldn’t be subject to any EU imposed directives to be applied retrospectively with any EU laws being reviewed starting with a clean sheet in that regard.Anything other than that won’t be Brexit at all but something else.Let alone maintaining any directives imposed after the vote to leave.While all the signs are that May is a typical lying Con who’s saying one thing to appease the Brexit vote while doing the exact opposite in playing for time to keep us shackled to Juncker’s rule.Which ironically also explains the split in UKIP’s ranks which Farage needs to get a grip on.
OK Carryfast, that’ll do for the politics please, otherwise you’ll end up derailing this topic.
I thought that the question regarding the credibility of any ‘EU’ ‘consultation’, regarding any directive,either retrospective or let alone being issued from this point in time,would be subject to the political argument how is it possibly justified if we’re leaving the EU.
Carryfast,
I’ll put this simply for you…
You mentioned “May,” and “Junker” and “Farage,” all of whom are absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand.
For my 2p worth (on this topic at hand ) I think that, once we’ve fully Brexited, EU Directives and Regulations will have no effect on UK domestic transport. However, if the vehicles being discussed in this topic have to go to Euroland once any new Regulation comes into force, I’d imagine that they’d have to comply with any applicable European rules.
There you go Carryfast, there’s how to post ON TOPIC and without bringing the price of fish, politics or politicians into it.
As I said.
a) We are ‘supposed’ to be leaving the EU in line with the leave campaign manifesto and the statement that Brexit supposedly means Brexit.
(b) An ‘EU’ ‘consulation’ is by definition obviously all part of an ‘EU’ ‘political’ process and thereby it’s a ‘political’ topic.Which is by implication subject to ( a ) but which itself is in doubt because of the untrustworthy nature of May v Farage.IE on topic.
(c) No there is no rule that says a non EU vehicle ( truck or van ) not aligned with EU regs ( AETR ) can’t carry out freight journeys to/from anywhere within the EU subject to the regs applying in its country of registration.Bearing in mind ( a ) we’re obviously not talking about cabotage operations.
I’m about to give up a job because the boss, who isn’t a fit and proper person to hold an operators license, wanted me to get in a van with him and drive for 10 hours on top of a 10 hour working day. Told it wasn’t safe for him nor me. Didn’t go.
Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
Piratefish:
I’m about to give up a job because the boss, who isn’t a fit and proper person to hold an operators license, wanted me to get in a van with him and drive for 10 hours on top of a 10 hour working day. Told it wasn’t safe for him nor me. Didn’t go.
Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
Strange how even the potential idea of putting the whole commercial fleet on log books subject to a reviewed 12 ( possibly 10 away from base ) hour daily rest regime,would be less preferable to some than staying with the dogs dinner of EU regs.
They’ve been banging o. About this for many years its not going to happen anytime soon I wouldn’t worry about it having said that it would get rid of the many cowboys that seem to be happy to do large van work for the price of a small van
Carryfast:
As I said.
a) We are ‘supposed’ to be leaving the EU in line with the leave campaign manifesto and the statement that Brexit supposedly means Brexit.
(b) An ‘EU’ ‘consulation’ is by definition obviously all part of an ‘EU’ ‘political’ process and thereby it’s a ‘political’ topic.Which is by implication subject to ( a ) but which itself is in doubt because of the untrustworthy nature of May v Farage.IE OFF topic.
Carryfast,
Your whole line of argument just imploded, and for the very reason YOU gave. 
Congratulations, you’re now standing in the middle of a pile of your own rubble. 
I’ll own up that I haven’t read the consultation, but I wouldn’t mind betting that it doesn’t name any politicians or political parties, so it might be an idea to debate what’s in the consultation document since that’s the title of the topic.
You can discuss Junker, May and Farage to your heart’s content in Bully’s Bar (That’s if you get any takers. )
Somehow DD I feel all you’ve done is lit a fuse!
dieseldave:
Carryfast:
As I said.
a) We are ‘supposed’ to be leaving the EU in line with the leave campaign manifesto and the statement that Brexit supposedly means Brexit.
(b) An ‘EU’ ‘consulation’ is by definition obviously all part of an ‘EU’ ‘political’ process and thereby it’s a ‘political’ topic.Which is by implication subject to ( a ) but which itself is in doubt because of the untrustworthy nature of May v Farage.IE OFF topic.
Carryfast,
Your whole line of argument just imploded, and for the very reason YOU gave.
Congratulations, you’re now standing in the middle of a pile of your own rubble.
I’ll own up that I haven’t read the consultation, but I wouldn’t mind betting that it doesn’t name any politicians or political parties, so it might be an idea to debate what’s in the consultation document since that’s the title of the topic.
You can discuss Junker, May and Farage to your heart’s content in Bully’s Bar (That’s if you get any takers. )
To be fair the EU ‘government’ is a ‘political’ entity regardless of its party make up and any type of ‘government’ ‘consultation’ is arguably part of the ‘political’ process.
That all obviously changes in the case of the Commissioners deciding to just impose EU directives without any consultation,or discussion,or MEP involvement whatsoever.By using military force to enforce it. 
In this case the ‘political process’ in question being that of an irrelevant foreign government that no longer holds any credible juristiction here.Which is where the argument between May v Farage becomes ‘on topic’.
Although having said that maybe I could start a topic in Bullies,regarding views on the definition of ‘on topic’ v ‘off topic’,in the case of this specific topic at least.
It’s so predictable, it’s almost not funny!
Evil8Beezle:
It’s so predictable, it’s almost not funny!
It wasn’t meant to be ‘funny’.
The issue of the EU,its directives and consultations regarding its directives,the fact that such directives can’t apply to a non EU member state,assuming we aren’t to be an EEA member state,nor an AETR member state,the definition of Brexit means Brexit and May’s probable agenda v that of Farage among others in that regard,are all arguably on topic regards ‘this’ topic.