Brexit matters

[najaB]

Presumably rational consumers agree that they get equal or better value from their current provider notwithstanding EU roaming charges, otherwise they’d be with O2.

Or, more likely, they don't know that roaming fees are back and won't realise until they get hit with a bill when they get back from holiday.

 

[Cdd89]

Or, more likely, they don't know that roaming fees are back and won't realise until they get hit with a bill when they get back from holiday.

Are any major providers bringing back EU roaming fees for those on existing contracts? I thought it was an “applies to new plans” thing. In which case they should be reading the terms and choosing the plan/provider most appropriate to them.

 

[najaB]

Are any major providers bringing back EU roaming fees for those on existing contracts? I thought it was an “applies to new plans” thing. In which case they should be reading the terms and choosing the plan/provider most appropriate to them.

They seem to be applying them to contracts started from this time last year onwards.

Though, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people roll over into a new contract without paying too much attention to the details - and the mobile operators are unlikely to highlight the reimposed fees.

 

[Cdd89]

Though, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people roll over into a new contract without paying too much attention to the details - and the mobile operators are unlikely to highlight the reimposed fees.

I don't believe you can "roll into a new contract" without being directed to read and agree to new terms and conditions. I agree that (unfortunately) many people will sign without reading, but that is on them.

My impression is that consumers have the power to force mobile operators to reintroduce free roaming. O2 are the only provider without them and have advertised hard on this basis. If people move en-masse to O2 (and networks always ask why you're leaving), the other networks will probably scrap the charges. If they don't, O2 will probably reintroduce them.

My guess, unfortunately, is that even knowledgeable consumers won't care. Based on an average of 14 days abroad p/a and a £2 daily fee, this makes free roaming worth an average of £2.33/month. My guess is that other differences are worth more to many consumers than that.

 

[Cloud Strife]

Doesn't apply to Switzerland either. In some countries the operators increased their domestic tariffs for all to cover the wholesale costs of roaming while in others operators have introduced cheaper domestic only tariffs. It isn't all milk and honey.

The whole Roam at Home programme is not based on economics but the politics of promoting the EU.

Switzerland will be included as part of the plan to include the EEA. There's very clear political will to get rid of roaming charges throughout Europe, not just in the EU. As for the increase in domestic tariffs, that was simply about protecting their profit margins and not about the actual cost of providing the service.

I suspect you may well be correct that there are insufficient mobile phone networks to provide adequate competition, and if there is inadequate competition, then regulation may be necessary to protect consumers. However, regulation of prices is invariably a very imperfect solution that would ideally need to be kept under review to make sure it remains necessary and that the particular regulations are appropriate: It's so easy for badly designed or overly heavy-handed price regulation to do more harm than good. I'd therefore be somewhat reluctant to embed price regulation in a treaty, which thereby becomes very difficult to change later on. I'd much rather any regulation of UK phone provider prices is done purely as a Government regulation that can be easily adjusted if market circumstances change.

The trick, I think, would have been to simply agree that free roaming would continue, but that either party had the right to unilaterally withdraw from the agreement. If there were strong market reasons (and not just 'let's give BT and Vodafone more money'), then there could be a formal withdrawal. Vodafone is particularly bad, given that they own a large network of mobile towers in the EU.

The UK networks can't afford free roaming as they now have to pay the wholesale charges that don't apply to EU members (and was recently extended 10 years - which means even in the EU, in theory, they could reintroduce charges one day because it has an expiry).

The EU would happily have agreed for UK-EU to be treated the same way as between EU countries.

The thing I cannot understand is *why* the Tories didn't sort this out. It was and is a popular policy, it came at little to no cost to consumers, and the only thing I can think of is that Vodafone and BT had some words.

 

[ainsworth74]

(and networks always ask why you're leaving)

Do they? I just left Three in favour of EE and haven't heard a dicky bird out of them!

 

[Doppelganger]

The thing I cannot understand is *why* the Tories didn't sort this out. It was and is a popular policy, it came at little to no cost to consumers, and the only thing I

The Tories don't give a flying fig unless it affects them.

I'm sure BT and/or Vodafone had zero to do with any of the decision making.

The Tories were too obsessed to get "get Brexit done" to consider any real detail and so pushed Brexit through and quite frankly it was to everyone's detriment. Unless you were a proper Tory though, and so could actually afford to bear any of the additional costs. I feel sorry for those red Tories who were only lending their votes to Johnson as they are the ones to be most affected, but the damage is done now.

 

[Enthusiast]

I'd be interested to know what awful EU law you feel threatened by or greatly disadvantages you that Brexit will remove?

None in particular. I simply don't want any laws devised by unelected bureaucrats imposed on this country when its representatives can be overruled. It's not a matter of what can be imposed, but a matter of who can impose it. I am, incidentally, well aware of how the EU works.

All EU member states influence the decision.

Only up to a point. The UK had about 10% of MEPs. If something suited the other 27 members but didn't suit us there was sweet FA we could do about it.

 

[Doppelganger]

Only up to a point. The UK had about 10% of MEPs. If something suited the other 27 members but didn't suit us there was sweet FA we could do about it.

But that isn't how it works. You think Wallonia scuppered the Canada/EU trade deal because of their number of MEPs?

Again I have to stress how small the British understanding of how the EU works is.

The UK was a big decision maker and influencer within the EU, but it's a lot easier to just blame the EU for all the UK's ills, as this fits the current narrative so much better.

The fact the UK has left the EU, yet still manages to complain is just amazing.

 

[ainsworth74]

The fact the UK has left the EU, yet still manages to complain is just amazing.

I find it amusing (in a "I'd cry otherwise" sort of way). They won! They got exactly what they wanted! The UK out of the EU! And yet they're still unhappy and seem to have to make the rest of us unhappy because apparently their Brexit wasn't to their liking? Must be the fault of traitorous Remoaners! Couldn't possibly be that their whole project was flawed from start to finish.

 

[Bald Rick]

The fact the UK has left the EU, yet still manages to complain is just amazing.

It was entirely predictable, unfortunately.

Leaving the EU was obviously going to affect our economy in a bad way, obviously cause various issues at borders for both trade and individuals, and obviously the EU would do whatever was in its own interests once we left.

There seemed to be a part of the U.K. press and politics that thought the EU needed us more than we needed them, and again obviously, all of the above issues would be portrayed as the EU behaving badly towards us - ie it’s their fault. And use that to suggest it is just as well we left! The logical gymnastics required to reach these conclusions has to be admired.

 

[birchesgreen]

Unhappy people are still unhappy, "woke" people are the new scapegoat which basically translates to anyone the hater doesn't like.

 

[najaB]

My guess, unfortunately, is that even knowledgeable consumers won't care. Based on an average of 14 days abroad p/a and a £2 daily fee, this makes free roaming worth an average of £2.33/month. My guess is that other differences are worth more to many consumers than that.

It's not knowledgeable consumers that we need to be concerned about, as they are likely to know that they need to turn off data roaming, or will buy a local SIM card.

Consumer protection legislation exists to protect the naive consumer, rather than the savvy ones.

There seemed to be a part of the U.K. press and politics that thought the EU needed us more than we needed them

I saw that very comment repeatedly in discussions about Brexit - apparently the German car industry would collapse without UK sales.

 

[jon0844]

We're still waiting for the German car makers to come to our rescue. Was there a major jam on the autobahns?

 

[Bald Rick]

I saw that very comment repeatedly in discussions about Brexit - apparently the German car industry would collapse without UK sales.

Not forgetting the Prosecco industry…

 

[birchesgreen]

We're still waiting for the German car makers to come to our rescue. Was there a major jam on the autobahns?

Any day now, they are going to be bashing down the door at the EU. Any day now...

 

[TwoYellas]

It really warmed the cockles of the heart to see the droves of people stand up to fill the vacant roles in hospitality, transport, care and fruit picking. So as to ensure no shortages occurred.

 

[AM9]

And of course, the only reason the England couldn't beat Germany at football was because of unfair EU rules. The women's team could put that right yesterday as they weren't unfairly disadvantaged as they have been ever since 1996, by the Masstrict Treaty.

 

[Bald Rick]

And of course, the only reason the England couldn't beat Germany at football was because of unfair EU rules. The women's team could put that right yesterday as they weren't unfairly disadvantaged as they have been ever since 1996, by the Masstrict Treaty.

Of course !!

 

[Doppelganger]

And of course, the only reason the England couldn't beat Germany at football was because of unfair EU rules. The women's team could put that right yesterday as they weren't unfairly disadvantaged as they have been ever since 1996, by the Masstrict Treaty.

It was 1992 when it was signed. Importantly however, it gave the UK a lot of opt outs, so that isn't a good comparison, as it gave the UK many concessions over other EU members.

 

[najaB]

It was 1992 when it was signed. Importantly however, it gave the UK a lot of opt outs, so that isn't a good comparison, as it gave the UK many concessions over other EU members.

Yeah, usually one more penalty than they conceded to England.

 

[nanstallon]

Well, Brexit was a great move, wasn't it? Our girls would never have beaten Germany before that wise decision!

 

[Mikw]

Well, Brexit was a great move, wasn't it? Our girls would never have beaten Germany before that wise decision!

Having a foreign coach may just have helped.....

 

[najaB]

Well, Brexit was a great move, wasn't it? Our girls would never have beaten Germany before that wise decision!

I fully expect the Honourable Member for the 1800s to be claiming that it's a Brexit benefit.

 

[Gloster]

I fully expect the Honourable Member for the 1800s to be claiming that it's a Brexit benefit.

He is most impressed by the way that our ladies’ stoolball team defeated Prussia.

 

[GusB]

Because if you're expecting to live permanently in another country, and effectively benefit from the hospitality of that country, it doesn't seem unreasonable to expect that in return, you show some allegiance to the country and its values, and a willingness to be a part of the community of that country

"Hospitality"? That makes it seem like the people who came to work here did so entirely at the invitation of and the expense of their "hosts" and that nothing was given back in return. Do please choose your words more carefully.

No-one is doing large scale expulsions. This is just silly hyperbole that has no relation to what is actually happening.

Setting limits on how much someone can earn before they can legitimately become a UK citizen is tantamount to expulsion when it's obvious that those workers cannot possibly achieve the level of income required. On the surface it's not an "expulsion", but...

 

[TwoYellas]

When Trump, Putin and Farage agree that something is a good idea. It's probably a bad idea!

 

[GusB]

Then it's a question of who do you want to take these decisions? An elected UK government over which the electorate has a modicum of control, or a panel of unelected bureaucrats over whom the electorate has no control whatsoever?

They were elected, though. The biggest problem that we had was that EU elections were never seen as being significant; rather like council elections, really. The EU was seen as something that was "done to us", rather than something that we actually participated in.

To be honest, I'm probably as guilty as anyone else in that I can't remember voting in an EU election but, at the same time, there was never any big push to involve UK citizens in EU decisions.

None in particular. I simply don't want any laws devised by unelected bureaucrats imposed on this country when its representatives can be overruled. It's not a matter of what can be imposed, but a matter of who can impose it. I am, incidentally, well aware of how the EU works.

Ah, like the old duffers currently sitting in the House of Lords. How's that going?

 

[tomuk]

We're still waiting for the German car makers to come to our rescue. Was there a major jam on the autobahns?

They did come to the rescue, the Brexit deal included no tariff on automotive rather than 10% and full bilateral cumulation on Rules of Origin.

 

[TwoYellas]

First they came for the hard Brexiteers, and I did not speak out.

Because no one is out to get you, you paranoid, delusional, swivel-eyed snake oil merchants!