***** This thread is now closed, please CLICK HERE to go to Volume 74 *****
IMPORTANT - PLEASE READ
Before discussions start in this thread, I would like to point out that any petty arguments, personal attacks, or any other infringement of house rules, etc. will be deleted where we feel fit from now on.
We will not give notice that we have deleted something. Nor will we enter into discussion why something was deleted. That will also be deleted.
It seems that discussion about Brexit brings out the worst in some people.
Be nice, Play nice, and control your temper. Your co-operation would be appreciated.
Last edited by: VxFan on Mon 17 Dec 18 at 01:41
|
So, TM is in charge.
And she just knocked a lot of game playing and players out of the ring.
The EU seem pretty rock solid that the negotiation is over. So there would appear to be a small number of choices;
1) Hard exit
Surely nobody is stupid enough or selfish enough to think this is a good idea;
2) The deal
It will deliver Brexit. It'll deliver it in 20 months [probably] and it'll probably be the best leave deal possible.
It'll be some form of Beano, but that's the best possible.
If I wanted leave, then I'd support it 100%.
3) A referendum
Not sure what this would achieve. I cannot see it producing a materially different result. It'll still be 50/50 near enough, so where does it take us?
If it was suddenly going to be 70/30 in either direction, that would be a different matter, but surely nobody thinks that's likely.
4) A General Election.
Not a snowball's chance. TM just won a NC vote, why would she?
I reckon it'll be 2).
|
>>1) Hard exit
>> Surely nobody is stupid enough or selfish enough to think this is a good idea;
I think there are. Some people would make an awful lot of money from a no deal Brexit. Think of all the share shorters out there.
|
|
I could imagine that if this was a different PM the 48 'weasels' might find themselves on a posting to Outer Mongolia!
|
>> 1) Hard exit
>> Surely nobody is stupid enough or selfish enough to think this is a good idea;
Ha! You know these helmets better than most, NoFM2R but that comes across as a tad naïve!
Any talk of "giving power back to the Great British public" is more to do with giving the power/money back to the politicos (and their mates) who will ultimately not suffer from hard Brexit.
I bet you the majority of Hard Brexiters did not vote for publishing their expenses either.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Wed 12 Dec 18 at 23:35
|
So wind back a few weeks and you had the usual Tory BREXITEER cheerleaders calling for a vote of no confidence.
Eventually they get their way, and to me the result is a fairly positive vote in support of TM, and suddenly they are now looking for an election.
They're not being very consistent really, as I recall we were previously told that 52-48 was a clear democratic majority which we all had to live with.
|
|
Read a tweet saying Boris has wasted money on his leadership haircut. "Thats £7.50 he will never get back"
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 13 Dec 18 at 08:04
|
>> They're not being very consistent really, as I recall we were previously told that 52-48
>> was a clear democratic majority which we all had to live with.
Exactly this. People like Rees-Mogg bleat on about a 52-48 vote in favour of Brexit being a mandate for a hard Brexit, but then say that a PM who wins a confidence vote 63-37 is somehow illegitimate. The hypocrisy is barely believable.
He needs to accept the result, get back in his box and be quiet, just like he and his ilk have been telling remain voters to do since the referendum.
|
>> He needs to accept the result, get back in his box and be quiet, just
>> like he and his ilk have been telling remain voters to do since the referendum.
>>
It would all be better if he, Bojo, Corbyn etc would stop trying to score points by criticising and state what they actually want. Last night's vote and JC's reluctance to actually go for a vote of no confidence show they know that they have nothing positive which would command more support but it reads well in the press that they don't like what is on offer.
|
I have a feeling that some voters are getting a bit disillusioned with "the system", to say the least.
The concerning thing about that is what that may cause at the next GE, whenever that may be.
|
>> The concerning thing about that is what that may cause at the next GE, whenever
>> that may be.
>>
Given that there will be little in the way of alternatives on offer I doubt there will be a massive change from that we have been used to in the last 60 years
1 labour in
2 labour bankrupts country
2a Election
3 Libdemwhatevertheyarecalledthisyear claim to be a new third way
4 NF/UKIP/Racist Party claim to be making ground
5 Tories elected (3 & 4 decimated)
6 hard fiscal policies to drag country back from bankrupcy
7 Tories eat current leader & dissolve into internal warfare
7a Election
8 Goto 1
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 13 Dec 18 at 10:11
|
|
I thought I read when I was away that Farage is considering a new party?
|
>> I thought I read when I was away that Farage is considering a new party?
Just add that to 4/ above
|
>>1) Hard exit
>>Surely nobody is stupid enough or selfish enough to think this is a good idea;
I know a fair chunk of bankers and such like who do. They passionately believe that the ensuing collapse in the pound and the opportunity to make deals with the rest of the growing world, rather than being shackled to stagnant Europe, is a good idea.
Long term, they're probably right. But some of us have grocery bills to pay in the intervening decade.
So who is being selfish? Discuss.
Interesting opinion poll in the Standard. Khan is on 52% and the Tory on 28%. Absent JC, nationally I presume numbers would be similar. Instead they forecast an unholy Labour/Scot Nat alliance needing the LDs for a majority.
www.electionpolling.co.uk/polls/general-election
A GE would not solve anything either.
|
Last night's vote clearly shows that many Tory MPs ignore the wishes of their local Associations on whom they rely for selection and campaigning at election time.
|
>> Last night's vote clearly shows that many Tory MPs ignore the wishes of their local
>> Associations on whom they rely for selection and campaigning at election time.
>>
Shows nothing of the sort. None of the local associations were asked in the last 7 days if they wanted to get rid of Theresa May.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 13 Dec 18 at 14:16
|
|
My local man, Steve Double voted against Theresa the Deceiver last night, will vote against the deal too.
|
|
He comes on BBC Radio Cornwall (lunchtime with Laurence) occasionally. He recently stated live on air that he would vote against May's deal, and came on again today stating he had voted against May last night.
|
|
He comes on BBC Radio Cornwall (lunchtime with Laurence) occasionally. He recently stated live on air that he would vote against May's deal, and came on again today stating he had voted against May last night.
|
Apparently the vote was 200/117 - I'd bet that at least 50 of those have said they will vote / have voted a particular way but actually voted the opposite
Say what'll please the people, do what will help yourself
|
|
"All politicians are liars"
|
>> www.thesun.co.uk/news/1265675/christian-affair-mps-sex-shame-aide-is-left-high-and-dry-as-he-heads-back-to-wife-he-betrayed/
A demonstration of what I said previously vis a vis Boris. Any of us can fall into temptation and get involved in a handful of off piste shags driven by lust and opportunity. Sensible couples will forgive and forget.
Serial offending is different.
|
|
Not true. There are plenty of decent honest politicians. There are plenty of mendacious people in the world at large. The biggest problem with democracy is not the honesty of politicians but the gullibility, stupidity and unrealistic expectations of a of much of the electorate. Some politicians will tell them what they want to hear.
|
>>The biggest problem with democracy is not the honesty of politicians but the gullibility, stupidity and unrealistic expectations of a of much of the electorate.
17.4 million stupid gullible people it seems .. maybe we should just restrict voting to the toffs.
|
Why do you automatically assume that I was referring to all those who voted Leave? I’m sure that there were some who had considered the pros and cons of the issues on both sides but as in most elections a good proportion of the electorates clearly never understood or were incpapable of understanding the issue before them.
You only have to look at internet comments or listen to a phone in or two to understand the dire level of argument involved.
I’m not sure what the alternative is but giving an uninformed and badly educated electorate the responsibility of making complex decisions that affect everybody’s lives is probably not a good idea.
It is why we had representative democRacy and not decision by referendum in the first place.
|
>>
>> It is why we had representative democracy and not decision by referendum in the first
>> place.
>>
Hear Hear!
|
>> Why do you automatically assume that I was referring to all those who voted Leave?
>> I’m sure that there were some who had considered the pros and cons of the
>> issues on both sides but as in most elections a good proportion of the electorates
>> clearly never understood or were incpapable of understanding the issue before them.
We basically don't have referendums in this country, excepting the devolution-related ones that are perhaps the only way to deal with that. So when June 2016 came, there wasn't a jury of electors briefed and with the skills to consider the question.
The ignorant (and most of us were, on detail and ramifications if not principles) were asked whether they wanted A or B about to which they probably never gave a thought, when the nature of things is that many of them as ever were blaming the government for C,D,E,F etc. about which they were angry at the time.
Perhaps if it had been left at that, then they might have turned their attention in a more or less objective way to the question, but a complacent, patronising Cameron then proceeded to tell them which way to vote. Add unpopularity to smug condescension and we got a massive protest vote on the leave side. Well, that's one theory. Maybe that was more than enough to offset the status quo bias that always supports the 'no change' option.
It doesn't really matter, people vote the way they do for all sorts of reasons, and democracy doesn't care what they are.
|
>> Why do you automatically assume that I was referring to all those who voted Leave?
Well, we could start with the fact that I've never heard the term stupid or gullible applied to Remainers.
>>You only have to look at internet comments or listen to a phone in or two to understand the dire level of argument involved.
Don't tell me you occasionally listen to LBC!!!
:)
|
>> >> Why do you automatically assume that I was referring to all those who voted
>> Leave?
>>
>> Well, we could start with the fact that I've never heard the term stupid or
>> gullible applied to Remainers.
we didnt vote to leave.
|
God no! Why do broadcasters think we want to hear the incoherent views of uninformed members of the public on any subject. I can get that down the pub. Give me the views of intelligent informed people whose view is worth listening to
|
>>Give me the views of intelligent informed people whose view is worth listening to
What, like Alastair Campbell, Peter Mandelson, Michael Heseltine, Nick Clegg, Sir Vince, Ken Clarke, Ken Livingstone, David Mellor, Gina Miller etc. etc. who have all either hosted a program, or phoned in at one time or another.
|
>> >>Give me the views of intelligent informed people whose view is worth listening to
>>
>> What, like Alastair Campbell, Peter Mandelson, Michael Heseltine, Nick Clegg, Sir Vince, Ken Clarke, Ken
>> Livingstone, David Mellor, Gina Miller etc. etc. who have all either hosted a program, or
>> phoned in at one time or another.
I suppose you are a Nige Ferrage on LBC kinda listener.
|
|
The only one I don't listen to is paddy from the bogs. No doubt you would lick his ass, whereas I would kick it.
|
>>Well, we could start with the fact that I've never heard the term stupid or gullible applied to Remainers.
You absolutely have from me. Well, perhaps not stupid, but certainly unknowing and ill-informed, lacking in understanding or awareness.
Not all of them, of course, any more than it is all leavers, but far more than it should be.
|
>> Well, we could start with the fact that I've never heard the term stupid or
>> gullible applied to Remainers.
Others have evidenced claim of gullibility/stupidity/ignorance of SOME leave voters with extracts from phone in programmes, social media and below the line comments on press articles.
Can you find similar from remain folks?
|
>>Can you find similar from remain folks?
There must be some out there, but yes, I must admit to wincing at some of the Brexiteer callers on LBC.
|
> Others have evidenced claim of gullibility/stupidity/ignorance of SOME leave voters with extracts from phone in
>> programmes, social media and below the line comments on press articles.
>>
>> Can you find similar from remain folks?
>>
10 mins on YT, I'd expect you'd find what you're looking for.
|
>> My local man, Steve Double voted against Theresa the Deceiver last night, will vote against
>> the deal too.
Couldnt give a monkies about you, now he found out you are going to vote for Kevin Neil
|
>> >> My local man, Steve Double voted against Theresa the Deceiver last night, will vote
>> against
>> >> the deal too.
>>
>> Couldnt give a monkies about you., now he found out you are going to vote
>> for Kevin Neil
>>
|
>>Kevin Neil
Never heard of him - looked I'm up, he's in Devon, England.
I don't think St Awul & Newquay have a Labour candy date. Candy Atherton used to be BIG in Cornwall, but she ate too much candy and it led to her demise en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candy_Atherton
|
>> >>Kevin Neil
>>
>> Never heard of him - looked I'm up, he's in Devon, England.
>>
>> I don't think St Awul & Newquay have a Labour candy date. Candy Atherton used
>> to be BIG in Cornwall, but she ate too much candy and it led to
>> her demise en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candy_Atherton
He was (and is) the labour candidate for your constituency.
|
|
AIUI, Kevin Neil has (post that election) been suspended by the Labour Party.
|
>> www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/plymouth-news/labour-councillor-suspended-police-investigation-1717389
Thought you'd never heard of him?
Never mind you vote for Labour anyway, they will be stealing from in a heartbeat. Might make up for the money you will owe me.
Last edited by: Zero on Thu 13 Dec 18 at 20:18
|
I've never voted Labour. The earliest I can recall voting for anyone was for Simon Hughes back in the 70's.
I voted UKIP in 2015 and for duplicitous May in 2016.
I'll have to back Double, now I know he's an extremist (according to Hammond) Brexiteer
|
The possible scenarios are;
1) Hard Exit
2) TM's Transition
3) 2nd Referendum
4) Extend Article 50
5) Retract Article 50
I don't think there is a 6).
As far as I can see there is no majority in Westminster, not even anything close to a majority, for any of those options.
So WTF do we go from here?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 13 Dec 18 at 15:57
|
Understatement of the year;
Sebastian Kurz, when asked what concessions might succeed in winning over TM's Transition Deal opponents, said: "It is difficult to judge, because many of the sceptics do not argue in a way that is really rational."
|
Option 3. It's the only way. Hard Brexit, or TM's deal.
Alternatively, also offer remain and do it the French presidential way with a run off for the top two at the end in a second referendum.
|
>> Option 3. It's the only way. Hard Brexit, or TM's deal.
>>
>> Alternatively, also offer remain and do it the French presidential way with a run off
>> for the top two at the end in a second referendum.
Not sure there's time for that. Or the votes to get a second ref legislation passed.
|
You miss my point.
Option 3 may be your preference but, like all the other options, there is no majority supporting it.
I can only think that TM will come back with a "clarification" and a bunch of ministers will use that as a face-saving exercise and then vote to support.
|
>> I can only think that TM will come back with a "clarification" and a bunch
>> of ministers will use that as a face-saving exercise and then vote to support.
>>
>>
>>
Agreed, it's the only option I can see that has anywhere near the numbers.
|
>>
>> I can only think that TM will come back with a "clarification" and a bunch
>> of ministers will use that as a face-saving exercise and then vote to support.
>>
>>
I think I remember saying something like that a long time ago, ie last week.
|
Noooo, you already said it?
But weren't you going on about the EU making some unilateral concession?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Thu 13 Dec 18 at 18:49
|
>> You miss my point.
>>
>> Option 3 may be your preference but, like all the other options, there is no
>> majority supporting it.
I think you miss my point. That's exactly the point.
What *can* Parliament do when it reaches stalemate. No point in a GE, it wouldn't solve anything in respect of this particular problem. Eventually I think there is nothing else left but the people's poll, 'rigged' in such a way as to force a decision.
It would be so amusing if it were Greece or Italy. Unfortunately we have to live it.
|
Yes, you're right. I completely miss you point. You post seems nonsensical to me.
Can you explain your point to me?
|
The Irish border - hard brexit
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46546295
This is the kind of info I was after, and probable details of how the Eu would mitigate. This opens the possibility of how to bend the Eu to negotiate post hard brexit, providing the UK can brazen out and survive a post brexit period of time.
|
>>Yes, you're right. I completely miss you point.
Thought it might be too difficult for you. Let me try again.
Something has to happen, eventually. I think you might agree with that - we cannot carry on as we are for ever.
Parliament cannot achieve a majority for any one option, and a general election will not change the impasse, then the only thing left is to put it to the public. It's not very British, but it will look democratic. Even politicians will eventually get fed up with arguing with each other and at that point a 50:50 choice put to the British public will have taken the responsibility out of their hands.
Shame we all have to get bored watching it first.
|
>> > at that point a 50:50 choice put to
>> the British public will have taken the responsibility out of their hands.
>>
And it's likely to get a 50:50 answer too.
I have this feeling that TM may yet pull off a victory, of sorts. The EU make some minor concessions, just enough to win over the waverers, and the deal gets approved.
Then we can all begin the long trudge home.
It feels a bit like Kutusov and the retreat to Borodino.
|
>> then the only thing left is to put it to the public
Again. There is, as for all the other options, no majority for that.
Now, what might change and cause a shift towards an option? I can only think TM finding a way for the anti politicians to save face and join in will pass the deal.
As it stands now that's the only one I can see moving.
If you haven't got it now then I'll just leave you to wherever you are.
|
>> I don't think there is a 6).
...a Northern Ireland plebiscite with the result that they'd rather become part of the Republic and stay in the EU, than remain in the UK and suffer a Hard Brexit.
Border problems resolved at a stroke. ;-)
|
>> >> I don't think there is a 6).
>>
>> ...a Northern Ireland plebiscite with the result that they'd rather become part of the Republic
>> and stay in the EU, than remain in the UK and suffer a Hard Brexit.
>>
>> Border problems resolved at a stroke. ;-)
Ace result in my book. NI and those who reside within have always been a PITA, get shot.
I always hoped someone would have done a sneaky swap job when Hong Kong was handed back to the Chinese, Overnight they ended up with NI. Bit of a job to tow it all the way there without anyone noticing tho.
|
17 paragraphs; 14 on the usual political reactionary tripe about what is wrong with the current transition deal, 1 on the usual political end comments and two paragraphs on a "new deal".
And I quote...
"The new backstop would provide for tariff-free trade in goods; it would bring about regulatory cooperation between us and the EU as well as regulatory recognition based on “deemed equivalence” – making use of the unique fact that our regulations will be identical on day one of Brexit.
This new and reformed backstop include an agreement to deploy advanced customs and trade facilitation measures, including any specific measures necessary for the Northern Ireland/Ireland border, in addition to normal, free trade agreement-style level playing field provisions on labour, the environment, competition and state aid – unlike the hugely one-sided commitments in the Withdrawal Agreement. And importantly, it will include a commitment by all parties not to place infrastructure on the border – nobody wants to see that."
How is that any different to what has been said in the current transition deal with it's backstop?
It says we will keep UK & EU regulation on tariffs and regulations identical??? So we will remain subject to those EU laws?
It will include a commitment not to place infrastructure on the border, but it will include any "specific measures necessary for the Northern Ireland/Ireland border" Well, which is it?
It states that we will have a "level playing field on labour, the environment, competition and state aid"?? I thought that was an objection to the current deal?
etc. etc.
If your question is serious, then no it is not a better deal. It is not even a different deal. It is just political garbage.
|
I do suspect that it is the beginning of capitulation;
"We are glad that TM has decided to listen to us and our new deal and with this in mind we now feel able to ….."
|
>> If your question is serious, then no it is not a better deal. It is not even a different deal. It is just political garbage.
I'm not qualified to comment on that, although I would have thought a former Northern Ireland Minister might know a thing or two about said border issues.
I post articles like that because I like to read what learned folk like you have to say about them.
|
>> I would have thought a former Northern Ireland Minister might know a thing or two about said border issues.
I'm sure he does, but if you go through his article he says absolutely nothing concrete other than fine words, and when one looks closely it is the deal that is already on the table.
If you think about it, and I'm not being sarky, it really is quite clever and certainly a skill; to take something someone else says, to essentially repeat it, but to make it sound quite different is an art.
And then to make it appealing is a further skill that I wish TM also had.
|
>> I'm not qualified to comment on that, although I would have thought a former Northern
>> Ireland Minister might know a thing or two about said border issues.
I think that might be a bit of a leap.
|
How grownup, knowledgeable politicians who are concerned about the issues rather than the headlines conduct themselves....
www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zBFh6bpcMo
|
Goodness me - I've just received a Conservative Midlands bulletin. Among the information that was there was an offer to buy a signed picture picture of Mrs. May.
Here is my reply....
"Crikey - thought this was joke - a signed photo of Mrs. May?
The woman who has destroyed the Brexit vision for which the country voted: has ignored the Party election manifesto: has cravenly given in to every EU demand and has made the United Kingdom a laughing stock.
I'd rather poke myself in the eye with a sharp stick than even see a picture of her, let alone buy one."
|
>>has cravenly given in to every EU demand
Such as?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 14 Dec 18 at 18:03
|
>> I'd rather poke myself in the eye with a sharp stick
Thats about the only brexit vision that gives me any pleasure.
|
|
...can we have a whip-round to send him a picture?......
|
|
Looks like it's going to cost €7 every three years to travel into EU and checks will be made at the boarder, not sure where that will be for ferry trips? Over here in Dover or when you get off the boat, each passport needs to be scanned so maybe an extra 10mins per car full... what does that work out for a ferry load of cars???
|
|
I doubt it will be required for land or sea arrivals in the EU, only Air Travel. That is how the equivalent US and Canadian systems works.
|
Its the European version of the ESTA
|
No, I’m wrong. Unlike the ESTA it will be needed on land an ferry arrivals.
europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-18-4362_en.htm
|
>> No, I’m wrong. Unlike the ESTA it will be needed on land an ferry arrivals.
>>
>>
>>
>> europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-18-4362_en.htm
>>
The Esta is required for a sea port of entry as well
|
|
Travelling short term then it's trivial. It's the loss of long term which will be such a damned PITA, if it actually happens.
|
>> Cruise ships, not ferries.
There tends to be not much in the way of ferry trade from foreign countries to the states.
Last time I drove the Canada/US border was when a US visa was needed. A lovely multicoloured bald eagle stamped on one of your passport pages.
|
|
A single return crossing from Kent to Essex (Dartford bridge/tunnel) isn't much less so monetarily it's not the end of the world. But any inconvenience due to increased border checks is a pain. Mind you, haven't they been checking before you travel for some years anyway? I'm sure I remember getting checked in Dover before getting on the ferry a few years back, and I've definitely had to open the boot in France before boarding a ferry. And on the return trip UK passport control is in France, or was the last time I travelled.
|
|
I was stopped on the way out to France Summer 2017 - on the bike, I had to open my top-box to a French UKB badged Officer. I only had my choir music and some bike oddities. She seemed a bit non-plussed I was travelling so light. (Baggage had gone by air !)
|
Being outside Shengen, there has always been, and often is, the potential for being held up at the border, this pass thing changes nothing really.
Ironically the only time I have never really been checked was when I was bringing in a dog on a dodgy pet passport.
Last edited by: Zero on Sat 15 Dec 18 at 09:07
|
|
Bet it was a ruff crossing.....
|
|
Made you paws for thought?
|
>> Did you get collared?
No but I did lead them on a bit, I was barking to try it, had I been challenged I would have had to flea.
|
>> checks will be made at the boarder, not sure where that will be for ferry
>> trips? Over here in Dover or when you get off the boat, each passport needs
>> to be scanned so maybe an extra 10mins per car full... what does that work
>> out for a ferry load of cars???
Presumably by French at present juxtaposed control in Dover.
At one time you just waved a UK passport and off you went. While the controls were at Calais we often entered France on a Sunday afternoon with out any apparent check at all. Last few times I've travelled the French have scanned my passport. The UK people at Calais ferryport or Chunnel terminal always scan them.
|
|
Surly bunch (UK Borders staff)
|
I'm not sure who is laughing Roger.A lot of extra hassle and cost by the time this Brexit journey is over.
|
I’m trying to remember if Visas were required to visit mainland Europe years ago. As a nipper my parents took me and my bruv to Lido de Jesolo about 50 years ago...we flew on a Comet 4B and for years I treasured the scrap of paper signed ( allegedly) by the BEA captain giving the flight details.
I regularly visit a friend in Turkey and their visa costs me $20 for 6 months, sometimes I need two a year. But worth it!
|
As a regular day tripper to France/Belgium I'm used to just driving off the ferry or shuttle and away I go... now it seems there will be queues while we are checked, as I said how long will the delay be for a ferry load of vehicles? even a short time per car will add up and mean a potential delay and could have cars backing up into the port.
It's always hit or missing coming home when you encounter the UK passport checks at Calais, I once got stuck in a particularly nasty queue which meant I missed two departures.
|
>> I’m trying to remember if Visas were required to visit mainland Europe years ago.
Not for Germany, Switzerland, France or Italy in the 1960s I do remember. Just a passport.
I remember a holiday in Lugano in 1966. We went by train on the Night Ferry from Victoria.
It was interesting that France began at Victoria. A French train, French sleeping car attendant, and shortly after boarding a French official came along the corridor to check our passports.
One was vaguely aware during the night of clanking noises as the carriages were chained down inside the ship.
On return we woke up early and the attendant announced that breakfast was ready. This time England began somewhere near Dover, as we left the wagon-lits and went along the corridor to a standard English dining car that had somehow been attached to the train, with English steward. There were no passport checks on return, just Nothing to Declare.
In fact often a passport was hardly necessary. I was disappointed not to being accumulating interesting customs stamps, and mostly officials didn't even both to wait for passports to be extricated from luggage but just nodded and moved on.
|
"Politico, known originally as The Politico, is an American political journalism company based in Arlington County, Virginia"
Say n'more. The article states that Britain has been a member of the EU for 45 years which is incorrect as the EU only came into being in 1993 - that's what Brexit is all about really, the Maastricht Treaty which brought about political union. If it had remained as just an economic union we wouldn't be in the mess we are today.
I remain a Leaver :) without any doubts whatsoever, but I'm only one clown with one vote, so what can I do faced with the elites/establishment in GB/EU = f all.
But at least the fool on the hill sees the sun going down, and the eyes in his head sees the political class for the slimy lying self-serving nematodes that they are.
|
From an economic union, it was always the case political ties would be closer in Europe.
I don't know what is so wrong with that.I was born four years after WW2 Finished.No more wars in Europe please.
At least you had a vote non-emmet I didn't because of a piece of paper.
Yes the political class who are voted in by the people.And the people are naive hasn't that always been the case.
Unless like the French you scare that class and they will run.Can't see that happening here do.
|
Firstly Dog, you commenting on the dodginess or not of a media source with some of the rubbish you post?
But in any case, had you looked further then you would have found the author is an Australian that used to work as a speechwriter for the British civil service, he then joined the European Commission working for President Jose Manuel Barroso and Vice President Neelie Kroes as a spokesperson. Ryan is regular policy commentator on outlets such as BBC, CNN, MSNBC, and Deutsche Welle. He has reported from major events such as the World Economic Forum in Davos, G7 summits and US political conventions.
But in any case, it was an opinion piece, and an interesting perspective, I think.
|
>>Firstly Dog, you commenting on the dodginess or not of a media source with some of the rubbish you post?
Agreed.
>>But in any case, it was an opinion piece, and an interesting perspective, I think.
As was the article written by the former NI minister, or any comment in the media, some interesting, some not. He comes over (to me) as someone biased towards Remain, others believe strongly in Leave.
It seems to me that there are powerful arguments on each side. I see it as a battle between Remain and Leave, and like the closing months of WW1, a victory of sorts could still be achieved by our government, but I'm kinda thinking that could only come about by installing a Brexiteer PM.
|
>>'m kinda thinking that could only come about by installing a Brexiteer PM.
I don't think so. Unless you see a hard and brutal exit as desirable. For a planned transition it is what it is.
Do bear in mind that it is a transition plan. It says little about what the ultimate outcome will be.
|
>>I don't think so. Unless you see a hard and brutal exit as desirable
Some use the term brutal/cliff edge/crash out, whereas equally knowledgeable people say manageable exit on WTO rules.
We'll just have to wait and see if May can pull a rabbit out of her bag, then perhaps parliament can vote for May's Remain deal, because that is what it is.
|
Ref: WTO
Read this. It's a few months old but it is a reasonable discussion.
WTO is also an incomplete solution. e.g. soft borders are not permitted. There is no jurisdiction over air travel. Even countries basing their trading on WTO terms have a bunch of agreements sitting on top of them.
All things we can fix. But it takes a transition, not a crash.
As far as I can quickly remember, there is nothing in TM's transition agreement which prevents us finishing the period on WTO terms. But it cannot be done in one day, it cannot even be done in the next three months.
2 years is a fair estimate. Bearing in mind that whilst much is made that the transition period can be extended, it seems to be ignored that it can be terminated early also.
What terms we end up with, the transition agreement, and the political whining are all less relevant and important that the fact tat we simply need a transition period. Not least because we've wasted the last two years.
|
The briefingsforbrexit article is very clear and concise about what the likely outcome would be if we left the EU without a deal. It should allay any fears of project fear becoming factual. But then again I can quite understand how people are concerned about the opposed arguments of leaving without a deal - if they haven't read and 'taken on board' articles like that.
In the final analysis, the EU have a trade surplus with us running into £95billion, and that's before the £16billion subsidy we pay to EU producers.
Any issues over trade with the EU if we leave without a deal will effect trade in both directions, so EU exporters will have as much incentive as UK exporters to solve those issues and maintain the free flow of trade.
The UK starts off already conforming to EU regs so there shouldn't be a problem coming to an agreement on that matter.
As for the trade agreements with the EU, we should be able to replace those with a new contract - which already exist between WTO members anyway.
So there we have it - done and dusted. When do I get my OBE (other bu&&ers efforts)
:o}
|
In case you haven't worked it out, you think the credible article is the one sayong what you want to hear.
Understandable, but quite wrong.
|
>> >>I don't think so. Unless you see a hard and brutal exit as desirable
>>
>> Some use the term brutal/cliff edge/crash out, whereas equally knowledgeable people say manageable exit on
>> WTO rules.
Well lets hope we leave on WTO rules, because nothing less will show these "knowledgeable" people up. And nothing less will please brexiteers like you, and nothing less will prove the misguided futility of both.
|
>> It seems to me that there are powerful arguments on each side. I see it
>> as a battle between Remain and Leave, and like the closing months of WW1, a
>> victory of sorts could still be achieved by our government, but I'm kinda thinking that
>> could only come about by installing a Brexiteer PM.
And its thinking and statements like that that attracts all those negative comments about brexiteers,
|
Brexit Discussion - Volume 72 - No FM2R
