Jump to content

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

Did anyone see last nights shit show of a Question Time where Claire Parry made an absolute tit of herself and then blamed this on Corbyn being an Anti-Semite. She was bizarre the whole night

Her labelling of Dimbleby as a sexist who doesn't let women talk was handled very humbly by the host, she made herself look a bit from that moment onwards really.

Cringier than Thornberry with Dominic Monaghan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, David said:

I would mention a future where we see an actual EU centralised army, and they all laughed at me, saying we'd never see such a thing and that I was "bonkers" for thinking that.

Yeah, not laughing so much now.

And now we're heading out the Union, a voice of reason to help persist with such claims has gone.

We can no longer fight from inside, so Germany and France will get their way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Teedy Kay said:

And now we're heading out the Union, a voice of reason to help persist with such claims has gone.

We can no longer fight from inside, so Germany and France will get their way.

What makes you think that we'd be a "voice of reason?"

If this EU army does come to fruition then I'm glad we look as though we'll not be a part of it. The increasing drive to centralising power that the EU represents disturbs me greatly, and if us getting out can do anything to help halt that, or even convince other nations to do the same then it'll be worth it in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, PJ Power said:

Just a quick question for @BomberPat

Does the Bailiwick of Jersey have the right to make an application for EU membership unilaterally without needing any sort of "permission" required from Westminster e.g. An Order in Council or something similar?

In theory they could probably make an application, yes. UK Parliament have no authority over the crown dependencies, so there'd be no need to seek permission from Westminster - we're loyal to the Crown, not to Parliament, and constitutionally we have the right to self-governance and judicial independence from the UK.

Beyond that, it gets complicated - while Jersey isn't an EU member state, it's treated as one for the purpose of free trade in goods (though not freedom of movement - a Jersey-born citizen, with a Jersey passport, doesn't have the right to work across the EU), and aviation and maritime matters, they "voluntarily" adopt EU legislation, and are represented by the Channel Islands Brussels Office, who lobby EU institutions, and advise Jersey's government on EU matters.

I doubt anything so mental has been floated in Jersey, but there was a headline a month or two back that a group in Guernsey were lobbying the government to create plans for independence from the UK in the case of no Brexit deal.

 

The question is around whether Jersey's "special relationship" with the EU can continue once the UK have left - and there's really no reason to imagine it would, largely because that relationship was formalised as part of the UK's Accession Treaty in 1972.

Jersey isn't currently covered by the UK's WTO membership, so that would need negotiating. The largest sector of our economy is the Finance Industry, and some politicians have argued that Brexit fucking over the City of London could be an opportunity for Jersey to become a powerhouse in that field again, but that's naive and shortsighted - the appeal of Jersey for the finance sector isn't just lax tax arrangements, it's that it's accessible from the City of London (40 minute flight), if London ceases to be a key player in international finance, Jersey goes down with it. Fishing could also take a hit, so we'd be relying increasingly on tourism - an industry that has been in steady decline for 20+ years, though could conceivably hope for a reversal of fortunes if Brexit renders travel from the UK to Europe less affordable/practical, but would be dependent on a concurrent marketing blitz by Jersey Tourism.

 

tl;dr, Jersey is a political mess and an anomaly, and one of countless complications that didn't get a second thought by anyone on the Leave campaign. 

 

6 minutes ago, David said:

What makes you think that we'd be a "voice of reason?"

If this EU army does come to fruition then I'm glad we look as though we'll not be a part of it. The increasing drive to centralising power that the EU represents disturbs me greatly, and if us getting out can do anything to help halt that, or even convince other nations to do the same then it'll be worth it in my opinion.

We would have a vote. All we're doing by leaving is denying the British people any say on what the EU does. If people genuinely aren't happy with the direction the EU is taking, then it's hugely irresponsible to walk out and say, "nothing to do with me, guv" rather than staying part of the conversation. If you object to an EU Army, then removing a potential vote against an EU Army is ridiculous.

Edited by BomberPat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

We would have a vote. All we're doing by leaving is denying the British people any say on what the EU does. If people genuinely aren't happy with the direction the EU is taking, then it's hugely irresponsible to walk out and say, "nothing to do with me, guv" rather than staying part of the conversation. If you object to an EU Army, then removing a potential vote against an EU Army is ridiculous.

The problem, for me personally, is that the EU is the next step in removing further power from the actual people. It's the centralisation of power that I don't like. 

Truth be told, we could object to an EU army all we like, but it'll go through eventually. 

As the President of the European Commission once said;

Quote

We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait and see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue step by step until there is no turning back.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more clued-up people at work insist that remaining in the EU was the only way to maintain market stability and growth in competition with the US, leading to the EU becoming the dominant global power and eventual creation of a world government when a deal was made with the Americans, linked as they are with the Middle East and (ahem) Russia. If so, that depresses me more than annoys me. The only way?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, CavemanLynn said:

The more clued-up people at work insist that remaining in the EU was the only way to maintain market stability and growth in competition with the US, leading to the EU becoming the dominant global power and eventual creation of a world government when a deal was made with the Americans, linked as they are with the Middle East and (ahem) Russia.

The lizard people will never let that happen.  Even if it slips by them the shapeshifters will slap it down.

 

9 hours ago, David said:

What makes you think that we'd be a "voice of reason?"

You don't need to be a voice of reason when you've got a veto, as do all the other EU members on matters such as an EU army.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎/‎16‎/‎2018 at 6:21 PM, d-d-d-dAz said:

Your ‘clued-in’ people at work don’t sound clued in.

That's the thing - these are the higher-ups in the company who have to be savvy to the financial and political climate because of the amount of work we do for businesses on the continent. Their assertion that everything would go to hell seemed too cut and dried - I couldn't imagine any politician, no matter how cowardly or spiteful, would essentially intentionally cock up an entire country by having any kind of vote if anything other than remaining would bring everything crashing down.

My flimsy understanding of Article 50 is that no negotiations can be had re: trade deals with non-EU countries until leaving is declared, which seemed to me to be an aggressive deterrent i.e. once you're in, you're in, and god help you if you want out. I believe at the start of this, some smaller African countries and Canada piped up about being happy to set up deals with an unaffiliated UK, which, although doubtlessly not great deals, would have been a way to tide things over at break-even. But I've not seen anything in the media since to suggest any of these channels are being followed up or discussed at all.

The EU itself seemed on the brink anyway, with smaller less-prosperous countries being happily brought in but then left to the German economy to keep them propped up when they began defaulting. The US and Russia seem intent on dividing up and pincering the Far East, and the whole time I'm left wondering how much these are all just games being played by a whole different stratum of people, where the majority of citizens just want to get on with things and not fight strangers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it's the Tories.  May became PM because she wanted what is best for her, not the country.  Does anyone think that the haunted victorian pencil gives a fuck about anyone who doesn't live in his stately home.  Look at Cameron and Osbourne (And Blair for that matter), couldn't be the top boys anymore so did they return to being MPs?  Did they fuck, it was beneath them. At least Ted Heath stayed on as an MP for about 15 years, even if it was mainly to wind up Thatcher.

Too many cunts in parliament think they've reached the pinnacle and are too important to go back to doing what an MP should do.  Even now the gammon nonce said he wouldn't mind being Foreign Secretary because he is bored.  Go fuck another porcine orifice you sentient Zuckerberg waxwork.  Too many of them get hotshotted into safe seats so they can be added to the front bench.  At least Ed Miliband is still a serving MP, but hahaha look at him trying to eat a bacon sandwich, he must be incompetent.  At least Boris has funny hair hahaha.

Fucking wankers.  Brexit will fuck us up but they won't give a shit as they'll be ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CavemanLynn said:

I couldn't imagine any politician, no matter how cowardly or spiteful, would essentially intentionally cock up an entire country by having any kind of vote if anything other than remaining would bring everything crashing down.

My flimsy understanding of Article 50 is that no negotiations can be had re: trade deals with non-EU countries...

No trade negotiations with anyone until it's done.  The future relationship with the EU is a political aspiration.  What's on the table in black and white is the leaving and transition procedure, not the future trade deal.

With regard to cocking up the country: Rees-Mogg's dad literally wrote a book on disaster capitalism.  Just to be clear that's not hyperbole.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/067162735X/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_t1_Lii8BbBT5BCNT

 

There are some that will literally be laughing all the way to the bank if no deal happens.

50 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

May became PM because she wanted what is best for her, not the country.  Does anyone think that the haunted victorian pencil gives a fuck about anyone who doesn't live in his stately home.

Pretty much.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Keith Houchen said:

At least Ted Heath stayed on as an MP for about 15 years, even if it was mainly to wind up Thatcher

Gordon Brown remained a backbencher for another five years as well. Understanding his main priority is the constituency that put him there to represent them.

You get that with the Labour lot though, but as you highlighted with the name Blair, New Labour hypocrites are just career politicians who would wear a blue or yellow tie if they knew it'd get them power. I was surprised David Miliband stayed on as an MP for as long he did following Ed beating him.

Saying that though, IDS and Hague have continued, but have always looked to hold cabinet (shadow cabinet) positions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if this has been posted or discussed, but it's an interesting take from Tony Abbott on Brexit;

Quote

 

It’s pretty hard for Britain’s friends, here in Australia, to make sense of the mess that’s being made of Brexit. The referendum result was perhaps the biggest-ever vote of confidence in the United Kingdom, its past and its future. But the British establishment doesn’t seem to share that confidence and instead looks desperate to cut a deal, even if that means staying under the rule of Brussels. Looking at this from abroad, it’s baffling: the country that did the most to bring democracy into the modern world might yet throw away the chance to take charge of its own destiny.

Let’s get one thing straight: a negotiation that you’re not prepared to walk away from is not a negotiation — it’s surrender. It’s all give and no get. When David Cameron tried to renegotiate Britain’s EU membership, he was sent packing because Brussels judged (rightly) that he’d never actually back leaving. And since then, Brussels has made no real concessions to Theresa May because it judges (rightly, it seems) that she’s desperate for whatever deal she can get.

The EU’s palpable desire to punish Britain for leaving vindicates the Brexit project. Its position, now, is that there’s only one ‘deal’ on offer, whereby the UK retains all of the burdens of EU membership but with no say in setting the rules. The EU seems to think that Britain will go along with this because it’s terrified of no deal. Or, to put it another way, terrified of the prospect of its own independence.

But even after two years of fearmongering and vacillation, it’s not too late for robust leadership to deliver the Brexit that people voted for. It’s time for Britain to announce what it will do if the EU can’t make an acceptable offer by March 29 next year — and how it would handle no deal. Freed from EU rules, Britain would automatically revert to world trade, using rules agreed by the World Trade Organization. It works pretty well for Australia. So why on earth would it not work just as well for the world’s fifth-largest economy?

A world trade Brexit lets Britain set its own rules. It can say, right now, that it will not impose any tariff or quota on European produce and would recognise all EU product standards. That means no border controls for goods coming from Europe to Britain. You don’t need to negotiate this: just do it. If Europe knows what’s in its own best interests, it would fully reciprocate in order to maintain entirely free trade and full mutual recognition of standards right across Europe.

Next, the UK should declare that Europeans already living here should have the right to remain permanently — and, of course, become British citizens if they wish. This should be a unilateral offer. Again, you don’t need a deal. You don’t need Michel Barnier’s permission. If Europe knows what’s best for itself, it would likewise allow Britons to stay where they are.

Third, there should continue to be free movement of people from Europe into Britain — but with a few conditions. Only for work, not welfare. And with a foreign worker’s tax on the employer, to make sure anyone coming in would not be displacing British workers.

Fourth, no ‘divorce bill’ whatsoever should be paid to Brussels. The UK government would assume the EU’s property and liabilities in Britain, and the EU would assume Britain’s share of these in Europe. If Britain was getting its fair share, these would balance out; and if Britain wasn’t getting its fair share, it’s the EU that should be paying Britain.

Finally, there’s no need on Britain’s part for a hard border with Ireland. Britain wouldn’t be imposing tariffs on European goods, so there’s no money to collect. The UK has exactly the same product standards as the Republic, so let’s not pretend you need to check for problems we all know don’t exist. Some changes may be needed but technology allows for smart borders: there was never any need for a Cold War-style Checkpoint Charlie. Irish citizens, of course, have the right to live and work in the UK in an agreement that long predates EU membership.

Of course, the EU might not like this British leap for independence. It might hit out with tariffs and impose burdens on Britain as it does on the US — but WTO rules put a cap on any retaliatory action. The worst it can get? We’re talking levies of an average 4 or 5 per cent. Which would be more than offset by a post-Brexit devaluation of the pound (which would have the added bonus of making British goods more competitive everywhere).

UK officialdom assumes that a deal is vital, which is why so little thought has been put into how Britain might just walk away. Instead, officials have concocted lurid scenarios featuring runs on the pound, gridlock at ports, grounded aircraft, hoarding of medicines and flights of investment. It’s been the pre-referendum Project Fear campaign on steroids. And let’s not forget how employment, investment and economic growth ticked up after the referendum.

As a former prime minister of Australia and a lifelong friend of your country, I would say this: Britain has nothing to lose except the shackles that the EU imposes on it. After the courage shown by its citizens in the referendum, it would be a tragedy if political leaders go wobbly now. Britain’s future has always been global, rather than just with Europe. Like so many of Britain’s admirers, I want to see this great country seize this chance and make the most of it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...