Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

UK Politics Hamsterwheel MkII

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

UK Politics Hamsterwheel MkII

Old 12th Dec 2018, 02:25
  #1241 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 16,365


NutLoose is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 07:26
  #1242 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bedford, UK
Age: 66
Posts: 1,219
Seems some want to believe their own derogatory myth that the English hold themselves superior and expect to be in charge of an empire. Where did this come from. I know if no-one like that, no-one speaks of the empire, or of colonies. Get real. All that is wanted is to reduce the control exercised over us: not by a colonial power, but by the EU.
Mr Optimistic is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 07:55
  #1243 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,120
No confidence vote by Conservative MPs in TM triggered as 48 letter requirement reached.

Vote to take place between 1800-2000 this evening. Result should be known shortly after.
ORAC is online now  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 08:33
  #1244 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,622
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
Not just the chicken, but the pork stuffed with banned chemicals and the beef full of growth hormones.
I am not sure why we have such fixation on US chemical foods. Are we short of chicken in UK? Why would we suddenly flood the market with US beef? Are Dutch and Danish pork and bacon and butter producers suddenly going to refuse to trade?

In the supermarket do we have a choice between Argentinean or Australian beef? Maybe, post Brexit we will, but I am sure that wherever we import our food from that we will continue to insist on existing standards of production and husbandry.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 08:35
  #1245 (permalink)  

Flashes from the Archives of Oblivion
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: 03 ACE
Age: 68
Posts: 5
Looks like another one is about to be dispatched in ignominy from the smoking wreck of British Politics.
Brought down by the subterfuge of Brexit.

Living in hope !
El Grifo
El Grifo is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 08:39
  #1246 (permalink)  
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Peripatetic
Posts: 10,120
Strange that the ECJ judgement said precisely the opposite - it stated specifically that if the UK withdrew its Art50 notification it could do so unilaterally with no consent or approval required from anyone else
Not true - bing the activist, power seeking, court they are, they retained the decision to themselves. To quote from their decision, who decides if it unequivocal and unconditional?

“…the revocation of the notification of the intention to withdraw must, first, be submitted in writing to the European Council and, secondly, be unequivocal and unconditional…”

Last edited by ORAC; 12th Dec 2018 at 08:54.
ORAC is online now  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 09:10
  #1247 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 335
Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator View Post
In the supermarket do we have a choice between Argentinean or Australian beef? Maybe, post Brexit we will, but I am sure that wherever we import our food from that we will continue to insist on existing standards of production and husbandry.
Except that it will be a condition of the trade deal that we will so desperately seek with the USA.
Sallyann1234 is online now  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 09:12
  #1248 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 54
Posts: 816
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
Not true - bing the activist, power seeking, court they are, they retained the decision to themselves. To quote from their decision, who decides if it unequivocal and unconditional?

“…the revocation of the notification of the intention to withdraw must, first, be submitted in writing to the European Council and, secondly, be unequivocal and unconditional…”
You’re stretching credulity a bit. Seems reasonable that they should qualify their response - if we just write and say we want to cancel Article 50 then all is fine; if we want to play silly beggars and write and say we’ll cancel Article 50 if you let us opt out of freedom of movement then that’s a whole different ballgame.
Curious Pax is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 09:17
  #1249 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chez Sprog
Posts: 493
I stopped reading after the activist, power seeking part.
Sprogget is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 09:29
  #1250 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 54
Posts: 816
At least the Brexiteers and their no confidence vote have clarified one thing for us. A vote in 2016 can be rerun a couple of years later if subsequent facts emerge that merit a new ballot.
Curious Pax is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 09:38
  #1251 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 1,654
What do the extremists in the Conservative party think they are doing, at this crucial time for the nation? Like her or loathe her Mrs. May has to be allowed to finish the job, then resign once we have left the EU.

Can you imagine the reaction if a group of Trots from Labour tried to unseat the PM in this fashion? How on earth does this performance give any credibility to voting for the Tories as a responsible party of government, as a party they are no better than Corbyn's Labour?

We desperately need a new party, but in the interim some sort of government of national unity.
ATNotts is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 09:42
  #1252 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 51.50N 1W (ish)
Posts: 1,012
At least the Brexiteers and their no confidence vote have clarified one thing for us.
Point of order, Mr Speaker. Not all the no-confidence letters are signed by Brexit supporters. Some remainers are equally dismayed at the very real prospect of a no-deal exit outcome if TM remains PM.
Fitter2 is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 09:51
  #1253 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 16,365
Point of order, Mr Speaker. Or that we might be tied to her plan, it's not all about no-deal.
NutLoose is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 09:54
  #1254 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 335
Originally Posted by Fitter2 View Post
Point of order, Mr Speaker. Not all the no-confidence letters are signed by Brexit supporters. Some remainers are equally dismayed at the very real prospect of a no-deal exit outcome if TM remains PM.
And who could do any better?
Telling a PM to get a nice comfortable deal with the EU is like telling him/her to run at a brick wall.
It was never possible to get what the Brexiters promised the EU would give us. Just another lie.
Sallyann1234 is online now  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 10:00
  #1255 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Currently within the EU
Posts: 335
Originally Posted by ATNotts View Post
We desperately need a new party, but in the interim some sort of government of national unity.
Plus one to that.
​​​​But there appears to be little chance of it.
In WW2 we had such a government, but I see no sign of a Churchill amongst the present lot.
Sallyann1234 is online now  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 10:03
  #1256 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,495
Originally Posted by ORAC View Post
Not true - bing the activist, power seeking, court they are, they retained the decision to themselves. To quote from their decision, who decides if it unequivocal and unconditional?

“…the revocation of the notification of the intention to withdraw must, first, be submitted in writing to the European Council and, secondly, be unequivocal and unconditional…”
Err..no, it doesn’t mean the court are retaining the decision, they have already made that call:

Submit a letter saying simply “we intend to withdraw from Article 50’. and the notification is valid.

Submit a letter saying “we intend to withdraw from Article 50, but.....” and it is not valid.

Even the current crop of MPs should be able to understand that.

wiggy is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 10:05
  #1257 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: West Wiltshire, UK
Age: 67
Posts: 369
Originally Posted by PDR1 View Post
Strange that the ECJ judgement said precisely the opposite - it stated specifically that if the UK withdrew its Art50 notification it could do so unilaterally with no consent or approval required from anyone else, it would remain in the EU on existing terms, and that the other 27 members could not impose any conditions or changes.

So it turns out that you've just been pushing yet another lie. A brexiter telling porkies - par for the course, I suppose.

PDR
However, anyone who believes that, if we were to revoke Article 50 now, that the EU would not find a way to make the UK pay for the costs associated with Brexit, plus the additional costs that the EU is going to incur as a result of the problems in some of the Southern EU states that are draining EU cash, really needs their bumps felt.

If we choose to remain at this late stage then we will pay a very hefty price for doing so, of that we can be absolutely certain. We may not be forced into Schengen, or forced to adopt the Euro, but we can be absolutely certain that we will be forced to pay one way or another. The EU couldn't afford to let us back in with no penalty, as that would send a message to all other member states that they can use threatening to leave the EU as a bargaining chip. That have no choice but to make it clear that threatening to leave the EU will not be tolerated, and I can't see how they can do that without imposing penalties in one form or another on the UK.

The long term effect of any increased penalties we have to pay will probably be to reinforce the views of the staunch Brexiteers, so rather than the rather poorly organised UKIP-led rebellion, next time we may well get one that is far better organised. The issues that caused 52% to vote leave haven't gone away, and won't go away if we change our minds now and decide to remain. All that will happen is that the rebellion against the EU will continue to grow and fester, polluting UK politics for another generation.

The only way to prevent this would be if the EU were to reform, and address the concerns that are causing people in several members states to question the direction in which the EU is heading. I can't see that happening with the present leadership of the EU, who seem totally wedded to the idea of creating a Federal Europe and removing the authority of member states to control their own affairs.
VP959 is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 10:07
  #1258 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,495
Originally Posted by Sallyann1234 View Post
And who could do any better?
Telling a PM to get a nice comfortable deal with the EU is like telling him/her to run at a brick wall.
It was never possible to get what the Brexiters promised the EU would give us. Just another lie.
Absolutely agree. FWIW I think TM might well survive tonight....hopefully the Tories with a bit of insight know that a “no deal” carries such a high risk that they won’t want to associated with trashing TM’s WA.

BJ, Gove et al will not want the job of PM in the current circumstances, poisoned chalice and all that....be interesting to see how/if they cast a vote.

The likes of JRM probably will vote against the PM but really don’t want to get their hands dirty doing a job such as PM, they simply want a man/woman to do the work for them (e.g. Gove, BJ,)
wiggy is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 10:12
  #1259 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Chez Sprog
Posts: 493
Originally Posted by VP959 View Post
However, anyone who believes that, if we were to revoke Article 50 now, that the EU would not find a way to make the UK pay for the costs associated with Brexit, plus the additional costs that the EU is going to incur as a result of the problems in some of the Southern EU states that are draining EU cash, really needs their bumps felt.

If we choose to remain at this late stage then we will pay a very hefty price for doing so, of that we can be absolutely certain. We may not be forced into Schengen, or forced to adopt the Euro, but we can be absolutely certain that we will be forced to pay one way or another. The EU couldn't afford to let us back in with no penalty, as that would send a message to all other member states that they can use threatening to leave the EU as a bargaining chip. That have no choice but to make it clear that threatening to leave the EU will not be tolerated, and I can't see how they can do that without imposing penalties in one form or another on the UK.

The long term effect of any increased penalties we have to pay will probably be to reinforce the views of the staunch Brexiteers, so rather than the rather poorly organised UKIP-led rebellion, next time we may well get one that is far better organised. The issues that caused 52% to vote leave haven't gone away, and won't go away if we change our minds now and decide to remain. All that will happen is that the rebellion against the EU will continue to grow and fester, polluting UK politics for another generation.

The only way to prevent this would be if the EU were to reform, and address the concerns that are causing people in several members states to question the direction in which the EU is heading. I can't see that happening with the present leadership of the EU, who seem totally wedded to the idea of creating a Federal Europe and removing the authority of member states to control their own affairs.
Do we have any concrete evidence for this beyond the confident assertion? Genuine question.
Sprogget is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 10:23
  #1260 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Manchester, England
Age: 54
Posts: 816
Originally Posted by Sprogget View Post
Do we have any concrete evidence for this beyond the confident assertion? Genuine question.
Project Fear? Legally the EU wouldn’t have a leg to stand on

Originally Posted by VP959
The EU couldn't afford to let us back in with no penalty, as that would send a message to all other member states that they can use threatening to leave the EU as a bargaining chip.
We haven’t left yet, so if we revoke Article 50 legally all is as before. Yes, they could try and extract a political price, but one of the Brexiteers’ main arguments is that they need us more than we need them, so doing anything to increase anti-EU feeling in the UK at the moment would be unwise. They wouldn’t want to push the UK into another attempt to leave any time soon.
Curious Pax is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.