|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Tue 23 Jul 13:01
With recent resignations and Tory MPs saying they won't support NO DEAL, does it matter in regard to getting Brexit done? If the PM says it's to be NO DEAL, would he need Parliamentary backing to get it done?
What's the future of the Scotland - England Union now?
Are Brexit and Indie all smoke and mirrors?
Post Edited (Wed 24 Jul 14:19)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Tue 23 Jul 13:15
Post Edited (Tue 23 Jul 13:18)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Tue 23 Jul 22:40
Johnson’s accession will change little. The UK electorate are uncertain what they really want regarding the EU, so until that is clarified we can only look forward to confusion. A 52-48 vote to leave clarified nothing, even at the time three years ago; even the humblest golf committee usually requires a 66% vote when constitutional change is being voted on. That vote may well be reversed to 52% remain today, but that would take us little further forward either.
Johnson will not be allowed to ‘Crash Out’ by a Business party such as the Conservatives. Nor can he hold a second referendum to cancel the first vote unless he wants to hand over a large section of his electorate to Nigel Farage. All that remains is putting lipstick on the pig of a deal that May brought back from the EU, one that three times failed to satisfy a parliament which was- important to remember this-elected AFTER the Brexit vote.
Johnson will hope to use his celebrated skills of oratory to tart up May’s deal and hope he can charm and frighten enough MPs to squeak his magic new deal through. If that fails, as is likely, he can go direct to the country either in the form of a referendum on his deal, or more dangerously a General Election. Expect much abuse directed towards Eire and the EU and ‘traitors’ who will be blamed for the impasse. Johnson is as boxed in as May was and may not last long.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Wed 24 Jul 08:03
I think his accession will make things even more difficult for Labour - certainly under the leader of Corbyn.
The public now have a very clear choice in a Brexiteer like Johnson, or a staunch remainer in Swinson. When it comes to Labour they still don't know what they'd be voting for.
The good old days
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Wed 24 Jul 14:47
We're in a strange place. No credible way to resolve Brexit. No credible government. No credible opposition so there'd be no way forward via a General Election, so it seems. Had no credible choice for PM.
Maybe it's time for me to retire from even thinking about it and just live out my sunset years as if I'm an innocent wee laddie again for whom politics was just part of the unknown, boring world of adults.
I tell you what though - isn't Greta Thunberg really something? Come on the young folks!
Post Edited (Wed 24 Jul 14:51)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Wed 24 Jul 14:53
So you predict a LibDem landslide then CDF?
With the leave vote split between Tory and Brexit parties and the LibDems as the sole Remain party the LibDems should sweep up, right?
"Who you are and what you feel comes not just from inside you, but from where you are in the power structure"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Wed 24 Jul 14:55
A nice thought Wotsit 🙂 But more likely they'd be literally sweeping up.
Post Edited (Wed 24 Jul 15:03)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Wed 24 Jul 15:00
I've learned to predict nothing in UK politics these days.
I do, however, foresee some kind of 'alliance' between the Conservatives and Brexit Party which could see a Brexit majority in Parliament in the event of a General Election.
Would I bet on it though? No.
The good old days
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Wed 24 Jul 15:10
You could be right Cap'n. Just don't want the pain of No Deal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Wed 24 Jul 15:14
Making a prediction I probably shouldn't, based on my previous post, but I do still think a deal will be reached.
That said I'm certainly not afraid of the outcome if there isn't one.
The good old days
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 24 Jul 15:55
Are you speaking personally or on behalf of the whole country?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Wed 24 Jul 16:56
"No deal Brexit: ten ways it could affect you"
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47470864
Seems from the above article that some foods might be more expensive and some medicines harder to get and more expensive. (They are the things that would affect me and most folk I think.)
I also have the impression that some businesses are against it, which might affect jobs. and I heard on telly recently that certain arrangements and agreements would just cease (trade and customs?) and we'd have to negotiate them from scratch?
Can someone give a clearer summary of the likely results of No deal?
I think I understand the view of those who aren't worried about it - they think short-term pain, long term gain? But doesn't that apply to Brexit anyway? Brexit is going to come with some pain, so it'd be significantly better to avoid the extra pain of No deal?
Post Edited (Thu 25 Jul 00:55)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Berkey
Date: Wed 24 Jul 18:29
Ah but we get £39bn back in our pockets. Can you guess the first thing the Eu will ask for in any future talks?
There was talk of lowering our tariffs to zero but the WTO most favoured nation rule would mean we would need to lower our tariffs to zero for every country. Great for them and means there’s no need for to bother to negotiate a trade deal as they already have what they want.
British produce looses its protection, ie we can now get Arbroath smokies from anywhere and agriculture dies as cheaper meat etc brought in from countries who now have no tariffs to pay. Exports of food plummet as it’s too expensive for foreign buyers due to the tariffs now imposed. Then you have Eu standards, example Cheap chlorinated chicken and Argentinian beef floods in, anyone producing chicken or beef in the uk goes bust. Usa would demand lower food standards to match theirs for a deal and likely access to nhs tenders.
As the sole brexit backing economist has openly said, manufacturing in the uk dies, whatever we do make here is made up of parts from abroad, these again are subject to increased costs and delays and hit again by the now lower value of the pound. Car manufacturers will go, any cars made here not profitable to sell in the EU so production moves to EU and we pay more due to tariffs and lower pound.
If we differentiate standards on products from the EU (single market) then we’re asking companies to produce 2 versions of thier products, one for 500m potential customers in the EU and one for the uk. Will they do that?
Welfare bill goes up due to well paid jobs lost in manufacturing inc loads of suppliers, agriculture, financial services and in EU institutions based here. Tax take goes down for the same reasons. Headquarters moved to biggest customer based, those companies then are liable for tax in those countries so further hit to coffers.
We get to design of our passports, we could have done anyway and we then outsource production to a company outside of the UK at the expense of a uk based company!
The situation with Iran, us has advised they won’t help so who did hunt go to? The EU. Strength in numbers. We loose access to Galileo due to a 3rd party rule the uk insisted on to ensure new EU countries didn’t get benefits without paying in.
I’m still waiting for the benefits for the ordinary man on the street.....
Back to being drenched in my own negativity….
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Wed 24 Jul 18:54
Quote:
Berkey, Wed 24 Jul 18:29
Ah but we get £39bn back in our pockets. Can you guess the first thing the Eu will ask for in any future talks?
There was talk of lowering our tariffs to zero but the WTO most favoured nation rule would mean we would need to lower our tariffs to zero for every country. Great for them and means there’s no need for to bother to negotiate a trade deal as they already have what they want.
British produce looses its protection, ie we can now get Arbroath smokies from anywhere and agriculture dies as cheaper meat etc brought in from countries who now have no tariffs to pay. Exports of food plummet as it’s too expensive for foreign buyers due to the tariffs now imposed. Then you have Eu standards, example Cheap chlorinated chicken and Argentinian beef floods in, anyone producing chicken or beef in the uk goes bust. Usa would demand lower food standards to match theirs for a deal and likely access to nhs tenders.
As the sole brexit backing economist has openly said, manufacturing in the uk dies, whatever we do make here is made up of parts from abroad, these again are subject to increased costs and delays and hit again by the now lower value of the pound. Car manufacturers will go, any cars made here not profitable to sell in the EU so production moves to EU and we pay more due to tariffs and lower pound.
If we differentiate standards on products from the EU (single market) then we’re asking companies to produce 2 versions of thier products, one for 500m potential customers in the EU and one for the uk. Will they do that?
Welfare bill goes up due to well paid jobs lost in manufacturing inc loads of suppliers, agriculture, financial services and in EU institutions based here. Tax take goes down for the same reasons. Headquarters moved to biggest customer based, those companies then are liable for tax in those countries so further hit to coffers.
We get to design of our passports, we could have done anyway and we then outsource production to a company outside of the UK at the expense of a uk based company!
The situation with Iran, us has advised they won’t help so who did hunt go to? The EU. Strength in numbers. We loose access to Galileo due to a 3rd party rule the uk insisted on to ensure new EU countries didn’t get benefits without paying in.
I’m still waiting for the benefits for the ordinary man on the street.....
Lose. Not loose. Please.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 24 Jul 19:00
If the ordinary man in the street has his wealth invested in JRM's hedge fund he'll be OK.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Wed 24 Jul 21:44
Ref: Berkey
Date: Wed 24 Jul 18:29
Thanks for that Berkey. I think what you've outlined are the consequences, as you see them, of Brexit not just No Deal? And it's said No Deal is likely to be worse?
Here is the BBC's version in May 2016 of what we were supposed to understand about both sides of the issue before we voted on Brexit:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32793642
I don't imagine many voted on the basis of a considered view gained from studying all that!
Anyway, no point worrying. Might as well chill.
Post Edited (Wed 24 Jul 22:21)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Wed 24 Jul 22:32
Ref: wee eck
Date: Wed 24 Jul 19:00
<<< If the ordinary man in the street has his wealth invested in JRM's hedge fund he'll be OK. >>>
Jacob Rees-Mogg. I saw him on the telly yesterday. Said to my wife, "He looks like the wimpish teacher in the Bash Street Kids." She replied, "He looks smart." (of course I had expected her to agree with me!) Just shows you how differently women can see men. It used to amaze me that Angus Deayton was thought of as a sex symbol; thought he was just a bog standard non-descript-lookin' guy! Some of my wife's friends think Bojo is lovely!!!! Strange world we all live in. 🙂
Post Edited (Wed 24 Jul 22:33)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: donj
Date: Wed 24 Jul 23:28
Actually mate I can actually imagine Boris doing that on reading the instructions.
Just an idea on how bad he is so looks like Moggy in charge now.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/16/boris-johnson-mayor-damaging-camden-council
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Wed 24 Jul 23:28
JRM has been appointed Leader of the House. That should give him plenty scope for using big words and making classical references to prove how well-educated he is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Thu 25 Jul 00:51
I just hot-linked that interesting article* you included in your last post, donj:
"I worked with Boris Johnson as mayor. He's not fit to lead."
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/16/boris-johnson-mayor-damaging-camden-council
The article draws attention to Johnson's inattention to detail and to work that it is claimed was frequently not followed through, e.g. a report on the costs to London of poor mental health - £26 billion - which it is said was left on the shelf. The report is said to have influenced New York's approach to improving mental health but not applied in London until Sadiq Khan took it up.
Quote:
"Those who have seen Johnson up close in power worry about his suitability for high office. This is not a party political point: while I would fundamentally disagree with Sajid Javid, or Jeremy Hunt, or Rory Stewart, I can see the case for them leading the country. The challenges, first of Brexit and then of the huge domestic conundrums we face – housing, adult social care, post-Brexit industrial and trade policy – all require attention to detail, hard work and tough choices. The Boris Johnson I and many of those around him have seen has shown no evidence that he is capable of that."
*by Sarah Hayward former Labour leader of Camden council.
Biased no doubt but a couple of weeks ago on the radio I heard this claim put, I believe by a Hunt supporter, that Hunt would be better suited to deal with the grind of having to attend to detail on so many subjects that is required of the PM. Time will tell.
Post Edited (Thu 25 Jul 00:53)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 25 Jul 14:03
And there's nothing wrong with not being a details person - I'm not either - it just changes the jobs that you can do to a high enough standard.
Jobs where I get to deal with the big picture and let other folk get on with the details suit me down to the ground and I'm self-aware enough to know that no matter how much I want to be an astronaut I'm not going to get there and if I used my connections to do it anyway it would be a disaster both for me and everyone else involved, so I wouldn't do that.
Which makes me think that BJ either lacks self awareness (quite likely given that he has some off-the-peg caricature of a "bumbling toff" from Jeeves and Wooster in place of a personality), or he is recklessly ambitious, or both.
It's possible too that he has loads of self-awareness and knows that his real personality is wholly unappealing, so he has chosen to hide it behind the Wodehousian caricature that he presents to the public.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Thu 25 Jul 17:03
I saw a little bit of him in the Commons today, firing off salvos about various things, it seemed to me so that he didn't have to have much prepared or have done much research, he could mostly just dredge up all the stuff he's had swilling about in his bonce for months.
I might well have made a snap judgement but that's how it looked from a few minutes watching.
My wife wouldn't let me watch for long - it was doing her head in.
It was hard to tell, looking at JRM, if he was aghast, or happy for Bojo to show some "passion."
I thought it was both funny and frightening.
Post Edited (Thu 25 Jul 17:04)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Thu 25 Jul 17:11
He absolutely destroyed Corbyn today
As one commentator put it, they hadn't seen as many glum faces on the Labour benches since Corbyn was actually elected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: GG Riva
Date: Thu 25 Jul 17:27
Quote:
Captain Desmond Fancey, Thu 25 Jul 17:11
He absolutely destroyed Corbyn today
As one commentator put it, they hadn't seen as many glum faces on the Labour benches since Corbyn was actually elected.
Destroying Corbyn would be pretty low down my list of priorities for the new PM. Leading this country through a very difficult time to a prosperous future for everyone, rather than those already well off, is far more important, in my humble one.
Not your average Sunday League player.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: jake89
Date: Thu 25 Jul 21:52
I really don't understand all this Tory nonsense about Johnson being the man to keep Corbyn out. You could put a dog licking it's balls up against Corbyn and he'd still lose. He will NEVER be Prime Minister of this country as the media would never allow it.
Though I also doubt we'll see a Lib Dem PM soon as England's had its fix of female PMs for a good while. Need a jolly good chap to grab people by the balls and give them a great British squeeze.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Fri 26 Jul 00:08
I believe you're right about Corbyn jake.
I wish they'd get a new leader.
Is there anyone who could do the biz?
Is there any chance that Labour will see sense and get a new leader?
If they don't I could envisage a GE with a much-increased majority for BOZO.
Post Edited (Fri 26 Jul 00:18)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Fri 26 Jul 00:37
I don't think Corbyn saw his future as a PM but just transform the Labour Party from their previous disguise as Tory lite into a hard left party hoping to leave the mantle for a younger version.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
Post Edited (Fri 26 Jul 00:38)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 26 Jul 00:59
The powerful interests within the UK are well aware of the dangers involved in a Johnson premiership and its potential to allow Corbyn through the door of No 10 Downing Street. Their preferred Labour PM in the event of an election win appears to be Keir Starmer, an ex-Oxbridge educated lawyer who is a Londoner to boot, so he ticks most of the boxes. A first name like Keir will appeal to the core Labour support as well.
I note that the Brexit vote of 2016 came just one day after Roy Hodgson resigned as England manager, which gives us some perspective on how far back this totemic vote actually took place. Hodgson could be seen as something of a Europhile, a man who had managed overseas, could speak a few languages, and felt England needed a more continental approach to the game. Whatever, he came back in disgrace from Europe after being defeated by the mighty Iceland, albeit not in a cod war, but with a leadership record as miserable as Theresa May’s.
His replacement was Sam Allardyce, a big, bluff self-publicist with an established record for dodgy dealing who insisted that all England needed to do to become successful was to be more English. I am sure you can see where I am going with this analogy. Allardyce lasted 67 days in office before he was forced to resign over yet another financial indiscretion, but he did win the one match that he was in charge of. Maybe that will be Johnson’s fate too: the man who cobbles together some acceptable brexit deal before being bundled out of office in a forthcoming General Election, or forced to resign after some scandal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Fri 26 Jul 09:28
Be interesting to see some opinion polls in the coming days and weeks. I suspect there will be a big bounce for the Tories now that they have a real Conservative and Brexiteer in charge.
Having voted for them more or less unbroken for the past 30 odd years it pained me a little to vote for Brexit Party in the Euro elections. I'm looking forward to returning to the Tory fold once again.
The good old days
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Fri 26 Jul 09:54
I agree the Tories are likely to ride high in the coming polls.
The Libs as a clear remain party are likely to take a lot of support away from Labour who to this day are still dithering on Brexit.
In Scotland however, I'd imagine Tory popularity will fall with SNP remaining high and the liberals gaining from the other two.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 26 Jul 10:23
There's some talk now of the Scottish Tories becoming a separate party to distance themselves from BJ. I'm not sure how that squares with continuing to brand themselves as the Conservative and Unionist Party though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Fri 26 Jul 11:26
Ref: sammer
Date: Fri 26 Jul 00:59
It's an amusing analogy Sammer.
Keir Starmer, got more voters' appeal than Corbyn I imagine. I see he's quoted at the same odds as Emily Thornberry as a potential leader:
https://www.theweek.co.uk/91412/labour-leadership-contenders-will-it-finally-be-a-women
Can't see anyone who excites me as someone who could really challenge the Tories, but I think a woman would help.
Emily Thornberry. Got the look? And what it takes?
Post Edited (Fri 26 Jul 11:38)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Fri 26 Jul 11:45
"Emily Thornberry. Got the look? And what it takes?"
Bit early to be on the drink is it not? She's a blundering incompetent buffoon as well. The majority of her interviews are pure cringe.
Sadly, as has been mentioned before, the House of Commons is as bereft of "talent" as it has been for many a year right now - and that's on all sides of the house.
The good old days
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 26 Jul 12:54
Anyone who expresses views contrary to yours is a 'buffoon' or some other derogatory term apparently. Anyway, the Prime Minister is now the self-styled 'Minister for the Union'. That should win over the Jocks. I wonder what other shiny trinkets he'll throw our way?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Fri 26 Jul 14:37
Calls MP a buffoon but is happy with BJ being PM... Jesus wept
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Fri 26 Jul 14:40
Ref: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Fri 26 Jul 11:45
<<< "Emily Thornberry. Got the look? And what it takes?"
Bit early to be on the drink is it not? She's a blundering incompetent buffoon as well. The majority of her interviews are pure cringe. >>>
Meaning - "She's a blundering incompetent buffoon as well" as that other one. Thanks for that Cap'n. For a minute there... 🙂
Yes I have ma doubts about her.
I said to ma wife I wish we had another Tony Benn, or someone who could actually win a war of words with Bozo. Because it seems to me a sharper intellect could put him in his place.
He wouldn't even need the costume.
Post Edited (Fri 26 Jul 14:40)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Fri 26 Jul 14:55
Getting a wee bit hypocritical in your old age Andrew ?
Completely agree about Tony Benn. At the complete opposite scale politically from me (except on Europe of course) but a bloody brilliant politician.
Parliament needs proper heavyweights like him
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Fri 26 Jul 15:07
Yeh politics is in a hole. Won't always be this way.
As Miss Marple said , "There's always the possibility of X - someone who hasn't appeared yet."
Anyone been talent-spotting young up-and-coming politicians?
I wonder if we will see them getting younger, like Greta Thunberg?
Post Edited (Fri 26 Jul 15:10)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Fri 26 Jul 15:37
What talents do you look for in a politician? Because I suspect that people will give pretty similar answers - honesty, integrity, etc - but that will slip when they get themselves under somebody's spell and start ignoring their obvious flaws.
"Teflon Tony" springs to mind. People even believed his 45 minutes tosh at first.
You simply cannot possess the qualities we think we expect of a politician and survive our poisonous political cesspool for long so, instead of fixing the system (because it's politicians who do that and they are perfectly happy with things as they are...), we compromise and vote for the least worse option out of all the liars, cheats and narcissists who get far enough to stand any chance.
Imagine if somebody who was actually honest and who actually behaved with integrity (even when no one's looking) tried to run for office? Doubt they'd even make it past the selection committee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Fri 26 Jul 17:41
When we have a PM who has lied, lied and lied again in his previous life as a politician, the prospects are nobody will believe him even when he's telling the truth.
They all get found out eventually.
What is alarming is that even the most deluded Boris fans are prepared to ignore his racism, his xenophobia, his misogyny, his record as foreign secretary but still say " but he's got charm" as if it negates all those things.
Winston Syndrome.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Fri 26 Jul 19:43
I get what you're saying Wotsit and AAPS. I agree with you both but, just as nobody? saw PRESIDENT Trump and BIG SHOT Farage and BREXIT and PM Bozo coming, I wonder if the next surprise will be youth getting some power.
It might be a spit in the ocean yet but the efforts of e.g. Malal Yousafzai, school strikes for climate, Greta Thunberg and young people interviewed about climate on BBC News - lead me to wonder if young folk are having more of a voice and becoming more savvy.
Maybe the oldies have messed up so much that younger folk are increasingly determined to set about trying to make the world more as they want it. Climate being as it is, more are feeling they must get involved. Maybe that will help to drive necessary change in politics?
As with the Pars, so with the world - come on the young folks!
Post Edited (Fri 26 Jul 19:44)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Fri 26 Jul 20:07
Malala is a truly inspirational figure right enough and she certainly has the potential to enact real change, but there must already be vested interests trying to inveigle their way into her inner circle and soon she might have to compromise one thing in order to get something she wants more, which will annoy some of her followers.
Which has made me wonder whether politicians should be judged on the compromises they make? Do they make skillfull compromises which target their priorities? If so, then they are probably displaying something almost but not entirely unlike integrity, which is, again probably, the best we can expect from a politician in the current climate.
And, to be fair to BJ, he has firmly and publicly identified a priority and he seems set on achieving it without any bull****.
I just happen to strongly disagree with his priority.
And his personality.
And his louche attitude.
And his pretension.
etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Fri 26 Jul 20:38
Quote:
onandupthepars, Fri 26 Jul 19:43
I get what you're saying Wotsit and AAPS. I agree with you both but, just as nobody? saw PRESIDENT Trump and BIG SHOT Farage and BREXIT and PM Bozo coming, I wonder if the next surprise will be youth getting some power.
It might be a spit in the ocean yet but the efforts of e.g. Malal Yousafzai, school strikes for climate, Greta Thunberg and young people interviewed about climate on BBC News - lead me to wonder if young folk are having more of a voice and becoming more savvy.
Maybe the oldies have messed up so much that younger folk are increasingly determined to set about trying to make the world more as they want it. Climate being as it is, more are feeling they must get involved. Maybe that will help to drive necessary change in politics?
As with the Pars, so with the world - come on the young folks!
Pretty much, a lot of people my generation and younger are sick if the attitudes of older generations towards the environment. Only so many times you can try and inform a baby boomer or similar whilst they stick their fingers in their ears. They'll be dead before the worst comes and they honestly couldn't give a sh1t
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Fri 26 Jul 22:05
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Fri 26 Jul 20:07
<<< Malala is a truly inspirational figure right enough and she certainly has the potential to enact real change, but there must already be vested interests trying to inveigle their way into her inner circle and soon she might have to compromise one thing in order to get something she wants more, which will annoy some of her followers.
Which has made me wonder whether politicians should be judged on the compromises they make? Do they make skillfull compromises which target their priorities? If so, then they are probably displaying something almost but not entirely unlike integrity, which is, again probably, the best we can expect from a politician in the current climate.
And, to be fair to BJ, he has firmly and publicly identified a priority and he seems set on achieving it without any bull****. >>>
I'm not sure about the integrity bit Wotsit. I've been looking for an example. For instance voting on whether or not to have HS2? In such a vote, some MPs weigh up party loyalty on the one hand with a duty to their constituents on the other. In such a case, I would tend to think there's only one one way to vote with integrity, which is following constituents' wishes.
But can you give an example of how you were thinking there?
As for Bozo, I'm not being bolshy but I think it is BS of him to think the abolition of the backstop is some kind of plan. It sounds more like "Gosh - must think of something - anything - I know..."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Fri 26 Jul 22:34
I did say "something almost but not entirely unlike integrity though. It's just the closest thing that we can hope that a politician can muster to said value.
An example is BJ with his Brexit and DT with his wall. They said that they would focus on those and they basically have. It's what keeps their supporters in tow.
I actually don't agree that politicians should always vote with their constituents' wishes though.
I think that that leads to Populism and Tyranny of the Majority, neither of which I think is A Good Thing. Sometimes it's "Better" to not go with the majority of your constituents if there is a greater good to be achieved by looking at the bigger picture: nobody wants a power station in their neighbourhood, but everybody needs electricity and power stations need to go somewhere.
NIMBYism would run riot.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Fri 26 Jul 22:36
Ref: Andrew283
Date: Fri 26 Jul 20:38
<<< a lot of people my generation and younger are sick of the attitudes of older generations towards the environment. Only so many times you can try and inform a baby boomer or similar whilst they stick their fingers in their ears. They'll be dead before the worst comes and they honestly couldn't give a sh1t >>>
I sympathise Andrew. I've had most of my life without having to worry about a few things you and younger folk have to now (e.g. Environment, Climate, Jobs, Extremism etc.) It's challenging but I think there are good signs. I think it's wise not to think too much about the dinosaur brigade (UK politics etc.) and megalomaniacs (Trump, Putin etc), but keep in touch with what the likes of Malal Yousafzai and Greta Thunberg - and other such bright young geniuses are doing - read about them, think of them as friends, it helps to keep the spirits up. They are the ones who are worthy of our attention.
Post Edited (Sat 27 Jul 00:29)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Fri 26 Jul 23:51
Ref: Wotsit
Date: Fri 26 Jul 22:34
I think MPs should at least vote according to pre-election pledges.
I would be unapologetically NIMBYist in certain situations:
Just like me - the auld geezer wi' the specs!
Post Edited (Sat 27 Jul 01:15)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sat 27 Jul 10:12
So where would you want your sewerage to go?
"Who you are and what you feel comes not just from inside you, but from where you are in the power structure"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: onandupthepars
Date: Sat 27 Jul 11:40
There's a leading question. 🙂
No you're right it has to go somewhere. That picture I posted came from an article about a treatment centre being proposed in a heavily populated area. I'd oppose that. I used to live within about a mile of one, which was sited on undeveloped land outwith the residential areas. That was OK.
Yes sewerage is a different proposition to HS2 or a power station in which people are being told they must make sacrifices for the so-called greater good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Sat 27 Jul 13:49
Quote:
onandupthepars, Sat 27 Jul 11:40
There's a leading question. 🙂
No you're right it has to go somewhere. That picture I posted came from an article about a treatment centre being proposed in a heavily populated area. I'd oppose that. I used to live within about a mile of one, which was sited on undeveloped land outwith the residential areas. That was OK.
Yes sewerage is a different proposition to HS2 or a power station in which people are being told they must make sacrifices for the so-called greater good.
But the NIMBYism is what leads to stuff being put in inappropriate places; politicians look to place unpopular things where they will have the least political fallout (in an opposition dominated area for example) rather than where it would be most sensible.
Say Party A relies on the rural vote and Party B on the urban vote. If Party A is in power they are going to be tempted to place sewerage plants in urban areas to avoid annoying their core supporters. Integrity would be to ignore what their supporters want.
Having said all that, I know absolutely nowt about waste water management so there might be lots of reasons why a sewerage plant might be ideally situated in an urbam area.
"Who you are and what you feel comes not just from inside you, but from where you are in the power structure"
Post Edited (Sat 27 Jul 13:50)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Tue 30 Jul 14:37
What now?
Brexit will only happen on October 31st if:
- Johnson manages to fool MPs into voting for May's withdrawal agreement
- Johnson gives the EU a better deal than they agreed with May and this gets though parliament
- Johnson runs the clock down with the EU hoping for them to back down and offer a last-minute deal
The first one will destroy Johnson and the Conservative party so it won't happen.
The second one will destroy Johnson and the Conservative party so it won't happen.
The third one will create a mess in parliament during October that will end with a Brexit extension being requested at an EU summit.
No deal will only happen if one EU member state refuses the extension (which is a real possibility).
The EU will not offer anything better than what is currently on the table. No deal is bad for them but worse for the UK and they know it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Tue 30 Jul 19:11
For all his bluster, Johnson has the same pieces on the board as Theresa May and which has resulted in a stalemate for three years.
He could call for a General Election to change the arithmetic in the House of Commons, claiming that parliament does not properly represent the people. I imagine he would need parliamentary assent to do this so it is probably a non –starter. Even if Johnson managed to call an election, that is as no more likely to win him a working majority than it did for Theresa May. There is the added terror that it might result in some kind of Corbyn administration for which Johnson, a man who likes to be liked, would never be forgiven.
He cannot really call for a second referendum on any ‘new’ deal acceptable to the Hoc and the EU for the reasons you explained: it is by definition bound to be unacceptable to half the Tory voters who have just put him in power. That is before we consider the probability that any deal, new or otherwise, would be rejected by the electorate since most Remainers and all Hard Line Brexiteers would vote against.
Nor can Johnson prorogue parliament, or hope to run down the clock, without the risk of being arrested for high treason.
I assume Johnson knew all this and more when he took on the job, which may explain the Queen questioning his sanity. As things stand his best bet would probably be a ‘Reichstag Fire’ laid at the door of fanatical Remainers which would lead to parliament being suspended and government by emergency powers. A military coup to deliver Brexit is probably out of the question since I doubt the military top brass trust the man any more than the public at large.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Tue 30 Jul 19:31
I was interested to notice that today’s Daily Express and Daily Mail were toning down the pro-Johnson rhetoric. The fact that the GBP is being damaged on the currency markets has no doubt curbed their enthusiasm a little, and even the Telegraph was carrying a story of how a Johnson administration intended to attack workers’ rights once released from EU directives.
It may be that Johnson has alarmed previous sympathisers by failing to produce much of a ‘Boris bounce’ and by his treatment of former ministers with ready access to the editors’ desks. Maybe the media are gearing up for a Dunkirk type Brexit in which Johnson is to be proclaimed a national hero not for victory, but for salvaging what could be salvaged from a predatory EU and back-stabbing remainers on the home front.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Tue 30 Jul 21:57
The pro-indie vote has had a proper 'Boris Bounce' to be fair - although the self-titled 'Minister for the Union' was never going to be good for it.
It would be interesting if the last Prime Minister of the United Kingdom were to award himself that title - I wonder how history would judge someone who did that?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Thu 1 Aug 08:42
This is all going to go t*ts-up very soon
Johnson's party line at the moment is just to say it is up to the EU to come up with something if they want to avoid a no deal. It isn't. It is up to the UK to come up with a suggestion (with parliament's agreement). If this doesn't happen, then May's deal and no deal remain the only things on the table.
I reckon we are going to have 2-3 months of nonsense, followed by a Brexit extension, followed by a few more months of nonsense, followed by a general election which will result in another mess where no-one has a majority. If the Tories are the biggest party then we will have another year or two of Brexit nonsense. If Labour are the biggest party then they will probably form a minority government with the Lib Dems helping out (but not joining a coalition) if they agree to either cancel Brexit or stay in the common market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 1 Aug 09:27
We will be out of the EU by hook or by crook before bonfire night.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: moviescot
Date: Thu 1 Aug 10:57
Quote:
The One Who Knocks, Thu 1 Aug 09:27
We will be out of the EU by hook or by crook before bonfire night.
Mmmmm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 1 Aug 12:52
‘We will be out of the EU by hook or by crook before bonfire night.’
If by bonfire night you mean a ‘Reichstag Fire’ I can see where you might be coming from. Otherwise it is not clear how there is any mechanism for Boris Johnson to remove the UK from the EU. A ‘soft’ Brexit was tried three times by Theresa May (and supported eventually by Johnson himself) but did not have parliamentary support. A ‘crash-out’ Brexit has even less support within parliament, while polling indicates two-thirds of the electorate opposes such a reckless action.
As things stand Johnson’s only obvious course is to negotiate what he might claim is an improved ‘soft’ Brexit and offer it in a referendum as the only Brexit on offer, but to do that he would presumably have to win enough support in the HoC to hold the referendum. When he returns after the recess he will almost certainly be leading a minority administration even with DUP votes.
Imagine all the turnip heads and flickering light bulbs that would be adorning the front pages of the tabloid press if Jeremy Corbyn was in charge of this fiasco. There are clips of Johnson being loudly jeered in Manchester and Edinburgh although this is scarcely being reported in print media so far as I can make out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Thu 1 Aug 13:14
The May deal will be rejigged and repackaged and Johnson will get a slap on the back as if he is the world's greatest diplomat and negotiator.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Thu 1 Aug 13:58
That’s his best bet as things stand, but I can’t see it being achieved in three months if at all.
There still remains the problem of getting a vote through a parliament which has on three occasions rejected what is on offer. The media may play up his ‘improved’ offer in military language as Boris bashing the EU into submission and making them blink first, but MPs are a little wiser than that.
If his deal is blocked in the HoC just as Theresa May’s was before, Johnson can hardly run to the country and ask for support in a General Election since he would be standing on the hustings as the man who promised Brexit but could not deliver.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Thu 1 Aug 14:14
Bank of England now stating even a smooth brexit is likely to pose a 1/3 chance of plunging the UK into another recession. Anything to stop Johnny foreigner coming and 'Taking ur jerbs'.
Honestly can see the EU just getting fed up and just punting us by refusing an extension. We're a total embarrassment
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Thu 1 Aug 16:41
"Bank of England now stating even a smooth brexit is likely to pose a 1/3 chance of plunging the UK into another recession."
This isn't surprising, since direct damage has already been done in a few sectors and Brexit hasn't even happened yet.
Many industries need to plan their activities months, or even years, in advance. Because of the uncertainty about the March 29th deadline many companies reduced investment in the UK to limit damage before then. This money is gone and might not come back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 1 Aug 17:06
There are one or two Tory MPs making noises about defecting to the Lib Dems and if, as expected, the Tories lose the upcoming bye-election then even one defection would wipe out their working majority
Not sure what the DUP are saying about it but even with their support Johnston is likely to struggle for a majority, and that's if all his MPs support him, which is unlikely on Brexit
"Who you are and what you feel comes not just from inside you, but from where you are in the power structure"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Thu 1 Aug 17:35
Can't see anything other than a General Election to happen to solve this impasse.
The Irish backstop continues to be a major stumbling block as well.
The logical step is for Northern Ireland to remain in the customs Union and Single Market but retain UK status.
It solves all their problems.
Of course the DUP will be against it but think Tories hope a GE will give enough of a majority to bypass their opposition.
A new General Election may see another referendum.
Not on remain vs leave but no deal vs the one on offer from the EU.
That's how I see it panning out.
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
Post Edited (Thu 01 Aug 18:06)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 1 Aug 17:49
The elephant in the room is a united Ireland.
It's odd how that solution isn't even being given as an option despite the fact that it would sort the border issue quite nicely.
Support for a united Ireland will definitely rise as a result of Brexit - it's currently not fully supported among the catholic community because of the NHS (Ireland has quite expensive healthcare) and tax. But Brexit could wipe out those advantages if the economy goes t1ts up as a result.
By the way, if there is a united Ireland what are the chances of Scotland being allowed to join? We could call the new country The United Kingdom (nobody else would be needing the name at that point) and we could be an EU member.
"Who you are and what you feel comes not just from inside you, but from where you are in the power structure"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Andrew283
Date: Thu 1 Aug 17:53
Quote:
Wotsit, Thu 1 Aug 17:49
By the way, if there is a united Ireland what are the chances of Scotland being allowed to join? We could call the new country The United Kingdom (nobody else would be needing the name at that point) and we could be an EU member.
Please let this happen. The sheer rage from British Nationalists would be the sweetest palate cleanser after the brexit mess they've imposed on the country. Let Wales enter a recession with them as they seem content budding up to England despite basically semi-surviving on EU grants
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: AdamAntsParsStripe
Date: Thu 1 Aug 18:13
Quote:
Wotsit, Thu 1 Aug 17:49
The elephant in the room is a united Ireland.
It's odd how that solution isn't even being given as an option despite the fact that it would sort the border issue quite nicely.
Support for a united Ireland will definitely rise as a result of Brexit - it's currently not fully supported among the catholic community because of the NHS (Ireland has quite expensive healthcare) and tax. But Brexit could wipe out those advantages if the economy goes t1ts up as a result.
By the way, if there is a united Ireland what are the chances of Scotland being allowed to join? We could call the new country The United Kingdom (nobody else would be needing the name at that point) and we could be an EU member.
Somehow I don't see how you could call a new partnership the United Kingdom given a united Ireland would still be a republic.
A union of sorts could be struck however.
I also feel Wales could be on the verge of changing from leave to remaining in the EU so let's invite them in as well :)
Zwei Pints Bier und ein Päckchen Chips bitte
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 1 Aug 18:26
All that UK branded paperwork and stuff we could buy on the cheap would save a fortune, just saying.
"Who you are and what you feel comes not just from inside you, but from where you are in the power structure"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Thu 1 Aug 19:59
“Support for a united Ireland will definitely rise as a result of Brexit - it's currently not fully supported among the catholic community because of the NHS (Ireland has quite expensive healthcare) and tax. But Brexit could wipe out those advantages if the economy goes t1ts up as a result.”
I don’t think you can automatically assume Brexit would result in majority support for a United Ireland.
The ROI economy will also go “tits up” so where would the economic benefit be for people in the North?
The unification issue is a lot bigger than the economy.
However, that won’t stop SF just like the SNP using any argument to further their cause and to hell with the economic consequences.
There is also no evidence that people in the ROI want their cousins in the North who have been weaned on successive U.K. governments’ largesse.
Post Edited (Thu 01 Aug 20:05)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Thu 1 Aug 21:15
I'm not saying that it will lead to a majority in favour of a united Ireland, just that some Catholics who previously tolerated the union may be less inclined post Brexit.
I also agree that Ireland doesn't necessarily want their fat neighbour back.
Really though my posts were a bit of a rubbish joke based around a Celtic Union stealing the UK's name so that it can save a few bob on second hand stationary....
Union Keltique? InvadeInvite Brittany?
"Who you are and what you feel comes not just from inside you, but from where you are in the power structure"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: aaaaaaaaaargh
Date: Fri 2 Aug 12:09
A no deal Brexit will definitely cause economic damage to the Republic of Ireland. The difference is that they will probably receive some support from the EU. The north will just need to rely on trapping and eating seagulls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 2 Aug 12:56
CDF, do you believe that there would be any negative economic consequences for Scotland if it became independent?
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Fri 2 Aug 14:43
In the short term, yes. However, I don't believe for a second it will be half as bad as the mainstream media and the less than neutral Bank of England would have people believe.
Remember we were already to have lost 800,000 jobs just for voting to leave. And yet, 3 years on unemployment is at a near all time low.
People on here are never done saying MPs are only "in it for themselves" so you do have to wonder why so many of them are really against Brexit. Just another way of keeping their noses deep in the trough.
The good old days
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 2 Aug 14:50
An interesting answer, but not to the question TOWK asked. It related to the possibility of Scottish independence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Fri 2 Aug 14:52
Good spot and apologies for genuine oversight on my part. Been a busy day in the Fancey household.
Simple answer is yes although again perhaps not as bad as some of the worst doom mongers would have you believe.
The good old days
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: wee eck
Date: Fri 2 Aug 15:00
Economic forecasting is notoriously fickle but the drop in value of the pound against the dollar and the euro is a fact.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Captain Desmond Fancey
Date: Fri 2 Aug 15:07
Indeed and whilst it's bad news for holidaymakers it is still good news for Britain's exporters and of course for domestic products too.
Completely agree - yep, I really said that - about economic forecasting too. Only need to see how often the Bank of England have gotten it wrong recently. They're about as reliable as the Met Office.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 2 Aug 17:16
Given the devaluation of sterling by around 20% since the referendum I don’t get the “woe is me” stuff in the event of a no deal Brexit. Average tariffs would be around 4-5% into the EU although admittedly some would be higher.
Most exporters to the EU would still be quids in compared to where they were 3 years ago.
Given we import significantly more than we export to the EU surely we would have a net gain on trade tariffs?
This windfall could be used to subsidise industries most adversely impacted.
Am I missing something ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 2 Aug 17:36
It's not the tarrif that worry me it's the tbt's (technical barriers to trade). With a no deal brexit imports and exports wil need checked and cleared by customs. For industries that rely on just in time deliveries to function that could be terminal.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: Wotsit
Date: Fri 2 Aug 17:41
Unemployment is low but poverty and underemployment are high and rising at an alarming rate.
The unemployment figures are meaningless in the gig economy - we need to measure who is earning enough to be on the more pleasant side of the poverty line, and right now that number is falling.
"Who you are and what you feel comes not just from inside you, but from where you are in the power structure"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 2 Aug 19:57
So if we have a surplus on tariffs we have spending options plus net £10bn savings in contributions so what’s the problem?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 2 Aug 20:12
I refer you to my previous post.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 2 Aug 20:41
Yes the bureaucracy will get in the way potentially in the short term but it is in the interests of both sides to reach an agreement.
I suspect that any disruption to the supply chain will be engineered by the EU just out of pettiness. They are rules based and the French will just do what they want as they always do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 2 Aug 21:12
Yes but no deal means no agreement is reached. That is what no deal means and why it could be so damaging. No deal means no deal on everything.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 2 Aug 22:03
Of course it does.
But given we have been in the EU for 45 years and compliant with all regs to date where do you think the pinch points in bureaucracy will surface?
I’ll wager it will not be from the U.K.
Says it all really.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: parbucks
Date: Fri 2 Aug 22:20
Would appreciate a response to my comments on the simple economics of a no deal scenario assuming we revert to WTO rules?
All I have heard so far is that JIT is the big issue but that works both ways.
Does anyone think the U.K. will be obstructive to free trade and minimal bureaucracy?
Pettifogging comes to mind when I think of the EU.
Post Edited (Fri 02 Aug 22:34)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: sammer
Date: Fri 2 Aug 22:57
I cannot see how allowing EU goods to flow freely into the UK after Brexit matches up with ‘taking back control of our borders.’ They could dump any rubbish they like on our shores if that was the case. Random checking sounds like Eldorado for drug smugglers and people smugglers as well.
It’s not so much a case of ‘reverting’ to WTO rules since as part of the EU we are already part of some WTO rules. The difference would be that as a single country we have less chance of negotiating a good deal than as a bloc of 28 countries. More bureaucrats, not fewer, will be require to be funded by the UK taxpayers as we try to arrange WTO deals- work that is currently shared across the EU members.
This WTO Brexit argument appears to me, in football terms, like the SFA leaving UEFA and claiming it will get a better deal under FIFA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic Originator: The One Who Knocks
Date: Fri 2 Aug 23:01
Of course they will enforce tbt's in the event of a no deal. If not what is the point of having a trade deal with the EU. I'm sure Japan, Singapore, Canada and South America would be asking exactly that. Also if we are always going to be mirroring EU standards and regulations then it's going to be problematic striking a deal on our own with nations like the U.S.
Now if people have a problem with being aligned with Europe for idealogical reasons then that's one thing but let's not try to pretend it makes economic sense in the short or even medium term. I'd actually say the same about Scottish independence.
I have said this before on here but that old saying rings true. People don't have ideas, ideas have people.
And although my eyes were open
They just might as well be closed
|
|
|
|
|
|
