The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums:
Politics

Brexit

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...49 50 51 52 53 · >>
shadowen On June 15, 2020




Bunyip Bend, Australia
#751New Post! Jun 08, 2020 @ 16:29:43
Ah how times change. Over the past four years or so the CBI have been widely quoted by remoaners. Presented as an infallible source. However just recently the Director-General of the CBI stated that the organisation now opposes any extension to the implementation period beyond December 2020. The Director-General said that that British businesses have the "resilience to be able to plan for a ‘no deal’ Brexit,” and they had "no interest in delaying". This is not what rejoiners are wanting to hear as they continue to try a pressure the UK government to extent the transition period by up to two years. Something that would clearly be in the EU's best interests but certainly not in the best interests of the UK.
shadowen On June 15, 2020




Bunyip Bend, Australia
#752New Post! Jun 11, 2020 @ 12:58:39
So the EU are saying they would be open to a Scottish only extension to the transition period. And here was me thinking April 1st had come and gone...
shadowen On June 15, 2020




Bunyip Bend, Australia
#753New Post! Jun 11, 2020 @ 13:19:24
Unilever is to combine its two businesses into one structure in the UK. In short they have chosen to concentrate their legal structure in the UK rather than have it split btw the UK and the Netherlands. Hmmm, why didn't they chose to concentrate their legal structure in the Netherlands if they wanted to move from a split setup? Why choose the UK over an EU country. A real head scratcher eh!
shadowen On June 15, 2020




Bunyip Bend, Australia
#754New Post! Jun 14, 2020 @ 16:28:46
So the time has effectively passed for the transition phase to be extended. That's another tick in the box for BJ but there is still a long way to go. Still plenty of time for him to betray the people who voted for him to 'get Brexit done'.
shadowen On June 15, 2020




Bunyip Bend, Australia
#755New Post! Jun 14, 2020 @ 16:30:05
Realistically the end of September needs to be the cut off date for any FTA. This would give businesses sufficient time to prepare for either trade under WTO terms or under any FTA.
nooneinparticular On September 04, 2020




, Hawaii
#756New Post! Jul 29, 2020 @ 04:13:03
@shadowen Said

Realistically the end of September needs to be the cut off date for any FTA. This would give businesses sufficient time to prepare for either trade under WTO terms or under any FTA.


Why September specifically? Just wondering why that month in particular was chosen?
nooneinparticular On September 04, 2020




, Hawaii
#757New Post! Jul 29, 2020 @ 05:26:20
@shadowen Said

It's not for the bloody civil service to decide what is reasonable. Furthermore, if they think a directive in not feasible then they can say so and explain why. However, having done this they still have an obligation to do the best they can. Their own bloody website concedes this. If what they are being asked to do is legal then they have a duty to do it. Of course the civil service often seek to delay, obstruct or simply torpedo government directives. Again, by their own admission they shouldn't but they do it anyway.


So the civil service have the authority or power to criticize the government's plans? And they can do so impartially? Especially in this political climate? How, exactly? How else would a civil servant agency "say so and explain why"? And who determines whether or not they have sought to 'delay, obstruct, or simply torpedo government directives'?

You want to talk about subjective arguments? You argue that the civil service must be impartial, but use subjective criteria to determine that impartiality.

Quote:

How the hell is determining what is unreasonable NOT subjective. Seriously...


You do realize that following this line of thinking eventually leads to 'the civil service are (at least partly) to blame for anything that I dislike' right?

Ultimately though, it comes down to a question of feasibility. If the police sector was tasked by Parliament and the government to double their patrols without additional aid, some would see that as unreasonable while others wouldn't regardless of actual feasibility.

Quote:

I have gone over the role of the civil service and even quoted directly from their own webpage what their role is...and it's not what you seem to think.


I've not actually gone against anything that was said on that website. The ONLY things that have been asked in response is who determines wrongdoing here? If you'll choose to remember, I said at the very beginning that the civil service are not NECESSARILY (aka automatically) at fault for failing to fulfill political promises. NECESSARILY does not mean THEY ARE AT FAULT nor does it mean that THEY ARE NOT AT FAULT. You seem to be of the opinion that NO MATTER WHAT, the civil service bears responsibility for a politicians promises and agendas irregardless of anything else.

Quote:

What is exactly?


I was under the impression that part of the whole Brexit fishing thing was to get foreign fisheries out of UK waters. How is this accomplished if UK fishermen are still allowed to sell their catch quotas and foreign vessels can still fish within UK waters?

Quote:

I've explained this multiple times and I'm not going to simply keep repeating myself. If you seriously can't understand the difference then so be it.


You've repeatedly said that it's important. When asked for clarification, you've just reiterated that it was important and not explained why in any way that addresses any of my follow-up questions.

Quote:

How does it not? It's simple maths. If you take the total fish caught in the UK's EEZ by foreign fishermen and compare that with the total fish caught by UK fishermen in waters controlled by the CFP (excluding British waters) you end up with a HUGE difference favouring foreign fishermen. In other words, even if UK fishermen lost ALL access to EU waters they would still come out well in front. Again, this is assuming the UK government don't rubber d*** them. So guess what, the simple maths agrees with me, disagrees with you.


'Simple maths' is rarely a true reflection of reality. In fact 'simple maths' often have underlying assumptions in place to make them 'simple' in the first place. Your scenario has several key assumptions in them that are REQUIRED to be fulfilled in order for such a prediction to be true. I've told you all of this before. If you're still asking me, 'how does it not', then...

Quote:

By the way, other than gut feel what do you base your view that poaching in the UK's waters will inevitable increase? What exactly is that view based on?


Would you like me to list the long history of poaching and their traditional reasonings?

Quote:

They didnt 'just' use their border claims. Their border claims were absolutely integral to their attempts to control fishing in 'their' waters. No border claims means no way of realistically controlling their fishing resources. So their border claims were absolutely critical to the cod wars.


Yes, but the whole point of creating that border claim in the first place was to control the fish in that area, not for s***s and giggles. That's what I mean when I say that the border issue was used. The border itself wasn't really the end goal, it was about the fish living in that border.
nooneinparticular On September 04, 2020




, Hawaii
#758New Post! Jul 29, 2020 @ 05:29:13
@shadowen Said

If you want to insist that the reason why in different areas under the control the the CFP the reason why year in year out the same percentage of fish species are caught by fishermen from specific countries isnt down to the CFP which species each nations quota (by species and area) then good for you. Maybe you could contact the EU and tell them there is in fact no need for their highly contentious quotas.


If you bothered to watch interviews with UK fishermen or read articles put out by fishing co-operatives you find that they are very much aware of the different issues and what is down to the CFP and what is down to the policies of UK governments over the years. Dare I suggest they are significantly better informed about the various fishing issues than either of us. But hey, if you want to insist they don't know what's going on and they were easily fooled then good for you.


What, like how the CFP works? Like how the said CFP's quota system operates? Like the role NATO played in the cod wars? That sort of thing...


If you want to blindly trust people, then that's on you. I would say something about blindly trusting the UK's political system here, but...
Jennifer1984 On about 3 hours ago
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#759New Post! Jul 29, 2020 @ 14:12:00
@nooneinparticular Said

If you want to blindly trust people, then that's on you. I would say something about blindly trusting the UK's political system here, but...



Feel free to shake your head in sad and sorrowful wonder at the levels of stupidity our country has descended to.

And the worst is yet to come.

As for what the fishermen think of the CFP, I live close to, and shop with the wives of the very fishermen that are referred to by the Australian. What their menfolk tell the papers and what their wives tell others they say to them between four walls at home, When we're in the queue for the checkout at Tesco, or at the school gates when we go to pick our kids up, are often two completely different things.

And yes, their wives say...... the fishermen were easily lied to. They were told what they wanted to hear. And they believed it. They don't now.


When you live in a Cornish fishing town, and not on the other side of the world, you get a different perspective on the realities for Cornish fishermen.
dookie On about 3 hours ago
Foolish Bombu





, United Kingdom
#760New Post! Jul 29, 2020 @ 21:00:45
Just reading through many of the posts here and find the usual argument of pro-brexiteers wanting the UK to be a "genuine sovereign nation" with someone else stating that this was a "no brainer".

Obviously it is a serious question, involving as it does "self determination", which is the heart of many things.

I would say first, that Winston Churchill, observing the devastation right across Europe at the end of WW2, was an advocate of a more united Europe. There is in fact a statue of Mr Churchill in Brussels in recognition of his vision of such greater unity. Winston stated that as far as national sovereignty was concerned, such was not inviolable, and in certain circumstances can be sacrificed for a greater good. Obviously, this requires judgement. The use of brains. Thus the question of "sovereignty" and how it is applied in our inter-connected world is in no way a "no brainer" in favour of the pro-brexiteer position.

Again, the UK participated in European elections and thus our MEP's were an integral part of the European Parliament. The implication that the EU is dictatorial, imposing its will upon the UK, which had no voice in the decisions, is a distortion. The UK was in fact potentially a strong contributor to the EU decision making process.


Also, the UK had many opt-outs of various EU projects and laws. Again, the UK had a veto (as every member state has) against virtually any law passed.

I have argued this elsewhere, but "control of our borders" was virtually complete as a member of the EU. For nationals beyond the EU countries, we had total and complete control (that the UK made a complete and shameful mess of this is another subject) For EU Nationals, an explicit directive of the EU is that freedom of movement is NOT an unqualified right. Entry could be refused to those posing a threat to public policy. The UK could also deport EU Nationals, and in fact deported over 4000 for various reasons in 2018.

That is about it.

Obviously, no one knows the future. Personally I am virtually immune to the financial hardships that I believe Brexit will bring. I could offer many examples where "Project Fear" has been shown to be, already, "Project Reality".

In my opinion, Brexit is an act of self harm unparalleled in British history. Others will disagree.
dookie On about 3 hours ago
Foolish Bombu





, United Kingdom
#761New Post! Aug 22, 2020 @ 09:38:30
After a few days without news, my eye caught the latest Daily Express Headline (this tabloid is the octogenarian's newsheet, white males in the south of England, Tory and Leave to the core.......well, I could be exaggerating a bit)

It blares from its front page:- "Wake Up EU. You're Forcing a No-Deal Brexit."

Quite funny if you like that sort of thing.

I'll say no more.
Jennifer1984 On about 3 hours ago
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#762New Post! Aug 22, 2020 @ 11:42:02
@dookie Said

After a few days without news, my eye caught the latest Daily Express Headline (this tabloid is the octogenarian's newsheet, white males in the south of England, Tory and Leave to the core.......well, I could be exaggerating a bit)

It blares from its front page:- "Wake Up EU. You're Forcing a No-Deal Brexit."

Quite funny if you like that sort of thing.

I'll say no more.


You don't need to. It's common knowledge that the Conservative Party always intended there to be a no deal Brexit and have done everything in their power to ensure that it happens.

Britain is to become an offshore tax haven for incredibly rich people and completely de-regulated so that nothing can stand in the way of them making even more.

The delusion of this is that there are a lot of people who believe that whatever wealth is created will "trickle down" in the form of well paid jobs and prosperity via increased consumerism.

Yeah, right. Those corporations have no intention of making anybody but themselves wealthier.

That is the reality of Brexit. As we will see in the long term.

But at least the Australian seems to have mooched off. So, that's a result then.
dookie On about 3 hours ago
Foolish Bombu





, United Kingdom
#763New Post! Aug 22, 2020 @ 12:02:08
Even in the the Tory Party there are various shades of opinion. Now, yes, Boris Johnson has composed his cabinet of virtual yes men - either those who were always ardent Brexiteers or others who have swallowed their previous opinions and now promise to tow the line. Alas, in the back benches are those who adhere to the "They Need Us More Than We Need Them" doctrine, that the EU will blur their own red lines in order to accommodate our every demand. Much like the member who elects and chooses to leave the Golf Club, who cancels their subscription, who then seeks to dictate exactly when they will enter the Clubhouse for a discounted drink, and when they will play a round.

The future is unknown. But I see disillusionment beckoning for Mr Joe Average who voted Leave, feeling "left behind" by the "establishment" and who - rather strangely in my opinion - blamed the EU.

(Of course, one must not mention the anti-anything foreign lobby which all insist had nothing whatever to do with their decision. The "I'm not a ******** but..... " brigade, who yet insist that "free speech" is dying and that we must be able to call a spade a spade)
Jennifer1984 On about 3 hours ago
Returner and proud





Penzance, United Kingdom
#764New Post! Aug 22, 2020 @ 18:24:33
@dookie Said

Even in the the Tory Party there are various shades of opinion. Now, yes, Boris Johnson has composed his cabinet of virtual yes men - either those who were always ardent Brexiteers or others who have swallowed their previous opinions and now promise to tow the line. Alas, in the back benches are those who adhere to the "They Need Us More Than We Need Them" doctrine, that the EU will blur their own red lines in order to accommodate our every demand. Much like the member who elects and chooses to leave the Golf Club, who cancels their subscription, who then seeks to dictate exactly when they will enter the Clubhouse for a discounted drink, and when they will play a round.

The future is unknown. But I see disillusionment beckoning for Mr Joe Average who voted Leave, feeling "left behind" by the "establishment" and who - rather strangely in my opinion - blamed the EU.

(Of course, one must not mention the anti-anything foreign lobby which all insist had nothing whatever to do with their decision. The "I'm not a ******** but..... " brigade, who yet insist that "free speech" is dying and that we must be able to call a spade a spade)



I don't mind calling a spade a spade, but I don't have to do it in a way that makes it quite clear that I hate the f***ing spade.....

..... while trying to kid everybody on that some of my best friends are spades.
dookie On about 3 hours ago
Foolish Bombu





, United Kingdom
#765New Post! Aug 25, 2020 @ 07:48:50
The Brexit paradox....."Any Government with the competence to deliver Brexit wouldn't. "
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>
Pages: << · 1 2 3 ...49 50 51 52 53 · >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Politics Forum - Some Rudeness Allowed

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   News & Current Events
Fri Jul 24, 2020 @ 23:20
10 3031
New posts   Religion & Philosophy
Sun Sep 11, 2011 @ 18:36
50 3310
New posts   Health & Fitness
Sat Sep 03, 2011 @ 14:19
27 2288
New posts   Random
Mon Jan 31, 2011 @ 12:25
11 653
New posts   Science
Thu Jul 05, 2007 @ 20:33
3 1022