One wonders why Theresa May would want a man by her side who when he was in charge of the Tory party was its only leader to preside over a second landslide general election defeat in its history, and its second biggest defeat since Napoleon.
Third, surely, behind 1906 and 1997?
Also shouldn't that be 'second consecutive landslide defeat?'
"Yes," says Mr Barnier, "but as you can appreciate, we need to place our orders from the Brewery in advance to ensure our bar is properly stocked." "You regularly used to spend at least £50 a week in the bar so we have placed orders with the brewery accordingly for the coming year." "You therefore owe us £2600 for the year"
"Will you still allow me to have these drinks?" asks Mr Davis. "No of course not Mr Davis. You are no longer a club member!" says Mr Barnier.
"Next is your restaurant bill," continues Mr Barnier. "In the same manner we have to make arrangements in advance with our catering suppliers. Your average restaurant bill was in the order of £300 a month, so we'll require payment of £3600 for the next year."
"I don't suppose you'll be letting me have these meals either?" asks Mr Davis.
"No, of course not," says an irritated Mr Barnier "You are no longer a club member!"
"Then of course," Mr Barnier continues, "there are repairs to the clubhouse roof."
"Clubhouse roof,” exclaims Mr Davis. "What's that got to do with me?"
"Well it still needs to be repaired and the builders are coming in next week, your share of the bill is £2000."
"I see," says Mr Davis, "anything else?"
"Now you mention it" says Mr Barnier, "there is Fred the Barman's pension. We would like you to pay £5 a week towards Fred's pension when he retires next month. He's not well you know so I doubt we'll need to ask you for payment for longer than about five years, so £1300 should do it. This brings your total bill to £10,000," says Mr Barnier. "Let me get this straight," says Mr Davis. "You want me to pay £500 for a jacket you won't let me have, £2600 for beverages you won't let me drink and £3600 for food you won't let me eat, all under a roof I won't be allowed under and not served by a bloke who's going to retire next month!"
"Yes, it's all perfectly clear and quite reasonable," says Mr Barnier.
Now we understand what Brexit is all about."
If even the Remainers think this is funny, the EU isn't making many friends in the UK.
The obvious get out is to have the transition period match this EU budget cycle.
In effect giving the club notice, but the subs for the notice period include full use of the facilities at usual rate of consumption. Pension liabilities and Irish loan in addition but modest and Irish debt will be repaid.
Problem solved. EU gets budget cycle sorted, we get transition at current terms.
So, to keep its story of last week alive, the Sunday Times is reporting that the Govt. has contingency planning IF Green does leave his post. According to unnamed sources.
Oh, and Hague has been asked - and said no thanks.
I would REALLY have to diet to be as thin as that story.
There are two twists to the Damian Green porn story.
The first is the DPP was consulted at the time, and Keir Starmer is now a Labour frontbencher.
The second is that Lord Hague has all the political judgement of a man who persuaded David Cameron to hold the EU referendum, against Osborne's advice.
Why is it even news if legal porn was on someone's computer?
It's news because it is a taxpayer funded computer.
If porn were found on my work laptop, I would be sacked there and then.
Admittedly I work in a school and therefore special considerations apply. But to my mind the principle is the same.
What bothers me far more about all this is that the police are making allegations about something that should have been reported and investigated by the Speaker's Office at the time as a misuse of parliamentary equipment, but wasn't. That's even more surprising given that it would have allowed them to extract some faint credit from what was ultimately a total debacle that made them look like a bunch of twats.
I'm therefore disposed to wonder - especially given the record of Quicke and Stephenson - how truthful they are being. Put it this way, if I was told there was evidence Quicke was inventing all this to make up for his embarrassment over the fiasco that was Green's arrest I would not find that terribly surprising.
When Senior Officers have to investigate and politicians get involved always difficult.Look how John Stalker went through the mill after looking at the so called shoot to kill policy in NI.Easy for members of political parties as on here to jump on the investigation team.However very rarely are we in full knowledge of the facts.
If extreme porn was found on a work laptop during a legitimate (or at any rate, legal) investigation into something else, that should have been reported to the owner of the laptop as a disciplinary matter. But this doesn't seem to have been. Instead it is being used many years later after two of the three people involved have left their posts.
We don't have the facts. You're right about that. However, the way this is panning out looks very strange.
"Yes," says Mr Barnier, "but as you can appreciate, we need to place our orders from the Brewery in advance to ensure our bar is properly stocked." "You regularly used to spend at least £50 a week in the bar so we have placed orders with the brewery accordingly for the coming year." "You therefore owe us £2600 for the year"
"Will you still allow me to have these drinks?" asks Mr Davis. "No of course not Mr Davis. You are no longer a club member!" says Mr Barnier.
"Next is your restaurant bill," continues Mr Barnier. "In the same manner we have to make arrangements in advance with our catering suppliers. Your average restaurant bill was in the order of £300 a month, so we'll require payment of £3600 for the next year."
"I don't suppose you'll be letting me have these meals either?" asks Mr Davis.
"No, of course not," says an irritated Mr Barnier "You are no longer a club member!"
"Then of course," Mr Barnier continues, "there are repairs to the clubhouse roof."
"Clubhouse roof,” exclaims Mr Davis. "What's that got to do with me?"
"Well it still needs to be repaired and the builders are coming in next week, your share of the bill is £2000."
"I see," says Mr Davis, "anything else?"
"Now you mention it" says Mr Barnier, "there is Fred the Barman's pension. We would like you to pay £5 a week towards Fred's pension when he retires next month. He's not well you know so I doubt we'll need to ask you for payment for longer than about five years, so £1300 should do it. This brings your total bill to £10,000," says Mr Barnier. "Let me get this straight," says Mr Davis. "You want me to pay £500 for a jacket you won't let me have, £2600 for beverages you won't let me drink and £3600 for food you won't let me eat, all under a roof I won't be allowed under and not served by a bloke who's going to retire next month!"
"Yes, it's all perfectly clear and quite reasonable," says Mr Barnier.
Now we understand what Brexit is all about."
If even the Remainers think this is funny, the EU isn't making many friends in the UK.
The obvious get out is to have the transition period match this EU budget cycle.
In effect giving the club notice, but the subs for the notice period include full use of the facilities at usual rate of consumption. Pension liabilities and Irish loan in addition but modest and Irish debt will be repaid.
Problem solved. EU gets budget cycle sorted, we get transition at current terms.
Now where do I submit my bill for payment...
If only someone drafting Article 50 had had your foresight...
"Yes," says Mr Barnier, "but as you can appreciate, we need to place our orders from the Brewery in advance to ensure our bar is properly stocked." "You regularly used to spend at least £50 a week in the bar so we have placed orders with the brewery accordingly for the coming year." "You therefore owe us £2600 for the year"
"Will you still allow me to have these drinks?" asks Mr Davis. "No of course not Mr Davis. You are no longer a club member!" says Mr Barnier.
"Next is your restaurant bill," continues Mr Barnier. "In the same manner we have to make arrangements in advance with our catering suppliers. Your average restaurant bill was in the order of £300 a month, so we'll require payment of £3600 for the next year."
"I don't suppose you'll be letting me have these meals either?" asks Mr Davis.
"No, of course not," says an irritated Mr Barnier "You are no longer a club member!"
"Then of course," Mr Barnier continues, "there are repairs to the clubhouse roof."
"Clubhouse roof,” exclaims Mr Davis. "What's that got to do with me?"
"Well it still needs to be repaired and the builders are coming in next week, your share of the bill is £2000."
"I see," says Mr Davis, "anything else?"
"Now you mention it" says Mr Barnier, "there is Fred the Barman's pension. We would like you to pay £5 a week towards Fred's pension when he retires next month. He's not well you know so I doubt we'll need to ask you for payment for longer than about five years, so £1300 should do it. This brings your total bill to £10,000," says Mr Barnier. "Let me get this straight," says Mr Davis. "You want me to pay £500 for a jacket you won't let me have, £2600 for beverages you won't let me drink and £3600 for food you won't let me eat, all under a roof I won't be allowed under and not served by a bloke who's going to retire next month!"
"Yes, it's all perfectly clear and quite reasonable," says Mr Barnier.
Now we understand what Brexit is all about."
If even the Remainers think this is funny, the EU isn't making many friends in the UK.
The obvious get out is to have the transition period match this EU budget cycle.
In effect giving the club notice, but the subs for the notice period include full use of the facilities at usual rate of consumption. Pension liabilities and Irish loan in addition but modest and Irish debt will be repaid.
Problem solved. EU gets budget cycle sorted, we get transition at current terms.
Now where do I submit my bill for payment...
They still wanted stuff above and beyond the normal budget payment, given that two/three years of membership doesn't cost £100bn, or whatever their absurd demand was.
Sure, but clearly the same people who realise the audiences of procedural cop shows (of which I am one) are willing to accept magic computer hacking and instantaneous forensic testing, know that they won't accept at face value a polygraph. They know the dumbest people in the audience are not willing to suspend their disbelief for that. That says a lot to me.
Although it wouldn't be a long show if the writer assumed they worked
Sure, but clearly the same people who realise the audiences of procedural cop shows (of which I am one) are willing to accept magic computer hacking and instantaneous forensic testing, know that they won't accept at face value a polygraph. They know the dumbest people in the audience are not willing to suspend their disbelief for that. That says a lot to me.
Although it wouldn't be a long show if the writer assumed they worked
Did you do it? No! You're lying The End
Ah, but in that case you just have the perp refuse to take it, letting them know they have the right man but having to have an exciting investigation to prove it.
Why is it even news if legal porn was on someone's computer?
It's news because it is a taxpayer funded computer.
If porn were found on my work laptop, I would be sacked there and then.
Admittedly I work in a school and therefore special considerations apply. But to my mind the principle is the same.
What bothers me far more about all this is that the police are making allegations about something that should have been reported and investigated by the Speaker's Office at the time as a misuse of parliamentary equipment, but wasn't. That's even more surprising given that it would have allowed them to extract some faint credit from what was ultimately a total debacle that made them look like a bunch of twats.
I'm therefore disposed to wonder - especially given the record of Quicke and Stephenson - how truthful they are being. Put it this way, if I was told there was evidence Quicke was inventing all this to make up for his embarrassment over the fiasco that was Green's arrest I would not find that terribly surprising.
When Senior Officers have to investigate and politicians get involved always difficult.Look how John Stalker went through the mill after looking at the so called shoot to kill policy in NI.Easy for members of political parties as on here to jump on the investigation team.However very rarely are we in full knowledge of the facts.
If extreme porn was found on a work laptop during a legitimate (or at any rate, legal) investigation into something else, that should have been reported to the owner of the laptop as a disciplinary matter. But this doesn't seem to have been. Instead it is being used many years later after two of the three people involved have left their posts.
We don't have the facts. You're right about that. However, the way this is panning out looks very strange.
It does , I read that the Police at the time asked the head of the CPS I believe Keir Starmer said it was not relevant to the investigation.I know the CPS get a lot of stick but it was a necessary change from the Police been the sole arbiter in charges been brought as was the introduction of P.A.C.E .
It's depressing that I'm not especially technically astute but seem to be about a decade and a half ahead of people whose idiotic misunderstandings don't stop them actually being in charge of making policy.
I'm reminded of Yvette Cooper blathering about algorithms and there 'must be a way' to automatically remove extremist content. Because algorithms are magic.
You mean TV and Movies have lied to me?!
I pity the poor people who have had the job of flagging illegal content though, it sounds soul destroying.
Does anyone remember the episode of The New Statesman where Alan B'Stard gets himself on the committee that reviews obscene images?
I imagine the people who go in for that kind of job probably enjoy their work.
Does anybody enjoy watching videos of beheadings etc? Because that is what these people will have to deal with in the current climate.
The first sweep is simply to automatically calculate and compare the hash values of all files on the laptop with known values for illegal images and videos, rather than actually look at them. As an aside, we might recall that Amber Rudd got confused about encryption and mentioned hashes, and probably this was what she was vaguely recalling and mixing up.
One wonders why Theresa May would want a man by her side who when he was in charge of the Tory party was its only leader to preside over a second landslide general election defeat in its history, and its second biggest defeat since Napoleon.
Perhaps she was around at the time and understands the magnitude of the task Hague was facing in 2001; and perhaps she thinks that using who won most seats when as a metric is like judging whether Austen or Dickens was the better novelist, on the sole basis of their respective lifetime gross earnings.
When I leave a job for instance, I will tell them when I want to leave. If my employers tell me I must stay until they decide I can go, I wouldn't regard that as equitable. Not unless my contract specified it.
When I leave a job for instance, I will tell them when I want to leave. If my employers tell me I must stay until they decide I can go, I wouldn't regard that as equitable. Not unless my contract specified it.
As far as I'm aware there is no contract.
Sure, we could go all legal and send it to an international court, just don't expect progress in other areas.
In practice we need a long transition to either complete a FTA or to prepare WTO borders. We should make a virtue out of a neccesity.
When I leave a job for instance, I will tell them when I want to leave. If my employers tell me I must stay until they decide I can go, I wouldn't regard that as equitable. Not unless my contract specified it.
As far as I'm aware there is no contract.
Are you really comparing Brexit to you moving jobs?
I remember Joan Bakewell interviewing two porn stars whilst they were being filmed plying their trade. A bit of a breathless affair but if JB could show how adult her arts program was by turning up to the filming surely Damien could find a legitimate reason for having a clip on his computer?
I remember Joan Bakewell interviewing two porn stars whilst they were being filmed plying their trade. A bit of a breathless affair but if JB could show how adult her arts program was by turning up to the filming surely Damien could find a legitimate reason for having a clip on his computer?
Grown man watches porn shocker. I'm more interested in the reasons the police released the information to the press.
I remember Joan Bakewell interviewing two porn stars whilst they were being filmed plying their trade. A bit of a breathless affair but if JB could show how adult her arts program was by turning up to the filming surely Damien could find a legitimate reason for having a clip on his computer?
Grown man watches porn shocker. I'm more interested in the reasons the police released the information to the press.
And why it’s the Sun and the Times which are flogging this dead horse.....
I remember Joan Bakewell interviewing two porn stars whilst they were being filmed plying their trade. A bit of a breathless affair but if JB could show how adult her arts program was by turning up to the filming surely Damien could find a legitimate reason for having a clip on his computer?
Grown man watches porn shocker. I'm more interested in the reasons the police released the information to the press.
And why it’s the Sun and the Times which are flogging this dead horse.....
Don't forget the The Telegraph too as per the tweet embedded above.
I remember Joan Bakewell interviewing two porn stars whilst they were being filmed plying their trade. A bit of a breathless affair but if JB could show how adult her arts program was by turning up to the filming surely Damien could find a legitimate reason for having a clip on his computer?
Grown man watches porn shocker. I'm more interested in the reasons the police released the information to the press.
And why it’s the Sun and the Times which are flogging this dead horse.....
Don't forget the The Telegraph too as per the tweet embedded above.
I don’t count the Telegraph as a newspaper any more.....
"Yes," says Mr Barnier, "but as you can appreciate, we need to place our orders from the Brewery in advance to ensure our bar is properly stocked." "You regularly used to spend at least £50 a week in the bar so we have placed orders with the brewery accordingly for the coming year." "You therefore owe us £2600 for the year"
"Will you still allow me to have these drinks?" asks Mr Davis. "No of course not Mr Davis. You are no longer a club member!" says Mr Barnier.
"Next is your restaurant bill," continues Mr Barnier. "In the same manner we have to make arrangements in advance with our catering suppliers. Your average restaurant bill was in the order of £300 a month, so we'll require payment of £3600 for the next year."
"I don't suppose you'll be letting me have these meals either?" asks Mr Davis.
"No, of course not," says an irritated Mr Barnier "You are no longer a club member!"
"Then of course," Mr Barnier continues, "there are repairs to the clubhouse roof."
"Clubhouse roof,” exclaims Mr Davis. "What's that got to do with me?"
"Well it still needs to be repaired and the builders are coming in next week, your share of the bill is £2000."
"I see," says Mr Davis, "anything else?"
"Now you mention it" says Mr Barnier, "there is Fred the Barman's pension. We would like you to pay £5 a week towards Fred's pension when he retires next month. He's not well you know so I doubt we'll need to ask you for payment for longer than about five years, so £1300 should do it. This brings your total bill to £10,000," says Mr Barnier. "Let me get this straight," says Mr Davis. "You want me to pay £500 for a jacket you won't let me have, £2600 for beverages you won't let me drink and £3600 for food you won't let me eat, all under a roof I won't be allowed under and not served by a bloke who's going to retire next month!"
"Yes, it's all perfectly clear and quite reasonable," says Mr Barnier.
Now we understand what Brexit is all about."
If even the Remainers think this is funny, the EU isn't making many friends in the UK.
The obvious get out is to have the transition period match this EU budget cycle.
In effect giving the club notice, but the subs for the notice period include full use of the facilities at usual rate of consumption. Pension liabilities and Irish loan in addition but modest and Irish debt will be repaid.
Problem solved. EU gets budget cycle sorted, we get transition at current terms.
Now where do I submit my bill for payment...
We should contribute to the budget commitments we previously agreed to and probably also towards pension liabilities. I don't understand how it has got so complicated.
Zimbabwe's state broadcaster says President Robert Mugabe will address the nation shortly. He has been meeting the country's military chiefs, who have called on him to step down.
Zimbabwe's state broadcaster says President Robert Mugabe will address the nation shortly. He has been meeting the country's military chiefs, who have called on him to step down.
One would think he has been somewhat disheartened by how quickly his party has been to disown him, the instant they were allowed and encouraged to do so.
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more years, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more year, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
You're comparing Brexit to moving phone contract? I mean, really?!
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more year, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
You're comparing Brexit to moving phone contract? I mean, really?!
No I'm not comparing it to switching providers, but cancelling midway early in the contract.
The company have honoured their part of the bargain, and expect us to do so.
I remember Joan Bakewell interviewing two porn stars whilst they were being filmed plying their trade. A bit of a breathless affair but if JB could show how adult her arts program was by turning up to the filming surely Damien could find a legitimate reason for having a clip on his computer?
Grown man watches porn shocker. I'm more interested in the reasons the police released the information to the press.
And why it’s the Sun and the Times which are flogging this dead horse.....
Don't forget the The Telegraph too as per the tweet embedded above.
I don’t count the Telegraph as a newspaper any more.....
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more year, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
You're comparing Brexit to moving phone contract? I mean, really?!
No I'm not comparing it to switching providers, but cancelling midway early in the contract.
The company have honoured their part of the bargain, and expect us to do so.
That's a terrible analogy, since a major part of the disagreement is about what meeting our part of the bargain entails, not that we are seeking not to meet our part.
When did we sign up to repair the club roof and pay for the club secretary to holiday for six months in the Bahamas?
Show us the contract.
I'm happy to pay for the things we've signed for. Where's the problem in the EU itemising it? While you wait for that, they can show us a video of tumbleweed being blown across the desert.
Hague has earned up to £820,000 a year, particularly through public speaking, multiple times the PM's salary yet alone the Deputy PM so I doubt he would be very interested in the role, especially given the current hassle.
Sir Eric Pickles might be a better bet if he can quickly be moved to the House of Lords.
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more year, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
You're comparing Brexit to moving phone contract? I mean, really?!
No I'm not comparing it to switching providers, but cancelling midway early in the contract.
The company have honoured their part of the bargain, and expect us to do so.
I thought they wanted the UK to pay for the reste à liquider, projects not undertaken until after the UK had left.
When did we sign up to repair the club roof and pay for the club secretary to holiday for six months in the Bahamas?
Show us the contract.
I'm happy to pay for the things we've signed for. Where's the problem in the EU itemising it? While you wait for that, they can show us a video of tumbleweed being blown across the desert.
The EU resembles a clip joint more than a clubhouse.
The BBC correspondence saying "Mugabe did many good things, but"....sorry you what...its a bit like saying Hitler was doing fine until he went a bit mad...there is no he was good, but when it comes to Mugabe. He ruined Zimbabwe. He had 10,000s killed and injured. He has stolen billions. And run the country as a brutal dictator.
The BBC correspondence saying "Mugabe did many good things, but"....sorry you what...its a bit like saying Hitler was doing fine until he went a bit mad...
The BBC correspondence saying "Mugabe did many good things, but"....sorry you what...its a bit like saying Hitler was doing fine until he went a bit mad...
Mr. Urquhart, reminds me of both when Jon Simpson[sp] described Mugabe as 'outmanoeuvring' his opponents (by being a despotic tyrant) or the Trudeau panegyric for Fidel Castro.
Sacking Green effectively gives the green light for the blackmail of ministers by police with a grudge. It might command a few sniggers, but it sets a dangerous precedent for fishing expeditions.
It isn't only the porn (which sounds a bit absurd), he is dealing with other harrassment complaints which have gone quiet recently.
And yet the porn is obviously felt to be something that will fatally undermine him, since that's what is making the headlines right now.
The harrassment stuff has gone quiet because of the tragic suicide in Wales. Its not gone away.
"Clinton recalled voters telling the people who knocked on doors for her: “Well, I can’t support her. She killed somebody; I can’t support her. She runs a child trafficking ring in the basement of a pizzeria.”
“Oh yeah,” she said they would reply when others said such rumors weren’t true. “’I saw it on the internet.’” "
Mr. kle4, you may remember the Checkpoint edition in which a patch or suchlike for a game was banned/blocked in the UK because the executable file had the letter string 'sex' near the start (it was something like leagueoflegendsexecutable or suchlike).
Wasn’t there a site which blocked posters from Penistone and Scunthorpe?
Supposed to be a classic search engine problem or email registration issue back in the day
Once you are accused of having porn on your computer the damage is done. It's one of those trivial things that are crushingly embarrassing however commonplace it might be.
I remember being told of a friend traveling from Euston to Manchester on a Virgin train. He was sitting on the toilet as it arrived at a station and through some mechanical fault the door flew open. All he could see were disbelieving faces staring in.
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more year, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
You're comparing Brexit to moving phone contract? I mean, really?!
No I'm not comparing it to switching providers, but cancelling midway early in the contract.
The company have honoured their part of the bargain, and expect us to do so.
Then Contract included a clause to say we could leave and made no mention of extra payments to do so. In any reasonable court it would be viewed with ridicule.
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more year, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
You're comparing Brexit to moving phone contract? I mean, really?!
No I'm not comparing it to switching providers, but cancelling midway early in the contract.
The company have honoured their part of the bargain, and expect us to do so.
A50 is the break clause, agreed to in the contract.
'Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?' is a headline - I don't know why both of those cannot be true. Whatever else he did as a young man that might have been heroic, he did definitely wreck Zimbabwe and rule as a brutal despot.
Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?
The question on the BBC live timeline about Mugabe.
He massacred thousands, and turned Zimbabwe from the breadbasket of Africa to a famine-ridden hellhole with rampant AIDS and hyperinflation that makes the Weimar Republic look like Japan.
But being a murderous racist tyrant is only arguably a bad thing, apparently.
Jeez...its is going to be a very good Christmas at Chez Peter Kay...he is basically sold out for 2018 in a few hours, and now selling masses of dates for mid 2019!!!
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more year, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
You're comparing Brexit to moving phone contract? I mean, really?!
No I'm not comparing it to switching providers, but cancelling midway early in the contract.
The company have honoured their part of the bargain, and expect us to do so.
No, this is a contract that's terminable on notice. If one serves notice, one is expected to pay during the notice period, not for the period following the expiry of the notice.
Your analogy only works if the UK government refuses to pay anything, immediately upon serving notice.
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more years, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
We've offered to pay for the rest of the budget cycle (which matches the 2 year transition).
'Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?' is a headline - I don't know why both of those cannot be true. Whatever else he did as a young man that might have been heroic, he did definitely wreck Zimbabwe and rule as a brutal despot.
Revolutionary hero could describe Mandela, but Murderer Mugabe nope...
People live in their own little bubbles of logic. Fair play to the canvasser for coming out as Jewish - hopefully that guy has had his bubble popped.
Probably not, the bubble can be maintained surprisingly well - I remember being utterly astonished when my own father, who I'd never considered might hold such views, starting criticising Ed M in quite anti-Semitic fashion, and since then clearly buying into the kind of conspiracy theories that, purely coincidentally, have jewish elements to them.
'Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?' is a headline - I don't know why both of those cannot be true. Whatever else he did as a young man that might have been heroic, he did definitely wreck Zimbabwe and rule as a brutal despot.
Revolutionary hero could describe Mandela, but Murderer Mugabe nope...
I have no idea what he did in the 60s or 70s in the fight for independence - I can accept the possibility as a leader at the time he would be regarded as heroic for what he did then. But even bad people can do heroic things, and it doesn't make up for decades of despotism.
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more years, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
A hangover from the Imperial days. The world owes us - well, I am not sure what.
Well, we are very important, don't they realise that!
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more years, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
A hangover from the Imperial days. The world owes us - well, I am not sure what.
Well, we are very important, don't they realise that!
Oh please, TSE's analogy is, with respect, bollocks, since we are offering to pay what we owe, we are just in dispute over the amount, which considering the EU has suggested several different amounts, is perfectly valid and hardly emblematic of an imperial attitude.
As a side note, people ascribe so many aspects of British life and policy to supposed imperial hangovers, and it is usually just an incredibly lazy way of suggesting what is essentially sinister motivation for whatever position we are proposing. Seriously, what the hell does that have to do with anything when we are not suggesting they owe us at all, we are negotiating an amount of which they don't have a firm number either.
Jeez...its is going to be a very good Christmas at Chez Peter Kay...he is basically sold out for 2018 in a few hours, and now selling masses of dates for mid 2019!!!
Thanks to the Warburtons commercial (which happens to be very good)
People live in their own little bubbles of logic. Fair play to the canvasser for coming out as Jewish - hopefully that guy has had his bubble popped.
In Frances Manning and Cyril Coles' masterpiece of espionage literature, Green Hazard, a factory owned by Goebbels is found to have been the target of sabotage. The manager blames the Jews. When it is pointed out to him that there are in fact no Jews in his factory, he simply says he doesn't care, it's the Jews. They managed it somehow.
It is rather depressing to reflect that his views wouldn't be ridiculously far out of the ordinary in the modern Labour Party.
Jeez...its is going to be a very good Christmas at Chez Peter Kay...he is basically sold out for 2018 in a few hours, and now selling masses of dates for mid 2019!!!
Thanks to the Warburtons commercial (which happens to be very good)
Erhhh....I think its has a lot more to do with Car Share, which is wildly popular*...and before that Phoenix Nights etc etc etc.
* for me its one of his weakness projects, but then I don't believe he was the original creator or writer.
Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?
The question on the BBC live timeline about Mugabe.
He massacred thousands, and turned Zimbabwe from the breadbasket of Africa to a famine-ridden hellhole with rampant AIDS and hyperinflation that makes the Weimar Republic look like Japan.
But being a murderous racist tyrant is only arguably a bad thing, apparently.
Just this morning you were proclaiming the death of nuance I think?
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more years, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
A hangover from the Imperial days. The world owes us - well, I am not sure what.
Well, we are very important, don't they realise that!
Well we are still the EU's largest export destination, so they do still want a deal too provided we pay our exit bill.
Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?
The question on the BBC live timeline about Mugabe.
He massacred thousands, and turned Zimbabwe from the breadbasket of Africa to a famine-ridden hellhole with rampant AIDS and hyperinflation that makes the Weimar Republic look like Japan.
But being a murderous racist tyrant is only arguably a bad thing, apparently.
Just this morning you were proclaiming the death of nuance I think?
'Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?' is a headline - I don't know why both of those cannot be true. Whatever else he did as a young man that might have been heroic, he did definitely wreck Zimbabwe and rule as a brutal despot.
Revolutionary hero could describe Mandela, but Murderer Mugabe nope...
I have no idea what he did in the 60s or 70s in the fight for independence - I can accept the possibility as a leader at the time he would be regarded as heroic for what he did then. But even bad people can do heroic things, and it doesn't make up for decades of despotism.
Nor does it matter what he did then. A man is entitled to be judged on his record of 37 years of office, and it's a dreadful record.
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more years, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
A hangover from the Imperial days. The world owes us - well, I am not sure what.
Well, we are very important, don't they realise that!
Oh please, TSE's analogy is, with respect, bollocks, since we are offering to pay what we owe, we are just in dispute over the amount, which considering the EU has suggested several different amounts, is perfectly valid and hardly emblematic of an imperial attitude.
As a side note, people ascribe so many aspects of British life and policy to supposed imperial hangovers, and it is usually just an incredibly lazy way of suggesting what is essentially sinister motivation for whatever position we are proposing. Seriously, what the hell does that have to do with anything when we are not suggesting they owe us at all, we are negotiating an amount of which they don't have a firm number either.
What are these different amounts you are aware of ? Since no one else is aware of them.
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more years, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
A hangover from the Imperial days. The world owes us - well, I am not sure what.
Well, we are very important, don't they realise that!
Oh please, TSE's analogy is, with respect, bollocks, since we are offering to pay what we owe, we are just in dispute over the amount, which considering the EU has suggested several different amounts, is perfectly valid and hardly emblematic of an imperial attitude.
As a side note, people ascribe so many aspects of British life and policy to supposed imperial hangovers, and it is usually just an incredibly lazy way of suggesting what is essentially sinister motivation for whatever position we are proposing. Seriously, what the hell does that have to do with anything when we are not suggesting they owe us at all, we are negotiating an amount of which they don't have a firm number either.
What are these different amounts you are aware of ? Since no one else is aware of them.
The BBC correspondence saying "Mugabe did many good things, but"....sorry you what...its a bit like saying Hitler was doing fine until he went a bit mad....
There was a serious book written called "How Green Were the Nazis?"
'Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?' is a headline - I don't know why both of those cannot be true. Whatever else he did as a young man that might have been heroic, he did definitely wreck Zimbabwe and rule as a brutal despot.
Revolutionary hero could describe Mandela, but Murderer Mugabe nope...
I have no idea what he did in the 60s or 70s in the fight for independence - I can accept the possibility as a leader at the time he would be regarded as heroic for what he did then. But even bad people can do heroic things, and it doesn't make up for decades of despotism.
Nor does it matter what he did then. A man is entitled to be judged on his record of 37 years of office, and it's a dreadful record.
Where did I suggest otherwise?! That is the exact point I was making, that he might have done some heroic things a long time ago, but that doesn't mean he isn't a monster now and has been one for along time.
What are these different amounts you are aware of ? Since no one else is aware of them.
Media reporting has gone anywhere from 50-100 billion in the past year, but since you contest the point, if they have suggested only one amount, or no amount, the same point applies anyway, since we are not refusing to pay what we owe, and indeed we cannot have been doing that if they haven't asked for a specific amount. And if they have and we are disputing the amount, it is still not saying they owe us, it is just that, disputing the amount owed.
So the analogy is still bollocks, and the idea it is imperial entitlement is also bollocks. And lazy bollocks at that.
And let us take it as read that all of us commenting on this are doing so on the basis of media reporting and assumptions, unless you are claiming some special insight into what arguments our negotiators are making which leads you to believe they don't think we should pay what we owe due to imperial arrogance? I didn't think so.
The BBC correspondence saying "Mugabe did many good things, but"....sorry you what...its a bit like saying Hitler was doing fine until he went a bit mad....
There was a serious book written called "How Green Were the Nazis?"
I presume they are currently working on a follow-up..."How good was Kevin Spacey for LGBT awareness"...
'Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?' is a headline - I don't know why both of those cannot be true. Whatever else he did as a young man that might have been heroic, he did definitely wreck Zimbabwe and rule as a brutal despot.
Revolutionary hero could describe Mandela, but Murderer Mugabe nope...
I have no idea what he did in the 60s or 70s in the fight for independence - I can accept the possibility as a leader at the time he would be regarded as heroic for what he did then. But even bad people can do heroic things, and it doesn't make up for decades of despotism.
When you’ve killed thousands of your own people - there isn’t anything you can put on the other side of the ledger to make up for it in my view in moral terms.
'Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?' is a headline - I don't know why both of those cannot be true. Whatever else he did as a young man that might have been heroic, he did definitely wreck Zimbabwe and rule as a brutal despot.
Revolutionary hero could describe Mandela, but Murderer Mugabe nope...
I have no idea what he did in the 60s or 70s in the fight for independence - I can accept the possibility as a leader at the time he would be regarded as heroic for what he did then. But even bad people can do heroic things, and it doesn't make up for decades of despotism.
When you’ve killed thousands of your own people - there isn’t anything you can put on the other side of the ledger to make up for it in my view in moral terms.
'Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?' is a headline - I don't know why both of those cannot be true. Whatever else he did as a young man that might have been heroic, he did definitely wreck Zimbabwe and rule as a brutal despot.
Revolutionary hero could describe Mandela, but Murderer Mugabe nope...
I have no idea what he did in the 60s or 70s in the fight for independence - I can accept the possibility as a leader at the time he would be regarded as heroic for what he did then. But even bad people can do heroic things, and it doesn't make up for decades of despotism.
When you’ve killed thousands of your own people - there isn’t anything you can put on the other side of the ledger to make up for it in my view in moral terms.
I didn't say there was! It says right there 'doesn't make up for decades of despotism'!
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
The best analogy is this.
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more years, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
We've offered to pay for the rest of the budget cycle (which matches the 2 year transition).
The budget cycle actually ends in 2020. We will already be paying our contributions up to 2019 so if we owe them to the end of the budget cycle on the current agreed rates then that is £15.7 billion gross with us foregoing the £7 billion we would normally get back (as a sign of good will )
I think May needs to get Fallon back. Two weeks off for a Tory who touched someone's knee is unforgivable. After all, he didn't put his d**k in a dead pig's mouth.
Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?
The question on the BBC live timeline about Mugabe.
He massacred thousands, and turned Zimbabwe from the breadbasket of Africa to a famine-ridden hellhole with rampant AIDS and hyperinflation that makes the Weimar Republic look like Japan.
But being a murderous racist tyrant is only arguably a bad thing, apparently.
Just this morning you were proclaiming the death of nuance I think?
Some situations are not nuanced, in fairness.
The fact that the BBC can run such a headline is I think excellent evidence that nuance is not dead.
'Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?' is a headline - I don't know why both of those cannot be true. Whatever else he did as a young man that might have been heroic, he did definitely wreck Zimbabwe and rule as a brutal despot.
Revolutionary hero could describe Mandela, but Murderer Mugabe nope...
I have no idea what he did in the 60s or 70s in the fight for independence - I can accept the possibility as a leader at the time he would be regarded as heroic for what he did then. But even bad people can do heroic things, and it doesn't make up for decades of despotism.
When you’ve killed thousands of your own people - there isn’t anything you can put on the other side of the ledger to make up for it in my view in moral terms.
I didn't say there was! It says right there 'doesn't make up for decades of despotism'!
Sorry to be unclear I know and I was trying to agree with you.
Revolutionary hero or the man who wrecked Zimbabwe?
The question on the BBC live timeline about Mugabe.
He massacred thousands, and turned Zimbabwe from the breadbasket of Africa to a famine-ridden hellhole with rampant AIDS and hyperinflation that makes the Weimar Republic look like Japan.
But being a murderous racist tyrant is only arguably a bad thing, apparently.
Just this morning you were proclaiming the death of nuance I think?
Some situations are not nuanced, in fairness.
This is excellent evidence I would suggest that nuance still lives.
Will the Irish be able to afford it once the EU has fined them for their Apple deal? I think we might effectively end up liable for that fine.
Of course, they can. All they have to do is not make Apple pay the tax they should have.
What's Apple's incentive to stay based in Ireland after that?
So Tax dodging companies can do whatever they like. What Ireland did is illegal. Not collecting taxes that were due. Why shouldn't the same rule apply to every other company ? My small company pays it's taxes in Ireland.
Comments
Also shouldn't that be 'second consecutive landslide defeat?'
In effect giving the club notice, but the subs for the notice period include full use of the facilities at usual rate of consumption. Pension liabilities and Irish loan in addition but modest and Irish debt will be repaid.
Problem solved. EU gets budget cycle sorted, we get transition at current terms.
Now where do I submit my bill for payment...
Oh, and Hague has been asked - and said no thanks.
I would REALLY have to diet to be as thin as that story.
The first is the DPP was consulted at the time, and Keir Starmer is now a Labour frontbencher.
The second is that Lord Hague has all the political judgement of a man who persuaded David Cameron to hold the EU referendum, against Osborne's advice.
We don't have the facts. You're right about that. However, the way this is panning out looks very strange.
Did you do it?
No!
You're lying
The End
When I leave a job for instance, I will tell them when I want to leave. If my employers tell me I must stay until they decide I can go, I wouldn't regard that as equitable. Not unless my contract specified it.
As far as I'm aware there is no contract.
In practice we need a long transition to either complete a FTA or to prepare WTO borders. We should make a virtue out of a neccesity.
He was quite Eurosceptic once right but then backed Remain? Does that make him a decent sort or a bit suspect?
There's an old Max Miller joke.
When leaving a hotel, he was asked to pay for a lot of extras.
"What are these extras?" he asked.
The manager explained it was for the use of the sauna and kit in the health club downstairs.
"But I never used it," Max said,
"It was there is you wanted it."
"Well," Max said. "You can take £20 off for the use of my wife."
"I never touched her," the manager said.
"She was there if you wanted her."
I mean really?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5097393/110-000-bids-porn-Parliament-computers.html
"just don't expect progress in other areas."
Like we have now? Why pay money to discuss trade terms? Not to make progress, but merely to have it on the agenda?
Mr Eagles, where else would pay to merely discuss things? Can you give me a logical analogy?
We've agreed the EU budget for a few more years, we've signed up to it. We're walking out of it midway, it is like signing up to a 2 year phone contract and wanting to cancel 6 weeks in without wanting to pay the rest of the contract nor the unbilled charges, and we still want to keep the handset.
If the EU are playing silly buggers, why should we make ourselves a patsy?"
The company have honoured their part of the bargain, and expect us to do so.
Show us the contract.
I'm happy to pay for the things we've signed for. Where's the problem in the EU itemising it? While you wait for that, they can show us a video of tumbleweed being blown across the desert.
Sir Eric Pickles might be a better bet if he can quickly be moved to the House of Lords.
Remember this lady?
https://twitter.com/bexbailey/status/925726372730949632
“Oh yeah,” she said they would reply when others said such rumors weren’t true. “’I saw it on the internet.’” "
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/18/hillary-clinton-trump-bill-arkansas-247679
I presume he will wait until after the Strictly results show ;-)
I remember being told of a friend traveling from Euston to Manchester on a Virgin train. He was sitting on the toilet as it arrived at a station and through some mechanical fault the door flew open. All he could see were disbelieving faces staring in.
Certain embarrassments are difficult to get over.
A50 is the break clause, agreed to in the contract.
The question on the BBC live timeline about Mugabe.
He massacred thousands, and turned Zimbabwe from the breadbasket of Africa to a famine-ridden hellhole with rampant AIDS and hyperinflation that makes the Weimar Republic look like Japan.
But being a murderous racist tyrant is only arguably a bad thing, apparently.
People live in their own little bubbles of logic. Fair play to the canvasser for coming out as Jewish - hopefully that guy has had his bubble popped.
Your analogy only works if the UK government refuses to pay anything, immediately upon serving notice.
Well, we are very important, don't they realise that!
As a side note, people ascribe so many aspects of British life and policy to supposed imperial hangovers, and it is usually just an incredibly lazy way of suggesting what is essentially sinister motivation for whatever position we are proposing. Seriously, what the hell does that have to do with anything when we are not suggesting they owe us at all, we are negotiating an amount of which they don't have a firm number either.
It is rather depressing to reflect that his views wouldn't be ridiculously far out of the ordinary in the modern Labour Party.
* for me its one of his weakness projects, but then I don't believe he was the original creator or writer.
What's Apple's incentive to stay based in Ireland after that?
So the analogy is still bollocks, and the idea it is imperial entitlement is also bollocks. And lazy bollocks at that.
And let us take it as read that all of us commenting on this are doing so on the basis of media reporting and assumptions, unless you are claiming some special insight into what arguments our negotiators are making which leads you to believe they don't think we should pay what we owe due to imperial arrogance? I didn't think so.
The other problem with agreeing to pay the EU £Xbn is that they will then bank that and still set about charging a high sum for ongoing 'access'.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/15670157.Dugdale_dumps_vow_to_donate_all_outside_earnings_to_charity/?ref=twtrec
Cast me £5 on e-bay....