Besides shooting Labour's fox, is Boris also shooting his own? What do his new programmes have to do with Brexit?
Did the EU ban police officers? Was there a Brussels directive against new rail links in the north? Those are the questions the Opposition should be asking.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
S
In
You are happy to trash the economy to secure Brexit. As are Boris Johnson and the Tories.
No, I don't believe Brexit will trash the economy, I believe being a free nation like Canada, Australia etc all of which have a better GDP/capita than we do will improve our economy like it has improved theirs.
@Philip_Thompson - We are a free nation. We have proved that by using that freedom to do something monumentally stupid like Brexit. We are like someone who doesn’t like the rules in the flats where he lives and uses his freedom to live in a leaky tent.
Australia and Canada have, by an order of some magnitude, massively greater natural resources than us. We rely on trade, always have done, and are erecting barriers to that trade. Even then they have considerably smaller economies than ours in the EU.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
It is normally a small circular pie filled with mutton , though you get good steak ones nowadays. Mandatory at football, pie and a bovril at half time. Delicious fast food if you get a good on and should never contain bollox. http://www.glasgowguide.co.uk/scottish_recipes_Scotch_Pie.htm
The ones on sale when I was growing up always said "minimum 16% meat content," which I never found very reassuring. It wouldn't have surprised me if some of the remaining 84% was testicular in origin. In Dundee they were said to request "a peh an a bridie an an ingin in an a"* although I never heard anyone say that, obviously. *"a pie and a bridie** and an onion one as well" **a different type of meat and pastry based foodstuff.
16 per cent meat (of dubious quality). 14 per cent rusk. 70 per cent pastry and water (or gravy, which is brown water).
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
How many lives were lost and ruined as a result of those 20,000 police cuts that Johnson now admits were wrong? Did you hear what Johnson said today about the economic benefits of infrastructure spending?
I don't think rates of homicides have changed by very much since 2010.
Lost and ruined I wrote. Levels of violent crime are on the rise.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
The FTPA has caused a problem. Because a government can only be VoNCed , the sitting PM will not allow himself to be budged until the 2 weeks are over. Then a GE automatically follows. I do not know how a PM can be removed in those 2 weeks. If Brown had not agreed to move, nothing short of a VoNC [ as it was then ] could have removed him. Believe me the Tory Press will be siding with BJ.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
How many lives were lost and ruined as a result of those 20,000 police cuts that Johnson now admits were wrong? Did you hear what Johnson said today about the economic benefits of infrastructure spending?
I don't think rates of homicides have changed by very much since 2010.
Lost and ruined I wrote. Levels of violent crime are on the rise.
That's certainly a concern, but violent crime dipped to an unusually low level from 2010-15. It's not higher now than in the 2000's.
It is normally a small circular pie filled with mutton , though you get good steak ones nowadays. Mandatory at football, pie and a bovril at half time. Delicious fast food if you get a good on and should never contain bollox. http://www.glasgowguide.co.uk/scottish_recipes_Scotch_Pie.htm
The ones on sale when I was growing up always said "minimum 16% meat content," which I never found very reassuring. It wouldn't have surprised me if some of the remaining 84% was testicular in origin. In Dundee they were said to request "a peh an a bridie an an ingin in an a"* although I never heard anyone say that, obviously. *"a pie and a bridie** and an onion one as well" **a different type of meat and pastry based foodstuff.
16 per cent meat (of dubious quality). 14 per cent rusk. 70 per cent pastry and water (or gravy, which is brown water).
Yes they still do them with onion , you tell difference by onion one having two holes on top , just meat is one hole PS: In most cases they have improved greatly of late.
Besides shooting Labour's fox, is Boris also shooting his own? What do his new programmes have to do with Brexit?
Did the EU ban police officers? Was there a Brussels directive against new rail links in the north? Those are the questions the Opposition should be asking.
Boris alone is not shooting a fox. But it works the other way too. Labour's plan may not look so profligate after all.
There were plenty of choices. Paying down the deficit did not have to take place over such a short time-frame, for example. A clear direction of travel would have been sufficient. Lives were lost and ruined because of police cuts that Johnson voted for and that you clearly supported.
Such a short time-frame!? 9 years!?
The average economic cycle is 9-10 years FFS. We're lucky that we haven't had another downturn yet. If we'd taken your path and gotten the deficit down to say 5% of GDP instead of 1% of GDP after 9 years, what do you think would have happened if we hit a recession?
We'd be back to where we started from with 10% deficit, if not even worse.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
How many lives were lost and ruined as a result of those 20,000 police cuts that Johnson now admits were wrong? Did you hear what Johnson said today about the economic benefits of infrastructure spending?
I don't think rates of homicides have changed by very much since 2010.
So cutting the numbers by 20k was OK then ? Why have a police force at all ?
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
How many lives were lost and ruined as a result of those 20,000 police cuts that Johnson now admits were wrong? Did you hear what Johnson said today about the economic benefits of infrastructure spending?
I don't think rates of homicides have changed by very much since 2010.
Lost and ruined I wrote. Levels of violent crime are on the rise.
That's certainly a concern, but violent crime dipped to an unusually low level from 2010-15. It's not higher now than in the 2000's.
Rises and falls in violent crime are the result of a number of factors as well as a possible simplistic relationship with the number of police persons. If we're talking about convictions for violent crime of course, that's a horse of a somewhat different colour.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
The FTPA has caused a problem. Because a government can only be VoNCed , the sitting PM will not allow himself to be budged until the 2 weeks are over. Then a GE automatically follows. I do not know how a PM can be removed in those 2 weeks. If Brown had not agreed to move, nothing short of a VoNC [ as it was then ] could have removed him. Believe me the Tory Press will be siding with BJ.
Much of the 'Tory press' is pro-EU membership, e.g. FT, Times, maybe even Daily Mail(!)
More the 'Murdoch and Barclay press' surely? Even with them, the Times on weekdays was pro-EU last time I heard a comment.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
Surely you've not drank Corbynistas Kool-Aid? Surely you didn't think austerity could be avoided when we were running a £150 billion deficit?
In an ideal world nobody would want police numbers cutting or infrastructure projects put on hold but as a country we literally couldn't afford that expenditure when the deficit was 10% of GDP. It is only because of the actions of the last nine years that now we can start to expand projects and start rebuilding what has been cut because now it can be afforded once more. But if the economy is trashed then it will be unavoidable once more which is why we need to avoid Corbynistas extravagence.
How many lives were lost and ruined as a result of those 20,000 police cuts that Johnson now admits were wrong? Did you hear what Johnson said today about the economic benefits of infrastructure spending?
I don't think rates of homicides have changed by very much since 2010.
So cutting the numbers by 20k was OK then ? Why have a police force at all ?
There's a difference between having 122,000 officers and having none at all. I accept, the force is under strain, and they need to recruit again.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
There were plenty of choices. Paying down the deficit did not have to take place over such a short time-frame, for example. A clear direction of travel would have been sufficient. Lives were lost and ruined because of police cuts that Johnson voted for and that you clearly supported.
Such a short time-frame!? 9 years!?
The average economic cycle is 9-10 years FFS. We're lucky that we haven't had another downturn yet. If we'd taken your path and gotten the deficit down to say 5% of GDP instead of 1% of GDP after 9 years, what do you think would have happened if we hit a recession?
We'd be back to where we started from with 10% deficit, if not even worse.
You can not be serious.
With more police officers on the streets, less damaging cuts to various services and higher public spending, as well as a more resilient infrastructure, we may well have been in a much better place to deal with recessions. Everything is a choice: your priority was reducing the deficit over preventing the damage done to people’s lives by cutting spending.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
The FTPA has caused a problem. Because a government can only be VoNCed , the sitting PM will not allow himself to be budged until the 2 weeks are over. Then a GE automatically follows. I do not know how a PM can be removed in those 2 weeks. If Brown had not agreed to move, nothing short of a VoNC [ as it was then ] could have removed him. Believe me the Tory Press will be siding with BJ.
Much of the 'Tory press' is pro-EU membership, e.g. FT, Times, maybe even Daily Mail(!)
More the 'Murdoch and Barclay press' surely? Even with them, the Times on weekdays was pro-EU last time I heard a comment.
Not the Daily Mail, and it's decades since the FT was part of the Tory press.
For long-range electric aircraft, you have to think outside the box.
A large airship, using helium, with electric motors and with solar cells printed over the envelope - for long range, possibly today's batteries might not quite be there (I think it's close), but in a decade or so, they should be. It'd be a damn sight easier than the orders of magnitude improvement they'd need for something like a Boeing 777, that's for sure, with far, far fewer technological breakthroughs required.
They'd be slower, of course - maybe 100-140 kph - and holding maybe a hundred passengers in comfort, but with an outstanding view (passenger dirigibles typically cruised at about 1500 feet, where the view is magnificent).
A different mode of transport, but one that would be far more environmentally friendly and still achieve a lot of what we want to achieve from long-range air transport.
There were plenty of choices. Paying down the deficit did not have to take place over such a short time-frame, for example. A clear direction of travel would have been sufficient. Lives were lost and ruined because of police cuts that Johnson voted for and that you clearly supported.
Such a short time-frame!? 9 years!?
The average economic cycle is 9-10 years FFS. We're lucky that we haven't had another downturn yet. If we'd taken your path and gotten the deficit down to say 5% of GDP instead of 1% of GDP after 9 years, what do you think would have happened if we hit a recession?
We'd be back to where we started from with 10% deficit, if not even worse.
You can not be serious.
With more police officers on the streets, less damaging cuts to various services and higher public spending, as well as a more resilient infrastructure, we may well have been in a much better place to deal with recessions. Everything is a choice: your priority was reducing the deficit over preventing the damage done to people’s lives by cutting spending.
No, we would not be. For most of the years of this past decade the UK has grown as fast or faster than comparable overseas nations. Far, far more damage would have been done by not reducing the deficit.
If we had not reduced the deficit we would now have debt:GDP well over 100% [it is already 85% even with the reductions] and a deficit still very high. Going into a recession with a major deficit and debt to GDP over 100% would have been absolutely catastrophic. We would have been no different to Greece a decade ago.
Wow. Boris's plan to out-Jezza Jezza and turn the Tories into the high-spending party isn't something I saw coming. It might be smart politics though, especially in the short term as a way to feed the sunshine narrative.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
The FTPA has caused a problem. Because a government can only be VoNCed , the sitting PM will not allow himself to be budged until the 2 weeks are over. Then a GE automatically follows. I do not know how a PM can be removed in those 2 weeks. If Brown had not agreed to move, nothing short of a VoNC [ as it was then ] could have removed him. Believe me the Tory Press will be siding with BJ.
No - if it is clear that another person is able - or has a better chance of being able - to form a Government which will command a majority, Johnson will be expected to resign. The Cabinet Secretary and Palace officials would make that very clear to him. In very extreme circumstances, the Queen could withdraw his Commission - ie he could be dismissed -, but it would not get that far.
Wow. Boris's plan to out-Jezza Jezza and turn the Tories into the high-spending party isn't something I saw coming. It might be smart politics though, especially in the short term as a way to feed the sunshine narrative.
I've been saying on here for weeks that I expected Boris would nick the popular bits of Corbyn's programme.....
It's their comfort blanket - the fact that car manufacturing is going through a seismic shift from fossil fuels to electric the companies have bigger issues to deal with at the moment.
Also new car sales have dropped 17% since 2016....
There were plenty of choices. Paying down the deficit did not have to take place over such a short time-frame, for example. A clear direction of travel would have been sufficient. Lives were lost and ruined because of police cuts that Johnson voted for and that you clearly supported.
Such a short time-frame!? 9 years!?
The average economic cycle is 9-10 years FFS. We're lucky that we haven't had another downturn yet. If we'd taken your path and gotten the deficit down to say 5% of GDP instead of 1% of GDP after 9 years, what do you think would have happened if we hit a recession?
We'd be back to where we started from with 10% deficit, if not even worse.
You can not be serious.
With more police officers on the streets, less damaging cuts to various services and higher public spending, as well as a more resilient infrastructure, we may well have been in a much better place to deal with recessions. Everything is a choice: your priority was reducing the deficit over preventing the damage done to people’s lives by cutting spending.
No, we would not be. For most of the years of this past decade the UK has grown as fast or faster than comparable overseas nations. Far, far more damage would have been done by not reducing the deficit.
If we had not reduced the deficit we would now have debt:GDP well over 100% [it is already 85% even with the reductions] and a deficit still very high. Going into a recession with a major deficit and debt to GDP over 100% would have been absolutely catastrophic. We would have been no different to Greece a decade ago.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
The FTPA has caused a problem. Because a government can only be VoNCed , the sitting PM will not allow himself to be budged until the 2 weeks are over. Then a GE automatically follows. I do not know how a PM can be removed in those 2 weeks. If Brown had not agreed to move, nothing short of a VoNC [ as it was then ] could have removed him. Believe me the Tory Press will be siding with BJ.
No - if it is clear that another person is able - or has a better chance of being able - to form a Government which will command a majority, Johnson will be expected to resign. The Cabinet Secretary and Palace officials would make that very clear to him. In very extreme circumstances, the Queen could withdraw his Commission - ie he could be dismissed -, but it would not get that far.
Indeed but I expect that he won't be made to resign prior to someone demonstrating that they are able to command a majority.
There were plenty of choices. Paying down the deficit did not have to take place over such a short time-frame, for example. A clear direction of travel would have been sufficient. Lives were lost and ruined because of police cuts that Johnson voted for and that you clearly supported.
Such a short time-frame!? 9 years!?
The average economic cycle is 9-10 years FFS. We're lucky that we haven't had another downturn yet. If we'd taken your path and gotten the deficit down to say 5% of GDP instead of 1% of GDP after 9 years, what do you think would have happened if we hit a recession?
We'd be back to where we started from with 10% deficit, if not even worse.
You can not be serious.
With more police officers on the streets, less damaging cuts to various services and higher public spending, as well as a more resilient infrastructure, we may well have been in a much better place to deal with recessions. Everything is a choice: your priority was reducing the deficit over preventing the damage done to people’s lives by cutting spending.
No, we would not be. For most of the years of this past decade the UK has grown as fast or faster than comparable overseas nations. Far, far more damage would have been done by not reducing the deficit.
If we had not reduced the deficit we would now have debt:GDP well over 100% [it is already 85% even with the reductions] and a deficit still very high. Going into a recession with a major deficit and debt to GDP over 100% would have been absolutely catastrophic. We would have been no different to Greece a decade ago.
Who said anything about not reducing the deficit?
You. You wrote "your priority was reducing the deficit"
The forthcoming negotiations? Have the Brexiteers had a Bobby Ewing moment that’s taken them back to July 2016?
Theresa had vanished. A morning came, and she was missing from Downing Street: a few thoughtless people commented on her absence. On the next day nobody mentioned her. On the third day Winston went into the vestibule of the Records Department to look at the notice-board. One of the notices carried a printed list of former prime minsters, of whom Theresa had been one. It looked almost exactly as it had looked before—nothing had been crossed out—but it was one name shorter. It was enough. Theresa had ceased to exist: she had never existed.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
The FTPA has caused a problem. Because a government can only be VoNCed , the sitting PM will not allow himself to be budged until the 2 weeks are over. Then a GE automatically follows. I do not know how a PM can be removed in those 2 weeks. If Brown had not agreed to move, nothing short of a VoNC [ as it was then ] could have removed him. Believe me the Tory Press will be siding with BJ.
No - if it is clear that another person is able - or has a better chance of being able - to form a Government which will command a majority, Johnson will be expected to resign. The Cabinet Secretary and Palace officials would make that very clear to him. In very extreme circumstances, the Queen could withdraw his Commission - ie he could be dismissed -, but it would not get that far.
The only problem the FTPA has created is that Boris can't call an election by himself..
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You have literally no idea about Irish history at all, do you?
Wow. Boris's plan to out-Jezza Jezza and turn the Tories into the high-spending party isn't something I saw coming. It might be smart politics though, especially in the short term as a way to feed the sunshine narrative.
I've been saying on here for weeks that I expected Boris would nick the popular bits of Corbyn's programme.....
We are quietly noting the majority of Tories who are NOT grumbling about increasing deficits, "spending to grow", and other Keynesian...adaptations.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You have literally no idea about Irish history at all, do you?
Under the backstop we would be obliged to follow EU laws and regulations but with no MEPs to the European Parliament.
Tell me please the last year in which Ireland was obliged to follow UK laws and regulations but with no MPs to the UK Parliament.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You have literally no idea about Irish history at all, do you?
I've fixed that for you. I also think Philip has similar issues with all other social sciences...
It's their comfort blanket - the fact that car manufacturing is going through a seismic shift from fossil fuels to electric the companies have bigger issues to deal with at the moment.
Also new car sales have dropped 17% since 2016....
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
.
.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
The FTPA has caused a problem. Because a government can only be VoNCed , the sitting PM will not allow himself to be budged until the 2 weeks are over. Then a GE automatically follows. I do not know how a PM can be removed in those 2 weeks. If Brown had not agreed to move, nothing short of a VoNC [ as it was then ] could have removed him. Believe me the Tory Press will be siding with BJ.
No - if it is clear that another person is able - or has a better chance of being able - to form a Government which will command a majority, Johnson will be expected to resign. The Cabinet Secretary and Palace officials would make that very clear to him. In very extreme circumstances, the Queen could withdraw his Commission - ie he could be dismissed -, but it would not get that far.
Indeed but I expect that he won't be made to resign prior to someone demonstrating that they are able to command a majority.
The Palace would need some indication that he would receive an Affirmative Vote from the Commons , but - as Chris has said - the Government would have to be formed prior to such a vote taking place. There could be no Confidence Vote in a Government which does not yet exist!
Besides shooting Labour's fox, is Boris also shooting his own? What do his new programmes have to do with Brexit?
Did the EU ban police officers? Was there a Brussels directive against new rail links in the north? Those are the questions the Opposition should be asking.
Boris alone is not shooting a fox. But it works the other way too. Labour's plan may not look so profligate after all.
Indeed. I've not the slightest doubt that Boris would also nationalise the rail network and put workers on the board of large companies if he thought it would help win.
I have been posting on PB for over 10 years now. I think this from @Philip_Thompson might be the finest comment I have ever seen on here. The ignorance is magnificent. It is the Sistine Chapel of ignorance. If there were awards for ignorance it would surely win them all. I give you ...
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You have literally no idea about Irish history at all, do you?
Under the backstop we would be obliged to follow EU laws and regulations but with no MEPs to the European Parliament.
Tell me please the last year in which Ireland was obliged to follow UK laws and regulations but with no MPs to the UK Parliament.
There were plenty of choices. Paying down the deficit did not have to take place over such a short time-frame, for example. A clear direction of travel would have been sufficient. Lives were lost and ruined because of police cuts that Johnson voted for and that you clearly supported.
Such a short time-frame!? 9 years!?
The average economic cycle is 9-10 years FFS. We're lucky that we haven't had another downturn yet. If we'd taken your path and gotten the deficit down to say 5% of GDP instead of 1% of GDP after 9 years, what do you think would have happened if we hit a recession?
We'd be back to where we started from with 10% deficit, if not even worse.
You can not be serious.
With more police officers on the streets, less damaging cuts to various services and higher public spending, as well as a more resilient infrastructure, we may well have been in a much better place to deal with recessions. Everything is a choice: your priority was reducing the deficit over preventing the damage done to people’s lives by cutting spending.
No, we would not be. For most of the years of this past decade the UK has grown as fast or faster than comparable overseas nations. Far, far more damage would have been done by not reducing the deficit.
If we had not reduced the deficit we would now have debt:GDP well over 100% [it is already 85% even with the reductions] and a deficit still very high. Going into a recession with a major deficit and debt to GDP over 100% would have been absolutely catastrophic. We would have been no different to Greece a decade ago.
Who said anything about not reducing the deficit?
You. You wrote "your priority was reducing the deficit"
That is not me advocating the deficit should not have been reduced, Philip.
I have been posting on PB for over 10 years now. I think this from @Philip_Thompson might be the finest comment I have ever seen on here. The ignorance is magnificent. It is the Sistine Chapel of ignorance. If there were awards for ignorance it would surely win them all. I give you ...
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Oh dear. But in fairness the backstop is Phillip's particular obsession. He's made not being very keen on it something of his magnum opus.
I perceive a spot of misplaced schadenfreude on the part of "academic" Matthew Goodwin.
Yup, shades of Andra Neil's 'Germany in technical recession at the end of 2018' schtick. The same rigorous analysis and desire to objectively inform, I'm sure.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You have literally no idea about Irish history at all, do you?
I've fixed that for you. I also think Philip has similar issues with all other social sciences...
It was my understand that Irish independence was declared following Sinn Féin winning 73 seats at the 1918 General Election. So while yes Ireland was subject to UK laws, they had representation, this isn't like the Thirteen Colonies which had no representation.
Heck in the 1868 General Election Gladstone's Liberals and Disraeli's Conservatives won 138/140 Irish MPs between them. Ireland was a full participating part of the United Kingdom.
While we're subjected to the backstop how many MEPs will we get?
I have been posting on PB for over 10 years now. I think this from @Philip_Thompson might be the finest comment I have ever seen on here. The ignorance is magnificent. It is the Sistine Chapel of ignorance. If there were awards for ignorance it would surely win them all. I give you ...
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Well? When was Ireland subject to Westminster law but denied Westminster MPs?
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You are either an ignorant troll or plain stupid. Where was the Article 50 allowing Ireland to quit the U.K. whenever it liked? When has the EU passed legislation preventing practitioners of our majority religion from voting or holding office? When has the EU gunned our people down in the streets? When has the EU allowed millions of us to starve when exporting food from our shores? When has the EU banned our language? Why, when the people of Ireland voted for Sinn Fein by an overwhelming majority in 1918 did we refuse to even discuss independence forcing a destructive war on them, whereas the EU agreed to negotiate with our elected representatives for an orderly exit?
You are (to coin a phrase) beyond the pale. You’re just a nasty little nationalist.
Ireland joined the United Kingdom in 1801, it was represented in Parliament by former Irish Parliamentary members. Ireland fully participated in the 1802 General election and participated in every General Election from then on while subject to Westminster law.
While we're subject to Brussels law under the backstop will we take part in European Parliamentary Elections? Will we maintain MEPs? Yes or no?
I have been posting on PB for over 10 years now. I think this from @Philip_Thompson might be the finest comment I have ever seen on here. The ignorance is magnificent. It is the Sistine Chapel of ignorance. If there were awards for ignorance it would surely win them all. I give you ...
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Well? When was Ireland subject to Westminster law but denied Westminster MPs?
Please tell me you are not going to double down and insist that the backstop will make you, me and everyone else on here less free than the people of Ireland were for hundreds of years under British rule. You cannot be that crass and ignorant, surely.
I have been posting on PB for over 10 years now. I think this from @Philip_Thompson might be the finest comment I have ever seen on here. The ignorance is magnificent. It is the Sistine Chapel of ignorance. If there were awards for ignorance it would surely win them all. I give you ...
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Well? When was Ireland subject to Westminster law but denied Westminster MPs?
Please tell me you are not going to double down and insist that the backstop will make you, me and everyone else on here less free than the people of Ireland were for hundreds of years under British rule. You cannot be that crass and ignorant, surely.
It wasn't British rule, it was UK rule with Ireland electing MPs to the UK Parliament.
We will be subject to EU rule but without MEPs. That is worse than what Ireland went through.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You have literally no idea about Irish history at all, do you?
I've fixed that for you. I also think Philip has similar issues with all other social sciences...
It was my understand that Irish independence was declared following Sinn Féin winning 73 seats at the 1918 General Election. So while yes Ireland was subject to UK laws, they had representation, this isn't like the Thirteen Colonies which had no representation.
Heck in the 1868 General Election Gladstone's Liberals and Disraeli's Conservatives won 138/140 Irish MPs between them. Ireland was a full participating part of the United Kingdom.
While we're subjected to the backstop how many MEPs will we get?
Philip - who had the right to vote in Ireland in the 1868 general election?
I have been posting on PB for over 10 years now. I think this from @Philip_Thompson might be the finest comment I have ever seen on here. The ignorance is magnificent. It is the Sistine Chapel of ignorance. If there were awards for ignorance it would surely win them all. I give you ...
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Well? When was Ireland subject to Westminster law but denied Westminster MPs?
Please tell me you are not going to double down and insist that the backstop will make you, me and everyone else on here less free than the people of Ireland were for hundreds of years under British rule. You cannot be that crass and ignorant, surely.
It wasn't British rule, it was UK rule with Ireland electing MPs to the UK Parliament.
We will be subject to EU rule but without MEPs. That is worse than what Ireland went through.
No, it's not. Your crass ignorance is genuinely astonishing.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You have literally no idea about Irish history at all, do you?
I've fixed that for you. I also think Philip has similar issues with all other social sciences...
It was my understand that Irish independence was declared following Sinn Féin winning 73 seats at the 1918 General Election. So while yes Ireland was subject to UK laws, they had representation, this isn't like the Thirteen Colonies which had no representation.
Heck in the 1868 General Election Gladstone's Liberals and Disraeli's Conservatives won 138/140 Irish MPs between them. Ireland was a full participating part of the United Kingdom.
While we're subjected to the backstop how many MEPs will we get?
Philip - who had the right to vote in Ireland in the 1868 general election?
I have been posting on PB for over 10 years now. I think this from @Philip_Thompson might be the finest comment I have ever seen on here. The ignorance is magnificent. It is the Sistine Chapel of ignorance. If there were awards for ignorance it would surely win them all. I give you ...
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Well? When was Ireland subject to Westminster law but denied Westminster MPs?
Please tell me you are not going to double down and insist that the backstop will make you, me and everyone else on here less free than the people of Ireland were for hundreds of years under British rule. You cannot be that crass and ignorant, surely.
It wasn't British rule, it was UK rule with Ireland electing MPs to the UK Parliament.
We will be subject to EU rule but without MEPs. That is worse than what Ireland went through.
Don't think many are "angered" by Boris. Mild bemusement, maybe, that a few jokes, speaking loudly, and a threat that we really, really mean to commit an act of self-harm, is seen to be a sure fire way to dislodge Brusssels from its consistently held position.
I dunno - I don't mind him myself, as he's helpful on animal welfare, but I have non-Lab/Lib friends who are absolutely furious with him - "a bloody comedian at a time of crisis", one Tory says. Anecdata but there's half a dozen acquaintances in that category, including work colleagues who normally don't comment on politics.
It was my understand that Irish independence was declared following Sinn Féin winning 73 seats at the 1918 General Election. So while yes Ireland was subject to UK laws, they had representation, this isn't like the Thirteen Colonies which had no representation.
Heck in the 1868 General Election Gladstone's Liberals and Disraeli's Conservatives won 138/140 Irish MPs between them. Ireland was a full participating part of the United Kingdom.
While we're subjected to the backstop how many MEPs will we get?
Philip - who had the right to vote in Ireland in the 1868 general election?
Male homeowners I believe as was the norm at the time.
Who will get to vote in the UK 2024 European Parliamentary elections if we're still subject to EU law at that point due to the backstop?
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You have literally no idea about Irish history at all, do you?
Under the backstop we would be obliged to follow EU laws and regulations but with no MEPs to the European Parliament.
Tell me please the last year in which Ireland was obliged to follow UK laws and regulations but with no MPs to the UK Parliament.
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
The weight is the killer. Even if you could develop a battery with similar energy density to aviation fuel, and even if you had a super efficient motor, you still have to carry that full weight of batteries from take-off to landing. This is not an easy to solve problem.
just make it like Saturn V , have the batteries jettison by parachute after takeoff , have a fleet of lorries going around picking them up.
Rather tangentially, there is a rocket that drops batteries off as it ascends. Most liquid-fuelled rockets use turbopumps to provide the vast amount of fuel to the engines, and in most rockets the turbopumps are driven by another rocket engine pre-burning fuel and oxidiser.
However New Zealand's Electron rocket uses batteries to power the turbopumps, and as they get depleted the batteries are dropped off.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You are either an ignorant troll or plain stupid. Where was the Article 50 allowing Ireland to quit the U.K. whenever it liked? When has the EU passed legislation preventing practitioners of our majority religion from voting or holding office? When has the EU gunned our people down in the streets? When has the EU allowed millions of us to starve when exporting food from our shores? When has the EU banned our language? Why, when the people of Ireland voted for Sinn Fein by an overwhelming majority in 1918 did we refuse to even discuss independence forcing a destructive war on them, whereas the EU agreed to negotiate with our elected representatives for an orderly exit?
You are (to coin a phrase) beyond the pale. You’re just a nasty little nationalist.
OKC to DougSeal
That's not entirely fair Mr S. Mr T is a victim of a history curriculum which held that all was the best in all possible worlds so long as the English were doing whatever it was. He is also clearly unaware of the pre-1914 situation where British Army officers announced that they would refuse to fire on 'rebels' who did not agree with a Parliamentary decision. Had they accepted that decision Ireland would probably have been still part of a one state British Isles.
Edited to compensate for vanilla's eccentricities.
I have been posting on PB for over 10 years now. I think this from @Philip_Thompson might be the finest comment I have ever seen on here. The ignorance is magnificent. It is the Sistine Chapel of ignorance. If there were awards for ignorance it would surely win them all. I give you ...
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Well? When was Ireland subject to Westminster law but denied Westminster MPs?
Please tell me you are not going to double down and insist that the backstop will make you, me and everyone else on here less free than the people of Ireland were for hundreds of years under British rule. You cannot be that crass and ignorant, surely.
It wasn't British rule, it was UK rule with Ireland electing MPs to the UK Parliament.
We will be subject to EU rule but without MEPs. That is worse than what Ireland went through.
Have you heard of Cromwell, out of interest?
Yes. That's pre-Act of Union 1800 is it not? We were talking about Ireland within the UK.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You have literally no idea about Irish history at all, do you?
Under the backstop we would be obliged to follow EU laws and regulations but with no MEPs to the European Parliament.
Tell me please the last year in which Ireland was obliged to follow UK laws and regulations but with no MPs to the UK Parliament.
Sometime about 1802 wasn't it?
Nope. Ireland had MPs all along.
Just as with the Act of Union a century earlier, the Parliaments merged so former Irish Parliamentarians became UK ones until the next election.
There were plenty of choices. Paying down the deficit did not have to take place over such a short time-frame, for example. A clear direction of travel would have been sufficient. Lives were lost and ruined because of police cuts that Johnson voted for and that you clearly supported.
Such a short time-frame!? 9 years!?
The average economic cycle is 9-10 years FFS. We're lucky that we haven't had another downturn yet. If we'd taken your path and gotten the deficit down to say 5% of GDP instead of 1% of GDP after 9 years, what do you think would have happened if we hit a recession?
We'd be back to where we started from with 10% deficit, if not even worse.
You can not be serious.
With more police officers on the streets, less damaging cuts to various services and higher public spending, as well as a more resilient infrastructure, we may well have been in a much better place to deal with recessions. Everything is a choice: your priority was reducing the deficit over preventing the damage done to people’s lives by cutting spending.
No, we would not be. For most of the years of this past decade the UK has grown as fast or faster than comparable overseas nations. Far, far more damage would have been done by not reducing the deficit.
If we had not reduced the deficit we would now have debt:GDP well over 100% [it is already 85% even with the reductions] and a deficit still very high. Going into a recession with a major deficit and debt to GDP over 100% would have been absolutely catastrophic. We would have been no different to Greece a decade ago.
Who said anything about not reducing the deficit?
You. You wrote "your priority was reducing the deficit"
That is not me advocating the deficit should not have been reduced, Philip.
The deficit actually fell at a slower rate than Darling planned in his 2010 budget.
Though whether those deficit reducing targets would have been reached seems highly doubtful to me.
Now its pretty easy to argue that after 2010 government spending had wrong priorities but its difficult to claim that the government didn't borrow and spend enough.
You are either an ignorant troll or plain stupid. Where was the Article 50 allowing Ireland to quit the U.K. whenever it liked? When has the EU passed legislation preventing practitioners of our majority religion from voting or holding office? When has the EU gunned our people down in the streets? When has the EU allowed millions of us to starve when exporting food from our shores? When has the EU banned our language? Why, when the people of Ireland voted for Sinn Fein by an overwhelming majority in 1918 did we refuse to even discuss independence forcing a destructive war on them, whereas the EU agreed to negotiate with our elected representatives for an orderly exit?
You are (to coin a phrase) beyond the pale. You’re just a nasty little nationalist.
We have Article 50 to allow us to exit the EU, we also have MEPs while we are in the EU. I never said as members of the EU it is worse now did I?
I said under the backstop. Where is Article 50 in the backstop? Where is our unilateral exit? The EU have been clear all along there can be no unilateral exit to the backstop "or there is no backstop". Where are our MEPs under the backstop?
It was my understand that Irish independence was declared following Sinn Féin winning 73 seats at the 1918 General Election. So while yes Ireland was subject to UK laws, they had representation, this isn't like the Thirteen Colonies which had no representation.
Heck in the 1868 General Election Gladstone's Liberals and Disraeli's Conservatives won 138/140 Irish MPs between them. Ireland was a full participating part of the United Kingdom.
While we're subjected to the backstop how many MEPs will we get?
Philip - who had the right to vote in Ireland in the 1868 general election?
Male homeowners I believe as was the norm at the time.
Who will get to vote in the UK 2024 European Parliamentary elections if we're still subject to EU law at that point due to the backstop?
What representation will we have prior to 2024?
So the vast majority of Irish people had no vote in 1868 and no ability whatsoever to influence any of the decisions taken by lawmakers about any aspect of their lives. I am afraid that this will not be the case for you and me if the UK were part of the backstop in 2024. If you genuinely cannot understand this, I would - in all seriousness - recommend that you spend a bit of time away from PB to do some reading.
It was my understand that Irish independence was declared following Sinn Féin winning 73 seats at the 1918 General Election. So while yes Ireland was subject to UK laws, they had representation, this isn't like the Thirteen Colonies which had no representation.
Heck in the 1868 General Election Gladstone's Liberals and Disraeli's Conservatives won 138/140 Irish MPs between them. Ireland was a full participating part of the United Kingdom.
While we're subjected to the backstop how many MEPs will we get?
Philip - who had the right to vote in Ireland in the 1868 general election?
Male homeowners I believe as was the norm at the time.
Who will get to vote in the UK 2024 European Parliamentary elections if we're still subject to EU law at that point due to the backstop?
What representation will we have prior to 2024?
So the vast majority of Irish people had no vote in 1868 and no ability whatsoever to influence any of the decisions taken by lawmakers about any aspect of their lives. I am afraid that this will not be the case for you and me if the UK were part of the backstop in 2024. If you genuinely cannot understand this, I would - in all seriousness - recommend that you spend a bit of time away from PB to do some reading.
The 19th century was undemocratic for all women and all poor people, not just the Irish.
In 2024 nobody at all in this country will be able to vote to the European Parliament setting our laws. That is unprecedented in these isles since the Acts of Union.
Ireland joined the United Kingdom in 1801, it was represented in Parliament by former Irish Parliamentary members. Ireland fully participated in the 1802 General election and participated in every General Election from then on while subject to Westminster law.
While we're subject to Brussels law under the backstop will we take part in European Parliamentary Elections? Will we maintain MEPs? Yes or no?
Read a book. Prior to 1801 Ireland was subject to Poynings Law which meant that the Irish Executive was responsible to London, not the Irish Parliament. That law also meant that the Irish parliament could not meet until its proposed legislation had been approved both by Ireland's Lord Deputy and Privy Council and by England/Great Britain’s monarch. Once Ireland was forced to join the U.K. in 1801 (having previously been a puppet state as I say) via a treaty ratified by a it’s puppet parliament in Dublin it could not leave. In 1918 the Irish people voted to leave (essentially) but we would not let them so we had a war to force us out. There was no Article 50 or choice to abrogate the 1801 treaty.
As to this bollocks about the backstop, the treaty can be abrogated at any time by MPs in London and there are no EU guns forcing us to obey, as Ireland had our guns facing it. It would be a voluntary arrangement. Indeed if we sign an FTA it falls by the wayside. When the Irish voted to leave the U.K. we terrorised them by sending in the Black and Tans to shoot them. We physically terrorised and killed the Irish into submission for centuries. Indeed that by some measures only stopped in 1998. Your ignorance is just...I have no words. You are really beneath a rock.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
S
In
You are happy to trash the economy to secure Brexit. As are Boris Johnson and the Tories.
No, I don't believe Brexit will trash the economy, I believe being a free nation like Canada, Australia etc all of which have a better GDP/capita than we do will improve our economy like it has improved theirs.
@Philip_Thompson - We are a free nation. We have proved that by using that freedom to do something monumentally stupid like Brexit. We are like someone who doesn’t like the rules in the flats where he lives and uses his freedom to live in a leaky tent.
Australia and Canada have, by an order of some magnitude, massively greater natural resources than us. We rely on trade, always have done, and are erecting barriers to that trade. Even then they have considerably smaller economies than ours in the EU.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
Ireland joined the United Kingdom in 1801, it was represented in Parliament by former Irish Parliamentary members. Ireland fully participated in the 1802 General election and participated in every General Election from then on while subject to Westminster law.
While we're subject to Brussels law under the backstop will we take part in European Parliamentary Elections? Will we maintain MEPs? Yes or no?
Read a book. Prior to 1801 Ireland was subject to Poynings Law which meant that the Irish Executive was responsible to London, not the Irish Parliament. That law also meant that the Irish parliament could not meet until its proposed legislation had been approved both by Ireland's Lord Deputy and Privy Council and by England/Great Britain’s monarch. Once Ireland was forced to join the U.K. in 1801 (having previously been a puppet state as I say) via a treaty ratified by a it’s puppet parliament in Dublin it could not leave. In 1918 the Irish people voted to leave (essentially) but we would not let them so we had a war to force us out. There was no Article 50 or choice to abrogate the 1801 treaty.
As to this bollocks about the backstop, the treaty can be abrogated at any time by MPs in London and there are no EU guns forcing us to obey, as Ireland had our guns facing it. It would be a voluntary arrangement. Indeed if we sign an FTA it falls by the wayside. When the Irish voted to leave the U.K. we terrorised them by sending in the Black and Tans to shoot them. We physically terrorised and killed the Irish into submission for centuries. Indeed that by some measures only stopped in 1998. Your ignorance is just...I have no words. You are really beneath a rock.
Prior to 1801 was prior to the UK existing. I was talking about under the UK so 1801 onwards.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You are either an ignorant troll or plain stupid. Where was the Article 50 allowing Ireland to quit the U.K. whenever it liked? When has the EU passed legislation preventing practitioners of our majority religion from voting or holding office? When has the EU gunned our people down in the streets? When has the EU allowed millions of us to starve when exporting food from our shores? When has the EU banned our language? Why, when the people of Ireland voted for Sinn Fein by an overwhelming majority in 1918 did we refuse to even discuss independence forcing a destructive war on them, whereas the EU agreed to negotiate with our elected representatives for an orderly exit?
You are (to coin a phrase) beyond the pale. You’re just a nasty little nationalist.
Sinn Fein fell short of a majority of votes in 1918, although they won a majority of seats.
Let's do some maths shall we. A a single Boeing 777 engine needs to provide 110,000 horsepower at cruising altitude and speed. There are 2 so you need 220,000 horsepower.
Now 1 horsepower = 746 watts.
So you need a battery system that can provide at any one time 164Megawatts and a battery system that holds 164mw/hrs worth of power for every hour of flying time. For a transatlantic flight that's something like 1320mw/hrs of power required or 15,500 of the largest battery available in a Tesla model S.
As for weight - the 85KWH battery pack in a Tesla weighs 520kg. And you need 15,500 of them....
Note I haven't bothered working out how the plane handles the additional weight or the space required for the batteries. I'll leave those additional issues to the reader.
The weight is the killer. Even if you could develop a battery with similar energy density to aviation fuel, and even if you had a super efficient motor, you still have to carry that full weight of batteries from take-off to landing. This is not an easy to solve problem.
just make it like Saturn V , have the batteries jettison by parachute after takeoff , have a fleet of lorries going around picking them up.
Rather tangentially, there is a rocket that drops batteries off as it ascends. Most liquid-fuelled rockets use turbopumps to provide the vast amount of fuel to the engines, and in most rockets the turbopumps are driven by another rocket engine pre-burning fuel and oxidiser.
However New Zealand's Electron rocket uses batteries to power the turbopumps, and as they get depleted the batteries are dropped off.
Ireland joined the United Kingdom in 1801, it was represented in Parliament by former Irish Parliamentary members. Ireland fully participated in the 1802 General election and participated in every General Election from then on while subject to Westminster law.
While we're subject to Brussels law under the backstop will we take part in European Parliamentary Elections? Will we maintain MEPs? Yes or no?
Read a book. Prior to 1801 Ireland was subject to Poynings Law which meant that the Irish Executive was responsible to London, not the Irish Parliament. That law also meant that the Irish parliament could not meet until its proposed legislation had been approved both by Ireland's Lord Deputy and Privy Council and by England/Great Britain’s monarch. Once Ireland was forced to join the U.K. in 1801 (having previously been a puppet state as I say) via a treaty ratified by a it’s puppet parliament in Dublin it could not leave. In 1918 the Irish people voted to leave (essentially) but we would not let them so we had a war to force us out. There was no Article 50 or choice to abrogate the 1801 treaty.
As to this bollocks about the backstop, the treaty can be abrogated at any time by MPs in London and there are no EU guns forcing us to obey, as Ireland had our guns facing it. It would be a voluntary arrangement. Indeed if we sign an FTA it falls by the wayside. When the Irish voted to leave the U.K. we terrorised them by sending in the Black and Tans to shoot them. We physically terrorised and killed the Irish into submission for centuries. Indeed that by some measures only stopped in 1998. Your ignorance is just...I have no words. You are really beneath a rock.
The IRA were hardly fluffy bunnies in the run up to 1998.
I'm from that ethnic group myself, but I don't let it get me down.
I have been posting on PB for over 10 years now. I think this from @Philip_Thompson might be the finest comment I have ever seen on here. The ignorance is magnificent. It is the Sistine Chapel of ignorance. If there were awards for ignorance it would surely win them all. I give you ...
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Well? When was Ireland subject to Westminster law but denied Westminster MPs?
Please tell me you are not going to double down and insist that the backstop will make you, me and everyone else on here less free than the people of Ireland were for hundreds of years under British rule. You cannot be that crass and ignorant, surely.
It wasn't British rule, it was UK rule with Ireland electing MPs to the UK Parliament.
We will be subject to EU rule but without MEPs. That is worse than what Ireland went through.
Have you heard of Cromwell, out of interest?
Yes. That's pre-Act of Union 1800 is it not? We were talking about Ireland within the UK.
No, you said "we will be less free than Ireland ever was".
It was my understand that Irish independence was declared following Sinn Féin winning 73 seats at the 1918 General Election. So while yes Ireland was subject to UK laws, they had representation, this isn't like the Thirteen Colonies which had no representation.
Heck in the 1868 General Election Gladstone's Liberals and Disraeli's Conservatives won 138/140 Irish MPs between them. Ireland was a full participating part of the United Kingdom.
While we're subjected to the backstop how many MEPs will we get?
Philip - who had the right to vote in Ireland in the 1868 general election?
Male homeowners I believe as was the norm at the time.
Who will get to vote in the UK 2024 European Parliamentary elections if we're still subject to EU law at that point due to the backstop?
What representation will we have prior to 2024?
So the vast majority of Irish people had no vote in 1868 and no ability whatsoever to influence any of the decisions taken by lawmakers about any aspect of their lives. I am afraid that this will not be the case for you and me if the UK were part of the backstop in 2024. If you genuinely cannot understand this, I would - in all seriousness - recommend that you spend a bit of time away from PB to do some reading.
The 19th century was undemocratic for all women and all poor people, not just the Irish.
In 2024 nobody at all in this country will be able to vote to the European Parliament setting our laws. That is unprecedented in these isles since the Acts of Union.
The European Parliament will not be setting our laws. The European Parliament has no lawmaking powers. The European Parliament is a ratifying body.
Under a backstop scenario, what would happen is that in limited areas the UK would have to implement laws agreed by the Council of Ministers and ratified by MEPs. Those laws will not cover all aspects of our lives - in fact they would make very little difference to the way we lead them. Our criminal law would be almost entirely unaffected, for example.
Now, compare that to how the UK Parliament - which most Irish people for most of the course of Irish history had no opportunity to elect - legislated in ways that affected the lives of ordinary Irish men and women.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics .
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You are either an ignorant troll or plain stupid. Where was the Article 50 allowing Ireland to quit the U.K. whenever it liked? When has the EU passed legislation preventing practitioners of our majority religion from voting or holding office? When has the EU gunned our people down in the streets? When has the EU allowed millions of us to starve when exporting food from our shores? When has the EU banned our language? Why, when the people of Ireland voted for Sinn Fein by an overwhelming majority in 1918 did we refuse to even discuss independence forcing a destructive war on them, whereas the EU agreed to negotiate with our elected representatives for an orderly exit?
You are (to coin a phrase) beyond the pale. You’re just a nasty little nationalist.
Sinn Fein fell short of a majority of votes in 1918, although they won a majority of seats.
Oh of course. If they had won a majority of votes than London would have gone “Hey Ho Chaps, that’s all fine then, you can leave. Let’s have a nice sit down and a cup of tea.”
Sinn Fein and the IPP did win a majority of votes - nearly 70%. SF won 47% of the popular vote and an overwhelming majority in provinces outside Ulster. Contentment with rule from London was not what was being democratically expressed.
I have been posting on PB for over 10 years now. I think this from @Philip_Thompson might be the finest comment I have ever seen on here. The ignorance is magnificent. It is the Sistine Chapel of ignorance. If there were awards for ignorance it would surely win them all. I give you ...
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Well? When was Ireland subject to Westminster law but denied Westminster MPs?
Please tell me you are not going to double down and insist that the backstop will make you, me and everyone else on here less free than the people of Ireland were for hundreds of years under British rule. You cannot be that crass and ignorant, surely.
It wasn't British rule, it was UK rule with Ireland electing MPs to the UK Parliament.
We will be subject to EU rule but without MEPs. That is worse than what Ireland went through.
Have you heard of Cromwell, out of interest?
Yes. That's pre-Act of Union 1800 is it not? We were talking about Ireland within the UK.
No, you said "we will be less free than Ireland ever was".
"Ever" didn't start in 1801.
Fair point. I meant "ever was [as part of the UK]"
Considering my point was that Ireland as part of the UK always had MPs, I thought that was self-explanatory and quite clearly Cromwell is different.
It was my understand that Irish independence was declared following Sinn Féin winning 73 seats at the 1918 General Election. So while yes Ireland was subject to UK laws, they had representation, this isn't like the Thirteen Colonies which had no representation.
Heck in the 1868 General Election Gladstone's Liberals and Disraeli's Conservatives won 138/140 Irish MPs between them. Ireland was a full participating part of the United Kingdom.
While we're subjected to the backstop how many MEPs will we get?
Philip - who had the right to vote in Ireland in the 1868 general election?
Male homeowners I believe as was the norm at the time.
Who will get to vote in the UK 2024 European Parliamentary elections if we're still subject to EU law at that point due to the backstop?
What representation will we have prior to 2024?
So the vast majority of Irish people had no vote in 1868 and no ability whatsoever to influence any of the decisions taken by lawmakers about any aspect of their lives. I am afraid that this will not be the case for you and me if the UK were part of the backstop in 2024. If you genuinely cannot understand this, I would - in all seriousness - recommend that you spend a bit of time away from PB to do some reading.
The 19th century was undemocratic for all women and all poor people, not just the Irish.
In 2024 nobody at all in this country will be able to vote to the European Parliament setting our laws. That is unprecedented in these isles since the Acts of Union.
Actually, and I appreciate this is not the point you are making, many of them will. In a little-heralded change to the law, from October the Irish Government is making it legal for Irish passport holders resident outside the Irish Republic to vote in Irish elections. So people in Northern Ireland or Great Britain with an Irish passport will be able to vote in Dail and EP elections, thus meeting your criteria.
Global Britain. D'y'know, I don't think anybody realised that door swung both ways...
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics .
I have never said that we are "enslaved" so I don't know why you quoted that.
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
You are either an ignorant troll or plain stupid. Where was the Article 50 allowing Ireland to quit the U.K. whenever it liked? When has the EU passed legislation preventing practitioners of our majority religion from voting or holding office? When has the EU gunned our people down in the streets? When has the EU allowed millions of us to starve when exporting food from our shores? When has the EU banned our language? Why, when the people of Ireland voted for Sinn Fein by an overwhelming majority in 1918 did we refuse to even discuss independence forcing a destructive war on them, whereas the EU agreed to negotiate with our elected representatives for an orderly exit?
You are (to coin a phrase) beyond the pale. You’re just a nasty little nationalist.
Sinn Fein fell short of a majority of votes in 1918, although they won a majority of seats.
Oh of course. If they had won a majority of votes than London would have gone “Hey Ho Chaps, that’s all fine then, you can leave. Let’s have a nice sit down and a cup of tea.”
Sinn Fein and the IPP did win a majority of votes - nearly 70%. SF won 47% of the popular vote and an overwhelming majority in provinces outside Ulster. Contentment with rule from London was not what was being democratically expressed.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
The FTPA has caused a problem. Because a government can only be VoNCed , the sitting PM will not allow himself to be budged until the 2 weeks are over. Then a GE automatically follows. I do not know how a PM can be removed in those 2 weeks. If Brown had not agreed to move, nothing short of a VoNC [ as it was then ] could have removed him. Believe me the Tory Press will be siding with BJ.
As far as I know it's never happened in the UK, but a precedent for a prime minister being removed against his will would be the dismissal of Gough Whitlam by the governor-general of Australia in 1975.
Obviously Johnson would be in Whitlam's shoes, and the Queen in the governor-general's.
I think he's doing great. Glad he prompted them to applaud, Theresa bless her would have just stumbled on getting croakier and croakier and looking miserable when applause did not materialise.
I turned him off when he got to electric planes.
Not a great speech is it, (or perhaps it's the delivery?).
It does seem that there is already advanced engineering for electric planes and innovation in this area by the UK could result in huge economic benefits
And Brexit makes it better how exactly?
We do not need to be in the EU to develop electric engineering
As ever you’ve failed to answer the question. How does Brexit increase our ability to develop electric engineering?
For long-range electric aircraft, you have to think outside the box.
A large airship, using helium, with electric motors and with solar cells printed over the envelope - for long range, possibly today's batteries might not quite be there (I think it's close), but in a decade or so, they should be. It'd be a damn sight easier than the orders of magnitude improvement they'd need for something like a Boeing 777, that's for sure, with far, far fewer technological breakthroughs required.
They'd be slower, of course - maybe 100-140 kph - and holding maybe a hundred passengers in comfort, but with an outstanding view (passenger dirigibles typically cruised at about 1500 feet, where the view is magnificent).
A different mode of transport, but one that would be far more environmentally friendly and still achieve a lot of what we want to achieve from long-range air transport.
Agreed, and I believe we are pretty good on airshship travel, like that flying bottom thing.
Johnson's promise to recruit 20,000 new police men and women that he voted to abolish is an absolute bobby dazzler: an admission that he was totally and utterly wrong. And he has also admitted that the Tories have been wrong not to invest heavily in infrastructure.
Labour should be doing high fives and dancing with joy - it is a political gift beyond precedent. Instead, they are attacking the LibDems.
S
In
You are happy to trash the economy to secure Brexit. As are Boris Johnson and the Tories.
No, I don't believe Brexit will trash the economy, I believe being a free nation like Canada, Australia etc all of which have a better GDP/capita than we do will improve our economy like it has improved theirs.
@Philip_Thompson - We are a free nation. We have proved that by using that freedom to do something monumentally stupid like Brexit. We are like someone who doesn’t like the rules in the flats where he lives and uses his freedom to live in a leaky tent.
Australia and Canada have, by an order of some magnitude, massively greater natural resources than us. We rely on trade, always have done, and are erecting barriers to that trade. Even then they have considerably smaller economies than ours in the EU.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
We are in uncharted FTPA territory here, but following a successful VNOC, I would expect discussions to take place between the Palace , the Cabinet Secretary and party leaders so as to form a judgement as to who is most likely to command a majority in the new circumstances. Some might argue that in the aftermath of a VNOC , Corbyn as Opposition Leader would be called to the Palace to 'try' to form a Government that would win an Affirmative vote. I am not sure that would occur without soundings having already taken place.
Yes, it's difficult to envisage exactly how things play out following a successful VONC but that's a decent enough guess.
No.
In that case the motion specified by the Act would have to say something like "That this House has confidence in the hypothetical government that the Queen has asked someone else to try to form." It doesn't say anything like that, for obvious reasons.
But it is not clear that in the aftermath of a successful VNOC that we would get to the point of an Affirmative Vote being held in another Government - if there is no evidence that anybody else is likely to command a majority. Under those circumstances, it seems likely that Boris would remain PM in a caretaker capacity. I may be wrong - and -in a way- I hope I am!
Oh, certainly if no one else is asked to form a government, Johnson will remain PM. How could it be otherwise?
Indeed - and my point really is that those who pass a VNOC need to have the clear intent of installing a new PM . Failing that ,No Deal Brexit on 31st October will happen regardless.
The FTPA has caused a problem. Because a government can only be VoNCed , the sitting PM will not allow himself to be budged until the 2 weeks are over. Then a GE automatically follows. I do not know how a PM can be removed in those 2 weeks. If Brown had not agreed to move, nothing short of a VoNC [ as it was then ] could have removed him. Believe me the Tory Press will be siding with BJ.
As far as I know it's never happened in the UK, but a precedent for a prime minister being removed against his will would be the dismissal of Gough Whitlam by the governor-general of Australia in 1975.
Obviously Johnson would be in Whitlam's shoes, and the Queen in the governor-general's.
Perhaps parliament would consider an alternative PM using an informal indicative vote. Only if a viable candidate were found would the Queen send for that person. Otherwise the incumbent PM would remain in office and a general election would ensue after 14 days.
Comments
Besides shooting Labour's fox, is Boris also shooting his own? What do his new programmes have to do with Brexit?
Did the EU ban police officers? Was there a Brussels directive against new rail links in the north? Those are the questions the Opposition should be asking.
Australia and Canada have, by an order of some magnitude, massively greater natural resources than us. We rely on trade, always have done, and are erecting barriers to that trade. Even then they have considerably smaller economies than ours in the EU.
Your constant reference to us becoming “free” and occasionally to having been “enslaved” is disgusting, offensive, degrading and shows a profound ignorance of politics and history. Tibet is not free, Catalonia is not free, Ireland was for much of its history not free and that experience keeps them in the EU to guarantee their hard won freedom. You have never been stopped from expressing your unhappiness at the EU (I have done the same on many occasions) nor voting to leave. You are spoiled living in this country within or without the EU.
We have not been unfree for nearly 1000 years. You would do well to shut up for a bit and listen to countries like Ireland, which never had the option to vote to leave the U.K. Indeed when it tried in 1918 we sent the troops in - a development notably not forthcoming from the EU post 2016. In the incredibly unlikely event Ireland chose to leave then the would be free to do so. So they are now free in a way they were not during centuries of oppression by us.You need to listen to the experiences of other countries before spouting such execrable bollocks about “freedom”.
PS: In most cases they have improved greatly of late.
The average economic cycle is 9-10 years FFS. We're lucky that we haven't had another downturn yet. If we'd taken your path and gotten the deficit down to say 5% of GDP instead of 1% of GDP after 9 years, what do you think would have happened if we hit a recession?
We'd be back to where we started from with 10% deficit, if not even worse.
You can not be serious.
If we're talking about convictions for violent crime of course, that's a horse of a somewhat different colour.
More the 'Murdoch and Barclay press' surely? Even with them, the Times on weekdays was pro-EU last time I heard a comment.
https://twitter.com/Mike_Fabricant/status/1154691395816427521
Ireland was every bit as free as the UK is now. Catalonia is every bit as free as the UK is now. However if the backstop comes into place we will be less free than either Ireland or Catalonia ever were since we will have no representation in who sets our laws and no way to exit that, whereas they had and have respectively representation.
If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was. It is disgusting that Ireland having struggled for its own freedom, should seek to deny it on others.
A large airship, using helium, with electric motors and with solar cells printed over the envelope - for long range, possibly today's batteries might not quite be there (I think it's close), but in a decade or so, they should be. It'd be a damn sight easier than the orders of magnitude improvement they'd need for something like a Boeing 777, that's for sure, with far, far fewer technological breakthroughs required.
They'd be slower, of course - maybe 100-140 kph - and holding maybe a hundred passengers in comfort, but with an outstanding view (passenger dirigibles typically cruised at about 1500 feet, where the view is magnificent).
A different mode of transport, but one that would be far more environmentally friendly and still achieve a lot of what we want to achieve from long-range air transport.
If we had not reduced the deficit we would now have debt:GDP well over 100% [it is already 85% even with the reductions] and a deficit still very high. Going into a recession with a major deficit and debt to GDP over 100% would have been absolutely catastrophic. We would have been no different to Greece a decade ago.
Also new car sales have dropped 17% since 2016....
* there may be some sarcasm in this post...
Tell me please the last year in which Ireland was obliged to follow UK laws and regulations but with no MPs to the UK Parliament.
"If this despicable backstop comes into force then we will be less free than Ireland ever was."
Heck in the 1868 General Election Gladstone's Liberals and Disraeli's Conservatives won 138/140 Irish MPs between them. Ireland was a full participating part of the United Kingdom.
While we're subjected to the backstop how many MEPs will we get?
You are (to coin a phrase) beyond the pale. You’re just a nasty little nationalist.
https://twitter.com/yorkshirepost/status/1155103640279027712
While we're subject to Brussels law under the backstop will we take part in European Parliamentary Elections? Will we maintain MEPs? Yes or no?
We will be subject to EU rule but without MEPs. That is worse than what Ireland went through.
https://twitter.com/zerohedge/status/1155087948448182272
Some of the replies are 'great'.
'ECB is a pariah institution raping the people of Europe, soon to be headed by a convicted fraudster.'
'I cant wait for this rotten ship to sink!...Gonna be a glorious day!'
Who will get to vote in the UK 2024 European Parliamentary elections if we're still subject to EU law at that point due to the backstop?
What representation will we have prior to 2024?
However New Zealand's Electron rocket uses batteries to power the turbopumps, and as they get depleted the batteries are dropped off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electron_(rocket)
Now, be honest; how many of you knew that New Zealand has a working orbital-class rocket?
Just as with the Act of Union a century earlier, the Parliaments merged so former Irish Parliamentarians became UK ones until the next election.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/timeseries/dzls/pusf
Though whether those deficit reducing targets would have been reached seems highly doubtful to me.
Now its pretty easy to argue that after 2010 government spending had wrong priorities but its difficult to claim that the government didn't borrow and spend enough.
I said under the backstop. Where is Article 50 in the backstop? Where is our unilateral exit? The EU have been clear all along there can be no unilateral exit to the backstop "or there is no backstop". Where are our MEPs under the backstop?
In 2024 nobody at all in this country will be able to vote to the European Parliament setting our laws. That is unprecedented in these isles since the Acts of Union.
As to this bollocks about the backstop, the treaty can be abrogated at any time by MPs in London and there are no EU guns forcing us to obey, as Ireland had our guns facing it. It would be a voluntary arrangement. Indeed if we sign an FTA it falls by the wayside. When the Irish voted to leave the U.K. we terrorised them by sending in the Black and Tans to shoot them. We physically terrorised and killed the Irish into submission for centuries. Indeed that by some measures only stopped in 1998. Your ignorance is just...I have no words. You are really beneath a rock.
I'm from that ethnic group myself, but I don't let it get me down.
"Ever" didn't start in 1801.
Which is probably just as well.
Under a backstop scenario, what would happen is that in limited areas the UK would have to implement laws agreed by the Council of Ministers and ratified by MEPs. Those laws will not cover all aspects of our lives - in fact they would make very little difference to the way we lead them. Our criminal law would be almost entirely unaffected, for example.
Now, compare that to how the UK Parliament - which most Irish people for most of the course of Irish history had no opportunity to elect - legislated in ways that affected the lives of ordinary Irish men and women.
No surprise !
Sinn Fein and the IPP did win a majority of votes - nearly 70%. SF won 47% of the popular vote and an overwhelming majority in provinces outside Ulster. Contentment with rule from London was not what was being democratically expressed.
Considering my point was that Ireland as part of the UK always had MPs, I thought that was self-explanatory and quite clearly Cromwell is different.
Global Britain. D'y'know, I don't think anybody realised that door swung both ways...
Obviously Johnson would be in Whitlam's shoes, and the Queen in the governor-general's.