Completely Off Topic But maybe more important in the long term than anything else discussed today. Artificial photosynthesis but 100 times faster that produces useful chemicals from CO2 and sunlight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urHqk7TLSUo Sell Shell?
does this mean the medieval serfdom that extinction rebellion wants can be avoided after all?
Wow, the subject turns back to Brexit, and the debate careers onto 1066, France invading the UK, the Battle of Lincoln, William of Orange, Hitler, the battle of Britain and reminiscing of the time when Hugh Grant was PM.
Listening to 5 live business this morning on the WDA by an independent observer she commented that the WDA is not being re-written but sections on the internal GB market and state aid are to be altered in UK law to come into force only if a no deal occurs
She went on to say that this must be seen in the context that the negotiations have to conclude by the 15th October and expects this will focus minds.
However, I do not agree with breaching a treaty and I would actually have preferred for Boris just to confirm that without movement in the negotiations this week the UK will leave on a no deal and everyone should make arrangements as necessary
It remains to be seen just how this plays out over the next 6 weeks
Cummings expects the EU to fold. I can't see how they can from a threat like this.
What next? Do they buckle at Putin's brinkmanship over Belarus?
The observer did not seem anything like as upset as many on here are and seemed to think it was just part of the increasing urgency over a deal
I do not know but I would be interested if an independent voice could advise on the legal status of the WDA in the event of no deal
I am not comfortable with breaching a treaty and like so much on Brexit controversy prevails all around
And as far as the EU and Putin are concerned do you really think Merkel will withdraw from the Nord Stream energy supply from Russia
Legally the WA applies in the event of no deal. The UK has the sovereign right to repudiate it. They would have to live with the consequences.
In the short term this would mean the breaking of the GFA and a border on the island of Ireland.
Philip doesn't care. He believes that this would lead to a United Ireland. He favours a United Ireland. He believes that other UK Govt policies are leading inevitably to Scottish Independence. He favours Scottish Independence.
Therefore he is entirely comfortable coming on here and defending UK Govt policy which will lead to the outcomes he favours. It doesn't matter to him that the UK Govt doesn't (we presume) support his outcomes.
I assume he also doesn't think the UK should bother trying to sign trade deals with other countries since other countries are not going to sign deals knowing that the UK will attempt to rewrite them whenever they discover something they don't like in them.
The UK is sticking to the terms of the WA not to have a hard border within Ireland actually, just threatening to rip up the pledge to have a border in the Irish Sea, which if Boris does do that will also win the 8 DUP MPs back to the Tories in the event of a hung parliament in 2024
If we don't get a deal what happens on the NI / Eire border?
The UK government still respects the WA terms within Ireland and on the NI/Eire border, they just refuse to impose a border in the Irish Sea.
If the EU want to build a hard border within Ireland that is up to the EU, the UK side will remain borderless
Why are we putting all the customs stuff in place at Dover then if we just leave the NI/Eire border open?
As if we go to WTO terms Brexit there would still be tariffs on goods coming from the EU (which would include from the Republic of Ireland) to GB however Northern Ireland along with the rest of the UK left the EU in January
Well exactly. I have no idea what your point it. Why do we put a border at one place and not the other?
The GFA means there will be no hard border within Ireland
So why do we bother elsewhere? If there is a great big gapping hole here.
Because some things are more important than holes. It's about a balance of risk.
Stop ruining my argument with HYUFD by coming back with sensible replies.
So will people now STFU about a border in the Irish Sea?
How about?
Different railway gauges (5ft 3 inches as opposed to 4ft 8.5 inches) Different car registration system (different number of letters/digits) Different political parties (save for a bit-part by the Tories!) Different motorway numbering (NI has an M1 and M2!)
He certainly did for the jews of Eastern Europe. Although not according to Rod Crosby.
Mate I can see now why you are such a cycling fan - just looking for a new light and the similarities between the Giant Recon HL1600 and a Glock 17 are striking.
Those are decent lights but 1800L is obnoxiously bright for other cyclists. If you're not bothered about Garmin integration have a look at a Moon Vortex. That has 450L which is plenty and they are much cheaper.
Deliberately breaching a treaty is an Act of War. In another era this would have lead to a declaration of war from the other side and actual fighting.
Well if the EU want to declare war on the UK, an island nation which has not been successfully invaded since 1066 and with a stronger military than any other nation in the EU bar France whose war record is not that great against us, in order to defend the right of customs and tariffs to be imposed on goods coming from NI to mainland GB and vice versa that is up to them
I agree that nobody is going to be arsed to go to war over these customs or tariffs but I think the reasoning that it is because 'France whose war record is not that great against us' is a smidging weak, since the last time planes didn't exist, battleships used sails and we defended ourselves against cavalry by forming square; or are you proposing we should fight a historic reenactment.
When Hitler tried to invade there were planes, hence the Battle of Britain, battleships without sails and tanks had replaced cavalry, he also failed
Bombing raids are not an invasion.
Without siding with HYUFD on any other part of this I am afraid that is palpable bollocks. The bombing of British airfields and the attempt to knock out the RAF was a specific first phase of the invasion plans as drawn up by the German High Command. Saying it wasn't an invasion attempt because the fist phase failed is just dumb. One might as well claim that the Armada was not an invasion attempt because they never manged to make landfall.
That said, the rest of HYUFD's claims about never having been invaded since 1066 is just wrong.
Interesting we view Obama positively considering what he said about our position in the trade deal queue.
Well, his Dad was one of ours, wasn't he? Kenyan.
Incidentally an old joke with a new twist was on one of the Facebook pages I look at the other day. Q. Why did the sun never set on the British Empire A. Because God didn't trust the English (new twist) in the dark.
Listening to 5 live business this morning on the WDA by an independent observer she commented that the WDA is not being re-written but sections on the internal GB market and state aid are to be altered in UK law to come into force only if a no deal occurs
She went on to say that this must be seen in the context that the negotiations have to conclude by the 15th October and expects this will focus minds.
However, I do not agree with breaching a treaty and I would actually have preferred for Boris just to confirm that without movement in the negotiations this week the UK will leave on a no deal and everyone should make arrangements as necessary
It remains to be seen just how this plays out over the next 6 weeks
Cummings expects the EU to fold. I can't see how they can from a threat like this.
What next? Do they buckle at Putin's brinkmanship over Belarus?
The observer did not seem anything like as upset as many on here are and seemed to think it was just part of the increasing urgency over a deal
I do not know but I would be interested if an independent voice could advise on the legal status of the WDA in the event of no deal
I am not comfortable with breaching a treaty and like so much on Brexit controversy prevails all around
And as far as the EU and Putin are concerned do you really think Merkel will withdraw from the Nord Stream energy supply from Russia
Legally the WA applies in the event of no deal. The UK has the sovereign right to repudiate it. They would have to live with the consequences.
In the short term this would mean the breaking of the GFA and a border on the island of Ireland.
Philip doesn't care. He believes that this would lead to a United Ireland. He favours a United Ireland. He believes that other UK Govt policies are leading inevitably to Scottish Independence. He favours Scottish Independence.
Therefore he is entirely comfortable coming on here and defending UK Govt policy which will lead to the outcomes he favours. It doesn't matter to him that the UK Govt doesn't (we presume) support his outcomes.
I assume he also doesn't think the UK should bother trying to sign trade deals with other countries since other countries are not going to sign deals knowing that the UK will attempt to rewrite them whenever they discover something they don't like in them.
The UK is sticking to the terms of the WA not to have a hard border within Ireland actually, just threatening to rip up the pledge to have a border in the Irish Sea, which if Boris does do that will also win the 8 DUP MPs back to the Tories in the event of a hung parliament in 2024
If we don't get a deal what happens on the NI / Eire border?
The UK government still respects the WA terms within Ireland and on the NI/Eire border, they just refuse to impose a border in the Irish Sea.
If the EU want to build a hard border within Ireland that is up to the EU, the UK side will remain borderless
Why are we putting all the customs stuff in place at Dover then if we just leave the NI/Eire border open?
As if we go to WTO terms Brexit there would still be tariffs on goods coming from the EU (which would include from the Republic of Ireland) to GB however Northern Ireland along with the rest of the UK left the EU in January
Well exactly. I have no idea what your point it. Why do we put a border at one place and not the other?
The GFA means there will be no hard border within Ireland
So why do we bother elsewhere? If there is a great big gapping hole here.
Because some things are more important than holes. It's about a balance of risk.
Stop ruining my argument with HYUFD by coming back with sensible replies.
Completely Off Topic But maybe more important in the long term than anything else discussed today. Artificial photosynthesis but 100 times faster that produces useful chemicals from CO2 and sunlight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urHqk7TLSUo Sell Shell?
does this mean the medieval serfdom that extinction rebellion wants can be avoided after all?
Idiot, they don't want that. You don't have to agree with their methods to support their aims which is to get some real action on climate change before it is too late. It will become much more expensive before it becomes too late.
If the toss up states really are Ohio, Florida and Georgia, it is looking really bad for Trump. He won GA by 5 percentage points and Ohio by 8 last time.
Interesting we view Obama positively considering what he said about our position in the trade deal queue.
Well, his Dad was one of ours, wasn't he? Kenyan.
Incidentally an old joke with a new twist was on one of the Facebook pages I look at the other day. Q. Why did the sun never set on the British Empire A. Because God didn't trust the English (new twist) in the dark.
Seems appropriate ATM.
Arab proverb: It's better to be an Englishman's enemy than his friend because they sell their friends and buy their enemies.
Completely Off Topic But maybe more important in the long term than anything else discussed today. Artificial photosynthesis but 100 times faster that produces useful chemicals from CO2 and sunlight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urHqk7TLSUo Sell Shell?
does this mean the medieval serfdom that extinction rebellion wants can be avoided after all?
Idiot, they don't want that. You don't have to agree with their methods to support their aims which is to get some real action on climate change before it is too late. It will become much more expensive before it becomes too late.
They do want that. They don't care about climate change, which is why their protests have involved attacking cycling and electric public transport.
Deliberately breaching a treaty is an Act of War. In another era this would have lead to a declaration of war from the other side and actual fighting.
Well if the EU want to declare war on the UK, an island nation which has not been successfully invaded since 1066 and with a stronger military than any other nation in the EU bar France whose war record is not that great against us, in order to defend the right of customs and tariffs to be imposed on goods coming from NI to mainland GB and vice versa that is up to them
But you'll have weakened our southern defences by deploying most of the troops to Scotland...
Lot of Martello towers still standing, though! On the negative side, Francois would be encouraged to re-form the Home Guard!
That's old thinking. Dom is working on a world beating British version of Unit 731.
There was a Canadian professor, (IIRC at the Uni of British Columbia) who got into trouble for using data from the Nazis experiments with freezing people. He was working on survival techniques for Canadian Air Force aircrew who crashed into Alaskan waters.
Completely Off Topic But maybe more important in the long term than anything else discussed today. Artificial photosynthesis but 100 times faster that produces useful chemicals from CO2 and sunlight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urHqk7TLSUo Sell Shell?
does this mean the medieval serfdom that extinction rebellion wants can be avoided after all?
Idiot, they don't want that. You don't have to agree with their methods to support their aims which is to get some real action on climate change before it is too late. It will become much more expensive before it becomes too late.
If We can use those amazing chloroplasts to offset Carbon omissions then why would we need to stop driving, flying and living?
Deliberately breaching a treaty is an Act of War. In another era this would have lead to a declaration of war from the other side and actual fighting.
Well if the EU want to declare war on the UK, an island nation which has not been successfully invaded since 1066 and with a stronger military than any other nation in the EU bar France whose war record is not that great against us, in order to defend the right of customs and tariffs to be imposed on goods coming from NI to mainland GB and vice versa that is up to them
But you'll have weakened our southern defences by deploying most of the troops to Scotland...
Lot of Martello towers still standing, though! On the negative side, Francois would be encouraged to re-form the Home Guard!
That's old thinking. Dom is working on a world beating British version of Unit 731.
There was a Canadian professor, (IIRC at the Uni of British Columbia) who got into trouble for using data from the Nazis experiments with freezing people. He was working on survival techniques for Canadian Air Force aircrew who crashed into Alaskan waters.
I thought that the freezing experiments were the one set of results it was decided internationally would be used because of their potential to save so many lives? .
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
If the toss up states really are Ohio, Florida and Georgia, it is looking really bad for Trump. He won GA by 5 percentage points and Ohio by 8 last time.
best you pile on Sleepy Joe at evens then. What a bargain!
On the other hand, a poll of Americans think Trump will beat Biden at the first debate 47 - 41.
Listening to 5 live business this morning on the WDA by an independent observer she commented that the WDA is not being re-written but sections on the internal GB market and state aid are to be altered in UK law to come into force only if a no deal occurs
She went on to say that this must be seen in the context that the negotiations have to conclude by the 15th October and expects this will focus minds.
However, I do not agree with breaching a treaty and I would actually have preferred for Boris just to confirm that without movement in the negotiations this week the UK will leave on a no deal and everyone should make arrangements as necessary
It remains to be seen just how this plays out over the next 6 weeks
Cummings expects the EU to fold. I can't see how they can from a threat like this.
What next? Do they buckle at Putin's brinkmanship over Belarus?
The observer did not seem anything like as upset as many on here are and seemed to think it was just part of the increasing urgency over a deal
I do not know but I would be interested if an independent voice could advise on the legal status of the WDA in the event of no deal
I am not comfortable with breaching a treaty and like so much on Brexit controversy prevails all around
And as far as the EU and Putin are concerned do you really think Merkel will withdraw from the Nord Stream energy supply from Russia
Legally the WA applies in the event of no deal. The UK has the sovereign right to repudiate it. They would have to live with the consequences.
In the short term this would mean the breaking of the GFA and a border on the island of Ireland.
Philip doesn't care. He believes that this would lead to a United Ireland. He favours a United Ireland. He believes that other UK Govt policies are leading inevitably to Scottish Independence. He favours Scottish Independence.
Therefore he is entirely comfortable coming on here and defending UK Govt policy which will lead to the outcomes he favours. It doesn't matter to him that the UK Govt doesn't (we presume) support his outcomes.
I assume he also doesn't think the UK should bother trying to sign trade deals with other countries since other countries are not going to sign deals knowing that the UK will attempt to rewrite them whenever they discover something they don't like in them.
The UK is sticking to the terms of the WA not to have a hard border within Ireland actually, just threatening to rip up the pledge to have a border in the Irish Sea, which if Boris does do that will also win the 8 DUP MPs back to the Tories in the event of a hung parliament in 2024
If we don't get a deal what happens on the NI / Eire border?
The UK government still respects the WA terms within Ireland and on the NI/Eire border, they just refuse to impose a border in the Irish Sea.
If the EU want to build a hard border within Ireland that is up to the EU, the UK side will remain borderless
Why are we putting all the customs stuff in place at Dover then if we just leave the NI/Eire border open?
As if we go to WTO terms Brexit there would still be tariffs on goods coming from the EU (which would include from the Republic of Ireland) to GB however Northern Ireland along with the rest of the UK left the EU in January
We WON'T be moving to WTO terms! It's a not happening event.
How many times.
If on 16 October it is announced that No Deal is happening then will that shake your worldview in other things you consider to be not happening events?
No. Because it would be merely an announcement. But if on 1st Jan 2021 we end transition with no trade deal with the EU and move overnight to WTO terms then yes. I will have been proved wrong on a big call on politics I'm making with supreme confidence based on my reading of politics. That would shake me. Same thing if Trump wins on 3/11. That's another not happening event, so if it happens I'll be shaken. Even more so in that case since I have the betting money down. I'll be shaken to the core. But I won't be because WTO Brexit is not happening and Trump is a one term president.
Interesting we view Obama positively considering what he said about our position in the trade deal queue.
Well, his Dad was one of ours, wasn't he? Kenyan.
Incidentally an old joke with a new twist was on one of the Facebook pages I look at the other day. Q. Why did the sun never set on the British Empire A. Because God didn't trust the English (new twist) in the dark.
Seems appropriate ATM.
Arab proverb: It's better to be an Englishman's enemy than his friend because they sell their friends and buy their enemies.
Completely Off Topic But maybe more important in the long term than anything else discussed today. Artificial photosynthesis but 100 times faster that produces useful chemicals from CO2 and sunlight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urHqk7TLSUo Sell Shell?
does this mean the medieval serfdom that extinction rebellion wants can be avoided after all?
Idiot, they don't want that. You don't have to agree with their methods to support their aims which is to get some real action on climate change before it is too late. It will become much more expensive before it becomes too late.
They do want that. They don't care about climate change, which is why their protests have involved attacking cycling and electric public transport.
Absolutely. Having been up close and personal with XR trying to walk over Waterloo Bridge, it is absolutely clear this is a political project and nothing to do with climate change.
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
And if that happens and by this time next year we look back and see the border is coping smoothly, the economy is growing and the sky didn't fall then what would you say?
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
And if that happens and by this time next year we look back and see the border is coping smoothly, the economy is growing and the sky didn't fall then what would you say?
I would say I was wrong. How about you in the converse scenario?
Deliberately breaching a treaty is an Act of War. In another era this would have lead to a declaration of war from the other side and actual fighting.
Well if the EU want to declare war on the UK, an island nation which has not been successfully invaded since 1066 and with a stronger military than any other nation in the EU bar France whose war record is not that great against us, in order to defend the right of customs and tariffs to be imposed on goods coming from NI to mainland GB and vice versa that is up to them
But you'll have weakened our southern defences by deploying most of the troops to Scotland...
Lot of Martello towers still standing, though! On the negative side, Francois would be encouraged to re-form the Home Guard!
That's old thinking. Dom is working on a world beating British version of Unit 731.
There was a Canadian professor, (IIRC at the Uni of British Columbia) who got into trouble for using data from the Nazis experiments with freezing people. He was working on survival techniques for Canadian Air Force aircrew who crashed into Alaskan waters.
I thought that the freezing experiments were the one set of results it was decided internationally would be used because of their potential to save so many lives? .
Could be, though I recall a storm around the BC experiments. Maybe the decision was afterwards, although one would have thought that everything would have been destroyed.
Although, there was a chap called von Braun who did quite well for himself in the US sometime after the war. And some of his earlier work could be ethically questioned. Again, if memory serves.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
While simultaneously quoshing hopes of having a vaccine ready to roll out sometime in the autumn.
How many can we administer per day? Has anyone thought of training an extra 10-20k people in giving the vaccines to really ramp up capacity? Or will we only start doing that a month after the vaccine is released and the media are unhappy at the pace of it.
How many people get a cold each week in the UK in winter? Presumably all should be tested or will want to be tested?
If you assume the average person gets 2 colds over 6 months, then it would need about 770k tests per day off my back of the envelope calc?
Hopefully colds are way down because of the covid measures but testing capacity will undoubtedly be under pressure again.
Testing capacity is meant to increase to 500,000 a day by the end of October. It should be a lot faster as well, at least for some places, as there are thousands of testing machines being ordered that can be used outside of laboratories.
While simultaneously quoshing hopes of having a vaccine ready to roll out sometime in the autumn.
How many can we administer per day? Has anyone thought of training an extra 10-20k people in giving the vaccines to really ramp up capacity? Or will we only start doing that a month after the vaccine is released and the media are unhappy at the pace of it.
Yes thought has been given to that including creating drive thru centres to get the vaccine at.
Listening to 5 live business this morning on the WDA by an independent observer she commented that the WDA is not being re-written but sections on the internal GB market and state aid are to be altered in UK law to come into force only if a no deal occurs
She went on to say that this must be seen in the context that the negotiations have to conclude by the 15th October and expects this will focus minds.
However, I do not agree with breaching a treaty and I would actually have preferred for Boris just to confirm that without movement in the negotiations this week the UK will leave on a no deal and everyone should make arrangements as necessary
It remains to be seen just how this plays out over the next 6 weeks
G, the whole purpose of the Withdrawal Agreement was to protect against the consequences for Ireland of No deal. To rewrite it so that sections don’t apply in the event of no deal is entirely to defeat its purpose.
Oh well what a shame.
Maybe the EU shouldn't have insisted on resolving that before trade talks? Just an idea.
That scheduling of talks was their choice. What happens from 1 January is our choice.
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
And if that happens and by this time next year we look back and see the border is coping smoothly, the economy is growing and the sky didn't fall then what would you say?
I would say I was wrong. How about you in the converse scenario?
I THINK Mr T is honest enough to say that he, too, had been wrong. He might, though be a lone voice among the current 'It'll all be fine brigade' who will, to a person, blame the EU.
If the toss up states really are Ohio, Florida and Georgia, it is looking really bad for Trump. He won GA by 5 percentage points and Ohio by 8 last time.
best you pile on Sleepy Joe at evens then. What a bargain!
On the other hand, a poll of Americans think Trump will beat Biden at the first debate 47 - 41.
That's closer to where we are, in my view.
I repeat: *If* the toss up states *really are* Ohio, Florida and Georgia, it is looking really bad for Trump. He won GA by 5 percentage points and Ohio by 8 last time.
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
And if that happens and by this time next year we look back and see the border is coping smoothly, the economy is growing and the sky didn't fall then what would you say?
I would say I was wrong. How about you in the converse scenario?
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
And if that happens and by this time next year we look back and see the border is coping smoothly, the economy is growing and the sky didn't fall then what would you say?
I would say I was wrong. How about you in the converse scenario?
You may be falling into a trap here. The economy is likely to grow in 2021 regardless of Brexit, because of covid in 2020. It will grow slower than it would have done otherwise, but that could never be proved conclusively. The other two "measures" are not measurable.
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
And if that happens and by this time next year we look back and see the border is coping smoothly, the economy is growing and the sky didn't fall then what would you say?
I would say I was wrong. How about you in the converse scenario?
It will be the EU's fault.
Yes it will certainly be the EU’s fault that we chose “no deal” over the “easiest deal in history”.
Interesting we view Obama positively considering what he said about our position in the trade deal queue.
Well, his Dad was one of ours, wasn't he? Kenyan.
Incidentally an old joke with a new twist was on one of the Facebook pages I look at the other day. Q. Why did the sun never set on the British Empire A. Because God didn't trust the English (new twist) in the dark.
Seems appropriate ATM.
Arab proverb: It's better to be an Englishman's enemy than his friend because they sell their friends and buy their enemies.
The Scots can certainly relate to that point of view.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
And if that happens and by this time next year we look back and see the border is coping smoothly, the economy is growing and the sky didn't fall then what would you say?
I would say I was wrong. How about you in the converse scenario?
It will be the EU's fault.
Yes it will certainly be the EU’s fault that we chose “no deal” over the “easiest deal in history”.
While simultaneously quoshing hopes of having a vaccine ready to roll out sometime in the autumn.
How many can we administer per day? Has anyone thought of training an extra 10-20k people in giving the vaccines to really ramp up capacity? Or will we only start doing that a month after the vaccine is released and the media are unhappy at the pace of it.
Talk of vets being able to administer it wasn't there ? I'd be more than happy to get mine done at Vets4Pets tbh.
Completely Off Topic But maybe more important in the long term than anything else discussed today. Artificial photosynthesis but 100 times faster that produces useful chemicals from CO2 and sunlight. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urHqk7TLSUo Sell Shell?
I'd be selling them anyway; what's going to screw the oil companies far sooner than this is the likely reduction in plastic usage, on top of renewable electrics.
"An appreciable challenge" means quite a way off yet. https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/artificial-chloroplasts-turn-co2-into-multicarbon-molecules-powered-only-by-light/4011694.article ...‘The encapsulation of chloroplast membranes in tiny droplets to drive carbon dioxide incorporation is a truly dramatic advance,’ comments Hagan Bayley who investigates synthetic biology at the University of Oxford, UK. ‘However, scale-up in a cost effective manner, for example for the synthesis of high-value pharmaceuticals, may require transplantation of entire in-vitro systems into workhorse cells, an appreciable challenge recognised by the authors.’..
A lot of money is going into finding efficient ways of splitting off hydrogen from water using electrolysis, too. But in the near term, batteries are where it's at.
Listening to 5 live business this morning on the WDA by an independent observer she commented that the WDA is not being re-written but sections on the internal GB market and state aid are to be altered in UK law to come into force only if a no deal occurs
She went on to say that this must be seen in the context that the negotiations have to conclude by the 15th October and expects this will focus minds.
However, I do not agree with breaching a treaty and I would actually have preferred for Boris just to confirm that without movement in the negotiations this week the UK will leave on a no deal and everyone should make arrangements as necessary
It remains to be seen just how this plays out over the next 6 weeks
G, the whole purpose of the Withdrawal Agreement was to protect against the consequences for Ireland of No deal. To rewrite it so that sections don’t apply in the event of no deal is entirely to defeat its purpose.
Oh well what a shame.
Maybe the EU shouldn't have insisted on resolving that before trade talks? Just an idea.
That scheduling of talks was their choice. What happens from 1 January is our choice.
I see you’re whining again and it’s only 10:30.
I see you don't know the meaning of the word whining again. Stating something matter of factly isn't a whine.
While simultaneously quoshing hopes of having a vaccine ready to roll out sometime in the autumn.
How many can we administer per day? Has anyone thought of training an extra 10-20k people in giving the vaccines to really ramp up capacity? Or will we only start doing that a month after the vaccine is released and the media are unhappy at the pace of it.
My neighbour who is a practice nurse is about to start the annual flu vaccination programme at the local GPs. She says they can reasonably do around 120 -130 jabs a day with the current covid restrictions.
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
And if that happens and by this time next year we look back and see the border is coping smoothly, the economy is growing and the sky didn't fall then what would you say?
I would say I was wrong. How about you in the converse scenario?
You may be falling into a trap here. The economy is likely to grow in 2021 regardless of Brexit, because of covid in 2020. It will grow slower than it would have done otherwise, but that could never be proved conclusively. The other two "measures" are not measurable.
On average, yes. But Brexit, particularly No Deal Brext, is a show stopper for certain industries and businesses. For example if you are a beef farmer, you will be shut out of your main market and you will likely go bust. Covid won't disguise that.
Although Brexit will have a significant economic effect (and greater than Covid ultimately according to consensus expert opinion), the biggest damage isn't economic. Covid won't disguise that damage either.
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
And if that happens and by this time next year we look back and see the border is coping smoothly, the economy is growing and the sky didn't fall then what would you say?
I would say I was wrong. How about you in the converse scenario?
I THINK Mr T is honest enough to say that he, too, had been wrong. He might, though be a lone voice among the current 'It'll all be fine brigade' who will, to a person, blame the EU.
Absolutely this is my answer.
To avoid any doubt and feel free to take this as a hostage to fortune but the one thing I can absolutely hand on heart promise I will not say is "it is the EU's fault".
To avoid any doubt I don't think it can be the EU's fault. The EU have to make their decisions, the UK has to make its own and the UK needs to be able to sink or swim on its own basis. We have no right to expect anything from the EU going forwards nor do I intend to say so.
I would like the EU to be more reasonable, but if they're not we need to live with it and make our own choices in whatever way suits us best. The whole point of Brexit is that we then control our destiny and if we control our own destiny it is absolutely pointless to blame others.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Absolutely I would like frictionless trade so long as it doesn't impinge our democracy.
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
If the toss up states really are Ohio, Florida and Georgia, it is looking really bad for Trump. He won GA by 5 percentage points and Ohio by 8 last time.
best you pile on Sleepy Joe at evens then. What a bargain!
On the other hand, a poll of Americans think Trump will beat Biden at the first debate 47 - 41.
That's closer to where we are, in my view.
Trafalgar's famed "How do you think your neighbour would vote" questions saw the result in Colorado of
Not being on much so I imagine this has been asked already but:
if no agreement is reached, does the Withdrawal Agreement expire, or continue on for a defined or indefinite period?
The Withdrawal Agreement is an agreed treaty. It continues as is unless it is dissolved through mutual agreement. It doesn't even lapse if the UK chooses to breach it.
Yes. The British should be very good at it. After all, we have 300 years experience of gaining advantage by flattering tinpot despots around the world.
Experience that will be put to good use since we appear to be developing our very tinpot despot in No.10
Not being on much so I imagine this has been asked already but:
if no agreement is reached, does the Withdrawal Agreement expire, or continue on for a defined or indefinite period?
The Withdrawal Agreement is an agreed treaty. It continues as is unless it is dissolved through mutual agreement. It doesn't even lapse if the UK chooses to breach it.
To add: international treaties are serious undertakings. The system is set up to discourage parties from thinking, not keen on these obligations, let's forget about them.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Absolutely I would like frictionless trade so long as it doesn't impinge our democracy.
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
Then we will sign no trade deals, as all trade deals involve some degree of relinquishment of sovereignty.
Sounds brilliant.
Your idealism is on the same level as a 16 year old communist.
Biden really needs to come out with something a bit stronger than "all violence is wrong" when it comes to BLM. I'm sure it will be mentioned that he is ahead in the polls etc etc but, as @MaxPB pointed out, it is not a good look.
Not being on much so I imagine this has been asked already but:
if no agreement is reached, does the Withdrawal Agreement expire, or continue on for a defined or indefinite period?
Certain elements expire, certain elements continue.
Correct. eg national treatment for citizens of the other side expires after 8 (?) years. But AIUI none of these expiries are dependent on the presence or content of other treaties. The Withdrawal Agreement is standalone.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Absolutely I would like frictionless trade so long as it doesn't impinge our democracy.
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
Then we will sign no trade deals, as all trade deals involve some degree of relinquishment of sovereignty.
Sounds brilliant.
Your idealism is on the same level as a 16 year old communist.
That's not true. Trade deals don't involve relinquishment of sovereignty. They involve an agreed set of arrangements to proceed and if a future government decides they don't like the arrangements then they can cancel the treaty. That's not an impingement any more than any other law a government passes, just like any other law it can not bind successor governments who are free to change the law if they don't like it. No Parliament can bind its successors.
Actually if we crash out in chaos on the 1st January we won't have an 'Australian-type' deal. We'll have an even worse position, because there is a (limited) agreement between the EU and Australia on mutual recognition of standards and also a formal understanding on other measures to reduce barriers:
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
And if that happens and by this time next year we look back and see the border is coping smoothly, the economy is growing and the sky didn't fall then what would you say?
I would say I was wrong. How about you in the converse scenario?
Lots of similar stories at the time, and talking heads on the TV saying the same.
I don't want to get to January and have people say, "It was never going to be ready in the first half of the year." And then on, and on, and on.
The timing is waiting for the completion of Phase III trials.
Phase III trials couldn't proceed in the UK because the prevalence of the virus was too low (ironic eh?) so were moved abroad. Phase III trials are underway already in Brazil and other countries and we are awaiting those results.
Wow, the subject turns back to Brexit, and the debate careers onto 1066, France invading the UK, the Battle of Lincoln, William of Orange, Hitler, the battle of Britain and reminiscing of the time when Hugh Grant was PM.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Absolutely I would like frictionless trade so long as it doesn't impinge our democracy.
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
Then we will sign no trade deals, as all trade deals involve some degree of relinquishment of sovereignty.
Sounds brilliant.
Your idealism is on the same level as a 16 year old communist.
That's not true. Trade deals don't involve relinquishment of sovereignty. They involve an agreed set of arrangements to proceed and if a future government decides they don't like the arrangements then they can cancel the treaty. That's not an impingement any more than any other law a government passes, just like any other law it can not bind successor governments who are free to change the law if they don't like it. No Parliament can bind its successors.
Only if there is no exit is it an impingement.
This is incorrect on the facts. Future governments can't unilaterally cancel treaties unless treaties specifically allow for it - the WA doesn't. Those treaty obligations have legal effect under international law.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Absolutely I would like frictionless trade so long as it doesn't impinge our democracy.
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
Then we will sign no trade deals, as all trade deals involve some degree of relinquishment of sovereignty.
Sounds brilliant.
Your idealism is on the same level as a 16 year old communist.
That's not true. Trade deals don't involve relinquishment of sovereignty. They involve an agreed set of arrangements to proceed and if a future government decides they don't like the arrangements then they can cancel the treaty. That's not an impingement any more than any other law a government passes, just like any other law it can not bind successor governments who are free to change the law if they don't like it. No Parliament can bind its successors.
Only if there is no exit is it an impingement.
By your logic, there was no relinquishment of sovereignty by virtue of our membership of the EU because we could leave whenever we wanted.
It is true. All international agreements involve relinquishment of sovereignty, no matter how temporary. The WA involved a relinquishment of some degree of sovereignty, something we AGREED to voluntarily. Nothing is permanent, but going back on our agreement 1 year later is not a good look.
Your dross about Parliament binding successors is irrelevant.
Interesting we view Obama positively considering what he said about our position in the trade deal queue.
Well, his Dad was one of ours, wasn't he? Kenyan.
Incidentally an old joke with a new twist was on one of the Facebook pages I look at the other day. Q. Why did the sun never set on the British Empire A. Because God didn't trust the English (new twist) in the dark.
Seems appropriate ATM.
Arab proverb: It's better to be an Englishman's enemy than his friend because they sell their friends and buy their enemies.
The Scots can certainly relate to that point of view.
I would also say fisherman but they seem to be strangely afflicted with amnesia when it comes to the Tory party.
While simultaneously quoshing hopes of having a vaccine ready to roll out sometime in the autumn.
How many can we administer per day? Has anyone thought of training an extra 10-20k people in giving the vaccines to really ramp up capacity? Or will we only start doing that a month after the vaccine is released and the media are unhappy at the pace of it.
My neighbour who is a practice nurse is about to start the annual flu vaccination programme at the local GPs. She says they can reasonably do around 120 -130 jabs a day with the current covid restrictions.
Literally a minute ago I booked my flu jab for 10:55 on Sept 15th. We have to stand outside in the car park 2 metres apart and proceed into a gazebo for the jab, sleeve rolled up. "Bring an umbrella if it's raining".
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Absolutely I would like frictionless trade so long as it doesn't impinge our democracy.
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
Then we will sign no trade deals, as all trade deals involve some degree of relinquishment of sovereignty.
Sounds brilliant.
Your idealism is on the same level as a 16 year old communist.
That's not true. Trade deals don't involve relinquishment of sovereignty. They involve an agreed set of arrangements to proceed and if a future government decides they don't like the arrangements then they can cancel the treaty. That's not an impingement any more than any other law a government passes, just like any other law it can not bind successor governments who are free to change the law if they don't like it. No Parliament can bind its successors.
Only if there is no exit is it an impingement.
My proposal, that you haven't yet accepted, does exactly that. The UK could cancel the arrangment with notice and within the agreement, and it therefore doesn't bind successor governments.
Wow, the subject turns back to Brexit, and the debate careers onto 1066, France invading the UK, the Battle of Lincoln, William of Orange, Hitler, the battle of Britain and reminiscing of the time when Hugh Grant was PM.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Absolutely I would like frictionless trade so long as it doesn't impinge our democracy.
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
Then we will sign no trade deals, as all trade deals involve some degree of relinquishment of sovereignty.
Sounds brilliant.
Your idealism is on the same level as a 16 year old communist.
That's not true. Trade deals don't involve relinquishment of sovereignty. They involve an agreed set of arrangements to proceed and if a future government decides they don't like the arrangements then they can cancel the treaty. That's not an impingement any more than any other law a government passes, just like any other law it can not bind successor governments who are free to change the law if they don't like it. No Parliament can bind its successors.
Only if there is no exit is it an impingement.
This is incorrect on the facts. Future governments can't unilaterally cancel treaties unless treaties specifically allow for it - the WA doesn't. Those treaty obligations have legal effect under international law.
The WA isn't a trade deal.
Trade agreements almost invariably have exit clauses. If a trade agreement has an exit clause then it is not a restriction on sovereignty because the exit clause can be invoked.
Plus international law is subordinate to domestic law anyway. Parliament can override international law whenever it wants, which is precisely what people are complaining about here.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Absolutely I would like frictionless trade so long as it doesn't impinge our democracy.
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
Then we will sign no trade deals, as all trade deals involve some degree of relinquishment of sovereignty.
Sounds brilliant.
Your idealism is on the same level as a 16 year old communist.
That's not true. Trade deals don't involve relinquishment of sovereignty. They involve an agreed set of arrangements to proceed and if a future government decides they don't like the arrangements then they can cancel the treaty. That's not an impingement any more than any other law a government passes, just like any other law it can not bind successor governments who are free to change the law if they don't like it. No Parliament can bind its successors.
Only if there is no exit is it an impingement.
This is incorrect on the facts. Future governments can't unilaterally cancel treaties unless treaties specifically allow for it - the WA doesn't. Those treaty obligations have legal effect under international law.
The WA isn't a trade deal.
Trade agreements almost invariably have exit clauses. If a trade agreement has an exit clause then it is not a restriction on sovereignty because the exit clause can be invoked.
Plus international law is subordinate to domestic law anyway. Parliament can override international law whenever it wants, which is precisely what people are complaining about here.
We’re not complaining about Parliament being able to override international law. We’re laughing at your (and the Government’s) shameless hypocrisy of celebrating the “fantastic” “oven-ready” deal as a fantastic achievement, then 12 months later whinging and whining about how it’s not acceptable.
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Absolutely I would like frictionless trade so long as it doesn't impinge our democracy.
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
Then we will sign no trade deals, as all trade deals involve some degree of relinquishment of sovereignty.
Sounds brilliant.
Your idealism is on the same level as a 16 year old communist.
That's not true. Trade deals don't involve relinquishment of sovereignty. They involve an agreed set of arrangements to proceed and if a future government decides they don't like the arrangements then they can cancel the treaty. That's not an impingement any more than any other law a government passes, just like any other law it can not bind successor governments who are free to change the law if they don't like it. No Parliament can bind its successors.
Only if there is no exit is it an impingement.
By your logic, there was no relinquishment of sovereignty by virtue of our membership of the EU because we could leave whenever we wanted.
It is true. All international agreements involve relinquishment of sovereignty, no matter how temporary. The WA involved a relinquishment of some degree of sovereignty, something we AGREED to voluntarily. Nothing is permanent, but going back on our agreement 1 year later is not a good look.
Your dross about Parliament binding successors is irrelevant.
Yes of course the UK was always sovereign because we could leave whenever we wanted. That is my logic yes.
You say that like you've scored a goal or made a great point. But I agree with you and have never said otherwise, of course the UK was always sovereign.
No international agreements do not involve relinquishments of sovereignty, unless we were to agree something Parliament couldn't undo.
Here's a free policy for Labour/Starmer - 2/3/4 day per week season tickets for the same pro-rated price as the weekly ticket. In my focus group of friends it's extremely popular. It speaks to the new age of working, it allows people to choose how many days they want to work in office and it gives part time workers (who tend to be on lower incomes) a much needed discount vs day returns.
The only losers are the train companies but who really gives a fuck about them anyway?
Lots of similar stories at the time, and talking heads on the TV saying the same.
I don't want to get to January and have people say, "It was never going to be ready in the first half of the year." And then on, and on, and on.
The timing is waiting for the completion of Phase III trials.
Phase III trials couldn't proceed in the UK because the prevalence of the virus was too low (ironic eh?) so were moved abroad. Phase III trials are underway already in Brazil and other countries and we are awaiting those results.
Yes. I know. That's what they said in June. With the results expected September/October (if it worked).
The obvious reason for the timescale to slip is that the vaccine doesn't work that well, and so it will take longer for the statistical evidence of how well it does work to emerge from the noise.
This is disappointing news, rather than "what we always knew" or "good news, it will be ready in four months".
Only goes to prove how wrong they are, why is johnson dancing to their beat?
Do you really have to ask that question?
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
@Philip_Thompson Philip - Can I ask you - would you say you are nearer the Brexit Party than the Tory Party? Nearer Bernard Jenkins and the ERG than Johnson and Dom Cummings?
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
You can ask. My answers are no and no.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
OK thanks. You and I agree on many things I think as followers of JS Mill. But we don't agree on this.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
Absolutely I would like frictionless trade so long as it doesn't impinge our democracy.
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
Then we will sign no trade deals, as all trade deals involve some degree of relinquishment of sovereignty.
Sounds brilliant.
Your idealism is on the same level as a 16 year old communist.
That's not true. Trade deals don't involve relinquishment of sovereignty. They involve an agreed set of arrangements to proceed and if a future government decides they don't like the arrangements then they can cancel the treaty. That's not an impingement any more than any other law a government passes, just like any other law it can not bind successor governments who are free to change the law if they don't like it. No Parliament can bind its successors.
Only if there is no exit is it an impingement.
By your logic, there was no relinquishment of sovereignty by virtue of our membership of the EU because we could leave whenever we wanted.
It is true. All international agreements involve relinquishment of sovereignty, no matter how temporary. The WA involved a relinquishment of some degree of sovereignty, something we AGREED to voluntarily. Nothing is permanent, but going back on our agreement 1 year later is not a good look.
Your dross about Parliament binding successors is irrelevant.
Yes of course the UK was always sovereign because we could leave whenever we wanted. That is my logic yes.
You say that like you've scored a goal or made a great point. But I agree with you and have never said otherwise, of course the UK was always sovereign.
No international agreements do not involve relinquishments of sovereignty, unless we were to agree something Parliament couldn't undo.
It’s not possible for the UK Government to agree to something Parliament cannot undo under our legal system, so it’s pointless even discussing it.
If Britain was always (and is) sovereign then why are you whinging about the fantastic oven-ready WA “impinging on our sovereignty”?
The issue is not sovereignty. The issue is agreeing to something and decrying it as a fantastic deal for Britain, and then 12 months later deciding it’s actually sh*t.
Comments
This is Godwin's Law raised to the power of 10.
Different railway gauges (5ft 3 inches as opposed to 4ft 8.5 inches)
Different car registration system (different number of letters/digits)
Different political parties (save for a bit-part by the Tories!)
Different motorway numbering (NI has an M1 and M2!)
That said, the rest of HYUFD's claims about never having been invaded since 1066 is just wrong.
Incidentally an old joke with a new twist was on one of the Facebook pages I look at the other day.
Q. Why did the sun never set on the British Empire
A. Because God didn't trust the English (new twist) in the dark.
Seems appropriate ATM.
You don't have to agree with their methods to support their aims which is to get some real action on climate change before it is too late. It will become much more expensive before it becomes too late.
If you assume the average person gets 2 colds over 6 months, then it would need about 770k tests per day off my back of the envelope calc?
Hopefully colds are way down because of the covid measures but testing capacity will undoubtedly be under pressure again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hsiuEEcGTo
A few days ago Farage explicitly threatened to re-start the brexit party and destroy the tories pending a bad brexit.
He would have plenty of other issues to tap into apart from brexit. Immigration. Culture wars. Possibly COVID restrictions.
He would take ten points out of the tories overnight. Over the following six months a further ten.
That is what the tories fear. Labour? They know they can rely on the likes of Dawn Butler and Co to f8ck up when necessary.
Which is what XR want. Not for them of course.
https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/australia/index_en.htm
https://eeas.europa.eu/sites/eeas/files/20130125_mra_conformity_assessment.pdf
(And that's without even considering the fact that the EU accounts for a tiny proportion of Australia's trade).
On the other hand, a poll of Americans think Trump will beat Biden at the first debate 47 - 41.
That's closer to where we are, in my view.
And a pretty nasty political campaign at that.
Although, there was a chap called von Braun who did quite well for himself in the US sometime after the war. And some of his earlier work could be ethically questioned. Again, if memory serves.
I ask because you are a useful indicator of the challenges that Johnson faces as described by Contrarian and as demonstrated by your responses on Brexit.
*If* the toss up states *really are* Ohio, Florida and Georgia, it is looking really bad for Trump. He won GA by 5 percentage points and Ohio by 8 last time.
My opinions are my own, I don't fit into what other people say. So I can agree on one subject with one person while completely disagreeing with them on another. I am far, far, far closer to the Tories and specifically what I consider to be liberal Tories like Johnson, Gove and Cameron, than authoritarian Tories like May.
On Brexit I may be taking a hard-line stance but that stems from my hard-line views on the importance of democracy. I was OK with us being EU members, I could have voted to Remain, we did elect MEPs. So I don't side with the likes of Jenkins and the ERG. But if we are going to leave we should leave properly. If we are going to remain we should remain properly. You can't be half pregnant.
"An appreciable challenge" means quite a way off yet.
https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/artificial-chloroplasts-turn-co2-into-multicarbon-molecules-powered-only-by-light/4011694.article
...‘The encapsulation of chloroplast membranes in tiny droplets to drive carbon dioxide incorporation is a truly dramatic advance,’ comments Hagan Bayley who investigates synthetic biology at the University of Oxford, UK. ‘However, scale-up in a cost effective manner, for example for the synthesis of high-value pharmaceuticals, may require transplantation of entire in-vitro systems into workhorse cells, an appreciable challenge recognised by the authors.’..
A lot of money is going into finding efficient ways of splitting off hydrogen from water using electrolysis, too.
But in the near term, batteries are where it's at.
“TRUMP CAN’T WIN BIGLY BUT HE CAN SURE LOSE BIGLY”.
I know rcs1000 has been making this very point - though perhaps not quite as elegantly!
I’ve just bought BIDEN ECV votes at 285 for £10 a point with SPIN. (Voided if Biden doesn’t contest the election).
Now let’s go win it Joe!
Although Brexit will have a significant economic effect (and greater than Covid ultimately according to consensus expert opinion), the biggest damage isn't economic. Covid won't disguise that damage either.
To avoid any doubt and feel free to take this as a hostage to fortune but the one thing I can absolutely hand on heart promise I will not say is "it is the EU's fault".
To avoid any doubt I don't think it can be the EU's fault. The EU have to make their decisions, the UK has to make its own and the UK needs to be able to sink or swim on its own basis. We have no right to expect anything from the EU going forwards nor do I intend to say so.
I would like the EU to be more reasonable, but if they're not we need to live with it and make our own choices in whatever way suits us best. The whole point of Brexit is that we then control our destiny and if we control our own destiny it is absolutely pointless to blame others.
I do agree you can't be half pregnant (obviously) but I also believe we can eat some cake and have it too with regard to the EU by keeping our independence and also maintaining frictionless trade with our biggest customer with a deal such as I have described. Nothing to do with pregnancy at all.
if no agreement is reached, does the Withdrawal Agreement expire, or continue on for a defined or indefinite period?
The way I view it is that frictionless trade is nice to have, democracy is essential.
Trump 46.4
Clinton 42.7
Actual result
Trump 43.3
Clinton 48.2
Lots of similar stories at the time, and talking heads on the TV saying the same.
I don't want to get to January and have people say, "It was never going to be ready in the first half of the year." And then on, and on, and on.
Sounds brilliant.
Your idealism is on the same level as a 16 year old communist.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/09/05/watch_black_lives_matter_protesters_riot_in_rochester_tell_restaurant_patrons_to_give_us_our_shit.html
Biden really needs to come out with something a bit stronger than "all violence is wrong" when it comes to BLM. I'm sure it will be mentioned that he is ahead in the polls etc etc but, as @MaxPB pointed out, it is not a good look.
Until then the UK government needs to do whatever is in the best interests of the UK as the EU are not partners from 1 January.
https://twitter.com/JenniferMerode/status/1302909570017353728
Only if there is no exit is it an impingement.
Phase III trials couldn't proceed in the UK because the prevalence of the virus was too low (ironic eh?) so were moved abroad. Phase III trials are underway already in Brazil and other countries and we are awaiting those results.
It is true. All international agreements involve relinquishment of sovereignty, no matter how temporary. The WA involved a relinquishment of some degree of sovereignty, something we AGREED to voluntarily. Nothing is permanent, but going back on our agreement 1 year later is not a good look.
Your dross about Parliament binding successors is irrelevant.
Oh boo hoo, the EU won’t do what we want. 😭😭😭
Otherwise we’ll rip up our international agreement we celebrated as a fantastic deal for Britain. That’ll show ‘em.
You sound ridiculous. Have some self-awareness.
Trade agreements almost invariably have exit clauses. If a trade agreement has an exit clause then it is not a restriction on sovereignty because the exit clause can be invoked.
Plus international law is subordinate to domestic law anyway. Parliament can override international law whenever it wants, which is precisely what people are complaining about here.
You guys just look stupid.
https://twitter.com/BorisJohnson/status/1212679425629859840
You say that like you've scored a goal or made a great point. But I agree with you and have never said otherwise, of course the UK was always sovereign.
No international agreements do not involve relinquishments of sovereignty, unless we were to agree something Parliament couldn't undo.
The only losers are the train companies but who really gives a fuck about them anyway?
The obvious reason for the timescale to slip is that the vaccine doesn't work that well, and so it will take longer for the statistical evidence of how well it does work to emerge from the noise.
This is disappointing news, rather than "what we always knew" or "good news, it will be ready in four months".
If Britain was always (and is) sovereign then why are you whinging about the fantastic oven-ready WA “impinging on our sovereignty”?
The issue is not sovereignty. The issue is agreeing to something and decrying it as a fantastic deal for Britain, and then 12 months later deciding it’s actually sh*t.
I thought the PM was a moron previously. I continue to think this.
It's almost as if scrutinising the Withdrawal Agreement would've been a good idea.