Not scrapping the IMB, are they? Just deleting some clauses. Still aiming to grab powers in contravention of the devolution settlements.
I'm genuinely puzzled as to how you can support the proposition that powers that were held by the EU should not be returned directly to the UK. Particularly (though not exclusively) because the devolved Governments in question actively campaigned *not* to have those powers repatriated at all. Sturgeon calling it a 'power grab' (though I suppose she'd know one when she sees it) was astonishing brass neck.
Speaking of brass necks...
'Powers will return to Holyrood from EU post-Brexit, says Michael Gove'
You would think these unionists would get fed up banging their heads against the wall, they come out with some crap and contradict what they said previously, priceless.
Random thought - why is Johnson heading off to Brussels? You'd think, given that we hold all the cards, that von der Leyen would be hot-footing it over here to plead with Johnson.
The talks have alternated between Brussels and London for months. The last round of talks were held in London. The next round will be in Brussels.
And Varadkar came to Britain (just about) for the crunch talks last time round. Funny how the Commission President at the time wasn't
Reading through the thread it is so tiresome with the same polarised arguments and so many on both sides of the argument stuck in repeat
As far as I am concerned I hope for a deal but would expect in a no deal outcome some form of transition period would be agreed to allow both sides to adjust
No deal with transition would effectively just be an extension of the current transition? Unless both sides pinky-swear not to talk to each other during that time.
The government has said today that negotiation won't be continued after December 31, so that would leave a delayed no-deal, with no further negotiations but with further time to 'adjust', as one of the prime likely scenarios at the moment.
You need to explain and show WHY the committee was at an impasse.
You then need to explain and show WHAT has changed in the agreement to cause the impasse to be over.
With sources.
If you can't do that, then once again you're talking nothing but meaningless dross.
Yes I said that we were at an impasse. I'm not sure we were. We had a deal and then didn't like it so introduced the IMB which we now seem to have rescinded and hence we are back to the deal.
No we're not back to where we were, because where we were was with a Joint Committee not reaching an agreement - where we are now is with a Joint Committee that has an agreement.
The Joint Committee agreement is the change. It is a significant delta that means we are not in the same place we were before.
You're still failing to backup everything you're saying.
The key questions are:
1. Why could the Joint Committee not reach an agreement? 2. What has changed to now allow the Joint Committee to reach an agreement?
I'm not going to answer your shifted goalpost questions as to "why" until you accept the fact I was right that the Joint Committee "agreement in principle" is a meaningful change from where we were before.
There's no point me trying to explain why something has changed, if you don't even accept that it is changed.
You are trying to argue that the reason the Joint Committee now has an agreement is because of the IM Bill. That is your argument, yes?
The only way for you to evidence that is to show WHY there was no agreement previously and to show HOW the EU have now "moved" to enable us to be happy with the agreement.
You've given zero evidence of your ridiculous argument and therefore it will be treated with the contempt it deserves.
OMG OMG how will PT survive the night after such treatment - almost as bad as being called out by Kinabalu for not drooling at Kay Burley's feet cos she's a great journalist. These are truly the end of days for those on the right!
Let's stay grounded and accurate. People are being called out for being hypocrites about hypocrisy. As evidenced by defending or downplaying that of PM Chief Political Advisor Dominic Cummings and yet calling for the head of Sky News Reporter Kay Burley.
5 convicted so far with the verdict on Philip in the balance. We await his reply to my key question.
You seem to live in a parallel universe, I have to to see anyone at all that is "calling for the head of Sky News Reporter Kay Burley".
I called for Cummings to resign - I have not said the same about Burley
However, I really do think she has put her career in some jeopardy herself as she will not be able to interview in the same strident holier than thou attitude
You need to explain and show WHY the committee was at an impasse.
You then need to explain and show WHAT has changed in the agreement to cause the impasse to be over.
With sources.
If you can't do that, then once again you're talking nothing but meaningless dross.
Yes I said that we were at an impasse. I'm not sure we were. We had a deal and then didn't like it so introduced the IMB which we now seem to have rescinded and hence we are back to the deal.
No we're not back to where we were, because where we were was with a Joint Committee not reaching an agreement - where we are now is with a Joint Committee that has an agreement.
The Joint Committee agreement is the change. It is a significant delta that means we are not in the same place we were before.
You're still failing to backup everything you're saying.
The key questions are:
1. Why could the Joint Committee not reach an agreement? 2. What has changed to now allow the Joint Committee to reach an agreement?
Fun to tumble around with PT but I can help here, I think, in case you've had enough and want a quick summary. Here it is. There was an impasse because we were not happy with the deal. And given it takes two to tango that meant there was no deal. Deal off. We therefore brought in the IMB as backstop and leverage and lo it has worked - we have forced ourselves to become happy with the deal and so now there is (again) a deal, it's on again, and the IMB having done its work can be dropped. Trebles all round.
Reading through the thread it is so tiresome with the same polarised arguments and so many on both sides of the argument stuck in repeat
As far as I am concerned I hope for a deal but would expect in a no deal outcome some form of transition period would be agreed to allow both sides to adjust
To be fair I've heard you express that view quite a few times before.
I am only making a sensible observation
Your tiresome, polarised arguments are on repeat.
My sensible observations are worth hearing again and again.
Her spend a penny nonsense is as bad as testing my eye sight...
Burley, who apologised over the incident and claimed she had only broken the rules because she needed to “spend a penny”, went to the Century Club in Soho, London, on Saturday night in a group of 10 that included Sky colleagues Beth Rigby, Inzamam Rashid and Sam Washington.
The group sat at two tables, of six and four, before going on to a nearby restaurant, Folie. A smaller group of four then returned to Burley’s home to continue the celebrations.
-------
So she went to.dinner with people not from her household...not allowed....then had people back to her house...not allowed. There is also claims that her popping into another venue for a tinkle, was actually 2hrs with other people.
That isn't an inadvertent rule break, as some sort of rule like don't go more than 5 miles from your house and you ended up being 6 because went to get petrol.
Seriously, who cares? She works with these people all week right?
Oh, the Corona virus must LOVE you.....
All I am saying is that I find it impossible to get exercised by this stuff, I'm sure millions of people do similar. And as she works with most of the people involved she will meet them in the studio daily I would expect.
Clearly it's against the rules but I sniff a touch of faux outrage.
Personally, I don't care but the simple fact is she is vocal in having a go at others on national TV and doing a fairly good job of getting on her high horse about breaking restrictions. Now she is being hoist by her own petard.
The fact she gave such a sh1t excuse also suggests she is not the brightest star in the sky.
Good integrity test, this.
Anyone who said no big deal about Cummings and is now up in arms about Burley has failed.
I'm counting.
How about those who would like the same standards to apply to both? Especially given what a gigantic hypocrite she has proven to be about the whole affair, it's a bit rich for her to claim it's no big deal now.
5.
Calling someone a hypocrite is not being "up in arms".
It depends. If you get animated in the process you are up in arms about the hypocrisy.
As here with Mr Blue. He was cool as you like about Cummings' hypocrisy but is now all over Burley for hers. Hence why he becomes the 5th person on here to have lost their integrity over this.
What is your position on Burley btw? I can't recall seeing it.
He doesn't look up in arms to me, he's laughing at the double standards. If I laugh at a Jimmy Carr sketch it doesn't mean I'm up in arms.
As for my position: She's a hypocrite, I've never liked her as a journalist, but I couldn't care less what she has done. Nothing that has come out has changed my opinion on her at all and I'm not surprised she's a hypocrite.
If you laugh at Jimmy Carr you need your head looking
You need to explain and show WHY the committee was at an impasse.
You then need to explain and show WHAT has changed in the agreement to cause the impasse to be over.
With sources.
If you can't do that, then once again you're talking nothing but meaningless dross.
Yes I said that we were at an impasse. I'm not sure we were. We had a deal and then didn't like it so introduced the IMB which we now seem to have rescinded and hence we are back to the deal.
No we're not back to where we were, because where we were was with a Joint Committee not reaching an agreement - where we are now is with a Joint Committee that has an agreement.
The Joint Committee agreement is the change. It is a significant delta that means we are not in the same place we were before.
You're still failing to backup everything you're saying.
The key questions are:
1. Why could the Joint Committee not reach an agreement? 2. What has changed to now allow the Joint Committee to reach an agreement?
Fun to tumble around with PT but I can help here, I think, in case you've had enough and want a quick summary. Here it is. There was an impasse because we were not happy with the deal. And given it takes two to tango that meant there was no deal. Deal off. We therefore brought in the IMB as backstop and leverage and lo it has worked - we have forced ourselves to become happy with the deal and so now there is (again) a deal, it's on again, and the IMB having done its work can be dropped. Trebles all round.
No, you're missing the fact there was no agreement in principle from the Joint Committee before today, there is now. Oops, silly you.
Ignoring the fact that there was previously no agreement and today there is an agreement is as absurd as claiming if Boris gets a trade deal that it means no change since he always had the Withdrawal Agreement anyway.
The Agreement in Principle from the Joint Committee is new today - true or false?
Reading through the thread it is so tiresome with the same polarised arguments and so many on both sides of the argument stuck in repeat
As far as I am concerned I hope for a deal but would expect in a no deal outcome some form of transition period would be agreed to allow both sides to adjust
To be fair I've heard you express that view quite a few times before.
I am only making a sensible observation
Your tiresome, polarised arguments are on repeat.
My sensible observations are worth hearing again and again.
I do not want to stop you talking to yourself to be honest
The Moving Finger writes; and, having writ, Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line, Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.
Fucking hell, its in the media that Edinburgh is going to be moved down to tier 2. That is utterly ludicrous.
Are the numbers still high there
Edinburgh staying in Tier 3. Not sure that will play well there. Perception is that Auld Reekie is treated a lot more harshly than Glasgow.
He said it was going to Tier 2 PS : not sure who's perception , certainly not mine or anyone I know.
The pox figures in Edinburgh are not going down, so no tier drop for them. 'She said cases there have risen slightly in recent days, but added that “the imminence of the Christmas period has also had an impact on our thinking”.'
In any case some other areas have been lowered from 4 to 3, and 2 to 1, so it's all pretty dynamic.
The problem with these things is that they might have literally zero to do with Brexit: INEOS might simply have gotten the old plant for nothing (or less), they might need to be near an essential production input, or to be close to a big customer.
Do you know what they're making in the plant? Is it something on which there are tariffs?
Fucking hell, its in the media that Edinburgh is going to be moved down to tier 2. That is utterly ludicrous.
Are the numbers still high there
Edinburgh staying in Tier 3. Not sure that will play well there. Perception is that Auld Reekie is treated a lot more harshly than Glasgow.
He said it was going to Tier 2 PS : not sure who's perception , certainly not mine or anyone I know.
I think it's just the Edinburghers of Morningside and Barnton clutching their pearls at being put on the same tier as the Weegies. It's bad enough being at the ends of the same canal as it is.
You need to explain and show WHY the committee was at an impasse.
You then need to explain and show WHAT has changed in the agreement to cause the impasse to be over.
With sources.
If you can't do that, then once again you're talking nothing but meaningless dross.
Yes I said that we were at an impasse. I'm not sure we were. We had a deal and then didn't like it so introduced the IMB which we now seem to have rescinded and hence we are back to the deal.
No we're not back to where we were, because where we were was with a Joint Committee not reaching an agreement - where we are now is with a Joint Committee that has an agreement.
The Joint Committee agreement is the change. It is a significant delta that means we are not in the same place we were before.
You're still failing to backup everything you're saying.
The key questions are:
1. Why could the Joint Committee not reach an agreement? 2. What has changed to now allow the Joint Committee to reach an agreement?
I'm not going to answer your shifted goalpost questions as to "why" until you accept the fact I was right that the Joint Committee "agreement in principle" is a meaningful change from where we were before.
There's no point me trying to explain why something has changed, if you don't even accept that it is changed.
You are trying to argue that the reason the Joint Committee now has an agreement is because of the IM Bill. That is your argument, yes?
The only way for you to evidence that is to show WHY there was no agreement previously and to show HOW the EU have now "moved" to enable us to be happy with the agreement.
You've given zero evidence of your ridiculous argument and therefore it will be treated with the contempt it deserves.
OMG OMG how will PT survive the night after such treatment - almost as bad as being called out by Kinabalu for not drooling at Kay Burley's feet cos she's a great journalist. These are truly the end of days for those on the right!
Let's stay grounded and accurate. People are being called out for being hypocrites about hypocrisy. As evidenced by defending or downplaying that of PM Chief Political Advisor Dominic Cummings and yet calling for the head of Sky News Reporter Kay Burley.
5 convicted so far with the verdict on Philip in the balance. We await his reply to my key question.
You seem to live in a parallel universe, I have to to see anyone at all that is "calling for the head of Sky News Reporter Kay Burley".
I called for Cummings to resign - I have not said the same about Burley
However, I really do think she has put her career in some jeopardy herself as she will not be able to interview in the same strident holier than thou attitude
Her sorry arse should be out the door. How can SKY complain about anyone if they have that halfwit still onscreen.
The problem with these things is that they might have literally zero to do with Brexit: INEOS might simply have gotten the old plant for nothing (or less), they might need to be near an essential production input, or to be close to a big customer.
Do you know what they're making in the plant? Is it something on which there are tariffs?
4 x 4s, so yes. IC engine, apparently, not leccy (logically enough given Mr Ratcliffe's business interests).
I'm not keen on over ear headphones, I'm much happier with my powerbeats pro.
These aren't for listening to music with! These are a fashion accessory for hanging round your neck.
Oh, as the most fashion conscious PBer, I usually prefer practicality over form.
On a tangent, can you or other PBers recommend a decent sound bar/system for a TV, that's mostly going to be connected to a PS5 and occasionally Sky that transmits in Dolby Surround Sound?
Fucking hell, its in the media that Edinburgh is going to be moved down to tier 2. That is utterly ludicrous.
Are the numbers still high there
Edinburgh staying in Tier 3. Not sure that will play well there. Perception is that Auld Reekie is treated a lot more harshly than Glasgow.
He said it was going to Tier 2 PS : not sure who's perception , certainly not mine or anyone I know.
The pox figures in Edinburgh are not going down, so no tier drop for them. 'She said cases there have risen slightly in recent days, but added that “the imminence of the Christmas period has also had an impact on our thinking”.'
In any case some other areas have been lowered from 4 to 3, and 2 to 1, so it's all pretty dynamic.
The problem with these things is that they might have literally zero to do with Brexit: INEOS might simply have gotten the old plant for nothing (or less), they might need to be near an essential production input, or to be close to a big customer.
Do you know what they're making in the plant? Is it something on which there are tariffs?
4 x 4s, so yes. IC engine, apparently, not leccy (logically enough given Mr Ratcliffe's business interests).
You need to explain and show WHY the committee was at an impasse.
You then need to explain and show WHAT has changed in the agreement to cause the impasse to be over.
With sources.
If you can't do that, then once again you're talking nothing but meaningless dross.
Yes I said that we were at an impasse. I'm not sure we were. We had a deal and then didn't like it so introduced the IMB which we now seem to have rescinded and hence we are back to the deal.
No we're not back to where we were, because where we were was with a Joint Committee not reaching an agreement - where we are now is with a Joint Committee that has an agreement.
The Joint Committee agreement is the change. It is a significant delta that means we are not in the same place we were before.
You're still failing to backup everything you're saying.
The key questions are:
1. Why could the Joint Committee not reach an agreement? 2. What has changed to now allow the Joint Committee to reach an agreement?
I'm not going to answer your shifted goalpost questions as to "why" until you accept the fact I was right that the Joint Committee "agreement in principle" is a meaningful change from where we were before.
There's no point me trying to explain why something has changed, if you don't even accept that it is changed.
You are trying to argue that the reason the Joint Committee now has an agreement is because of the IM Bill. That is your argument, yes?
The only way for you to evidence that is to show WHY there was no agreement previously and to show HOW the EU have now "moved" to enable us to be happy with the agreement.
You've given zero evidence of your ridiculous argument and therefore it will be treated with the contempt it deserves.
OMG OMG how will PT survive the night after such treatment - almost as bad as being called out by Kinabalu for not drooling at Kay Burley's feet cos she's a great journalist. These are truly the end of days for those on the right!
Let's stay grounded and accurate. People are being called out for being hypocrites about hypocrisy. As evidenced by defending or downplaying that of PM Chief Political Advisor Dominic Cummings and yet calling for the head of Sky News Reporter Kay Burley.
5 convicted so far with the verdict on Philip in the balance. We await his reply to my key question.
ROFLMFAO -I much prefer Judge Judy to Judge Kinba - you need to get a life m8 - pronto!
The problem with these things is that they might have literally zero to do with Brexit: INEOS might simply have gotten the old plant for nothing (or less), they might need to be near an essential production input, or to be close to a big customer.
Do you know what they're making in the plant? Is it something on which there are tariffs?
Dunno about tariffs but it's the Ineos Grenadier, a somewhat stylistically derivative 4 x 4.
Fucking hell, its in the media that Edinburgh is going to be moved down to tier 2. That is utterly ludicrous.
Are the numbers still high there
Edinburgh staying in Tier 3. Not sure that will play well there. Perception is that Auld Reekie is treated a lot more harshly than Glasgow.
He said it was going to Tier 2 PS : not sure who's perception , certainly not mine or anyone I know.
The pox figures in Edinburgh are not going down, so no tier drop for them. 'She said cases there have risen slightly in recent days, but added that “the imminence of the Christmas period has also had an impact on our thinking”.'
In any case some other areas have been lowered from 4 to 3, and 2 to 1, so it's all pretty dynamic.
How did North Ayrshire fare
Just looking at Graun feed, - "All 11 local authorities which have been in virtual lockdown for the last three weeks at level 4, the top level, will move to level 3". But you weren't in Tier 4 were you? NO mention of NA, so presumably the same as before? But better check when there has been a bit of time for updating of websites.
Fucking hell, its in the media that Edinburgh is going to be moved down to tier 2. That is utterly ludicrous.
Are the numbers still high there
Edinburgh staying in Tier 3. Not sure that will play well there. Perception is that Auld Reekie is treated a lot more harshly than Glasgow.
He said it was going to Tier 2 PS : not sure who's perception , certainly not mine or anyone I know.
The pox figures in Edinburgh are not going down, so no tier drop for them. 'She said cases there have risen slightly in recent days, but added that “the imminence of the Christmas period has also had an impact on our thinking”.'
In any case some other areas have been lowered from 4 to 3, and 2 to 1, so it's all pretty dynamic.
How did North Ayrshire fare
Just looking at Graun feed, - "All 11 local authorities which have been in virtual lockdown for the last three weeks at level 4, the top level, will move to level 3". But you weren't in Tier 4 were you? NO mention of NA, so presumably the same as before? But better check when there has been a bit of time for updating of websites.
Chris Musson @ChrisMusson · 57m No wonder Edinburgh folk annoyed re not going down to Level 2. Edinburgh.. * has same Scot Gov indicator scores as three areas that will be in Level 2 from Friday * is scoring BETTER than three of the Level 2 areas from Friday * is doing almost as well as two areas going into L1
Random thought - why is Johnson heading off to Brussels? You'd think, given that we hold all the cards, that von der Leyen would be hot-footing it over here to plead with Johnson.
The talks have alternated between Brussels and London for months. The last round of talks were held in London. The next round will be in Brussels.
Dammit Philip, will you not just let me make a cheap point for once without making me look like an idiot by providing context and rebuttal?
Random thought - why is Johnson heading off to Brussels? You'd think, given that we hold all the cards, that von der Leyen would be hot-footing it over here to plead with Johnson.
The talks have alternated between Brussels and London for months. The last round of talks were held in London. The next round will be in Brussels.
Dammit Philip, will you not just let me make a cheap point for once without making me look like an idiot by providing context and rebuttal?
Oh, as the most fashion conscious PBer, I usually prefer practicality over form
Didn't you shop at Debenhams?
Only for the Levi jeans.
When thy had the sale on them they were like nearly 50% cheaper than the Levi store.
But Levi jeans are not cool. Shaking my head.
I know, normally I wear Hugo Boss jeans, however for day to day, and when you have kids, particularly ones who think you're a human climbing frame, Levis are great.
Fucking hell, its in the media that Edinburgh is going to be moved down to tier 2. That is utterly ludicrous.
Are the numbers still high there
Edinburgh staying in Tier 3. Not sure that will play well there. Perception is that Auld Reekie is treated a lot more harshly than Glasgow.
He said it was going to Tier 2 PS : not sure who's perception , certainly not mine or anyone I know.
The pox figures in Edinburgh are not going down, so no tier drop for them. 'She said cases there have risen slightly in recent days, but added that “the imminence of the Christmas period has also had an impact on our thinking”.'
In any case some other areas have been lowered from 4 to 3, and 2 to 1, so it's all pretty dynamic.
How did North Ayrshire fare
Just looking at Graun feed, - "All 11 local authorities which have been in virtual lockdown for the last three weeks at level 4, the top level, will move to level 3". But you weren't in Tier 4 were you? NO mention of NA, so presumably the same as before? But better check when there has been a bit of time for updating of websites.
Chris Musson @ChrisMusson · 57m No wonder Edinburgh folk annoyed re not going down to Level 2. Edinburgh.. * has same Scot Gov indicator scores as three areas that will be in Level 2 from Friday * is scoring BETTER than three of the Level 2 areas from Friday * is doing almost as well as two areas going into L1
That tweet doesn't take rates of change into account.
Its an entirely reasonable suggestion when trying to find a compromise.
The fact the EU is an unreasonable and sclerotic behemoth of a Byzantine organisation is not a selling point, it is a reason we're right to leave.
More Charlemagnean and Roman than Byzantine, and the early Papacy always was terribly hypocritical about its own labyrinthine and corrupt bureaucracy compared to Byzantium.
Her spend a penny nonsense is as bad as testing my eye sight...
Burley, who apologised over the incident and claimed she had only broken the rules because she needed to “spend a penny”, went to the Century Club in Soho, London, on Saturday night in a group of 10 that included Sky colleagues Beth Rigby, Inzamam Rashid and Sam Washington.
The group sat at two tables, of six and four, before going on to a nearby restaurant, Folie. A smaller group of four then returned to Burley’s home to continue the celebrations.
-------
So she went to.dinner with people not from her household...not allowed....then had people back to her house...not allowed. There is also claims that her popping into another venue for a tinkle, was actually 2hrs with other people.
That isn't an inadvertent rule break, as some sort of rule like don't go more than 5 miles from your house and you ended up being 6 because went to get petrol.
Seriously, who cares? She works with these people all week right?
Oh, the Corona virus must LOVE you.....
All I am saying is that I find it impossible to get exercised by this stuff, I'm sure millions of people do similar. And as she works with most of the people involved she will meet them in the studio daily I would expect.
Clearly it's against the rules but I sniff a touch of faux outrage.
Personally, I don't care but the simple fact is she is vocal in having a go at others on national TV and doing a fairly good job of getting on her high horse about breaking restrictions. Now she is being hoist by her own petard.
The fact she gave such a sh1t excuse also suggests she is not the brightest star in the sky.
Good integrity test, this.
Anyone who said no big deal about Cummings and is now up in arms about Burley has failed.
I'm counting.
How about those who would like the same standards to apply to both? Especially given what a gigantic hypocrite she has proven to be about the whole affair, it's a bit rich for her to claim it's no big deal now.
5.
Calling someone a hypocrite is not being "up in arms".
It depends. If you get animated in the process you are up in arms about the hypocrisy.
As here with Mr Blue. He was cool as you like about Cummings' hypocrisy but is now all over Burley for hers. Hence why he becomes the 5th person on here to have lost their integrity over this.
What is your position on Burley btw? I can't recall seeing it.
He doesn't look up in arms to me, he's laughing at the double standards. If I laugh at a Jimmy Carr sketch it doesn't mean I'm up in arms.
As for my position: She's a hypocrite, I've never liked her as a journalist, but I couldn't care less what she has done. Nothing that has come out has changed my opinion on her at all and I'm not surprised she's a hypocrite.
People metaphorically up in arms about hypocrisy - as you two clearly are here with Burley - rarely use the actual words "metaphorically up in arms" because it's not cool to look like you're too bothered. So what they tend to say is they are merely "laughing at the double standards". Bit silly, but it's fine because it's obvious to the likes of me what is meant.
So, Burley = hypocrite. And Cummings = hypocrite too (in spades) with his Lockdown breaches and therefore for you to avoid loss of integrity you need to have said so at the time. Did you?
She's not a hypocrite for breaching the rules. Breaking rules doesn't make you a hypocrite it makes you a rule breaker.
She's a hypocrite for breaking the rules after showing zero tolerance to those like Cummings who broke them before her. As far as I'm aware Cummings never spent week ranting about others breaking the rules and calling for them to be fired from their jobs before he was outed for doing what he did.
My opinion has always been that everyone breaks rules from time to time and people should use their own judgement and do their best. That I don't especially care if a rule is broken from time to time. To me that applies equally to Burley and Cummings. I think firing someone for something as meaningless as this would be a gross overreaction - the same as I would say for Cummings or Patel etc.
So I'm being consistent. Thank you.
This is far from satisfactory. We already agree on Burley's hypocrisy so all of that bit was gratuitous. But thank you anyway. Now to the heart of the matter -
In order to be acquitted of the charge (and consequent loss of integrity) you need to either (i) say here and now to me and the rest of the Board that Dominic Cummings was also iyo a hypocrite or (ii) make the challenging case that it is NOT an act of rank hypocrisy for a person to break the high profile rules that they themselves have been instrumental in very recently creating.
Fucking hell, its in the media that Edinburgh is going to be moved down to tier 2. That is utterly ludicrous.
Are the numbers still high there
Edinburgh staying in Tier 3. Not sure that will play well there. Perception is that Auld Reekie is treated a lot more harshly than Glasgow.
He said it was going to Tier 2 PS : not sure who's perception , certainly not mine or anyone I know.
The pox figures in Edinburgh are not going down, so no tier drop for them. 'She said cases there have risen slightly in recent days, but added that “the imminence of the Christmas period has also had an impact on our thinking”.'
In any case some other areas have been lowered from 4 to 3, and 2 to 1, so it's all pretty dynamic.
How did North Ayrshire fare
Just looking at Graun feed, - "All 11 local authorities which have been in virtual lockdown for the last three weeks at level 4, the top level, will move to level 3". But you weren't in Tier 4 were you? NO mention of NA, so presumably the same as before? But better check when there has been a bit of time for updating of websites.
Chris Musson @ChrisMusson · 57m No wonder Edinburgh folk annoyed re not going down to Level 2. Edinburgh.. * has same Scot Gov indicator scores as three areas that will be in Level 2 from Friday * is scoring BETTER than three of the Level 2 areas from Friday * is doing almost as well as two areas going into L1
That tweet doesn't take rates of change into account.
Yeah. I happen to think Sturgeon is probably right but, as we know. it's perception that counts with Covid in Scotland.
I can't help thinking that at least some in the ERG and the DUP are not going to be very pleased about today's WA news. We now - and definitively - have an internal UK customs border in the Irish Sea and a part of the UK subject to the continued jurisdiction of the CJEU. Of course, for non-loons and yoons it is very good news as it means the UK has avoided becoming a pariah state. But such a development seemed to be what many on the more extreme fringes of Brexitania were after. I wonder how they will react.
Her spend a penny nonsense is as bad as testing my eye sight...
Burley, who apologised over the incident and claimed she had only broken the rules because she needed to “spend a penny”, went to the Century Club in Soho, London, on Saturday night in a group of 10 that included Sky colleagues Beth Rigby, Inzamam Rashid and Sam Washington.
The group sat at two tables, of six and four, before going on to a nearby restaurant, Folie. A smaller group of four then returned to Burley’s home to continue the celebrations.
-------
So she went to.dinner with people not from her household...not allowed....then had people back to her house...not allowed. There is also claims that her popping into another venue for a tinkle, was actually 2hrs with other people.
That isn't an inadvertent rule break, as some sort of rule like don't go more than 5 miles from your house and you ended up being 6 because went to get petrol.
Seriously, who cares? She works with these people all week right?
Oh, the Corona virus must LOVE you.....
All I am saying is that I find it impossible to get exercised by this stuff, I'm sure millions of people do similar. And as she works with most of the people involved she will meet them in the studio daily I would expect.
Clearly it's against the rules but I sniff a touch of faux outrage.
Personally, I don't care but the simple fact is she is vocal in having a go at others on national TV and doing a fairly good job of getting on her high horse about breaking restrictions. Now she is being hoist by her own petard.
The fact she gave such a sh1t excuse also suggests she is not the brightest star in the sky.
Good integrity test, this.
Anyone who said no big deal about Cummings and is now up in arms about Burley has failed.
I'm counting.
How about those who would like the same standards to apply to both? Especially given what a gigantic hypocrite she has proven to be about the whole affair, it's a bit rich for her to claim it's no big deal now.
5.
Calling someone a hypocrite is not being "up in arms".
It depends. If you get animated in the process you are up in arms about the hypocrisy.
As here with Mr Blue. He was cool as you like about Cummings' hypocrisy but is now all over Burley for hers. Hence why he becomes the 5th person on here to have lost their integrity over this.
What is your position on Burley btw? I can't recall seeing it.
He doesn't look up in arms to me, he's laughing at the double standards. If I laugh at a Jimmy Carr sketch it doesn't mean I'm up in arms.
As for my position: She's a hypocrite, I've never liked her as a journalist, but I couldn't care less what she has done. Nothing that has come out has changed my opinion on her at all and I'm not surprised she's a hypocrite.
People metaphorically up in arms about hypocrisy - as you two clearly are here with Burley - rarely use the actual words "metaphorically up in arms" because it's not cool to look like you're too bothered. So what they tend to say is they are merely "laughing at the double standards". Bit silly, but it's fine because it's obvious to the likes of me what is meant.
So, Burley = hypocrite. And Cummings = hypocrite too (in spades) with his Lockdown breaches and therefore for you to avoid loss of integrity you need to have said so at the time. Did you?
She's not a hypocrite for breaching the rules. Breaking rules doesn't make you a hypocrite it makes you a rule breaker.
She's a hypocrite for breaking the rules after showing zero tolerance to those like Cummings who broke them before her. As far as I'm aware Cummings never spent week ranting about others breaking the rules and calling for them to be fired from their jobs before he was outed for doing what he did.
My opinion has always been that everyone breaks rules from time to time and people should use their own judgement and do their best. That I don't especially care if a rule is broken from time to time. To me that applies equally to Burley and Cummings. I think firing someone for something as meaningless as this would be a gross overreaction - the same as I would say for Cummings or Patel etc.
So I'm being consistent. Thank you.
This is far from satisfactory. We already agree on Burley's hypocrisy so all of that bit was gratuitous. But thank you anyway. Now to the heart of the matter -
In order to be acquitted of the charge (and consequent loss of integrity) you need to either (i) say here and now to me and the rest of the Board that Dominic Cummings was also iyo a hypocrite or (ii) make the challenging case that it is NOT an act of rank hypocrisy for a person to break the high profile rules that they themselves have been instrumental in very recently creating.
You remain in the dock, pending.
(ii) is what I said at the time though wasn't it, so why do you want me to repeat it?
I said at the time it was understandable to break the guidelines if you think you have a reason to need to do so and that was the same for everyone. I say the same today. Nothing has changed.
My best guess for a compromise is a can-kick/fudge - i.e. we agree regression governance on LPF clauses for 10 years only subject to review of scope/applicability of the whole FTA at that stage and bilateral UK-EU arbitration for piss-taking in the meantime. So it gives some medium-term stability and surety to the EU of a LPF but also isn't "permanent" either.
The EU has to move on fish though. We aren't accepting 18% only over 10 years. They know that.
You need to explain and show WHY the committee was at an impasse.
You then need to explain and show WHAT has changed in the agreement to cause the impasse to be over.
With sources.
If you can't do that, then once again you're talking nothing but meaningless dross.
Yes I said that we were at an impasse. I'm not sure we were. We had a deal and then didn't like it so introduced the IMB which we now seem to have rescinded and hence we are back to the deal.
No we're not back to where we were, because where we were was with a Joint Committee not reaching an agreement - where we are now is with a Joint Committee that has an agreement.
The Joint Committee agreement is the change. It is a significant delta that means we are not in the same place we were before.
You're still failing to backup everything you're saying.
The key questions are:
1. Why could the Joint Committee not reach an agreement? 2. What has changed to now allow the Joint Committee to reach an agreement?
I'm not going to answer your shifted goalpost questions as to "why" until you accept the fact I was right that the Joint Committee "agreement in principle" is a meaningful change from where we were before.
There's no point me trying to explain why something has changed, if you don't even accept that it is changed.
You are trying to argue that the reason the Joint Committee now has an agreement is because of the IM Bill. That is your argument, yes?
The only way for you to evidence that is to show WHY there was no agreement previously and to show HOW the EU have now "moved" to enable us to be happy with the agreement.
You've given zero evidence of your ridiculous argument and therefore it will be treated with the contempt it deserves.
OMG OMG how will PT survive the night after such treatment - almost as bad as being called out by Kinabalu for not drooling at Kay Burley's feet cos she's a great journalist. These are truly the end of days for those on the right!
Let's stay grounded and accurate. People are being called out for being hypocrites about hypocrisy. As evidenced by defending or downplaying that of PM Chief Political Advisor Dominic Cummings and yet calling for the head of Sky News Reporter Kay Burley.
5 convicted so far with the verdict on Philip in the balance. We await his reply to my key question.
You seem to live in a parallel universe, I have to to see anyone at all that is "calling for the head of Sky News Reporter Kay Burley".
You're being a bit too literal! Nobody has called for her head to be severed from her body - at least not on PB - but there have been calls for her to be sacked. Which is obviously what I meant. No such calls from you, I hasten to stress. You don't have that problem. Indeed all you need to do to wriggle completely free of the charge and leave the dock with your integrity intact is to say that iyo DC was a hypocrite for breaking the rules that he himself was a key player in drafting. That's all. It's very easy and my money's on you doing it.
I can't help thinking that at least some in the ERG and the DUP are not going to be very pleased about today's WA news. We now - and definitively - have an internal UK customs border in the Irish Sea and a part of the UK subject to the continued jurisdiction of the CJEU. Of course, for non-loons and yoons it is very good news as it means the UK has avoided becoming a pariah state. But such a development seemed to be what many on the more extreme fringes of Brexitania were after. I wonder how they will react.
Let's wait and read the text and its operation before jumping to conclusions.
An understanding has been reached on this in the text (which we are yet to see) so it just applies to NI and not the rest of UK on state aid - as quoted by Peter Foster in the referenced tweet.
Its an entirely reasonable suggestion when trying to find a compromise.
The fact the EU is an unreasonable and sclerotic behemoth of a Byzantine organisation is not a selling point, it is a reason we're right to leave.
If you have spent multiple years negotiating with a client you usually understand after a while what their decision making process is.
Boris has been PM for over a year and still hasn't a clue how the EU works...
Who says he hasn't?
He didn't tell them to join the call, he made a request. During negotiations people make requests, he was entitled to make that one even if he foresaw the unreasonable answer.
Why bother? They speak proper English in Ireland so why bother with a different website and distribution? (I assume Amazon have a local company structure, but that's not the same thing as a front of house).
Fucking hell, its in the media that Edinburgh is going to be moved down to tier 2. That is utterly ludicrous.
Are the numbers still high there
Edinburgh staying in Tier 3. Not sure that will play well there. Perception is that Auld Reekie is treated a lot more harshly than Glasgow.
He said it was going to Tier 2 PS : not sure who's perception , certainly not mine or anyone I know.
The pox figures in Edinburgh are not going down, so no tier drop for them. 'She said cases there have risen slightly in recent days, but added that “the imminence of the Christmas period has also had an impact on our thinking”.'
In any case some other areas have been lowered from 4 to 3, and 2 to 1, so it's all pretty dynamic.
How did North Ayrshire fare
Just looking at Graun feed, - "All 11 local authorities which have been in virtual lockdown for the last three weeks at level 4, the top level, will move to level 3". But you weren't in Tier 4 were you? NO mention of NA, so presumably the same as before? But better check when there has been a bit of time for updating of websites.
Chris Musson @ChrisMusson · 57m No wonder Edinburgh folk annoyed re not going down to Level 2. Edinburgh.. * has same Scot Gov indicator scores as three areas that will be in Level 2 from Friday * is scoring BETTER than three of the Level 2 areas from Friday * is doing almost as well as two areas going into L1
One factor that's missing from those assessments is that reopening hospitality likely has a greater impact in a big(ish) city where everyone heads into the city centre, compared to more rural areas where towns and villages keep to themselves a bit more. Plus it attracts people from outside the city to spread the virus around further.
Fucking hell, its in the media that Edinburgh is going to be moved down to tier 2. That is utterly ludicrous.
Are the numbers still high there
Edinburgh staying in Tier 3. Not sure that will play well there. Perception is that Auld Reekie is treated a lot more harshly than Glasgow.
He said it was going to Tier 2 PS : not sure who's perception , certainly not mine or anyone I know.
The pox figures in Edinburgh are not going down, so no tier drop for them. 'She said cases there have risen slightly in recent days, but added that “the imminence of the Christmas period has also had an impact on our thinking”.'
In any case some other areas have been lowered from 4 to 3, and 2 to 1, so it's all pretty dynamic.
How did North Ayrshire fare
Just looking at Graun feed, - "All 11 local authorities which have been in virtual lockdown for the last three weeks at level 4, the top level, will move to level 3". But you weren't in Tier 4 were you? NO mention of NA, so presumably the same as before? But better check when there has been a bit of time for updating of websites.
Chris Musson @ChrisMusson · 57m No wonder Edinburgh folk annoyed re not going down to Level 2. Edinburgh.. * has same Scot Gov indicator scores as three areas that will be in Level 2 from Friday * is scoring BETTER than three of the Level 2 areas from Friday * is doing almost as well as two areas going into L1
One factor that's missing from those assessments is that reopening hospitality likely has a greater impact in a big(ish) city where everyone heads into the city centre, compared to more rural areas where towns and villages keep to themselves a bit more. Plus it attracts people from outside the city to spread the virus around further.
And the big peripheral shopping centres too.
And Christmas coming (exactly the point Ms Sturgeon was quoted in the Graun as saying, though they didn't give the details).
Did you ever come to a reason why the postivity rate is cyclic over the week? Makes no sense to me at all.
Looks like the peaks are on the weekend? Might be because people with light symptoms are less likely to arrange a test then, so more of the tests are on people with more serious symptoms who are more likely to have the virus.
Mr. kinabalu, the problem, I would assert, is that powers temporarily given to national governments by electorates are then granted in perpetuity with no or very difficult means of return to the EU.
A general two-speed approach would've been better, but the nature of the beast is consumption, of growth, of deepening integration. That's partly due to zealous ideologues and partly (perhaps mostly) due to the mechanical necessities of a confederation with so many members and a seemingly insatiable appetite for more.
I agree that the regaining of significant powers without leaving was more a theoretical than a practical proposition. But ditto the fully integrated European superstate. This too is more a theoretical than a practical proposition. What you're doing is choosing to see the theory over the practice with the one and the opposite with the other.
Oh, as the most fashion conscious PBer, I usually prefer practicality over form
Didn't you shop at Debenhams?
Only for the Levi jeans.
When thy had the sale on them they were like nearly 50% cheaper than the Levi store.
But Levi jeans are not cool. Shaking my head.
I know, normally I wear Hugo Boss jeans, however for day to day, and when you have kids, particularly ones who think you're a human climbing frame, Levis are great.
Like @TheScreamingEagles I would got to Debenhams to buy Levis when they had a sale, as way cheaper than elsewhere. In fact probably the only time I have been in there in last twenty years.
You need to explain and show WHY the committee was at an impasse.
You then need to explain and show WHAT has changed in the agreement to cause the impasse to be over.
With sources.
If you can't do that, then once again you're talking nothing but meaningless dross.
Yes I said that we were at an impasse. I'm not sure we were. We had a deal and then didn't like it so introduced the IMB which we now seem to have rescinded and hence we are back to the deal.
No we're not back to where we were, because where we were was with a Joint Committee not reaching an agreement - where we are now is with a Joint Committee that has an agreement.
The Joint Committee agreement is the change. It is a significant delta that means we are not in the same place we were before.
You're still failing to backup everything you're saying.
The key questions are:
1. Why could the Joint Committee not reach an agreement? 2. What has changed to now allow the Joint Committee to reach an agreement?
I'm not going to answer your shifted goalpost questions as to "why" until you accept the fact I was right that the Joint Committee "agreement in principle" is a meaningful change from where we were before.
There's no point me trying to explain why something has changed, if you don't even accept that it is changed.
You are trying to argue that the reason the Joint Committee now has an agreement is because of the IM Bill. That is your argument, yes?
The only way for you to evidence that is to show WHY there was no agreement previously and to show HOW the EU have now "moved" to enable us to be happy with the agreement.
You've given zero evidence of your ridiculous argument and therefore it will be treated with the contempt it deserves.
OMG OMG how will PT survive the night after such treatment - almost as bad as being called out by Kinabalu for not drooling at Kay Burley's feet cos she's a great journalist. These are truly the end of days for those on the right!
Let's stay grounded and accurate. People are being called out for being hypocrites about hypocrisy. As evidenced by defending or downplaying that of PM Chief Political Advisor Dominic Cummings and yet calling for the head of Sky News Reporter Kay Burley.
5 convicted so far with the verdict on Philip in the balance. We await his reply to my key question.
You seem to live in a parallel universe, I have to to see anyone at all that is "calling for the head of Sky News Reporter Kay Burley".
You're being a bit too literal! Nobody has called for her head to be severed from her body - at least not on PB - but there have been calls for her to be sacked. Which is obviously what I meant. No such calls from you, I hasten to stress. You don't have that problem. Indeed all you need to do to wriggle completely free of the charge and leave the dock with your integrity intact is to say that iyo DC was a hypocrite for breaking the rules that he himself was a key player in drafting. That's all. It's very easy and my money's on you doing it.
Since I don't view breaking rules as hypocrisy I'll pass thanks. Everyone breaks rules, not the end of the world.
I'm atheist but was brought up going to an Anglican school. Every single week we had to go to Chapel and every single week the Chaplain would say "forgive us father for we have sinned", or we would say the Lord's Prayer "forgives us our tresspasses as we forgive those who trespass against us".
I don't believe in the heavenly father or most of Christianities teachings but I do agree that we all break the rules. Every single one of us. No exceptions. To err is human and I don't want, demand or expect infallibility from anyone. So no breaking the rules isn't shocking, we all are rule breakers. Get over it already.
More than a month since Wales' 17-day firebreak lockdown ended, there are more Covid-19 patients in hospitals than during the peak of the first wave in April.
Their firebreak has been a dismal failure, as forecast by many of us here. Probably worse even than forecast.
But they're still going ahead with Christmas loosening. It is insanity!
Yes, that is even more bonkers. They finally in a round about way admitting there is a big problemo, but have boxed themselves in to not taking any action until after Christmas.
No following the science, its all politics. They should be locking down Wales now and cancelling Christmas (so should England for that matter, as not squished down enough).
We have cancelled Christmas and did it some time ago
Likewise. We'll be on our own for the first time, not even bothering with decorations. Never felt more pessimistic about the future of the UK. Hope the Brexiteers enjoy their victory.
We will, thanks.
Let's see how the Red-wall leavers feel in a couple of months time, not that I care, it's what they voted for so no use bleating afterwards. As far as I can see there is precious little joy being expressed amongst the Brexiteers. The best the most optimistic can come up this is that it might not be that bad. Shame the consequences can't be targeted at those that vote for it.
Why are people obsessed with what the DUP think? The government has a majority. The DUP got 244k votes at the last general election approximately 30% of the total in Northern Ireland and less than 1% across the UK. And yet some seem to think they ought to have a veto over any deal. I accept there ought to be broad based support in NI for a border in the Irish Sea but the DUP aren't remotely close to being 'the voice' of Northern Ireland.
Did you ever come to a reason why the postivity rate is cyclic over the week? Makes no sense to me at all.
Looks like the peaks are on the weekend? Might be because people with light symptoms are less likely to arrange a test then, so more of the tests are on people with more serious symptoms who are more likely to have the virus.
It's the scale of the spike that makes me wonder - a massive jump each Monday.
Why bother? They speak proper English in Ireland so why bother with a different website and distribution? (I assume Amazon have a local company structure, but that's not the same thing as a front of house).
I would guess that if there was an amazon.ie (which does indeed redirect to amazon.co.uk), they'd also have to support Gaelic.
There is a currency problem though. No doubt Amazon contrive to make money if you pay in Euros.
Amazon is increasingly a Chinese tat bazaar anyway. I'm not sure double tariffs are allowed?
Did you ever come to a reason why the postivity rate is cyclic over the week? Makes no sense to me at all.
Looks like the peaks are on the weekend? Might be because people with light symptoms are less likely to arrange a test then, so more of the tests are on people with more serious symptoms who are more likely to have the virus.
It's the scale of the spike that makes me wonder - a massive jump each Monday.
You're feeling a bit rubbish over the weekend, but hoped it would just go away. Now it's Monday morning, you're still feeling rubbish and you decide to phone in sick, at which point you better also arrange for a test. Your employer might even remind you.
You need to explain and show WHY the committee was at an impasse.
You then need to explain and show WHAT has changed in the agreement to cause the impasse to be over.
With sources.
If you can't do that, then once again you're talking nothing but meaningless dross.
Yes I said that we were at an impasse. I'm not sure we were. We had a deal and then didn't like it so introduced the IMB which we now seem to have rescinded and hence we are back to the deal.
No we're not back to where we were, because where we were was with a Joint Committee not reaching an agreement - where we are now is with a Joint Committee that has an agreement.
The Joint Committee agreement is the change. It is a significant delta that means we are not in the same place we were before.
You're still failing to backup everything you're saying.
The key questions are:
1. Why could the Joint Committee not reach an agreement? 2. What has changed to now allow the Joint Committee to reach an agreement?
Fun to tumble around with PT but I can help here, I think, in case you've had enough and want a quick summary. Here it is. There was an impasse because we were not happy with the deal. And given it takes two to tango that meant there was no deal. Deal off. We therefore brought in the IMB as backstop and leverage and lo it has worked - we have forced ourselves to become happy with the deal and so now there is (again) a deal, it's on again, and the IMB having done its work can be dropped. Trebles all round.
No, you're missing the fact there was no agreement in principle from the Joint Committee before today, there is now. Oops, silly you.
Ignoring the fact that there was previously no agreement and today there is an agreement is as absurd as claiming if Boris gets a trade deal that it means no change since he always had the Withdrawal Agreement anyway.
The Agreement in Principle from the Joint Committee is new today - true or false?
Yep, we've now agreed what we previously didn't, having spooked ourselves with the IMB, which can thus be retired. That's exactly what I said. I do hope I don't have to type everything out multiple times. It's nearly half five.
Why are people obsessed with what the DUP think? The government has a majority. The DUP got 244k votes at the last general election approximately 30% of the total in Northern Ireland and less than 1% across the UK. And yet some seem to think they ought to have a veto over any deal. I accept there ought to be broad based support in NI for a border in the Irish Sea but the DUP aren't remotely close to being 'the voice' of Northern Ireland.
I wonder if it is because SF don't take their seats at Westminster so people in the UK tend to downplay them anyway and it carries over to attitudes to Stormont.
And more generally becayuse DUP are seen as more 'British' - admittedly a very loaded word in its various contexts.
You need to explain and show WHY the committee was at an impasse.
You then need to explain and show WHAT has changed in the agreement to cause the impasse to be over.
With sources.
If you can't do that, then once again you're talking nothing but meaningless dross.
Yes I said that we were at an impasse. I'm not sure we were. We had a deal and then didn't like it so introduced the IMB which we now seem to have rescinded and hence we are back to the deal.
No we're not back to where we were, because where we were was with a Joint Committee not reaching an agreement - where we are now is with a Joint Committee that has an agreement.
The Joint Committee agreement is the change. It is a significant delta that means we are not in the same place we were before.
You're still failing to backup everything you're saying.
The key questions are:
1. Why could the Joint Committee not reach an agreement? 2. What has changed to now allow the Joint Committee to reach an agreement?
Fun to tumble around with PT but I can help here, I think, in case you've had enough and want a quick summary. Here it is. There was an impasse because we were not happy with the deal. And given it takes two to tango that meant there was no deal. Deal off. We therefore brought in the IMB as backstop and leverage and lo it has worked - we have forced ourselves to become happy with the deal and so now there is (again) a deal, it's on again, and the IMB having done its work can be dropped. Trebles all round.
No, you're missing the fact there was no agreement in principle from the Joint Committee before today, there is now. Oops, silly you.
Ignoring the fact that there was previously no agreement and today there is an agreement is as absurd as claiming if Boris gets a trade deal that it means no change since he always had the Withdrawal Agreement anyway.
The Agreement in Principle from the Joint Committee is new today - true or false?
Yep, we've now agreed what we previously didn't, having spooked ourselves with the IMB, which can thus be retired. That's exactly what I said. I do hope I don't have to type everything out multiple times. It's nearly half five.
Yes we as in the EU and UK Joint Committee have reached an agreement.
So if you're saying the EU reached an agreement with the UK because they were spooked by the IMB then I will say mission accomplished.
Comments
However, I really do think she has put her career in some jeopardy herself as she will not be able to interview in the same strident holier than thou attitude
My sensible observations are worth hearing again and again.
Ignoring the fact that there was previously no agreement and today there is an agreement is as absurd as claiming if Boris gets a trade deal that it means no change since he always had the Withdrawal Agreement anyway.
The Agreement in Principle from the Joint Committee is new today - true or false?
PS : not sure who's perception , certainly not mine or anyone I know.
Moves on: nor all thy Piety nor Wit
Shall lure it back to cancel half a Line,
Nor all thy Tears wash out a Word of it.
In any case some other areas have been lowered from 4 to 3, and 2 to 1, so it's all pretty dynamic.
Do you know what they're making in the plant? Is it something on which there are tariffs?
The nation of England that is.
https://twitter.com/WilliamJHague/status/1336239190703476741?s=20
I guess it will all come down to audio quality when the reviews come in.
On a tangent, can you or other PBers recommend a decent sound bar/system for a TV, that's mostly going to be connected to a PS5 and occasionally Sky that transmits in Dolby Surround Sound?
When thy had the sale on them they were like nearly 50% cheaper than the Levi store.
Chris Musson
@ChrisMusson
·
57m
No wonder Edinburgh folk annoyed re not going down to Level 2. Edinburgh..
* has same Scot Gov indicator scores as three areas that will be in Level 2 from Friday
* is scoring BETTER than three of the Level 2 areas from Friday
* is doing almost as well as two areas going into L1
I've got a very low opinion of them, and much as I'd love to participate I can't do so if I don't trust that any funds deposited are safe.
The fact the EU is an unreasonable and sclerotic behemoth of a Byzantine organisation is not a selling point, it is a reason we're right to leave.
In order to be acquitted of the charge (and consequent loss of integrity) you need to either (i) say here and now to me and the rest of the Board that Dominic Cummings was also iyo a hypocrite or (ii) make the challenging case that it is NOT an act of rank hypocrisy for a person to break the high profile rules that they themselves have been instrumental in very recently creating.
You remain in the dock, pending.
I said at the time it was understandable to break the guidelines if you think you have a reason to need to do so and that was the same for everyone. I say the same today. Nothing has changed.
from case data
from hospitalisation data
Boris has been PM for over a year and still hasn't a clue how the EU works...
The EU has to move on fish though. We aren't accepting 18% only over 10 years. They know that.
So this is shit-stirring.
He didn't tell them to join the call, he made a request. During negotiations people make requests, he was entitled to make that one even if he foresaw the unreasonable answer.
As a lawyer, 95% of my negotations are lawyer to lawyer.
Sometimes in order to get traction, they ask for the other side's clients to be present.
This is a form of mediation.
I am not sure what to make of BJ's request. Perhaps it is in response to VDL saying that UK demands breach her/Barnier's mandate.
And Christmas coming (exactly the point Ms Sturgeon was quoted in the Graun as saying, though they didn't give the details).
No wonder they went under.
I'm atheist but was brought up going to an Anglican school. Every single week we had to go to Chapel and every single week the Chaplain would say "forgive us father for we have sinned", or we would say the Lord's Prayer "forgives us our tresspasses as we forgive those who trespass against us".
I don't believe in the heavenly father or most of Christianities teachings but I do agree that we all break the rules. Every single one of us. No exceptions. To err is human and I don't want, demand or expect infallibility from anyone. So no breaking the rules isn't shocking, we all are rule breakers. Get over it already.
There is a currency problem though. No doubt Amazon contrive to make money if you pay in Euros.
Amazon is increasingly a Chinese tat bazaar anyway. I'm not sure double tariffs are allowed?
And more generally becayuse DUP are seen as more 'British' - admittedly a very loaded word in its various contexts.
So if you're saying the EU reached an agreement with the UK because they were spooked by the IMB then I will say mission accomplished.
It must be hard for some Leavers to accept that they were taken for mugs . The denial is tragic !