Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Cyclefree’s 2020 Awards – politicalbetting.com

12467

Comments

  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877
    Scott_xP said:

    Pagan2 said:

    You make the mistake of thinking brexit was the end game. For some it's the first step. Had to be out the EU as a first step, next step is to break the power of westminster.

    Brexit consolidates power in Westminster.

    Actually it consolidates it in Government. Parliament is sidelined completely.
    For now, just as before brexit power was consolidated in Brussels, what is your point? You fix crappy systems from the head downwards
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    But I'm also conscious of powers I have lost, or had diluted. After Friday, it will be (at the very least) harder to move around, buy and sell stuff beyond the UK.

    Trimmed to the part I wanted to address

    Yes you had freedom to sell the stuff to europe but only around 5 to 10% of uk people were involved in that

    Yes you had the freedom to move to live and work in the eu but an even more miniscule amount of the people in this country ever wanted to take advantage of it.

    On the other hand 100% of people had to pay for those freedoms for the few

    a) via taxes
    b) via not having the ability to vote for policies that weren't allowed under the eu...nationalisation, state subsidy etc
    c) Having the eu used to get around national parliaments when it was used as a way of bringing in laws a national government wanted but knew it would never get past the national parliament so they would get it brought in at eu level.
    d) Paid for in people not able to get their family in because we couldn't restrict eu nationals coming here so had to tighten up on non eu migration rules

    Your vaunted freedoms were for the few and when you asked the rest of us to pay and we finally got to answer we said "On your bike sunshine". Tough luck



    Some of that's fair enough, and the rest of it does come in the category of Leave won, so here we are.

    But the UK does seem to be moving in the direction of Westminster taking control. Replacing a set of rules applied imperfectly across a wide area, which a whimsical despot who might be replaced in four years time.

    Who, exactly has got the extra control now? If it's the government, is there any sign that they are capable of using that control effectively and morally?
    The voter has the extra control.

    If you're not happy with the government, elect a new one.
    And for the next three years?
    You make the mistake of thinking brexit was the end game. For some it's the first step. Had to be out the EU as a first step, next step is to break the power of westminster.
    Explain that one to me please? 🤔

    Westminster has just had the biggest restoration of power in half a century.
    Yes the EU needed to go before we can tackle westminister and bring powers back to lower levels of government. No point tackling Westminster when all the power was in brussels
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,441

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    But I'm also conscious of powers I have lost, or had diluted. After Friday, it will be (at the very least) harder to move around, buy and sell stuff beyond the UK.

    Trimmed to the part I wanted to address

    Yes you had freedom to sell the stuff to europe but only around 5 to 10% of uk people were involved in that

    Yes you had the freedom to move to live and work in the eu but an even more miniscule amount of the people in this country ever wanted to take advantage of it.

    On the other hand 100% of people had to pay for those freedoms for the few

    a) via taxes
    b) via not having the ability to vote for policies that weren't allowed under the eu...nationalisation, state subsidy etc
    c) Having the eu used to get around national parliaments when it was used as a way of bringing in laws a national government wanted but knew it would never get past the national parliament so they would get it brought in at eu level.
    d) Paid for in people not able to get their family in because we couldn't restrict eu nationals coming here so had to tighten up on non eu migration rules

    Your vaunted freedoms were for the few and when you asked the rest of us to pay and we finally got to answer we said "On your bike sunshine". Tough luck



    Some of that's fair enough, and the rest of it does come in the category of Leave won, so here we are.

    But the UK does seem to be moving in the direction of Westminster taking control. Replacing a set of rules applied imperfectly across a wide area, which a whimsical despot who might be replaced in four years time.

    Who, exactly has got the extra control now? If it's the government, is there any sign that they are capable of using that control effectively and morally?
    The voter has the extra control.

    If you're not happy with the government, elect a new one.
    And for the next three years?
    You make the mistake of thinking brexit was the end game. For some it's the first step. Had to be out the EU as a first step, next step is to break the power of westminster.
    Explain that one to me please? 🤔

    Westminster has just had the biggest restoration of power in half a century.
    Yes the EU needed to go before we can tackle westminister and bring powers back to lower levels of government. No point tackling Westminster when all the power was in brussels
    Never going to happen. 😂

    Not even on the agenda. Gove and Boris didn't campaign to take back control to give it to the parish councillor of dunny on the wold.
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,028

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    I've absolutely no idea what the next 10 years look like - and presumably, neither do you. I think some general heat needs t9

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    When can we start talking about something other than brexit, where all that happens is a cyclical exchange of entrenched opinion.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,221

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    RobD said:

    slade said:

    Just popped up on my Facebook page: 'Britain has won nothing but has lost a continent,' - Ursula van der Leyen. Anyone know the source?

    No hits on google, so more twitter bollocks.
    It sounds intuitively BS.

    Sort of thing a Remainer would invent, not diplomatic enough for UvDL (even if she thought it she wouldn't say it).
    It’s true though we no longer have frictionless trade with the continent we once had.
    It isn't true. We no longer have frictionless trade but it is not true at all to say we have "won nothing".
    LOL. What are you saying we won? We went backwards in frictionless trade, what did we win in return to account for making our economy, government and households poorer?
    Freedom to control our own laws.
    Freedom to control our own economy.
    Freedom to negotiate better trade deals with fewer red lines.
    Freedom to make our own economy, government and households richer.
    Oh and some fish.
    You haven't read the agreement, have you?

    I'm currently working my way through it. It's dismal how few of Britain's own publicly stated asks it managed to get, despite holding all the cards. Apparently.
    Hence why it was bounced through.

    https://twitter.com/redhistorian/status/1344230499976404992?s=19

    I think the reason that so many Tories are OK with this is that parliamentary careers are now rather short. Most of the Cabinet have been in parliament less than 10 years so have no experience of opposition, and no intention of staying in Parliament were they to become the opposition. As a result they do not fear such powers in the hands of the opposition.

    We have moved from a parliamentary democracy, to one where we get a say in the executive once every few years.
    It's the curious thing about the powers that the UK may have gained by this process. Leave aside whether those powers are operable (I suspect most of the buttons the UK now has access to will never be worth pressing, because of the consequences).

    To my non-expert eye, it looks like the powers gained in this process have accrued to the UK government- more flex in changing laws and economics. But I'm also conscious of powers I have lost, or had diluted. After Friday, it will be (at the very least) harder to move around, buy and sell stuff beyond the UK.

    I can see the extra vim for the government, and yes- I get to vote for or against them a dozen or so times more in my time on this planet.

    But I've got less control of my life next week than this, haven't I?
    True. I’m slightly puzzled why a self declared libertarian like Philip is so keen on the settlement.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,682
    Leon said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Barnesian said:

    Wow. These are really convincing counter arguments from the two of you, propping each other up. Well done.

    I'll say it again.

    This is as good as it ever gets for Brexit. The unsullied fantasy. Let them revel in it while they still can.

    It's all downhill from here...
    News broadcasts from East Germany used to be full of stories about how awful it was in the West: poverty, drug addiction, immigration and social collapse. I expect it's the kind of thing we can look forward to in order to portray the EU as a failed project.
    ‘The slaves of EUroland continue to suffer the tyranny of barely scorched toast and the obscenity of straight bananas; they’re so brainwashed they don’t even realise the horror of it all.’
    The weird thing is, this is the way liberal media giants like the New York Times, and, to a lesser extent, some EU media, are reporting on Brexit Britain.

    Like we have become this total freaky toilet-of-the-world, riven with racism, divided, bigoted and violent, doomed to a nihilistic decline, and so on and so forth. It's insane hyperbole.

    Today I took my daughter to the vet to get her beloved budgie checked. Then I had a nice lunch. This afternoon I met a friend for a thermos of mulled wine, each, in Waterlow Park in Highgate. Parents walked their kids, young people flirted and laughed, joggers passed by, checking their wearable fitness apps. And people of all races, colours, creeds and beliefs happily mixed in the higgledy-piggeldy madness that is London, somehow without stabbing each other. Yes Covid has made life very difficult, but that is true of the entire world, and in the UK civilised life continues.

    Compare this with, ooh, I dunno, New York City and the USA? - where murder rates have soared since Covid.

    https://www.vox.com/2020/8/3/21334149/murders-crime-shootings-protests-riots-trump-biden

    What happened there then? Did the USA Brexit even more dangerously? Creating this perilous instability? Or is it just a kind of liberal elite wishful thinking, that WANTS to see Britain as a mad, doom-laden hellhouse, because a successful, democratic vote to overthrow an unwanted elite menaces elites everywhere?
    The 'higgledy-piggledy madness that is London' voted Remain of course.

    Sadly, large swathes of little England are not so attuned to multicultural diversity.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,398

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    +1 - the entire point of the single market was to kill paperwork and what will we have a ton of come Friday morning - extra paperwork for everything imported or exported.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,001
    Leon said:

    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.

    Not liking the Euro does not imply she would have wanted to dismantle her signature achievement.

    You can think the Euro is bad and still think Brexit is worse.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    If the government's number crunchers are any good they ought to be able to work out precisely which (groups of) people need to be vaccinated in order to reduce the number of deaths by 80%, 90%, 95%, etc.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    But I'm also conscious of powers I have lost, or had diluted. After Friday, it will be (at the very least) harder to move around, buy and sell stuff beyond the UK.

    Trimmed to the part I wanted to address

    Yes you had freedom to sell the stuff to europe but only around 5 to 10% of uk people were involved in that

    Yes you had the freedom to move to live and work in the eu but an even more miniscule amount of the people in this country ever wanted to take advantage of it.

    On the other hand 100% of people had to pay for those freedoms for the few

    a) via taxes
    b) via not having the ability to vote for policies that weren't allowed under the eu...nationalisation, state subsidy etc
    c) Having the eu used to get around national parliaments when it was used as a way of bringing in laws a national government wanted but knew it would never get past the national parliament so they would get it brought in at eu level.
    d) Paid for in people not able to get their family in because we couldn't restrict eu nationals coming here so had to tighten up on non eu migration rules

    Your vaunted freedoms were for the few and when you asked the rest of us to pay and we finally got to answer we said "On your bike sunshine". Tough luck



    Some of that's fair enough, and the rest of it does come in the category of Leave won, so here we are.

    But the UK does seem to be moving in the direction of Westminster taking control. Replacing a set of rules applied imperfectly across a wide area, which a whimsical despot who might be replaced in four years time.

    Who, exactly has got the extra control now? If it's the government, is there any sign that they are capable of using that control effectively and morally?
    The voter has the extra control.

    If you're not happy with the government, elect a new one.
    And for the next three years?
    You make the mistake of thinking brexit was the end game. For some it's the first step. Had to be out the EU as a first step, next step is to break the power of westminster.
    Explain that one to me please? 🤔

    Westminster has just had the biggest restoration of power in half a century.
    Yes the EU needed to go before we can tackle westminister and bring powers back to lower levels of government. No point tackling Westminster when all the power was in brussels
    Never going to happen. 😂

    Not even on the agenda. Gove and Boris didn't campaign to take back control to give it to the parish councillor of dunny on the wold.
    Did I claim it was happening in the next couple of years? No it might take as long as it took to get rid of the EU but then we have got through step 1 and those of us who think Westminster is too centralized as a government can take heart that eventually we can take people with us.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,001

    When can we start talking about something other than brexit, where all that happens is a cyclical exchange of entrenched opinion.

    When all of the effects have been ameliorated, or we have rejoined.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 21,675

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    But I'm also conscious of powers I have lost, or had diluted. After Friday, it will be (at the very least) harder to move around, buy and sell stuff beyond the UK.

    Trimmed to the part I wanted to address

    Yes you had freedom to sell the stuff to europe but only around 5 to 10% of uk people were involved in that

    Yes you had the freedom to move to live and work in the eu but an even more miniscule amount of the people in this country ever wanted to take advantage of it.

    On the other hand 100% of people had to pay for those freedoms for the few

    a) via taxes
    b) via not having the ability to vote for policies that weren't allowed under the eu...nationalisation, state subsidy etc
    c) Having the eu used to get around national parliaments when it was used as a way of bringing in laws a national government wanted but knew it would never get past the national parliament so they would get it brought in at eu level.
    d) Paid for in people not able to get their family in because we couldn't restrict eu nationals coming here so had to tighten up on non eu migration rules

    Your vaunted freedoms were for the few and when you asked the rest of us to pay and we finally got to answer we said "On your bike sunshine". Tough luck



    Some of that's fair enough, and the rest of it does come in the category of Leave won, so here we are.

    But the UK does seem to be moving in the direction of Westminster taking control. Replacing a set of rules applied imperfectly across a wide area, which a whimsical despot who might be replaced in four years time.

    Who, exactly has got the extra control now? If it's the government, is there any sign that they are capable of using that control effectively and morally?
    The voter has the extra control.

    If you're not happy with the government, elect a new one.
    And for the next three years?
    You make the mistake of thinking brexit was the end game. For some it's the first step. Had to be out the EU as a first step, next step is to break the power of westminster.
    Explain that one to me please? 🤔

    Westminster has just had the biggest restoration of power in half a century.
    Yes the EU needed to go before we can tackle westminister and bring powers back to lower levels of government. No point tackling Westminster when all the power was in brussels
    Never going to happen. 😂

    Not even on the agenda. Gove and Boris didn't campaign to take back control to give it to the parish councillor of dunny on the wold.
    The belief in democracy somewhat superficial. 🤷‍♂️ Can’t say I’m surprised.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited December 2020
    Nigelb said:

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    RobD said:

    slade said:

    Just popped up on my Facebook page: 'Britain has won nothing but has lost a continent,' - Ursula van der Leyen. Anyone know the source?

    No hits on google, so more twitter bollocks.
    It sounds intuitively BS.

    Sort of thing a Remainer would invent, not diplomatic enough for UvDL (even if she thought it she wouldn't say it).
    It’s true though we no longer have frictionless trade with the continent we once had.
    It isn't true. We no longer have frictionless trade but it is not true at all to say we have "won nothing".
    LOL. What are you saying we won? We went backwards in frictionless trade, what did we win in return to account for making our economy, government and households poorer?
    Freedom to control our own laws.
    Freedom to control our own economy.
    Freedom to negotiate better trade deals with fewer red lines.
    Freedom to make our own economy, government and households richer.
    Oh and some fish.
    You haven't read the agreement, have you?

    I'm currently working my way through it. It's dismal how few of Britain's own publicly stated asks it managed to get, despite holding all the cards. Apparently.
    Hence why it was bounced through.

    https://twitter.com/redhistorian/status/1344230499976404992?s=19

    I think the reason that so many Tories are OK with this is that parliamentary careers are now rather short. Most of the Cabinet have been in parliament less than 10 years so have no experience of opposition, and no intention of staying in Parliament were they to become the opposition. As a result they do not fear such powers in the hands of the opposition.

    We have moved from a parliamentary democracy, to one where we get a say in the executive once every few years.
    It's the curious thing about the powers that the UK may have gained by this process. Leave aside whether those powers are operable (I suspect most of the buttons the UK now has access to will never be worth pressing, because of the consequences).

    To my non-expert eye, it looks like the powers gained in this process have accrued to the UK government- more flex in changing laws and economics. But I'm also conscious of powers I have lost, or had diluted. After Friday, it will be (at the very least) harder to move around, buy and sell stuff beyond the UK.

    I can see the extra vim for the government, and yes- I get to vote for or against them a dozen or so times more in my time on this planet.

    But I've got less control of my life next week than this, haven't I?
    True. I’m slightly puzzled why a self declared libertarian like Philip is so keen on the settlement.
    I'd rather have the least amount of laws, set by a government we can elect - with the possibility of a future government rolling back the clock and reversing laws.

    The ratchet in the EU meant that laws were only added not reversed. The EEC did good work in its early years breaking down barriers but now it exists as just a procedure to add them instead. Once passed its nigh on impossible to wind back the clock or deregulate - in the UK to do so you just need to elect one government to do so, in the EU you need to QMV of nations all wanting to do so.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877
    Jonathan said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    But I'm also conscious of powers I have lost, or had diluted. After Friday, it will be (at the very least) harder to move around, buy and sell stuff beyond the UK.

    Trimmed to the part I wanted to address

    Yes you had freedom to sell the stuff to europe but only around 5 to 10% of uk people were involved in that

    Yes you had the freedom to move to live and work in the eu but an even more miniscule amount of the people in this country ever wanted to take advantage of it.

    On the other hand 100% of people had to pay for those freedoms for the few

    a) via taxes
    b) via not having the ability to vote for policies that weren't allowed under the eu...nationalisation, state subsidy etc
    c) Having the eu used to get around national parliaments when it was used as a way of bringing in laws a national government wanted but knew it would never get past the national parliament so they would get it brought in at eu level.
    d) Paid for in people not able to get their family in because we couldn't restrict eu nationals coming here so had to tighten up on non eu migration rules

    Your vaunted freedoms were for the few and when you asked the rest of us to pay and we finally got to answer we said "On your bike sunshine". Tough luck



    Some of that's fair enough, and the rest of it does come in the category of Leave won, so here we are.

    But the UK does seem to be moving in the direction of Westminster taking control. Replacing a set of rules applied imperfectly across a wide area, which a whimsical despot who might be replaced in four years time.

    Who, exactly has got the extra control now? If it's the government, is there any sign that they are capable of using that control effectively and morally?
    The voter has the extra control.

    If you're not happy with the government, elect a new one.
    And for the next three years?
    You make the mistake of thinking brexit was the end game. For some it's the first step. Had to be out the EU as a first step, next step is to break the power of westminster.
    Explain that one to me please? 🤔

    Westminster has just had the biggest restoration of power in half a century.
    Yes the EU needed to go before we can tackle westminister and bring powers back to lower levels of government. No point tackling Westminster when all the power was in brussels
    Never going to happen. 😂

    Not even on the agenda. Gove and Boris didn't campaign to take back control to give it to the parish councillor of dunny on the wold.
    The belief in democracy somewhat superficial. 🤷‍♂️ Can’t say I’m surprised.
    He speaks as if gove and boris have formed a thousand year reich...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,001
    Pagan2 said:

    those of us who think Westminster is too centralized as a government can take heart that eventually we can take people with us.

    Your great first step was backwards.

    Good job.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,441
    Scott_xP said:

    Leon said:

    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.

    Not liking the Euro does not imply she would have wanted to dismantle her signature achievement.

    You can think the Euro is bad and still think Brexit is worse.
    You are a monumental bore on this subject. Even when you are clearly proven to be wrong, with evidence, you just chunter on. And on, And on. It is a waste of my limited time on this earth to engage with this tediousness.

    But do carry on shouting into the void, if you want. Happy New Year
  • Pagan2 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    But I'm also conscious of powers I have lost, or had diluted. After Friday, it will be (at the very least) harder to move around, buy and sell stuff beyond the UK.

    Trimmed to the part I wanted to address

    Yes you had freedom to sell the stuff to europe but only around 5 to 10% of uk people were involved in that

    Yes you had the freedom to move to live and work in the eu but an even more miniscule amount of the people in this country ever wanted to take advantage of it.

    On the other hand 100% of people had to pay for those freedoms for the few

    a) via taxes
    b) via not having the ability to vote for policies that weren't allowed under the eu...nationalisation, state subsidy etc
    c) Having the eu used to get around national parliaments when it was used as a way of bringing in laws a national government wanted but knew it would never get past the national parliament so they would get it brought in at eu level.
    d) Paid for in people not able to get their family in because we couldn't restrict eu nationals coming here so had to tighten up on non eu migration rules

    Your vaunted freedoms were for the few and when you asked the rest of us to pay and we finally got to answer we said "On your bike sunshine". Tough luck



    Some of that's fair enough, and the rest of it does come in the category of Leave won, so here we are.

    But the UK does seem to be moving in the direction of Westminster taking control. Replacing a set of rules applied imperfectly across a wide area, which a whimsical despot who might be replaced in four years time.

    Who, exactly has got the extra control now? If it's the government, is there any sign that they are capable of using that control effectively and morally?
    The voter has the extra control.

    If you're not happy with the government, elect a new one.
    And for the next three years?
    You make the mistake of thinking brexit was the end game. For some it's the first step. Had to be out the EU as a first step, next step is to break the power of westminster.
    Explain that one to me please? 🤔

    Westminster has just had the biggest restoration of power in half a century.
    Yes the EU needed to go before we can tackle westminister and bring powers back to lower levels of government. No point tackling Westminster when all the power was in brussels
    Never going to happen. 😂

    Not even on the agenda. Gove and Boris didn't campaign to take back control to give it to the parish councillor of dunny on the wold.
    The belief in democracy somewhat superficial. 🤷‍♂️ Can’t say I’m surprised.
    He speaks as if gove and boris have formed a thousand year reich...
    They haven't but whoever replaces them will be elected with their own agenda they want to implement.

    Spoiler alert: It won't be to "break" their own powers.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877
    Scott_xP said:

    Pagan2 said:

    those of us who think Westminster is too centralized as a government can take heart that eventually we can take people with us.

    Your great first step was backwards.

    Good job.
    Only to you, you probably believe a world government would be great. I on the other hand believe democracy fails when the demos goes above a few million and instead hands all power to the corrupt and those with the money to buy them.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,001
    Leon said:

    It is a waste of my limited time on this earth to engage

    You don't engage. You have no answers.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877

    Pagan2 said:

    Jonathan said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    But I'm also conscious of powers I have lost, or had diluted. After Friday, it will be (at the very least) harder to move around, buy and sell stuff beyond the UK.

    Trimmed to the part I wanted to address

    Yes you had freedom to sell the stuff to europe but only around 5 to 10% of uk people were involved in that

    Yes you had the freedom to move to live and work in the eu but an even more miniscule amount of the people in this country ever wanted to take advantage of it.

    On the other hand 100% of people had to pay for those freedoms for the few

    a) via taxes
    b) via not having the ability to vote for policies that weren't allowed under the eu...nationalisation, state subsidy etc
    c) Having the eu used to get around national parliaments when it was used as a way of bringing in laws a national government wanted but knew it would never get past the national parliament so they would get it brought in at eu level.
    d) Paid for in people not able to get their family in because we couldn't restrict eu nationals coming here so had to tighten up on non eu migration rules

    Your vaunted freedoms were for the few and when you asked the rest of us to pay and we finally got to answer we said "On your bike sunshine". Tough luck



    Some of that's fair enough, and the rest of it does come in the category of Leave won, so here we are.

    But the UK does seem to be moving in the direction of Westminster taking control. Replacing a set of rules applied imperfectly across a wide area, which a whimsical despot who might be replaced in four years time.

    Who, exactly has got the extra control now? If it's the government, is there any sign that they are capable of using that control effectively and morally?
    The voter has the extra control.

    If you're not happy with the government, elect a new one.
    And for the next three years?
    You make the mistake of thinking brexit was the end game. For some it's the first step. Had to be out the EU as a first step, next step is to break the power of westminster.
    Explain that one to me please? 🤔

    Westminster has just had the biggest restoration of power in half a century.
    Yes the EU needed to go before we can tackle westminister and bring powers back to lower levels of government. No point tackling Westminster when all the power was in brussels
    Never going to happen. 😂

    Not even on the agenda. Gove and Boris didn't campaign to take back control to give it to the parish councillor of dunny on the wold.
    The belief in democracy somewhat superficial. 🤷‍♂️ Can’t say I’m surprised.
    He speaks as if gove and boris have formed a thousand year reich...
    They haven't but whoever replaces them will be elected with their own agenda they want to implement.

    Spoiler alert: It won't be to "break" their own powers.
    There was no point in localist parties while brussels held the reins, only anti eu parties. Now brussels no longer hold the reins expect localist parties to spring up. Hopefully we will get scottish independence and irish reunification which will hasten things
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,441
    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,001
    Pagan2 said:

    I on the other hand believe democracy fails when the demos goes above a few million and instead hands all power to the corrupt and those with the money to buy them.

    I agree with that sentiment, which is why Brexit is such a retrograde step.

    BoZo and chums can fuck things up really badly now, with limited oversight.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,600
    Scott_xP said:

    Leon said:

    It is a waste of my limited time on this earth to engage

    You don't engage. You have no answers.
    Whilst you just have tweets.
  • Nigelb said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Of course Richard B Russell was.....er.....a democrat Senator
    The Democrats were the party that opposed blacks being allowed to vote. Indeed, they had segregationist Senators, including one that remained in office until 2010.

    There is no doubt that the Republicans, the party of Lincoln and of Reagan, were the non-racist party.

    There is also no doubt that Lincoln and Reagan, men of enormous personal probity, would be disgusted at Trump.
    Otoh one link between Reagan and Trump was Roy Cohn. Pretty sure Reagan’s disgust would be tempered by what point he was on between arch conservative cold warrior and dead cuddly old duffer on whom folk can impose their own templates.
    Is that the man of enormous personal probity who defended Nixon throughout Watergate ?
    Not an official defender but certainly a true and loyal advisor. A good claim to be the worst human being in US public life of the last 70 years, and that includes Trump.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 8,603

    Barnesian said:

    Leon said:

    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    RobD said:

    slade said:

    Just popped up on my Facebook page: 'Britain has won nothing but has lost a continent,' - Ursula van der Leyen. Anyone know the source?

    No hits on google, so more twitter bollocks.
    It sounds intuitively BS.

    Sort of thing a Remainer would invent, not diplomatic enough for UvDL (even if she thought it she wouldn't say it).
    It’s true though we no longer have frictionless trade with the continent we once had.
    It isn't true. We no longer have frictionless trade but it is not true at all to say we have "won nothing".
    LOL. What are you saying we won? We went backwards in frictionless trade, what did we win in return to account for making our economy, government and households poorer?
    Freedom to control our own laws.
    Freedom to control our own economy.
    Freedom to negotiate better trade deals with fewer red lines.
    Freedom to make our own economy, government and households richer.
    Oh and some fish.
    like all brexiteers, you haven’t a clue what freedom is.

    Freedom is in the pocket. When you are poor you are closer to being a slave, when you are wealthier you come closer to be being free. And Brexit will make the country poorer, year on year. As every good economist knows.

    like all brexiteers, you haven’t a clue what sovereignty is.

    It’s a currency. You put it to work for you and your citizens. Just sitting on it, it’s useless. You spend it In all your trade deals. In your all your security deals, like NATO. In your dealings with the UN. We know how every pro European party leader from Thatcher to Cameron used the currency of sovereignty for the good of their citizens, and how this current government have ripped up the deal previous conservative governments built and nurtured for the current and future citizens.

    like all brexiteers you don’t understand what Democracy is.

    The whole point of the democracy isn’t so that 52% ever trumps 48%, actual democracy is about tolerating minority views in the big decisions for a big society going forwards, not just as fairest, but to minimise ongoing conflict. So a Brexit not just for the 52% (many of which actually did not vote for hard brexit), but also the views of the 48% too, and the many millions too baffled by the campaigning to appreciate the difference. Direct democracy relies so much on the quality of the debate. Did the 2016 campaign inform the voters or confuse or mislead them? When people voted were they sure what they would be getting? Were all the risks with both options fully appreciated?
    representative democracy is far stronger than direct democracy because it allows for more efficient scrutiny by a sufficiently small number of people with time and skills, who have maturity of judgment and unbiased in opinion to go into forensic depth and come to a more enlightened conclusion on behalf of all people and points of view. key difference between direct and representative forms of democracy is representatives not simply to communicate the wishes of the electorate but to use their own judgment in the exercise of their powers, even if their views are not reflective of those of a majority of voters, but the voters can still remove them. If you don’t agree with me on that then you don’t actually agree with parliamentary democracy.
    Democracy is really about what do you do when you disagree. And the time and skills to scrutinise and debate to a strong conclusion.

    Democracy, sovereignty, freedom. Today the U.K. has gone backwards in everyone.
    Utter bollocks from start to finish.
    Yes. Total nonsense. And too much of it, as well. Bleurgh
    Wow. These are really convincing counter arguments from the two of you, propping each other up. Well done.
    Its total whingy bullshit. Where should we start?
    What you as well! The three of you. Great arguments you've produced between you. Enlightening and educational.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 8,298
    Yorkcity said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Yorkcity said:

    I know I am biased working for the police for 30 years.
    However I think they do a difficult job for those working on the front line during a pandemic.Many in very close contact with violent people who spit and injure officers.
    Maybe cyclefree omitted them for a reason I very much hope not.

    Why do you think the police were trusted more 30 years ago than today by many people?
    I never said that.
    I think you have read it wrong.
    I believe the police are better than they were over 30 years ago when I joined.
    In many aspects including more equality in race and gender also with much more diverse political views in its ranks than when it was nearly dominated by conservative views.
    If you can let me know what mean would be appreciated.
    Police are a bit more trusted according to ipsos I think. The massive rise has been trust in civil servants.
    2019 Veracity index - Trust in professions.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,600
    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    Subtle. By Remainer standards....
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,441

    Nigelb said:

    Foxy said:

    Cyclefree said:

    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    RobD said:

    slade said:

    Just popped up on my Facebook page: 'Britain has won nothing but has lost a continent,' - Ursula van der Leyen. Anyone know the source?

    No hits on google, so more twitter bollocks.
    It sounds intuitively BS.

    Sort of thing a Remainer would invent, not diplomatic enough for UvDL (even if she thought it she wouldn't say it).
    It’s true though we no longer have frictionless trade with the continent we once had.
    It isn't true. We no longer have frictionless trade but it is not true at all to say we have "won nothing".
    LOL. What are you saying we won? We went backwards in frictionless trade, what did we win in return to account for making our economy, government and households poorer?
    Freedom to control our own laws.
    Freedom to control our own economy.
    Freedom to negotiate better trade deals with fewer red lines.
    Freedom to make our own economy, government and households richer.
    Oh and some fish.
    You haven't read the agreement, have you?

    I'm currently working my way through it. It's dismal how few of Britain's own publicly stated asks it managed to get, despite holding all the cards. Apparently.
    Hence why it was bounced through.

    https://twitter.com/redhistorian/status/1344230499976404992?s=19

    I think the reason that so many Tories are OK with this is that parliamentary careers are now rather short. Most of the Cabinet have been in parliament less than 10 years so have no experience of opposition, and no intention of staying in Parliament were they to become the opposition. As a result they do not fear such powers in the hands of the opposition.

    We have moved from a parliamentary democracy, to one where we get a say in the executive once every few years.
    It's the curious thing about the powers that the UK may have gained by this process. Leave aside whether those powers are operable (I suspect most of the buttons the UK now has access to will never be worth pressing, because of the consequences).

    To my non-expert eye, it looks like the powers gained in this process have accrued to the UK government- more flex in changing laws and economics. But I'm also conscious of powers I have lost, or had diluted. After Friday, it will be (at the very least) harder to move around, buy and sell stuff beyond the UK.

    I can see the extra vim for the government, and yes- I get to vote for or against them a dozen or so times more in my time on this planet.

    But I've got less control of my life next week than this, haven't I?
    True. I’m slightly puzzled why a self declared libertarian like Philip is so keen on the settlement.
    I'd rather have the least amount of laws, set by a government we can elect - with the possibility of a future government rolling back the clock and reversing laws.

    The ratchet in the EU meant that laws were only added not reversed. The EEC did good work in its early years breaking down barriers but now it exists as just a procedure to add them instead. Once passed its nigh on impossible to wind back the clock or deregulate - in the UK to do so you just need to elect one government to do so, in the EU you need to QMV of nations all wanting to do so.
    Absolutely. How do you repeal an EU law/directive? As a voter? No one was ever able to give me an answer.

    That alone was reason enough to Exit. And so we have. And it was the right decision, even tho it may cost us, in the first few years.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,001
    Leon said:

    How do you repeal an EU law/directive? As a voter?

    Which one did you have in mind?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,696
    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    If Blair had spent his political capital on taking us into the Euro instead of encouraging US imperial overreach, the world would be a better place.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,588
    "UK internet use doubles in 2020 due to pandemic"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55486157
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877
    Scott_xP said:

    Pagan2 said:

    I on the other hand believe democracy fails when the demos goes above a few million and instead hands all power to the corrupt and those with the money to buy them.

    I agree with that sentiment, which is why Brexit is such a retrograde step.

    BoZo and chums can fuck things up really badly now, with limited oversight.
    Ah you edit and agree but completely disregard the fact that brussels had more industry lobbyists than washington. Look at the eu copyright directive if you want to see industry buying politicians for a good example of corruption. Brussels is corrupt in a way that makes westminster look like a rank amateur. Brussels is a high class hooker charging 200£ an hour in comparison westminster is giving bj's for a fiver in the alley behind the pub.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,713
    Andy_JS said:

    If the government's number crunchers are any good they ought to be able to work out precisely which (groups of) people need to be vaccinated in order to reduce the number of deaths by 80%, 90%, 95%, etc.

    You have a faith in the DoH that I do not share. Specifying such level of detail slows things down considerably.
  • Barnesian said:

    Barnesian said:

    Leon said:

    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    gealbhan said:

    RobD said:

    slade said:

    Just popped up on my Facebook page: 'Britain has won nothing but has lost a continent,' - Ursula van der Leyen. Anyone know the source?

    No hits on google, so more twitter bollocks.
    It sounds intuitively BS.

    Sort of thing a Remainer would invent, not diplomatic enough for UvDL (even if she thought it she wouldn't say it).
    It’s true though we no longer have frictionless trade with the continent we once had.
    It isn't true. We no longer have frictionless trade but it is not true at all to say we have "won nothing".
    LOL. What are you saying we won? We went backwards in frictionless trade, what did we win in return to account for making our economy, government and households poorer?
    Freedom to control our own laws.
    Freedom to control our own economy.
    Freedom to negotiate better trade deals with fewer red lines.
    Freedom to make our own economy, government and households richer.
    Oh and some fish.
    like all brexiteers, you haven’t a clue what freedom is.

    Freedom is in the pocket. When you are poor you are closer to being a slave, when you are wealthier you come closer to be being free. And Brexit will make the country poorer, year on year. As every good economist knows.

    like all brexiteers, you haven’t a clue what sovereignty is.

    It’s a currency. You put it to work for you and your citizens. Just sitting on it, it’s useless. You spend it In all your trade deals. In your all your security deals, like NATO. In your dealings with the UN. We know how every pro European party leader from Thatcher to Cameron used the currency of sovereignty for the good of their citizens, and how this current government have ripped up the deal previous conservative governments built and nurtured for the current and future citizens.

    like all brexiteers you don’t understand what Democracy is.

    The whole point of the democracy isn’t so that 52% ever trumps 48%, actual democracy is about tolerating minority views in the big decisions for a big society going forwards, not just as fairest, but to minimise ongoing conflict. So a Brexit not just for the 52% (many of which actually did not vote for hard brexit), but also the views of the 48% too, and the many millions too baffled by the campaigning to appreciate the difference. Direct democracy relies so much on the quality of the debate. Did the 2016 campaign inform the voters or confuse or mislead them? When people voted were they sure what they would be getting? Were all the risks with both options fully appreciated?
    representative democracy is far stronger than direct democracy because it allows for more efficient scrutiny by a sufficiently small number of people with time and skills, who have maturity of judgment and unbiased in opinion to go into forensic depth and come to a more enlightened conclusion on behalf of all people and points of view. key difference between direct and representative forms of democracy is representatives not simply to communicate the wishes of the electorate but to use their own judgment in the exercise of their powers, even if their views are not reflective of those of a majority of voters, but the voters can still remove them. If you don’t agree with me on that then you don’t actually agree with parliamentary democracy.
    Democracy is really about what do you do when you disagree. And the time and skills to scrutinise and debate to a strong conclusion.

    Democracy, sovereignty, freedom. Today the U.K. has gone backwards in everyone.
    Utter bollocks from start to finish.
    Yes. Total nonsense. And too much of it, as well. Bleurgh
    Wow. These are really convincing counter arguments from the two of you, propping each other up. Well done.
    Its total whingy bullshit. Where should we start?
    What you as well! The three of you. Great arguments you've produced between you. Enlightening and educational.
    What was there to answer. It was a bollocks whingefest.

    Where to start with a rant that starts off with saying we will be closer to being slaves outside of the EU? 🤷‍♂️

    It should be noted that the UK ought to be richer outside of the EU. English speaking western nations are all richer and grown faster per capita than the EU have.
  • Wonder why they'd give up any leverage over tax competition?

    https://twitter.com/Rob_Kimbell/status/1344395098419851264?s=20
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,001
    Pagan2 said:

    Brussels is a high class hooker charging 200£ an hour in comparison westminster is giving bj's for a fiver in the alley behind the pub.

    And the site expert would tell you which is preferable
  • Gallowgate should be happy tonight.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,713
    Pagan2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Pagan2 said:

    those of us who think Westminster is too centralized as a government can take heart that eventually we can take people with us.

    Your great first step was backwards.

    Good job.
    Only to you, you probably believe a world government would be great. I on the other hand believe democracy fails when the demos goes above a few million and instead hands all power to the corrupt and those with the money to buy them.
    Wow. You should vote Lib Dem rather than Brexit then.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    @TheScreamingEagles and others. Cant believe Liverpool couldn't even beat Newcastle United Comedy Club. Rubbish.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877
    Foxy said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Pagan2 said:

    those of us who think Westminster is too centralized as a government can take heart that eventually we can take people with us.

    Your great first step was backwards.

    Good job.
    Only to you, you probably believe a world government would be great. I on the other hand believe democracy fails when the demos goes above a few million and instead hands all power to the corrupt and those with the money to buy them.
    Wow. You should vote Lib Dem rather than Brexit then.
    Why when the lib dems are neither liberal democratic nor non corrupt? Did they ever return that money?
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,176

    @TheScreamingEagles and others. Cant believe Liverpool couldn't even beat Newcastle United Comedy Club. Rubbish.

    Made my Christmas. Both the unbeaten season and scoring in every game in a season records safe for another year. :)
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,221
    edited December 2020
    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    Sure.
    The poll tax was the inspiration of a colossus at the height of her powers.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,441

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    If Blair had spent his political capital on taking us into the Euro instead of encouraging US imperial overreach, the world would be a better place.
    That is an interesting alternative history. I see the argument that Blair possibly had just enough power - ie lots and lots -in 1997, to force us into the euro without a referendum. It was Gordon Brown that kept us out, God bless his little weird autistic cotton socks.

    But I doubt that. Even Blair in his pomp would have needed a referendum to get the UK into the euro, I think. And he would have lost it, even in the afterglow of the huge majority of 1997. The Brits are eurosceptic, always have been, always will be. That's why Blair didn't force the issue.

    Would the UK joining the euro have changed history? Yes, it would have made Brexit much harder, and probably impossible (so I can see why you would like the idea), but it would not have prevented the euro-crisis (which is just waiting to be reborn, by the way). The euro extended over the entire EU, pretty much, is a really bad idea, which is why it hasn't worked. Thatcher was right,

    They should have started it with the the Original EU six, maybe minus Italy. Just Germany, France and Benelux. Get that working, then expand it slowly and carefully. Instead - as Thatcher said - they had a "rush of blood to the head" and included Greece and Spain et al. Result: disaster



  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 36,001
    Leon said:

    The euro extended over the entire EU, pretty much, is a really bad idea, which is why it hasn't worked. Thatcher was right,

    They should have started it with the the Original EU six, maybe minus Italy. Just Germany, France and Benelux. Get that working, then expand it slowly and carefully. Instead - as Thatcher said - they had a "rush of blood to the head" and included Greece and Spain et al. Result: disaster

    Which will last longer?

    Euro?

    or Brexit?
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877
    Scott_xP said:

    Leon said:

    The euro extended over the entire EU, pretty much, is a really bad idea, which is why it hasn't worked. Thatcher was right,

    They should have started it with the the Original EU six, maybe minus Italy. Just Germany, France and Benelux. Get that working, then expand it slowly and carefully. Instead - as Thatcher said - they had a "rush of blood to the head" and included Greece and Spain et al. Result: disaster

    Which will last longer?

    Euro?

    or Brexit?
    Brexit, the eu lurches from crises to crises and never resolves them but kicks them into the long grass. Sooner or later they will all come due at once
  • Scott_xP said:

    Leon said:

    The euro extended over the entire EU, pretty much, is a really bad idea, which is why it hasn't worked. Thatcher was right,

    They should have started it with the the Original EU six, maybe minus Italy. Just Germany, France and Benelux. Get that working, then expand it slowly and carefully. Instead - as Thatcher said - they had a "rush of blood to the head" and included Greece and Spain et al. Result: disaster

    Which will last longer?

    Euro?

    or Brexit?
    Brexit.

    Though Britain itself likely won't last longer and parts of Britain may rejoin.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,441
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    Sure.
    The poll tax was the inspiration of a colossus at the height of her powers.
    Quite right. Mrs Oliver Letwin. God help us.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,713
    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,221
    Did anyone post this story ?

    Impressionist Rory Bremner 'saved Sir John Major's bacon' amid MPs revolt
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55477424
    ... Mr Carlisle had told another MP, Graham Bright, about the phone calls and the cabinet secretary investigated. A fortnight after the calls, he phoned both MPs.
    Sir Richard was insistent it had been the real prime minister. According to an official note of their conversation, Sir Richard told the cabinet secretary that the call had "saved [Sir John's] bacon".
    The cabinet secretary then called Michael Grade, then-chief executive of Channel 4.
    He told him that in his view and that of the PM the calls had "crossed the boundary between entertainment and real life to an unacceptable degree"....
  • Scott_xP said:
    So the Nightingales will reopen. Weren't we told they were quietly been (mostly) rolled up and closed?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,036
    Odds on it being carried there by a jet-setting Hollywood luvvie?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,600
    Nigelb said:

    Did anyone post this story ?

    Impressionist Rory Bremner 'saved Sir John Major's bacon' amid MPs revolt
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-55477424
    ... Mr Carlisle had told another MP, Graham Bright, about the phone calls and the cabinet secretary investigated. A fortnight after the calls, he phoned both MPs.
    Sir Richard was insistent it had been the real prime minister. According to an official note of their conversation, Sir Richard told the cabinet secretary that the call had "saved [Sir John's] bacon".
    The cabinet secretary then called Michael Grade, then-chief executive of Channel 4.
    He told him that in his view and that of the PM the calls had "crossed the boundary between entertainment and real life to an unacceptable degree"....

    Deserves a thread!
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    I have literally never met anyone as dishonest as Boris Johnson. I have known people who lie easily but they have some concept that the truth matters at some level and at certain times.

    I am not talking only about this, but he was certainly on form today.

    https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1344381526126047232
  • Odds on it being carried there by a jet-setting Hollywood luvvie?
    "No history of travel"

    https://twitter.com/K_G_Andersen/status/1344399869889269761?s=20
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,221
    .
    Leon said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    Sure.
    The poll tax was the inspiration of a colossus at the height of her powers.
    Quite right. Mrs Oliver Letwin. God help us.
    She might not have lost her marbles at that point, but she’d certainly mislaid most of her judgment.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,209
    Colorado and California: two states with skiing. Coincidence?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,441
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.
    If onl
    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
    And she was entirely right. If only the EU had stayed where it was about then: 1990-1995. Single Market minus the Maastricht political bits. We Brits would be happy members of the Single Market and we would all be likely thriving.

    But most Brits (and I include Thatcher in this) badly underestimated the genuine desire, of the European elite, to Federalise and unify: "Ever Closer Union" was not boilerplate to them, it was a proper goal. It is what they wanted and what they want. The euro was a means, however dangerous and foolish, to accelerate that process. Once a nation is in the euro it can basically never leave, even if it so desires, the process is too damaging. See: Greece.

    We should have had a referendum on Maastricht, the Constitution or Lisbon. We would have said No. The EU would have accommodated us, and we would have remained inside but on the periphery, but with say over EU law. As it is, the europhiles overplayed their hand, insulted democracy too many times, and in the end it came to a polarising In/Out vote and Out won, because the europhiles had lied too much, too often.

    It is a tragedy. It need not have happened. Ah well.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877
    rcs1000 said:

    Colorado and California: two states with skiing. Coincidence?
    Have they been visited by the PB "must have a skiing holiday" fraternity
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,468
    Fun fact @Philip_Thompson, there hasn't been a 0-0 Newcastle Liverpool match since 1974, the year before the UK joined the EU.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877
    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.
    If onl
    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
    And she was entirely right. If only the EU had stayed where it was about then: 1990-1995. Single Market minus the Maastricht political bits. We Brits would be happy members of the Single Market and we would all be likely thriving.

    But most Brits (and I include Thatcher in this) badly underestimated the genuine desire, of the European elite, to Federalise and unify: "Ever Closer Union" was not boilerplate to them, it was a proper goal. It is what they wanted and what they want. The euro was a means, however dangerous and foolish, to accelerate that process. Once a nation is in the euro it can basically never leave, even if it so desires, the process is too damaging. See: Greece.

    We should have had a referendum on Maastricht, the Constitution or Lisbon. We would have said No. The EU would have accommodated us, and we would have remained inside but on the periphery, but with say over EU law. As it is, the europhiles overplayed their hand, insulted democracy too many times, and in the end it came to a polarising In/Out vote and Out won, because the europhiles had lied too much, too often.

    It is a tragedy. It need not have happened. Ah well.
    Indeed pre maastricht I was perfectly fine with our membership. Then each time we elected a government and lent them powers they seemed to give a few away and hand us back more than we had lent them.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,221
    The FT had a story about production delays for the Oxford vaccine back on the 8th December.
    https://www.ft.com/content/651be7e7-2a4e-410f-8089-b4b7e887f6e8

    The UK manufacturers are Oxford BioMedica and Cobra Therapeutics,
    ‘Fill and finish’ by Wockhart in Wrexham.

  • Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.
    If onl
    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
    And she was entirely right. If only the EU had stayed where it was about then: 1990-1995. Single Market minus the Maastricht political bits. We Brits would be happy members of the Single Market and we would all be likely thriving.

    But most Brits (and I include Thatcher in this) badly underestimated the genuine desire, of the European elite, to Federalise and unify: "Ever Closer Union" was not boilerplate to them, it was a proper goal. It is what they wanted and what they want. The euro was a means, however dangerous and foolish, to accelerate that process. Once a nation is in the euro it can basically never leave, even if it so desires, the process is too damaging. See: Greece.

    We should have had a referendum on Maastricht, the Constitution or Lisbon. We would have said No. The EU would have accommodated us, and we would have remained inside but on the periphery, but with say over EU law. As it is, the europhiles overplayed their hand, insulted democracy too many times, and in the end it came to a polarising In/Out vote and Out won, because the europhiles had lied too much, too often.

    It is a tragedy. It need not have happened. Ah well.
    We still could have had the single market and none iof the Maastricht bits. That was available - it was our choice to leave the EEA as well as the EU.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,877

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.
    If onl
    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
    And she was entirely right. If only the EU had stayed where it was about then: 1990-1995. Single Market minus the Maastricht political bits. We Brits would be happy members of the Single Market and we would all be likely thriving.

    But most Brits (and I include Thatcher in this) badly underestimated the genuine desire, of the European elite, to Federalise and unify: "Ever Closer Union" was not boilerplate to them, it was a proper goal. It is what they wanted and what they want. The euro was a means, however dangerous and foolish, to accelerate that process. Once a nation is in the euro it can basically never leave, even if it so desires, the process is too damaging. See: Greece.

    We should have had a referendum on Maastricht, the Constitution or Lisbon. We would have said No. The EU would have accommodated us, and we would have remained inside but on the periphery, but with say over EU law. As it is, the europhiles overplayed their hand, insulted democracy too many times, and in the end it came to a polarising In/Out vote and Out won, because the europhiles had lied too much, too often.

    It is a tragedy. It need not have happened. Ah well.
    We still could have had the single market and none iof the Maastricht bits. That was available - it was our choice to leave the EEA as well as the EU.
    Before maastricht I believe the eea was different. The EEA has changed too
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,713

    Odds on it being carried there by a jet-setting Hollywood luvvie?
    "No history of travel"

    https://twitter.com/K_G_Andersen/status/1344399869889269761?s=20
    Its out there in the wild then.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,682
    Nigelb said:

    The FT had a story about production delays for the Oxford vaccine back on the 8th December.
    https://www.ft.com/content/651be7e7-2a4e-410f-8089-b4b7e887f6e8

    The UK manufacturers are Oxford BioMedica and Cobra Therapeutics,
    ‘Fill and finish’ by Wockhart in Wrexham.

    It's paywalled. What's the article title?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,766
    edited December 2020
    https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1344409552452780032

    Another Johnson 'promise" on covid.

    Why does he never ever learn?

    Surely after the massive clusterfuck that was his 'saving xmas' policy you would have thought he would learn.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,682
    rcs1000 said:

    Colorado and California: two states with skiing. Coincidence?
    The virus has gone off-piste?
  • RazedabodeRazedabode Posts: 3,028
    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.
    If onl
    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
    And she was entirely right. If only the EU had stayed where it was about then: 1990-1995. Single Market minus the Maastricht political bits. We Brits would be happy members of the Single Market and we would all be likely thriving.

    But most Brits (and I include Thatcher in this) badly underestimated the genuine desire, of the European elite, to Federalise and unify: "Ever Closer Union" was not boilerplate to them, it was a proper goal. It is what they wanted and what they want. The euro was a means, however dangerous and foolish, to accelerate that process. Once a nation is in the euro it can basically never leave, even if it so desires, the process is too damaging. See: Greece.

    We should have had a referendum on Maastricht, the Constitution or Lisbon. We would have said No. The EU would have accommodated us, and we would have remained inside but on the periphery, but with say over EU law. As it is, the europhiles overplayed their hand, insulted democracy too many times, and in the end it came to a polarising In/Out vote and Out won, because the europhiles had lied too much, too often.

    It is a tragedy. It need not have happened. Ah well.
    Indeed pre maastricht I was perfectly fine with our membership. Then each time we elected a government and lent them powers they seemed to give a few away and hand us back more than we had lent them.
    It was evident after the introduction of other ideas like the flag and anthem.

    Of course that doesn't really explain why EEA wouldn't have been a sensible compromise. I suppose even that had been tainted by the tentacles of the EU at that point.

    The China / EU investment deal was an interesting announcement today - seems to have been led by Merkel and Macron with Xi. That symbolically says a lot..
  • Not agreed yet - Gibraltar:

    https://www.chronicle.gi/intense-negotiations-as-gib-deal-edges-ever-closer/

    It looks like the dispute is over putting EU border control officers in Gib Airport.
  • Fun fact @Philip_Thompson, there hasn't been a 0-0 Newcastle Liverpool match since 1974, the year before the UK joined the EU.

    The year AFTER!
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,720

    Nigelb said:

    The FT had a story about production delays for the Oxford vaccine back on the 8th December.
    https://www.ft.com/content/651be7e7-2a4e-410f-8089-b4b7e887f6e8

    The UK manufacturers are Oxford BioMedica and Cobra Therapeutics,
    ‘Fill and finish’ by Wockhart in Wrexham.

    It's paywalled. What's the article title?
    Output of Oxford-AstraZeneca doses held up

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,696
    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.
    If onl
    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
    And she was entirely right. If only the EU had stayed where it was about then: 1990-1995. Single Market minus the Maastricht political bits. We Brits would be happy members of the Single Market and we would all be likely thriving.

    But most Brits (and I include Thatcher in this) badly underestimated the genuine desire, of the European elite, to Federalise and unify: "Ever Closer Union" was not boilerplate to them, it was a proper goal. It is what they wanted and what they want. The euro was a means, however dangerous and foolish, to accelerate that process. Once a nation is in the euro it can basically never leave, even if it so desires, the process is too damaging. See: Greece.

    We should have had a referendum on Maastricht, the Constitution or Lisbon. We would have said No. The EU would have accommodated us, and we would have remained inside but on the periphery, but with say over EU law. As it is, the europhiles overplayed their hand, insulted democracy too many times, and in the end it came to a polarising In/Out vote and Out won, because the europhiles had lied too much, too often.

    It is a tragedy. It need not have happened. Ah well.
    We still could have had the single market and none iof the Maastricht bits. That was available - it was our choice to leave the EEA as well as the EU.
    Before maastricht I believe the eea was different. The EEA has changed too
    The EEA didn't exist before Maastricht. It was extended to allow the EFTA countries to participate in the single market. Nevertheless many of them chose to join the full EU.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,713

    rcs1000 said:

    Colorado and California: two states with skiing. Coincidence?
    The virus has gone off-piste?
    Its downhill all the way now.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,682

    Fun fact @Philip_Thompson, there hasn't been a 0-0 Newcastle Liverpool match since 1974, the year before the UK joined the EU.

    Man U can go top by beating Villa 10-0 on Friday. Just saying.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,208
    Had this thread been posted here? The situation described is absolutely shocking...

    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1344242189057089539
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    Sure.
    The poll tax was the inspiration of a colossus at the height of her powers.
    Philosophically it was logical, coherent and defensible (local government provides services and charges a flat fee while redistribution should be a matter for national government).

    Politically it was... foolish
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,221

    Nigelb said:

    The FT had a story about production delays for the Oxford vaccine back on the 8th December.
    https://www.ft.com/content/651be7e7-2a4e-410f-8089-b4b7e887f6e8

    The UK manufacturers are Oxford BioMedica and Cobra Therapeutics,
    ‘Fill and finish’ by Wockhart in Wrexham.

    It's paywalled. What's the article title?
    The Irish Times has essentially the same story:
    https://www.irishtimes.com/business/health-pharma/supply-of-covid-vaccine-doses-held-up-by-manufacturing-delays-1.4430676
  • Does anyone here remember how Ladbrokes treated the bets for the postponed Mayoral election - were they voided, or carried into 2021?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
    Shame the free market in services never happened then
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,682
    edited December 2020
    geoffw said:

    Nigelb said:

    The FT had a story about production delays for the Oxford vaccine back on the 8th December.
    https://www.ft.com/content/651be7e7-2a4e-410f-8089-b4b7e887f6e8

    The UK manufacturers are Oxford BioMedica and Cobra Therapeutics,
    ‘Fill and finish’ by Wockhart in Wrexham.

    It's paywalled. What's the article title?
    Output of Oxford-AstraZeneca doses held up

    Thanks. So according to that article the expected number of doses available by the end of 2020 had dropped from 30m to 4m.

    4m still seems plenty to get started in January. However, if the production issues are worse or ongoing, the Government must already know and should come clean to manage public expectations accordingly.

    Any PBers have inside knowledge?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,209
    Charles said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
    Shame the free market in services never happened then
    Most services - whether inside the EU or not - are completely free from tariffs or regulation. PR, application development, virtual assistants, call centres, etc., all happily get sold around the world without supranational bodies getting involved.

    Where there is regulation that restricts cross border trade it tends to be in specific professional services, particularly law.

    But then again, we don't really have a single market in lawyers in the UK either, as - AFIUI, and I could be wrong - Scottish Advocates and English Barristers are not able perform each others' roles.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,478
    Regarding Free Ports/Enterprise Zones in the EU, @williamglenn & @Theuniondivvie may be interested in the following report from a UN body looking at free ports from the perspective of the Far East:

    'The conclusion is that FTZs as originally conceived do not exist any more in the European Union.
    The Commission does allow the establishment of free zones within its territory but its definition of free
    zone is a very narrow one. Free zones are special areas within the customs territory of the Community
    where goods are free of import duties, VAT and other import charges.'

    Most of the free trade zones raised (like Hamburg) were in place before accession to the EU, and their benefits have been devalued successively since.

    https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/pub_2377_fulltext.pdf#page=86 - the bit about the European Union starts on page 73.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 59,933
    edited December 2020

    geoffw said:

    Nigelb said:

    The FT had a story about production delays for the Oxford vaccine back on the 8th December.
    https://www.ft.com/content/651be7e7-2a4e-410f-8089-b4b7e887f6e8

    The UK manufacturers are Oxford BioMedica and Cobra Therapeutics,
    ‘Fill and finish’ by Wockhart in Wrexham.

    It's paywalled. What's the article title?
    Output of Oxford-AstraZeneca doses held up

    Thanks. So according to that article the expected number of doses available by the end of 2020 had dropped from 30m to 4m.

    4m still seems plenty to get started in January. However, if the production issues are worse or ongoing, the Government must already know and should come clean to manage public expectations accordingly.

    Any PBers have inside knowledge?
    A more recent article states the Wales plant can now produce 5million doses a month, with a projected capacity of double that. Combined with imports from Europe it should add up.

    https://www.business-live.co.uk/manufacturing/wrexham-factory-produce-millions-doses-19539566
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,706

    if the production issues are worse or ongoing, the Government must already know and should come clean to manage public expectations accordingly.

    They had that opportunity both in the last few days and today and if anything doubled down on their previous assertions, so they're either extremely confident or extremely deluded.
  • The UK has now approved two vaccines while Ireland waits for decisions from the European Medicines Agency, which has taken a more “relaxed” approach to authorisations without any visible benefit so far.

    At this stage it is unclear whether the new UK and South African variants of the virus are as much a threat as they have been made out to be, but if this does prove the case we will be indebted to the work of scientists in London and Porton Down, not Brussels.


    https://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/coronavirus-vaccine-the-only-game-in-town-to-end-lockdown-cycle-1.4447652
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,478
    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
    Shame the free market in services never happened then
    Most services - whether inside the EU or not - are completely free from tariffs or regulation. PR, application development, virtual assistants, call centres, etc., all happily get sold around the world without supranational bodies getting involved.

    Where there is regulation that restricts cross border trade it tends to be in specific professional services, particularly law.

    But then again, we don't really have a single market in lawyers in the UK either, as - AFIUI, and I could be wrong - Scottish Advocates and English Barristers are not able perform each others' roles.
    There isn't a free market in gaming.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410

    Fun fact @Philip_Thompson, there hasn't been a 0-0 Newcastle Liverpool match since 1974, the year before the UK joined the EU.

    Man U can go top by beating Villa 10-0 on Friday. Just saying.
    Earlier that day, the mighty EFC can pull within a point of the top from the same number of games, by beating West Ham at home.
    We've 4 wins on the trot and coming off a huge 6 days rest.
    It's turning into a fascinating season at the top.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,209

    rcs1000 said:

    Charles said:

    Foxy said:

    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    This is Maggie in 1988, talking about Europe:

    "Action to get rid of the barriers. Action to make it possible for insurance companies to do business throughout the Community. Action to let people practice their trades and professions freely throughout the Community. Action to remove the customs barriers and formalities so that goods can circulate [end p10] freely and without time-consuming delays. Action to make sure that any company could sell its goods and services without let or hindrance. Action to secure free movement of capital throughout the Community."

    And:

    "Today's conference is not just a one-off event. That is why we have set ourselves a target of ensuring that over 90%; of British firms are aware of the 1992 commitment by the end of this year. It must be the start of a sustained national effort to ensure that everyone in business, in industry, in the service [end p19] sector, is aware of the challenge.

    And not just in business and industry. We are putting the European Community to work for ordinary people: for cheaper air fares, for more and better services, for consumer choice and product safety."

    From:

    https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/107219
    Shame the free market in services never happened then
    Most services - whether inside the EU or not - are completely free from tariffs or regulation. PR, application development, virtual assistants, call centres, etc., all happily get sold around the world without supranational bodies getting involved.

    Where there is regulation that restricts cross border trade it tends to be in specific professional services, particularly law.

    But then again, we don't really have a single market in lawyers in the UK either, as - AFIUI, and I could be wrong - Scottish Advocates and English Barristers are not able perform each others' roles.
    There isn't a free market in gaming.
    Betting?

    A Frenchman can bet with Ladbrokes in the UK, no?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,868
    Leon said:

    IanB2 said:

    Leon said:

    Yes of course, one of the prime movers of the Single Market would be delighted we have fucked business, blown up our FDI chances and erected customs barriers.
    Recently released papers make it clear Thatcher was becoming seriously eurosceptic as early as the late 80s. She was, for instance, absolutely bang on about the euro, and how it was a madcap idea which would do grave damage.


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/27/margaret-thatcher-said-plan-for-the-euro-was-a-rush-of-blood-archives-reveal
    Those of us around at the time also recall the deterioration in her mental state at the same time
    This is simultaneously mendacious, insulting and borderline libellous (if one could libel the dead). Margaret Thatcher in the late 80s was in her prime. She might have let the power go to her head occasionally ("we are a grandmother") but there was absolutely no sign of her later, melancholy decline into dementia. That came a full decade later.

    Be a gent. Desist and retract. It's a truly nasty thing to impute.
    Margaret Thatcher may have been showing the ‘first signs of dementia’ during her final year as prime minister, Ken Clarke has claimed.

    The Tory grandee, who served in Mrs Thatcher’s Cabinet, said the prime minister’s personality ‘rapidly changed’ towards the end of her tenure, leading him to develop the ‘theory’ that she was displaying early symptoms of the condition.
This discussion has been closed.