... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
We're Airstrip One, part of Oceania, not Eurasia.
Thankfully though we've done a good job so far at keeping out Ingsoc.
So THAT'S why the EU really wanted our vaccines: they DO work.....
Unfortunately it’s just Pfizer, in the data, at the moment. However
‘SEOUL (Reuters) - South Korea on Wednesday said it would grant its first approval for a coronavirus vaccine to AstraZeneca, and will allow use in people 65 years or older, despite advisory panels’ warning of a lack of data on its efficacy for the elderly’
If there’s one foreign country I really trust on Covid19, it’s South Korea. A smart, advanced nation that has handled a potentially horrific outbreak incredibly well, far better than anywhere in the West. So this is properly good news.
It isn't just Pfizer...from the Sun being briefed on this.
Scientists say early data also shows the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab — which was rolled out a month after Pfizer — offers similar levels of protection across all age groups.
Urgently restore friendly relations with the EU. This is a no-brainer. We absolutely have to cooperate with our EU friends, we depend on them for our food, they are crucial partners in our security, they are central to our economy in whatever arrangement we reach.
Err - it takes 2 to tango and all that
The EU have hardly shown themselves as acting in a "friendly" way with us have they?
OK then. What would friendly look like, compared to now?
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
We're Airstrip One, part of Oceania, not Eurasia.
Thankfully though we've done a good job so far at keeping out Ingsoc.
I would happily turn the Five Eyes into a more formal political bloc. Esp CANZUK
We share so much. Give us Freedom of Movement within
Indeed. Sadly, we don't really need the Chinese to ruin the settings of our historic buildings, since we've already done so much of the damage ourselves.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
IIRC that site is already blighted by hideous post war crap - apart from the historic Mint - so this lump might even be an improvement.
It is also a vote of confidence in London’s continuing importance, even if it is clearly a massive bunker for Chinese spies, as well. You can’t win them all
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
"Chuka Umunna, the former Labour MP and City banker who fought against "reckless" banker pay after the 2008 financial crash, has been hired by JP Morgan, America's biggest bank. "
(Telegraph)
Cue Corbynista outrage filling Twitter for next few hours.
He should never have been in Labour. He'll fit in much better there.
I could hardly contain my surprise at which figure Gooders finds significant.
Although it looks as if the total vote for the 3 left parties has gone down - so the green is a switch from SDP while both the CDU and ADP have gone up
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some random MEP".
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
He is the leader of the largest party in the European Parliament, quoted here in a live debate with the President of the European Commission, this very morning. If anything “is the EU” this is it. Right here. Under your stupid face. But of course you cannot bear to accept this fact.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the European Parliament's largest party.
His Westminster equivalent is Boris Johnson.
Hahaha
It's not funny it's true. The leader of the largest party in Westminster is Boris Johnson.
That doesn't mean he is the equivalent of Boris Johnson, that job goes more to UVDL, but that's just because the EU is undemocratic. Boris's job is divided between multiple people in the EU - Weber as the one who gets elected and faces elections, UVDL as the executive.
His equivalent here though is Boris not Farage, I don't recall Farage ever leading the largest party in Westminster. Heck I don't recall Farage ever being elected to Westminster.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Saying he's irrelevant is just saying that the EP is irrelevant.
Which I'm happy to sign up to, but seems like it invites some further questions as to how exactly EU democracy is supposedly functioning if the guy who has the most influence on direction for the largest voting bloc in the only elected bit, is irrelevant. So I'm not sure if it's really a point you want to be making.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
The "Anglosphere".
A racist retro fantasy.
Racist?
Only if you are willing to call the European Union a racist retro fantasy.
You're delving further and further into hypocrisy every passing day.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
We await your links....without holding breath.
Why? It's not exactly important.
I've been very critical of the EU throughout this. I think they've behaved awfully and are doing themselves a massive discredit. That isn't controversial.
I was merely highlighting that this guy is not "the EU" and we should simply pay attention to their official policy not the views of those meaningless rubber stampers in the EUParl.
It's almost like Brexiteers are obsessed with every facet of the EU or something?
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
Case in point: shellfish harvesters. It looks like the UK government could have negotiated access, but would have to commit to EU rules, something the UK government was not prepared to do.
But they won't go to shellfish harvesters and say, "on principle we will not be ruletaker from the EU, even though we don't care what the rules are and the EU rules are just as good as any we might come up with. So that means you lose your livelihoods. Sorry, but the principle is more important." Instead they get very aggressive towards the EU and blame them.
The dishonesty makes me mad. This is not a principle I subscribe to, but that's fine. People have different values. But what's the point of a principle you are not prepared to defend, or even admit to the consequences of ?
I would need to understand more about this issue before venturing an opinion here. Of course we have to conform to EU standards for the importation of anything (including shellfish) to the EU. Given that shellfish before met the standard, and UK law in this area has not changed (AFAIK), why have they suddenly stopped meeting it now? Granted we now need to *show* that they meet it - and that might cause more frustrating checks and paperwork initially, but we can work on that.
I will be one of the statistics tomorrow (or possibly Friday, depending on how in arrears the reporting is). Just been done: Oxford-AZ.
Good news that the EU are getting going with their vaccine program. I'm sure in a couple of weeks we'll all be there or thereabouts.
For those who are looking for a great and resounding British victory.. ...I have no words
Sadly, no.
The issue is not just the vaccines. The problem is that most states in the EU haven't setup a mass vaccination program. A whole bunch of infrastructure is required to do this quickly.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
We await your links....without holding breath.
Why? It's not exactly important.
I've been very critical of the EU throughout this. I think they've behaved awfully and are doing themselves a massive discredit. That isn't controversial.
I was merely highlighting that this guy is not "the EU" and we should simply pay attention to their official policy not the views of those meaningless rubber stampers in the EUParl.
It's almost like Brexiteers are obsessed with every facet of the EU or something?
Not particularly, but he was commenting on an issue that directly relates to the UK. Therefore I assume it is okay for us to comment on?
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
He's one of the most senior politicians in UvdL's party. I don't think he is an irrelevance.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
We await your links....without holding breath.
Why? It's not exactly important.
I've been very critical of the EU throughout this. I think they've behaved awfully and are doing themselves a massive discredit. That isn't controversial.
I was merely highlighting that this guy is not "the EU" and we should simply pay attention to their official policy not the views of those meaningless rubber stampers in the EUParl.
It's almost like Brexiteers are obsessed with every facet of the EU or something?
Not particularly, but he was commenting on an issue that directly relates to the UK. Therefore I assume it is okay for us to comment on?
The quote was posted with the suggestion that this was the EU's negotiating position and justified further vitriol. In case you forgot we aren't members of the EU anymore. We don't have to pay attention to this nonsense. We can simply respond to actual policy and statements of people with actual power.
So THAT'S why the EU really wanted our vaccines: they DO work.....
Unfortunately it’s just Pfizer, in the data, at the moment. However
‘SEOUL (Reuters) - South Korea on Wednesday said it would grant its first approval for a coronavirus vaccine to AstraZeneca, and will allow use in people 65 years or older, despite advisory panels’ warning of a lack of data on its efficacy for the elderly’
If there’s one foreign country I really trust on Covid19, it’s South Korea. A smart, advanced nation that has handled a potentially horrific outbreak incredibly well, far better than anywhere in the West. So this is properly good news.
It isn't just Pfizer...from the Sun being briefed on this.
Scientists say early data also shows the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab — which was rolled out a month after Pfizer — offers similar levels of protection across all age groups.
Getting imperfect vaccines rolled out quickly is better than banging out a perfect one in a year's time from now with this pandemic. As Van Tam says, we can have another vaccine later.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
I consider the European Parliament to be weak, but not irrelevant. You're going further and consider it entirely unimportant?
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
1. Too slow to implement. 2. Not broad enough 3. Too expensive 4. 10 years in jail? Why? No one will ever serve this - it is presumably just to make up for point 1
At the weekend the govt was saying we are not looking at vaccine passports. Today they say we are looking at them. Id give it about a week before we are not again, within a month we will probably have u-turned a couple of times more. They are inevitable, we should be ahead of the curve and planning how to implement them sensibly and on time. Instead we will panic too late and come up with something ineffective.
The ten years in jail is for perjury when completing the arrival forms. Same idea as Chris Huhne and the speeding ticket.
Huhne served 2 months which was about right and would be fine in a quarantine perjury case. The culture of pretending jail terms are 10 years when they are actually a couple of months is bizarre to me. I guess no politician ever loses out by promising tougher sentences even when they know its nonsense.
The culture is rotten from top to bottom.
The problem is if the law says ten years, they get a nine month sentence, then released after three.
If the law said three months in the first place we all know nobody would serve three months, they likely would serve no time at all.
I'm curious if anyone has a clue how to fix that?
Isn't the ten years a maximum, to allow judges to sentence more serious/repeat offenders for longer if they need to? I don't really have a problem with Huhne spending only a few months in jail; he was hardly a danger to the public and the damage to his career and reputation only really required him to spend five minutes in jail. From a "punishment fitting the crime" perspective, a few months felt OK.
Yes, I think so: the maximum sentence is there so that the worst cases can be appropriately punished. What would the worst case for perjury be? Probably something like knowingly lying in a murder trial in order to send someone to prison for an extended period for your own personal benefit. If you’ve deliberately caused someone to suffer years of imprisonment, then the possibility of equivalent years in prison yourself seems a reasonable sentence. It would not, on the other hand, be a reasonable sentence for lying on a police form in order to avoid a £150 fine. For that we would expect a very short custodial sentence at worst, surely?
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
We await your links....without holding breath.
Why? It's not exactly important.
I've been very critical of the EU throughout this. I think they've behaved awfully and are doing themselves a massive discredit. That isn't controversial.
I was merely highlighting that this guy is not "the EU" and we should simply pay attention to their official policy not the views of those meaningless rubber stampers in the EUParl.
It's almost like Brexiteers are obsessed with every facet of the EU or something?
Not particularly, but he was commenting on an issue that directly relates to the UK. Therefore I assume it is okay for us to comment on?
The quote was posted with the suggestion that this was the EU's negotiating position and justified further vitriol. In case you forgot we aren't members of the EU anymore. We don't have to pay attention to this nonsense. We can simply respond to actual policy and statements of people with actual power.
If the leader of the EPP is saying this, the question is who else is thinking it? These aren't off the cuff remarks.
So THAT'S why the EU really wanted our vaccines: they DO work.....
Unfortunately it’s just Pfizer, in the data, at the moment. However
‘SEOUL (Reuters) - South Korea on Wednesday said it would grant its first approval for a coronavirus vaccine to AstraZeneca, and will allow use in people 65 years or older, despite advisory panels’ warning of a lack of data on its efficacy for the elderly’
If there’s one foreign country I really trust on Covid19, it’s South Korea. A smart, advanced nation that has handled a potentially horrific outbreak incredibly well, far better than anywhere in the West. So this is properly good news.
It isn't just Pfizer...from the Sun being briefed on this.
Scientists say early data also shows the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab — which was rolled out a month after Pfizer — offers similar levels of protection across all age groups.
Getting imperfect vaccines rolled out quickly is better than banging out a perfect one in a year's time from now with this pandemic. As Van Tam says, we can have another vaccine later.
The Irish said it well: the best vaccine is the one available to you today.
So THAT'S why the EU really wanted our vaccines: they DO work.....
Unfortunately it’s just Pfizer, in the data, at the moment. However
‘SEOUL (Reuters) - South Korea on Wednesday said it would grant its first approval for a coronavirus vaccine to AstraZeneca, and will allow use in people 65 years or older, despite advisory panels’ warning of a lack of data on its efficacy for the elderly’
If there’s one foreign country I really trust on Covid19, it’s South Korea. A smart, advanced nation that has handled a potentially horrific outbreak incredibly well, far better than anywhere in the West. So this is properly good news.
It isn't just Pfizer...from the Sun being briefed on this.
Scientists say early data also shows the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab — which was rolled out a month after Pfizer — offers similar levels of protection across all age groups.
Getting imperfect vaccines rolled out quickly is better than banging out a perfect one in a year's time from now with this pandemic. As Van Tam says, we can have another vaccine later.
And given the excellent job the government has done in procurement, in 3 months time, we should have more vaccines than we know what to do with.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
The "Anglosphere".
A racist retro fantasy.
Racist?
Only if you are willing to call the European Union a racist retro fantasy.
You're delving further and further into hypocrisy every passing day.
Non-sequitur ad homini deflectibus is no match for the truth.
Urgently restore friendly relations with the EU. This is a no-brainer. We absolutely have to cooperate with our EU friends, we depend on them for our food, they are crucial partners in our security, they are central to our economy in whatever arrangement we reach.
Err - it takes 2 to tango and all that
The EU have hardly shown themselves as acting in a "friendly" way with us have they?
OK then. What would friendly look like, compared to now?
An earnest desire to find a way of mutually exchanging seed potatoes?
Case in point: shellfish harvesters. It looks like the UK government could have negotiated access, but would have to commit to EU rules, something the UK government was not prepared to do.
But they won't go to shellfish harvesters and say, "on principle we will not be ruletaker from the EU, even though we don't care what the rules are and the EU rules are just as good as any we might come up with. So that means you lose your livelihoods. Sorry, but the principle is more important." Instead they get very aggressive towards the EU and blame them.
The dishonesty makes me mad. This is not a principle I subscribe to, but that's fine. People have different values. But what's the point of a principle you are not prepared to defend, or even admit to the consequences of ?
I would need to understand more about this issue before venturing an opinion here. Of course we have to conform to EU standards for the importation of anything (including shellfish) to the EU. Given that shellfish before met the standard, and UK law in this area has not changed (AFAIK), why have they suddenly stopped meeting it now? Granted we now need to *show* that they meet it - and that might cause more frustrating checks and paperwork initially, but we can work on that.
I suggest because a treaty is a commitment. The UK would need to commit to following EU rules and the EU would need to commit to allowing the access if they do so. It looks like this fell at the first of those hurdles.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
I consider the European Parliament to be weak, but not irrelevant. You're going further and consider it entirely unimportant?
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
My position is simply that Brexiteers seem to spend their days unpicking the statements of every single politician of a foreign power. Why? Why so obsessed?
We're out of the EU. We don't need to concern ourselves with this anymore.
A person who's confident in Britain does not need to get worked up about this sort of thing. They should take a leaf out of the Government's book and rise above it.
Great header, Richard. If the debate in the comments is anything to go by, your follow up list of practical suggestions can probably wait a couple of years...
...Move on from the obsolete framing of ‘Remainers’ and ‘Leavers’...
Leavers voted for Brexit for reasons that make sense to them, but it wasn't to make life worse for people than it needs to be. You can't limit damage unless you accept the damage is there.
Except many leavers now say the reasons they voted Leave were bollocks, lies fed to them by BoZo and lapped up by unwitting idiots
They are keenly aware of the damage
I am not seeing a lot of evidence of Leavers deciding they shot themselves in the foot with Brexit. Some, but not many. Ultimately Richard is right. The way out of the mess is damage limitation. I have been saying this since 2016, but I voted Remain. Leavers need to drive this.
Scott is so far up his own echo chamber, he can't appreciate that many Leavers are perfectly happy with Brexit.
Yes, there are challenges; Northern Ireland, SPS checks on fish and agricultural produce, temporary movement of workers/musicians for services and getting financial services recognised all needs fixing - all of which has a practical solution - but, aside from that I think it's going rather well. My life this year is no different to last year, and nor are the prices I'm paying. Neither have my personal or professional options been constrained. There are adjustments and teething problems, sure, but otherwise cross-channel traffic is moving at almost normal volumes.
What I have seen is a new more confident UK on the world stage, defining and leading its own foreign policy with partners across the world, one in control of its borders, one considering serious market regulatory reforms for the first time in years, one leading an industrial strategy to become, for example, a world hub for pharmaceuticals, and one replacing the damaging CFP and CAP with more ecologically friendly versions.
Most of all I don't have to worry or care about the noisy and introspective distraction of internal EU politics across the Channel anymore, and what it might mean for us - which I think was distracting, hamstringing us and funnelling us toward a future we did not want. Instead, I can just watch it with amused interest, as we focus on what's best for us here in the UK.
Case in point: shellfish harvesters. It looks like the UK government could have negotiated access, but would have to commit to EU rules, something the UK government was not prepared to do.
But they won't go to shellfish harvesters and say, "on principle we will not be ruletaker from the EU, even though we don't care what the rules are and the EU rules are just as good as any we might come up with. So that means you lose your livelihoods. Sorry, but the principle is more important." Instead they get very aggressive towards the EU and blame them.
The dishonesty makes me mad. This is not a principle I subscribe to, but that's fine. People have different values. But what's the point of a principle you are not prepared to defend, or even admit to the consequences of ?
I would need to understand more about this issue before venturing an opinion here. Of course we have to conform to EU standards for the importation of anything (including shellfish) to the EU. Given that shellfish before met the standard, and UK law in this area has not changed (AFAIK), why have they suddenly stopped meeting it now? Granted we now need to *show* that they meet it - and that might cause more frustrating checks and paperwork initially, but we can work on that.
It seems, at least from the anguished cries emanating from the sector, that such checks make the export of shellfish essentially impossible due to the inevitable delays they cause.
I’m guessing that the EU offered some kind of 'we can offer equivalency, so long as any disagreements fall under EU courts' and this was the UK government’s red line. In essence, they had decided that even when the offer of carving out individual sectors was made, they’d rather a piece of the UK economy be forced out of business than any part of it be subject to EU courts.
Those sectors, even the ones that majority voted for Brexit, might have appreciated being asked whether they genuinely cared about these things, but apparently that wasn’t an option: gung ho totality Brexit was the only Brexit we were getting as far as the Johnson government was concerned.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some random MEP".
Farage, sadly, was the face of Brexit in the European Parliament and we wonder why the other 27 nations might not have much time for us now he has won and led us out of the EU.
There is a price to pay for the constant vilification that Farage and his media cheerleaders used for years to stoke up opposition to the EU. It's no use turning round now and bleating that the EU27 don't seem to like us much.
A dignified and rational argument for leaving the EU could have been made by the leavers but that wasn't the path they chose to take.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
I consider the European Parliament to be weak, but not irrelevant. You're going further and consider it entirely unimportant?
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
My position is simply that Brexiteers seem to spend their days unpicking the statements of every single politician of a foreign power. Why? Why so obsessed?
We're out of the EU. We don't need to concern ourselves with this anymore.
A person who's confident in Britain does not need to get worked up about this sort of thing. They should take a leaf out of the Government's book and rise above it.
Why?
Maybe because we're politics nerds on a politics website discussing the politics of our neighbours and how it directly relates to us.
In case you missed it we also discuss US politics a lot too. We aren't in the United States. If Nancy Pelosi said something similar regarding the United Kingdom then I have no doubt we'd be discussing that.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
I consider the European Parliament to be weak, but not irrelevant. You're going further and consider it entirely unimportant?
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
My position is simply that Brexiteers seem to spend their days unpicking the statements of every single politician of a foreign power. Why? Why so obsessed?
We're out of the EU. We don't need to concern ourselves with this anymore.
A person who's confident in Britain does not need to get worked up about this sort of thing. They should take a leaf out of the Government's book and rise above it.
Why?
Maybe because we're politics nerds on a politics website discussing the politics of our neighbours and how it directly relates to us.
In case you missed it we also discuss US politics a lot too. We aren't in the United States. If Nancy Pelosi said something similar regarding the United Kingdom then I have no doubt we'd be discussing that.
If Nancy Pelosi said something negative about Britain on Twitter we'd discuss it, sure, but we wouldn't start crying about how the USA hates Britain.
I will be one of the statistics tomorrow (or possibly Friday, depending on how in arrears the reporting is). Just been done: Oxford-AZ.
Good news that the EU are getting going with their vaccine program. I'm sure in a couple of weeks we'll all be there or thereabouts.
For those who are looking for a great and resounding British victory.. ...I have no words
What do you mean getting going? The major countries are often doing less now in a day than they were a few weeks ago.
And what they are doing is 2nd vaccinations due to their political need to distance from the common sense British approach - hence the actual number of people being newly protected right now is nugatory and they're back below Britain for total 1st vaccinations.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
I consider the European Parliament to be weak, but not irrelevant. You're going further and consider it entirely unimportant?
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
My position is simply that Brexiteers seem to spend their days unpicking the statements of every single politician of a foreign power. Why? Why so obsessed?
We're out of the EU. We don't need to concern ourselves with this anymore.
A person who's confident in Britain does not need to get worked up about this sort of thing. They should take a leaf out of the Government's book and rise above it.
Well the header relates to the EU. There is one poster who pastes Brexit related tweets ad nauseam....spoiler he's not a Brexiter.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some random MEP".
Farage, sadly, was the face of Brexit in the European Parliament and we wonder why the other 27 nations might not have much time for us now he has won and led us out of the EU.
There is a price to pay for the constant vilification that Farage and his media cheerleaders used for years to stoke up opposition to the EU. It's no use turning round now and bleating that the EU27 don't seem to like us much.
A dignified and rational argument for leaving the EU could have been made by the leavers but that wasn't the path they chose to take.
Bovine manure.
A dignified and rational argument for leaving the EU was made by the likes of Johnson, Gove and others in Vote Leave that explicitly excluded Faragists. Johnson refused to share a stage with Farage, for very good reason.
Farage is now a meaningless unelected hack chasing after migrants on a dinghy in the night with a camera phone while Johnson is First Lord of the Treasury and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
I consider the European Parliament to be weak, but not irrelevant. You're going further and consider it entirely unimportant?
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
My position is simply that Brexiteers seem to spend their days unpicking the statements of every single politician of a foreign power. Why? Why so obsessed?
We're out of the EU. We don't need to concern ourselves with this anymore.
A person who's confident in Britain does not need to get worked up about this sort of thing. They should take a leaf out of the Government's book and rise above it.
Well the header relates to the EU. There is one poster who pastes Brexit related tweets ad nauseam....spoiler he's not a Brexiter.
You mean the person who is constantly berated for posting such things after we've left the EU by Brexiteers?
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
The "Anglosphere".
A racist retro fantasy.
But, weirdly, working
Sounds a bit Ian Fleming to me.
The chaps you can trust.
Whatever. Your tediously Woke view of the world is as boring as it is pointless
The Anglosphere is no fantasy. It clearly exists politically - Five Eyes, the Commonwealth. It clearly exists culturally - language, movies, literature, TV. It also exists demographically - more Brits live in Australia than live in the entire EU.
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
Case in point: shellfish harvesters. It looks like the UK government could have negotiated access, but would have to commit to EU rules, something the UK government was not prepared to do.
But they won't go to shellfish harvesters and say, "on principle we will not be ruletaker from the EU, even though we don't care what the rules are and the EU rules are just as good as any we might come up with. So that means you lose your livelihoods. Sorry, but the principle is more important." Instead they get very aggressive towards the EU and blame them.
The dishonesty makes me mad. This is not a principle I subscribe to, but that's fine. People have different values. But what's the point of a principle you are not prepared to defend, or even admit to the consequences of ?
I would need to understand more about this issue before venturing an opinion here. Of course we have to conform to EU standards for the importation of anything (including shellfish) to the EU. Given that shellfish before met the standard, and UK law in this area has not changed (AFAIK), why have they suddenly stopped meeting it now? Granted we now need to *show* that they meet it - and that might cause more frustrating checks and paperwork initially, but we can work on that.
I suggest because a treaty is a commitment. The UK would need to commit to following EU rules and the EU would need to commit to allowing the access if they do so. It looks like this fell at the first of those hurdles.
Shellfish are an immediately consumed product. If our regulations are 100% within current EU laws, shellfish can surely be exported now, and consumed now. If we decide to change the law, the EU would be within its rights to ban shellfish imports or take some other measure. Is there any other way to look at this than to say a ban now because 'some day' the UK might diverge, is utterly disproportionate?
In my view the 'ban' is just the EU protecting its domestic industry - granted, by leaving, we've placed our own shellfish producers outside the scope of this protection, so they now need some form of protection or recompense from the UK. But let's not kid ourselves that the EU is on the side of righteousness here.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
I consider the European Parliament to be weak, but not irrelevant. You're going further and consider it entirely unimportant?
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
My position is simply that Brexiteers seem to spend their days unpicking the statements of every single politician of a foreign power. Why? Why so obsessed?
We're out of the EU. We don't need to concern ourselves with this anymore.
A person who's confident in Britain does not need to get worked up about this sort of thing. They should take a leaf out of the Government's book and rise above it.
Why?
Maybe because we're politics nerds on a politics website discussing the politics of our neighbours and how it directly relates to us.
In case you missed it we also discuss US politics a lot too. We aren't in the United States. If Nancy Pelosi said something similar regarding the United Kingdom then I have no doubt we'd be discussing that.
If Nancy Pelosi said something negative about Britain on Twitter we'd discuss it, sure, but we wouldn't start crying about how the USA hates Britain.
You would, and you’d blame it on Brexit, or anti-chestfeeders
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some random MEP".
Farage, sadly, was the face of Brexit in the European Parliament and we wonder why the other 27 nations might not have much time for us now he has won and led us out of the EU.
There is a price to pay for the constant vilification that Farage and his media cheerleaders used for years to stoke up opposition to the EU. It's no use turning round now and bleating that the EU27 don't seem to like us much.
A dignified and rational argument for leaving the EU could have been made by the leavers but that wasn't the path they chose to take.
I just checked and of the large EU countries only Germany is doing more on a 7 day rolling average basis now than they were at previous peak in late Jan, and even then it is only margin increase (and has been falling the past few days as they again return to doing effectively bugger all <100k / day).
The likes of France, Spain, Italy, still at same rate as they were 3-4 weeks ago.
It is the smaller / poorer countries of EU that has increased, Malta, Poland, etc. I believe they very naughty and bought supplies from outside the EU scheme (and I presume in time they will be getting a nasty letter telling them how bad they have been).
In comparison the UK have until 2 days ago (where we presume the bad weather has hit the numbers a little bit) just been a constantly increasing upward trend.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
I consider the European Parliament to be weak, but not irrelevant. You're going further and consider it entirely unimportant?
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
My position is simply that Brexiteers seem to spend their days unpicking the statements of every single politician of a foreign power. Why? Why so obsessed?
We're out of the EU. We don't need to concern ourselves with this anymore.
A person who's confident in Britain does not need to get worked up about this sort of thing. They should take a leaf out of the Government's book and rise above it.
Why?
Maybe because we're politics nerds on a politics website discussing the politics of our neighbours and how it directly relates to us.
In case you missed it we also discuss US politics a lot too. We aren't in the United States. If Nancy Pelosi said something similar regarding the United Kingdom then I have no doubt we'd be discussing that.
If Nancy Pelosi said something negative about Britain on Twitter we'd discuss it, sure, but we wouldn't start crying about how the USA hates Britain.
I think there's a good chance we'd be speculating as to whether the Democrat Party specifically was long-term committed to the US alliance with the UK.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
I consider the European Parliament to be weak, but not irrelevant. You're going further and consider it entirely unimportant?
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
My position is simply that Brexiteers seem to spend their days unpicking the statements of every single politician of a foreign power. Why? Why so obsessed?
We're out of the EU. We don't need to concern ourselves with this anymore.
A person who's confident in Britain does not need to get worked up about this sort of thing. They should take a leaf out of the Government's book and rise above it.
Why?
Maybe because we're politics nerds on a politics website discussing the politics of our neighbours and how it directly relates to us.
In case you missed it we also discuss US politics a lot too. We aren't in the United States. If Nancy Pelosi said something similar regarding the United Kingdom then I have no doubt we'd be discussing that.
If Nancy Pelosi said something negative about Britain on Twitter we'd discuss it, sure, but we wouldn't start crying about how the USA hates Britain.
You would, and you’d blame it on Brexit, or anti-chestfeeders
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Saying he's irrelevant is just saying that the EP is irrelevant.
Which I'm happy to sign up to, but seems like it invites some further questions as to how exactly EU democracy is supposedly functioning if the guy who has the most influence on direction for the largest voting bloc in the only elected bit, is irrelevant. So I'm not sure if it's really a point you want to be making.
All this post-hoc rationalizing for leaving the EU is quite something to observe. It feels a bit desperate. Also it isn't necessary. There was only one good reason for leaving but it trumps all the good reasons for not leaving put together. 52/48.
I will be one of the statistics tomorrow (or possibly Friday, depending on how in arrears the reporting is). Just been done: Oxford-AZ.
Good news that the EU are getting going with their vaccine program. I'm sure in a couple of weeks we'll all be there or thereabouts.
For those who are looking for a great and resounding British victory.. ...I have no words
What do you mean getting going? The major countries are often doing less now in a day than they were a few weeks ago.
And what they are doing is 2nd vaccinations due to their political need to distance from the common sense British approach - hence the actual number of people being newly protected right now is nugatory and they're back below Britain for total 1st vaccinations.
Supply is clearly an issue everywhere but things have almost ground to a halt in some EU countries because as you state they cannot proceed with 1st doses because their limited supply is required to catch up with 2nd doses.
On Sunday Belgium managed a mere 2,644 1st and 2nd doses combined (a UK equivalent based on population would be 16,000 vaccinations). Weather may have played its part but their best day has been approx 28k and the most recent 7 day average is around 10k. It's no wonder tensions are rising among the public and the politicians.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
The "Anglosphere".
A racist retro fantasy.
But, weirdly, working
Sounds a bit Ian Fleming to me.
The chaps you can trust.
Whatever. Your tediously Woke view of the world is as boring as it is pointless
The Anglosphere is no fantasy. It clearly exists politically - Five Eyes, the Commonwealth. It clearly exists culturally - language, movies, literature, TV. It also exists demographically - more Brits live in Australia than live in the entire EU.
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
The irony is that the Anglosphere is far more racially diverse and "Woke" than the EU. Nor it is retro - most world-leading Western companies are based or HQ'ed there.
It's the fact that its genesis was through the British Empire that offends the Left.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
The "Anglosphere".
A racist retro fantasy.
Racist?
Only if you are willing to call the European Union a racist retro fantasy.
You're delving further and further into hypocrisy every passing day.
Non-sequitur ad homini deflectibus is no match for the truth.
The truth is that the Anglosphere is real and has been for decades. It's not new or a fantasy.
Five Eyes, which is the Anglosphere nations, dates back to World War Two.
It's not just older than the European Union, it's not just older the Single Market, it's not just older than the European Economic Community . . . It is even older than the European Coal and Steel Community.
So yes your dismissing an eighty year old alliance as a racist fantasy is a total non sequitur and not the truth.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some MEP".
Brexiteers: The European Parliament is just a body of meaningless rubber stampers.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
So you accept he's not just "some random MEP"?
Not at all. His view is as important as some "random MEP". I.e. not important whatsoever. We can safely ignore him.
I consider the European Parliament to be weak, but not irrelevant. You're going further and consider it entirely unimportant?
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
My position is simply that Brexiteers seem to spend their days unpicking the statements of every single politician of a foreign power. Why? Why so obsessed?
We're out of the EU. We don't need to concern ourselves with this anymore.
A person who's confident in Britain does not need to get worked up about this sort of thing. They should take a leaf out of the Government's book and rise above it.
Why?
Maybe because we're politics nerds on a politics website discussing the politics of our neighbours and how it directly relates to us.
In case you missed it we also discuss US politics a lot too. We aren't in the United States. If Nancy Pelosi said something similar regarding the United Kingdom then I have no doubt we'd be discussing that.
If Nancy Pelosi said something negative about Britain on Twitter we'd discuss it, sure, but we wouldn't start crying about how the USA hates Britain.
I think there's a good chance we'd be speculating as to whether the Democrat Party specifically was long-term committed to the US alliance with the UK.
Which is also fine. But I wasn't objecting to that. I was objecting to the characterisation that what this guy is saying is what "the EU" is saying which is clearly nonsense.
He's just some random MEP. It's like saying something Farage tweets is "The UK".
He's the leader of the largest party in the parliament.
So what? He isn't "the EU".
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
I was pointing out the comparison to Farage is ridiculous. He's probably the second most important politician in the parliament, after the parliament president.
You mean that irrelevant parliament that has no power? Yeah I remember that one.
Yeah, I'm sure he has absolutely no influence within the parliament or with members of the commission.
What's your point? This is ridiculous.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
Sorry, why am I obsessed again? I was pointing out it was ridiculous to claim he was just "some MEP" with about as much influence as Farage.
I never said anything about influence.
OK, but you made a comparison to Farage. I think a leader of the largest grouping in the parliament is a little more than "some random MEP".
Farage, sadly, was the face of Brexit in the European Parliament and we wonder why the other 27 nations might not have much time for us now he has won and led us out of the EU.
There is a price to pay for the constant vilification that Farage and his media cheerleaders used for years to stoke up opposition to the EU. It's no use turning round now and bleating that the EU27 don't seem to like us much.
A dignified and rational argument for leaving the EU could have been made by the leavers but that wasn't the path they chose to take.
Bovine manure.
A dignified and rational argument for leaving the EU was made by the likes of Johnson, Gove and others in Vote Leave that explicitly excluded Faragists. Johnson refused to share a stage with Farage, for very good reason.
Farage is now a meaningless unelected hack chasing after migrants on a dinghy in the night with a camera phone while Johnson is First Lord of the Treasury and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
That's a win in my books.
Farage was campaigning to leave the EU when Johnson was fwahing around in the Bullingdon Club with the other self entitled young pr8cks
Brexit was a flag of convenience for Johnson, just like every flag he has ever campaigned under.
I take it they want to move from their current embassy then.
A beautiful house in Portland Place, perpetually opposed by Falun Gong protesters outside.
It always seemed rather small for a superpower like China. It would a good Embassy in London for independent Catalonia.
In the days when getting up in the morning on a sunny day during the holidays and deciding to pop into London was a thing, it was a landmark on my usual walk from Marylebone to the British Museum for lunch.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
But Philip doesn't want India in the "Anglosphere".
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
No.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
No.
They will work against China when it suits their interests but that is entirely a matter of self interest.
They aren't closer or more vital on other issues than that. They aren't a part of Five Eyes and for very good reason.
Case in point: shellfish harvesters. It looks like the UK government could have negotiated access, but would have to commit to EU rules, something the UK government was not prepared to do.
But they won't go to shellfish harvesters and say, "on principle we will not be ruletaker from the EU, even though we don't care what the rules are and the EU rules are just as good as any we might come up with. So that means you lose your livelihoods. Sorry, but the principle is more important." Instead they get very aggressive towards the EU and blame them.
The dishonesty makes me mad. This is not a principle I subscribe to, but that's fine. People have different values. But what's the point of a principle you are not prepared to defend, or even admit to the consequences of ?
I would need to understand more about this issue before venturing an opinion here. Of course we have to conform to EU standards for the importation of anything (including shellfish) to the EU. Given that shellfish before met the standard, and UK law in this area has not changed (AFAIK), why have they suddenly stopped meeting it now? Granted we now need to *show* that they meet it - and that might cause more frustrating checks and paperwork initially, but we can work on that.
I suggest because a treaty is a commitment. The UK would need to commit to following EU rules and the EU would need to commit to allowing the access if they do so. It looks like this fell at the first of those hurdles.
Shellfish are an immediately consumed product. If our regulations are 100% within current EU laws, shellfish can surely be exported now, and consumed now. If we decide to change the law, the EU would be within its rights to ban shellfish imports or take some other measure. Is there any other way to look at this than to say a ban now because 'some day' the UK might diverge, is utterly disproportionate?
In my view the 'ban' is just the EU protecting its domestic industry - granted, by leaving, we've placed our own shellfish producers outside the scope of this protection, so they now need some form of protection or recompense from the UK. But let's not kid ourselves that the EU is on the side of righteousness here.
I suspect that isn't the case here because there doesn't seem to be much of an ex-UK EU production to protect. In other cases I would agree with you.
The UK government and leavers in general seem to struggle with the purpose of a treaty is to get the other side to commit to things in the future that they might choose not to do.
... Intriguingly, the ultra europhile FT is coming round to this position. The western world is splitting between the EU - more friendly to Russia and China - and the Anglosphere - more wary of both
‘the idea of an Anglosphere is taking on an unexpected contemporary relevance. The trigger is the increasingly assertive behaviour of China, which is bringing together a group of English-speaking countries, all of whom have adopted more confrontational policies towards Beijing’
I'm not sure about that. It's true that the Anglosphere has been quicker to start becoming much more wary of China in particular than the EU has, but I think that's probably a temporary phenomenon. After all it's not very long since the Anglosphere was as keen as anyone to cuddle up to China, and the same factors which are driving us to reconsider that will increasingly gain weight in the EU. Give it a couple of years.
Russia's a bit different. It's largely irrelevant to much of the Anglosphere, at least in trade terms. For the EU, it's a close neighbour and happens to supply a large chunk of its energy.
No. Germany’s successful export-driven economy is hugely dependent on China.
“The People's Republic of China is again Germany's main trading partner
According to final results, goods worth 206.0 billion euros were traded between Germany and the People's Republic of China in 2019 (exports and imports).”
Germany leads the EU (even more so, now that the UK has quit). There will be anti-Chinese EU murmurs, but no more than that.
Oh certainly. But that's even more true of Australia, and the US is also economically very bound up with China, albeit more as a supplier and sub-contractor for US firms than as an export market.
And yet Oz seems much more willing to square up to Beijing than Berlin
I do believe this will become a geopolitical feature in the future. Anglosphere <> EU <> Russia <> China
India will also be part of the Anglosphere, Japan and South Korea and Taiwan also connected to it
No they won't.
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
The "Anglosphere".
A racist retro fantasy.
But, weirdly, working
Sounds a bit Ian Fleming to me.
The chaps you can trust.
Whatever. Your tediously Woke view of the world is as boring as it is pointless
The Anglosphere is no fantasy. It clearly exists politically - Five Eyes, the Commonwealth. It clearly exists culturally - language, movies, literature, TV. It also exists demographically - more Brits live in Australia than live in the entire EU.
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
The irony is that the Anglosphere is far more racially diverse and "Woke" than the EU. Nor it is retro - most world-leading Western companies are based or HQ'ed there.
It's the fact that its genesis was through the British Empire that offends the Left.
Not that ethnic representation is in any way 'woke' but The Brexit Party accounted for more ethnic minority MEPs than any other party in history. I believe the EU parliament is around 97% white since they left.
Case in point: shellfish harvesters. It looks like the UK government could have negotiated access, but would have to commit to EU rules, something the UK government was not prepared to do.
But they won't go to shellfish harvesters and say, "on principle we will not be ruletaker from the EU, even though we don't care what the rules are and the EU rules are just as good as any we might come up with. So that means you lose your livelihoods. Sorry, but the principle is more important." Instead they get very aggressive towards the EU and blame them.
The dishonesty makes me mad. This is not a principle I subscribe to, but that's fine. People have different values. But what's the point of a principle you are not prepared to defend, or even admit to the consequences of ?
I would need to understand more about this issue before venturing an opinion here. Of course we have to conform to EU standards for the importation of anything (including shellfish) to the EU. Given that shellfish before met the standard, and UK law in this area has not changed (AFAIK), why have they suddenly stopped meeting it now? Granted we now need to *show* that they meet it - and that might cause more frustrating checks and paperwork initially, but we can work on that.
It seems, at least from the anguished cries emanating from the sector, that such checks make the export of shellfish essentially impossible due to the inevitable delays they cause.
I’m guessing that the EU offered some kind of 'we can offer equivalency, so long as any disagreements fall under EU courts' and this was the UK government’s red line. In essence, they had decided that even when the offer of carving out individual sectors was made, they’d rather a piece of the UK economy be forced out of business than any part of it be subject to EU courts.
Those sectors, even the ones that majority voted for Brexit, might have appreciated being asked whether they genuinely cared about these things, but apparently that wasn’t an option: gung ho totality Brexit was the only Brexit we were getting as far as the Johnson government was concerned.
So what are these checks? Why are they taking so long? There's nothing wrong with information - there's nothing wrong with the EU insisting that we prove our Clams are healthy and had long, happy, frolicksome lives - how do we give them the information they require, quicker then we (and they) currently think is possible? Can we use more digital, more specialised electronic scanning kit etc.?
The EU (in normal times) already consumed a lot more fish than it fished. That included Britain's fish, which will now be added at the expense of the European total, year on year. In other words, this is a growth industry and that fish is as good as sold, IF we get this other stuff right. So why can't we get on with it?
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
You're missing one critical thing here. Does anyone in the "Anglosphere" other than Britain want that level of formality and political integration?
Because if not this entire discussion is academic.
I said “slightly” more formal. Personally I’d go the whole hog and have a political CANZUK union, it would be a superbly weird creature, United under the Crown and with immense resources and potential, and a suitably imperial capital in London.
Sadly, the time for that is gone for now (it was probably 100 years ago, tho it may return) so ambitions are more limited. But they do exist.
Comments
Thankfully though we've done a good job so far at keeping out Ingsoc.
Scientists say early data also shows the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab — which was rolled out a month after Pfizer — offers similar levels of protection across all age groups.
We share so much. Give us Freedom of Movement within
India will forge their own path as will those East and Southeast Asian nations.
They'll work with the Anglosphere when it suits their interests, but work with other blocs when it suits theirs. That's the original meaning of the term third world.
It is also a vote of confidence in London’s continuing importance, even if it is clearly a massive bunker for Chinese spies, as well. You can’t win them all
The EU have on the whole acted like utter bellends throughout this whole thing, including this guy, but it's hysterical to keep highlighting everything he's saying as "the EU". I'm sure there's MEPs saying the opposite too.
Just been done: Oxford-AZ.
His Westminster equivalent is Boris Johnson.
Is he a bellend? Yes.
Does he represent the EU? No.
Therefore he isn't "the EU".
You people are completely obsessed.
A racist retro fantasy.
Also Brexiteers: The leader of the biggest party of the European Parliament is a very important person who has huge influence on the EU.
Lol.
That doesn't mean he is the equivalent of Boris Johnson, that job goes more to UVDL, but that's just because the EU is undemocratic. Boris's job is divided between multiple people in the EU - Weber as the one who gets elected and faces elections, UVDL as the executive.
His equivalent here though is Boris not Farage, I don't recall Farage ever leading the largest party in Westminster. Heck I don't recall Farage ever being elected to Westminster.
For those who are looking for a great and resounding British victory.. ...I have no words
Which I'm happy to sign up to, but seems like it invites some further questions as to how exactly EU democracy is supposedly functioning if the guy who has the most influence on direction for the largest voting bloc in the only elected bit, is irrelevant. So I'm not sure if it's really a point you want to be making.
Only if you are willing to call the European Union a racist retro fantasy.
You're delving further and further into hypocrisy every passing day.
I've been very critical of the EU throughout this. I think they've behaved awfully and are doing themselves a massive discredit. That isn't controversial.
I was merely highlighting that this guy is not "the EU" and we should simply pay attention to their official policy not the views of those meaningless rubber stampers in the EUParl.
It's almost like Brexiteers are obsessed with every facet of the EU or something?
The issue is not just the vaccines. The problem is that most states in the EU haven't setup a mass vaccination program. A whole bunch of infrastructure is required to do this quickly.
It always seemed rather small for a superpower like China. It would a good Embassy in London for independent Catalonia.
Commenters below the line are seething ! Getting imperfect vaccines rolled out quickly is better than banging out a perfect one in a year's time from now with this pandemic. As Van Tam says, we can have another vaccine later.
Then I'm assuming you consider the EU entirely undemocratic then?
So you think we were wise to leave? Or do you think democracy is overrated?
The chaps you can trust.
https://twitter.com/fheisbourg/status/1359132026440417280?s=21
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/10/japan-pfizer-vaccine-doses-wrong-syringes
Not just the EU struggling. Getting the right equipment in place really sounds like the sort of thing that should have been taken care of months ago.
We're out of the EU. We don't need to concern ourselves with this anymore.
A person who's confident in Britain does not need to get worked up about this sort of thing. They should take a leaf out of the Government's book and rise above it.
If the debate in the comments is anything to go by, your follow up list of practical suggestions can probably wait a couple of years...
...Move on from the obsolete framing of ‘Remainers’ and ‘Leavers’...
Pragmatists vs diehard Brexiteers ?
Yes, there are challenges; Northern Ireland, SPS checks on fish and agricultural produce, temporary movement of workers/musicians for services and getting financial services recognised all needs fixing - all of which has a practical solution - but, aside from that I think it's going rather well. My life this year is no different to last year, and nor are the prices I'm paying. Neither have my personal or professional options been constrained. There are adjustments and teething problems, sure, but otherwise cross-channel traffic is moving at almost normal volumes.
What I have seen is a new more confident UK on the world stage, defining and leading its own foreign policy with partners across the world, one in control of its borders, one considering serious market regulatory reforms for the first time in years, one leading an industrial strategy to become, for example, a world hub for pharmaceuticals, and one replacing the damaging CFP and CAP with more ecologically friendly versions.
Most of all I don't have to worry or care about the noisy and introspective distraction of internal EU politics across the Channel anymore, and what it might mean for us - which I think was distracting, hamstringing us and funnelling us toward a future we did not want. Instead, I can just watch it with amused interest, as we focus on what's best for us here in the UK.
I’m guessing that the EU offered some kind of 'we can offer equivalency, so long as any disagreements fall under EU courts' and this was the UK government’s red line. In essence, they had decided that even when the offer of carving out individual sectors was made, they’d rather a piece of the UK economy be forced out of business than any part of it be subject to EU courts.
Those sectors, even the ones that majority voted for Brexit, might have appreciated being asked whether they genuinely cared about these things, but apparently that wasn’t an option: gung ho totality Brexit was the only Brexit we were getting as far as the Johnson government was concerned.
There is a price to pay for the constant vilification that Farage and his media cheerleaders used for years to stoke up opposition to the EU. It's no use turning round now and bleating that the EU27 don't seem to like us much.
A dignified and rational argument for leaving the EU could have been made by the leavers but that wasn't the path they chose to take.
Maybe because we're politics nerds on a politics website discussing the politics of our neighbours and how it directly relates to us.
In case you missed it we also discuss US politics a lot too. We aren't in the United States. If Nancy Pelosi said something similar regarding the United Kingdom then I have no doubt we'd be discussing that.
A dignified and rational argument for leaving the EU was made by the likes of Johnson, Gove and others in Vote Leave that explicitly excluded Faragists. Johnson refused to share a stage with Farage, for very good reason.
Farage is now a meaningless unelected hack chasing after migrants on a dinghy in the night with a camera phone while Johnson is First Lord of the Treasury and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.
That's a win in my books.
Edit could see it become the residence of the ambassador.
The Anglosphere is no fantasy. It clearly exists politically - Five Eyes, the Commonwealth. It clearly exists culturally - language, movies, literature, TV. It also exists demographically - more Brits live in Australia than live in the entire EU.
It’s not hard to envisage a world, dividing into blocs, when the Anglosphere decides to make its cousinage slightly more formal and political.
India has already had many near confrontations with China, as I said they will be part of the Anglosphere in order to contain China and it is vital they are if the Anglosphere is to have any relevance in Asia
In my view the 'ban' is just the EU protecting its domestic industry - granted, by leaving, we've placed our own shellfish producers outside the scope of this protection, so they now need some form of protection or recompense from the UK. But let's not kid ourselves that the EU is on the side of righteousness here.
The likes of France, Spain, Italy, still at same rate as they were 3-4 weeks ago.
It is the smaller / poorer countries of EU that has increased, Malta, Poland, etc. I believe they very naughty and bought supplies from outside the EU scheme (and I presume in time they will be getting a nasty letter telling them how bad they have been).
In comparison the UK have until 2 days ago (where we presume the bad weather has hit the numbers a little bit) just been a constantly increasing upward trend.
Because if not this entire discussion is academic.
On Sunday Belgium managed a mere 2,644 1st and 2nd doses combined (a UK equivalent based on population would be 16,000 vaccinations). Weather may have played its part but their best day has been approx 28k and the most recent 7 day average is around 10k. It's no wonder tensions are rising among the public and the politicians.
It's the fact that its genesis was through the British Empire that offends the Left.
Five Eyes, which is the Anglosphere nations, dates back to World War Two.
It's not just older than the European Union, it's not just older the Single Market, it's not just older than the European Economic Community . . . It is even older than the European Coal and Steel Community.
So yes your dismissing an eighty year old alliance as a racist fantasy is a total non sequitur and not the truth.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_CANZUK_endorsements
Brexit was a flag of convenience for Johnson, just like every flag he has ever campaigned under.
Leon asserted that it isn't hard to envisage a world whether the "Anglosphere" makes their "union" more politically linked.
I said fine, but do they want that? What level of political integration is the limit? Do they want free movement of people, for example?
There's several giant leaps from "5 Eyes" to "deeper ties" to "political union".
I'm not opposed to further integration with the "Anglosphere" by the way.
They will work against China when it suits their interests but that is entirely a matter of self interest.
They aren't closer or more vital on other issues than that. They aren't a part of Five Eyes and for very good reason.
The UK government and leavers in general seem to struggle with the purpose of a treaty is to get the other side to commit to things in the future that they might choose not to do.
The EU (in normal times) already consumed a lot more fish than it fished. That included Britain's fish, which will now be added at the expense of the European total, year on year. In other words, this is a growth industry and that fish is as good as sold, IF we get this other stuff right. So why can't we get on with it?
Sadly, the time for that is gone for now (it was probably 100 years ago, tho it may return) so ambitions are more limited. But they do exist.
Straws in the wind:
https://www.cityam.com/gday-uk-australia-trade-deal-set-to-increase-freedom-of-movement-downunder/