Some More on topic. I think I am the only poster who is today.
Starmer’s problem in that he has no personality, so he will always lose out as to who would make the better Prime Minister because of that, because GE voting for so many voters come down to its either her or him, or him or him. But to offset that Starmer is doing nothing to make Labour electable again, by tackling every single reason why voters wont vote Labour at the next GE. He hasn’t got to grips with controlling his own Party yet, he still has the inept vote losing Angela Rayner as his deputy, but has a typical do nothing policy about it. It’s easily solved. The party came up with the perfect way to remove the ridiculous elected deputy, just a two thirds vote in NEC – imagine US president not allowed their pick veep and get one dumped on them by their party and disaster that would be – but as it was too close to the last election they bottled it so didn’t do it. Now its mid term Starmer needs to be taking control and getting such baggage out the way. He needs to be actively demonstrating that things have changed to win voters minds back. He needs to remove Rayner and appoint a better spokesperson he can trust. He needs to demonstrate he has control of the Party, NEC and policy. At the moment, in voters minds, Starmer doesn’t have control over any of that, and it makes him and Labour unelectable.
Labour’s policy positions are still exactly the same in voters minds as the last general Election manifesto. No? Those were put on the table, nothing else has been put on the table since.
Labour are an anti Brexit, pro EU party? No? Well in voters minds they were, what has changed. What has rabidly pro EU Starmer actually said about Brexit and Global Britain recently? There is only one example, and that is where Labour would have joined EU in vaccine procurement. That is what is in voters minds when it comes to Brexit positioning.
Just some example of many things Starmer must do for Labour to become electable again. The lazy do nothing approach is rightly getting the proper hammering in these disastrous mid term polls for Labour.
I don't think that Starmer has no personality. It is just that as a lawyer he had practised suppressing it in a professional context. He has to unlearn a bit of that, I think.
That's well put and I agree. He needs to unbutton a bit. But only a bit. Johnson is a phony; that Starmer isn't is a distinction I wouldn't want to see thrown away.
That Met Gala really does look like The Hunger Games.
The Met Gala is an obscene display of vulgar wealth and when talking of wealth taxes there is one of your targets
Start with Miss Ocasio-Cortez - who I just remembered has a salary of $174,000 per year, before tax.
I’m going to take a wild guess that she didn’t buy her own $30,000 ticket to the ball - so who did, and what do they expect from her in return?
Her campaign has over $5m in the bank and you can see the top contributors if you are really interested. They want her to represent their views, which she is doing with the dress. Not a fan at all of US political fundraising, but her funds are raised far more democratically than most of their politicians.
So she should be spending $30K on a ball ticket (and then we have the dress).
Woman of the People!
Actually, if she wants to do that, fine. But she can stop moralising and telling the rest of us how she is so much a better person.
Socialist girls must NOT look glam and go to parties. It's just not right!
La Raducanu is presumably now a capitalist ...
She's between 18-24 years old and so statistically more likely to lean Labour than not; however, we have no evidence of her politics.
She could be straight down the road or a capitalist, as you say, given her parents occupation.
EDIT: she might also couldn't care less.
While there has been a volley of speculation about Raducanu's political match, she has never been seen at a rally and we cannot de-deuce which set she belongs to, nor whether politics is her game. Each party, to a fault, looks for an advantage, even a backhand compliment or any kind of break to net her support and rally in the polls. While politicos might court her, it is likely she has another love.
That Met Gala really does look like The Hunger Games.
The Met Gala is an obscene display of vulgar wealth and when talking of wealth taxes there is one of your targets
Start with Miss Ocasio-Cortez - who I just remembered has a salary of $174,000 per year, before tax.
I’m going to take a wild guess that she didn’t buy her own $30,000 ticket to the ball - so who did, and what do they expect from her in return?
Her campaign has over $5m in the bank and you can see the top contributors if you are really interested. They want her to represent their views, which she is doing with the dress. Not a fan at all of US political fundraising, but her funds are raised far more democratically than most of their politicians.
So she should be spending $30K on a ball ticket (and then we have the dress).
Woman of the People!
Actually, if she wants to do that, fine. But she can stop moralising and telling the rest of us how she is so much a better person.
Socialist girls must NOT look glam and go to parties. It's just not right!
La Raducanu is presumably now a capitalist ...
She's between 18-24 years old and so statistically more likely to lean Labour than not; however, we have no evidence of her politics.
She could be straight down the road or a capitalist, as you say, given her parents occupation.
EDIT: she might also couldn't care less.
While there has been a volley of speculation about Raducanu's political match, she has never been seen at a rally and we cannot de-deuce which set she belongs to, nor whether politics is her game. Each party, to a fault, looks for an advantage, even a backhand compliment or any kind of break to net her support and rally in the polls. While politicos might court her, it is likely she has another love.
Let her choose if she becomes part of the political racket.
That Met Gala really does look like The Hunger Games.
The Met Gala is an obscene display of vulgar wealth and when talking of wealth taxes there is one of your targets
Start with Miss Ocasio-Cortez - who I just remembered has a salary of $174,000 per year, before tax.
I’m going to take a wild guess that she didn’t buy her own $30,000 ticket to the ball - so who did, and what do they expect from her in return?
Her campaign has over $5m in the bank and you can see the top contributors if you are really interested. They want her to represent their views, which she is doing with the dress. Not a fan at all of US political fundraising, but her funds are raised far more democratically than most of their politicians.
So she should be spending $30K on a ball ticket (and then we have the dress).
Woman of the People!
Actually, if she wants to do that, fine. But she can stop moralising and telling the rest of us how she is so much a better person.
Socialist girls must NOT look glam and go to parties. It's just not right!
La Raducanu is presumably now a capitalist ...
She's between 18-24 years old and so statistically more likely to lean Labour than not; however, we have no evidence of her politics.
She could be straight down the road or a capitalist, as you say, given her parents occupation.
EDIT: she might also couldn't care less.
While there has been a volley of speculation about Raducanu's political match, she has never been seen at a rally and we cannot de-deuce which set she belongs to, nor whether politics is her game. Each party, to a fault, looks for an advantage, even a backhand compliment or any kind of break to net her support and rally in the polls. While politicos might court her, it is likely she has another love.
Wholesale price of electricity was 35p a KWh yesterday.
Yikes.
This issue could explode this winter.
Fucking hell.
Where's that tidal lagoon ?
Too much reliance on wind/solar?
We have had a strangely windless summer apparently. That's part of what's going on.
Long term wind should be OK for the UK though, more CO2 = more heat = more energy in the atmosphere = more wind generation. I'd lean in the direction of more windfarms as part of the overall mix. Fortunately looks like there are shovels in the ground for the big dogger bank one https://doggerbank.com/construction/ Dogger always seems to have SOME wind whenever I listen to the shipping forecast during a test.
That Met Gala really does look like The Hunger Games.
The Met Gala is an obscene display of vulgar wealth and when talking of wealth taxes there is one of your targets
Start with Miss Ocasio-Cortez - who I just remembered has a salary of $174,000 per year, before tax.
I’m going to take a wild guess that she didn’t buy her own $30,000 ticket to the ball - so who did, and what do they expect from her in return?
Her campaign has over $5m in the bank and you can see the top contributors if you are really interested. They want her to represent their views, which she is doing with the dress. Not a fan at all of US political fundraising, but her funds are raised far more democratically than most of their politicians.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
That Met Gala really does look like The Hunger Games.
The Met Gala is an obscene display of vulgar wealth and when talking of wealth taxes there is one of your targets
Start with Miss Ocasio-Cortez - who I just remembered has a salary of $174,000 per year, before tax.
I’m going to take a wild guess that she didn’t buy her own $30,000 ticket to the ball - so who did, and what do they expect from her in return?
Her campaign has over $5m in the bank and you can see the top contributors if you are really interested. They want her to represent their views, which she is doing with the dress. Not a fan at all of US political fundraising, but her funds are raised far more democratically than most of their politicians.
So she should be spending $30K on a ball ticket (and then we have the dress).
Woman of the People!
Actually, if she wants to do that, fine. But she can stop moralising and telling the rest of us how she is so much a better person.
Socialist girls must NOT look glam and go to parties. It's just not right!
La Raducanu is presumably now a capitalist ...
She's between 18-24 years old and so statistically more likely to lean Labour than not; however, we have no evidence of her politics.
She could be straight down the road or a capitalist, as you say, given her parents occupation.
EDIT: she might also couldn't care less.
While there has been a volley of speculation about Raducanu's political match, she has never been seen at a rally and we cannot de-deuce which set she belongs to, nor whether politics is her game. Each party, to a fault, looks for an advantage, even a backhand compliment or any kind of break to net her support and rally in the polls. While politicos might court her, it is likely she has another love.
Wholesale price of electricity was 35p a KWh yesterday.
Yikes.
This issue could explode this winter.
We do not have sufficient power generation capacity. We are reliant on interconnectors to (almost always) import power from other markets. Or if we want to roll back the years reliant on coal imports from Venezuela or Russia (with the current +100% shipping costs...).
So yes, prices are going to shoot up because we have basically done nothing to secure sufficient power provision.
That Met Gala really does look like The Hunger Games.
The Met Gala is an obscene display of vulgar wealth and when talking of wealth taxes there is one of your targets
Start with Miss Ocasio-Cortez - who I just remembered has a salary of $174,000 per year, before tax.
I’m going to take a wild guess that she didn’t buy her own $30,000 ticket to the ball - so who did, and what do they expect from her in return?
Her campaign has over $5m in the bank and you can see the top contributors if you are really interested. They want her to represent their views, which she is doing with the dress. Not a fan at all of US political fundraising, but her funds are raised far more democratically than most of their politicians.
So she should be spending $30K on a ball ticket (and then we have the dress).
Woman of the People!
Actually, if she wants to do that, fine. But she can stop moralising and telling the rest of us how she is so much a better person.
Socialist girls must NOT look glam and go to parties. It's just not right!
La Raducanu is presumably now a capitalist ...
She's between 18-24 years old and so statistically more likely to lean Labour than not; however, we have no evidence of her politics.
She could be straight down the road or a capitalist, as you say, given her parents occupation.
EDIT: she might also couldn't care less.
While there has been a volley of speculation about Raducanu's political match, she has never been seen at a rally and we cannot de-deuce which set she belongs to, nor whether politics is her game. Each party, to a fault, looks for an advantage, even a backhand compliment or any kind of break to net her support and rally in the polls. While politicos might court her, it is likely she has another love.
Let her choose if she becomes part of the political racket.
If other MPs did vote for the EEA then I stand corrected. Remiss of me not to know of a rare instance of pro-EU MPs voting in a pro-EU way rather than alongside anti-EU Conservative backbenchers.
I am referring to the "indicative votes", as far as I am aware the only opportunity MPs had to vote for single market or customs union membership. As you will see below, Labour MPs voted overwhelmingly for these soft Brexit options, Tory MPs overwhelmingly opposed.
I'd be grateful if everyone took a look at this so we can put to bed the idea that a soft Brexit was blocked by Remainer MPs when in fact the opposite is true. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts!
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Thats what we have now. A 3rd country which in the EEA means full customs. Not reciprocated here. We signed the deal for customs checks, allowed them to be imposed as we demanded by the other side, and not imposed here.
If we want to negotiate them away now, they hold the cards do they not? As they benefit from the current impasse at our cost?
I have no problem with a free trade deal. How have we ended up with a one-sided one?
Better than the factually inaccurate nonsense in the New Statesman anyways. Which wasn't hard.
Note the article also points out Nanos has the Liberals back ahead now, though still well short of the lead they would need for a majority Trudeau called the election to try and win that should ensure they narrowly win most seats still
The consensus is 70-75% Liberal most seats. So, similar to Clinton/Trump. Several things would have to fall together to produce Con most seats, or Liberal majority. But, as we saw then, they sometimes do. The most fitting punishment for Trudeau would be another minority with an even stronger NDP.
There was talk, a few weeks ago, of several domestic suppliers going bust because they had taken on lots of new customers with fixed deals at low prices and hadn’t hedged as prices rose.
I think the crunch point was said to be end of this month or next month when they had big payments due.
If other MPs did vote for the EEA then I stand corrected. Remiss of me not to know of a rare instance of pro-EU MPs voting in a pro-EU way rather than alongside anti-EU Conservative backbenchers.
I am referring to the "indicative votes", as far as I am aware the only opportunity MPs had to vote for single market or customs union membership. As you will see below, Labour MPs voted overwhelmingly for these soft Brexit options, Tory MPs overwhelmingly opposed.
I'd be grateful if everyone took a look at this so we can put to bed the idea that a soft Brexit was blocked by Remainer MPs when in fact the opposite is true. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts!
Mostly agree with that, but LDs were part of the blocking of a soft Brexit. As were Labour when May offered a deal at the end of her reign. The amount of MPs I thought dealt with it all well is less than 10%.
Leon your life is so empty you get off by talking about young girls on the Internet, you spend your days here because you have nothing else to do. You are lonely and alone and I can see why.
That Met Gala really does look like The Hunger Games.
The Met Gala is an obscene display of vulgar wealth and when talking of wealth taxes there is one of your targets
Start with Miss Ocasio-Cortez - who I just remembered has a salary of $174,000 per year, before tax.
I’m going to take a wild guess that she didn’t buy her own $30,000 ticket to the ball - so who did, and what do they expect from her in return?
Her campaign has over $5m in the bank and you can see the top contributors if you are really interested. They want her to represent their views, which she is doing with the dress. Not a fan at all of US political fundraising, but her funds are raised far more democratically than most of their politicians.
So she should be spending $30K on a ball ticket (and then we have the dress).
Woman of the People!
Actually, if she wants to do that, fine. But she can stop moralising and telling the rest of us how she is so much a better person.
Socialist girls must NOT look glam and go to parties. It's just not right!
La Raducanu is presumably now a capitalist ...
She's between 18-24 years old and so statistically more likely to lean Labour than not; however, we have no evidence of her politics.
She could be straight down the road or a capitalist, as you say, given her parents occupation.
EDIT: she might also couldn't care less.
While there has been a volley of speculation about Raducanu's political match, she has never been seen at a rally and we cannot de-deuce which set she belongs to, nor whether politics is her game. Each party, to a fault, looks for an advantage, even a backhand compliment or any kind of break to net her support and rally in the polls. While politicos might court her, it is likely she has another love.
You typed "rally" twice!
Well, you always get at least two shots at in a rally
'Shots' another glaring omission
Hmm, I totally should have made 'rally in the polls' 'break deuce in the polls'.... Would also have saved me from 'de-deuce'. I need an editor!
Conservative voters are opposed to proposals to sell off Channel 4, according to a survey commissioned by the state-owned broadcaster.
As part of Channel 4’s response to a government consultation on its future, The Times understands it has submitted research showing that 76 per cent of Tory voters want the company to remain publicly owned.
Of the 2,006 people questioned by research firm Tapestry, a total of 82 per cent said they were against the idea of privatising Channel 4.
Better than the factually inaccurate nonsense in the New Statesman anyways. Which wasn't hard.
Note the article also points out Nanos has the Liberals back ahead now, though still well short of the lead they would need for a majority Trudeau called the election to try and win that should ensure they narrowly win most seats still
The consensus is 70-75% Liberal most seats. So, similar to Clinton/Trump. Several things would have to fall together to produce Con most seats, or Liberal majority. But, as we saw then, they sometimes do. The most fitting punishment for Trudeau would be another minority with an even stronger NDP.
Different to US 2016 then though for as Trudeau showed in 2019 he can still win most seats even if the Liberals lose the popular vote, as Trump won the EC losing the popular vote then.
I agree though most likely result is another minority with a stronger NDP and an even narrower Liberal lead over the Conservatives on seats. Currently most polls still have the Liberals narrowly ahead in Ontario but with the Conservatives making gains and the Liberals clearly ahead in Quebec
Mr. Boy, ah, I just about remember those indicative votes.
Though worth noting Labour did thrice vote against May's softer deal. Then bemoaned the obvious consequence of a more anti-EU PM coming in.
Edited extra bit: Incidentally, like Socrates at the market I decided not to buy something I didn't need. This is entirely because of my iron discipline, and not because I'm enjoying Dragon Age: Origins so much that any PS5 game would be a downward step.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Thats what we have now. A 3rd country which in the EEA means full customs. Not reciprocated here. We signed the deal for customs checks, allowed them to be imposed as we demanded by the other side, and not imposed here.
If we want to negotiate them away now, they hold the cards do they not? As they benefit from the current impasse at our cost?
I have no problem with a free trade deal. How have we ended up with a one-sided one?
Because if we do that then we have to sign up to their rules and obligations and we don't want to do that.
Having our own rules trumps them not doing checks, and our own rules do not need to require checks to be done.
If other MPs did vote for the EEA then I stand corrected. Remiss of me not to know of a rare instance of pro-EU MPs voting in a pro-EU way rather than alongside anti-EU Conservative backbenchers.
I am referring to the "indicative votes", as far as I am aware the only opportunity MPs had to vote for single market or customs union membership. As you will see below, Labour MPs voted overwhelmingly for these soft Brexit options, Tory MPs overwhelmingly opposed.
I'd be grateful if everyone took a look at this so we can put to bed the idea that a soft Brexit was blocked by Remainer MPs when in fact the opposite is true. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts!
Mostly agree with that, but LDs were part of the blocking of a soft Brexit. As were Labour when May offered a deal at the end of her reign. The amount of MPs I thought dealt with it all well is less than 10%.
All May's deals were hard Brexit involving an end to free movement. I can't speak for the Lib Dems (a party whose sole achievement in the postwar era has been to enable a Tory government).
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Another reason to be confident the Tories will maintain their majority is the Boris’s ratings at this stage of his premiership with IPSIS-MORI are bettered only by Blair, whilst Sir Keir’s as LotO are only better than Corbyn and Foot’s
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
The amazing thing about Emma speaking fluent Mandarin is what it represents. This is a new image of Britain forming right before our eyes. Multicultural. Multilingual. Confident. Winning. Raducanu has done for diversity what Rashford did for community. So, so good.
That’s why people who hate Boris are trying to emphasise her Romanian-ness. This can’t be allowed to reflect well on the government. It probably will though, it’s hard to make the case that immigrants are despised when the nation are cheering them
She identifies as British and was born on Canada.
Unless she self-identifies as Romanian, anyone who calls her that is being racist.
Its no different to saying that Priti Patel is Ugandan.
There's a weird assumption amongst some on the Left that British identity must be somehow based on racial purity.
It says more about them than anyone else.
It’s also repugnant. ‘She’s not really British’. You what? We’ve just spent 50 fucking years learning (rightly) that anyone who legally migrates here is British. End of. That’s it. Race is irrelevant
This is a victory for the progressive left and I salute it. Emma R is an outstanding example of how this can work so well.
Now the same progressives say ‘nah she’s not *really* British look at her racial background’, just because they hate Brexit. Fuck them
Its the opposite. The right bang on about ethnicity and nationalism and race.
The reason why her migrant status and ethnic background are being raised by progressives is to show the hypocrisy of the people who openly voted to get rid of the Romanians and now cheer one.
And before anyone says "managed migration policy" I don't hear knuckle-draggers demanding the right kind of Romanians be allowed in. They just want them gone.
What she demonstrates is that you can be a migrant and naturalise. She is British because she chooses to be. That is a good thing. Yet other people who may also have the same skills and potential are shut out. They don't get the choice.
And its the same with the hypocrites in the cabinet. Javid makes a great deal of being the son of a bus driver, whilst ensuring that future sons of bus drivers are banned from having the same opportunities he had.
This is all in your head.
Indeed. Rochdale is fighting some caricature of ‘right wing belief’ which is all in his mind. Literally delusional.
It reminds me of Remoaners who think Brexiteers are all dim, 60-something empire nostalgics who want to reinvade Kenya and bring back Bakelite phones. I’ve never met a single Brexiteer - or Leave voter - who thinks like that. Yet that is the demon in the brains of your A C Graylings
It’s partly why - against the odds - Remain lost. They conjured up a demonic opponent who made them feel morally superior - and smarter. But that wasn’t their actual opponent
Absolutely. I've made it all up. Nobody voted Brexit to get rid of the foreigners in their midst. All those TV and radio vox pops and phone ins where people say that didn't happen. That Farage "Breaking Point" poster is a figment of my deranged imagination.
Given that you are a Brexiteer who voted to LEAVE, an eternal period of silence from you on this issue would be welcome.
Rochdale voted LEAVE??!
Oh my sides. Lol
Yes. It's a daily exhibition of extreme hypocrisy.
I don't remember being asked if I was supporting today's one sided trading arrangements.
Do have to laugh though. I am a leave voter saying "this is shit". Telling me to shut up doesn't miraculously make it not shit.
Can anyone please tell me how the current massive cost only on UK exports and minimal restrictions on EU imports is a Good Thing? And if it isn't a good thing then how does my long-regretted vote not for this impact the reality?
Someone said we have a "zero tariff" trade deal. Do we Buxton, there's a long list of payable tariffs and a whole industry of paperwork and checks to manage them.
Don't blame me or come crying to me old bean.
I voted REMAIN.
At least most Leavers on here have the courage of their convictions.
Lol - I wanted to leave the European Union. We were never going to agree their direction of travel on integration. Which means at some point or other we were either going to step out to the outer ring of the "twin track" / "two speed" Europe in our own time, or be put there in theirs.
Having done that the question is what we do now. And we've chosen to demand the EU treat us like a 3rd country and thus fuck exports whilst failing to reciprocate. Not even by policy, by being shit. We haven't invested in facilities or computer systems or the people to the checks we demanded.
How does me voting leave mean I have no say on this shitfest? In what way is this non-reciprocal trade fuck a direct non-negotiable outcome of leaving the EU?
So, you're still a Leaver but you think all Leavers are morons?
Wouldn't it be easier just to argue for EEA-EFTA plus CU rather than the James O'Brien tribute act?
Dame Cressida Dick jokes that when @metpoliceuk celebrates its 200th anniversary in 2029 “it absolutely won’t be me” as Met Police Commissioner addressing #supersconference … So, no more contract renewals after 2024?
The amazing thing about Emma speaking fluent Mandarin is what it represents. This is a new image of Britain forming right before our eyes. Multicultural. Multilingual. Confident. Winning. Raducanu has done for diversity what Rashford did for community. So, so good.
That’s why people who hate Boris are trying to emphasise her Romanian-ness. This can’t be allowed to reflect well on the government. It probably will though, it’s hard to make the case that immigrants are despised when the nation are cheering them
She identifies as British and was born on Canada.
Unless she self-identifies as Romanian, anyone who calls her that is being racist.
Its no different to saying that Priti Patel is Ugandan.
There's a weird assumption amongst some on the Left that British identity must be somehow based on racial purity.
It says more about them than anyone else.
It’s also repugnant. ‘She’s not really British’. You what? We’ve just spent 50 fucking years learning (rightly) that anyone who legally migrates here is British. End of. That’s it. Race is irrelevant
This is a victory for the progressive left and I salute it. Emma R is an outstanding example of how this can work so well.
Now the same progressives say ‘nah she’s not *really* British look at her racial background’, just because they hate Brexit. Fuck them
Its the opposite. The right bang on about ethnicity and nationalism and race.
The reason why her migrant status and ethnic background are being raised by progressives is to show the hypocrisy of the people who openly voted to get rid of the Romanians and now cheer one.
And before anyone says "managed migration policy" I don't hear knuckle-draggers demanding the right kind of Romanians be allowed in. They just want them gone.
What she demonstrates is that you can be a migrant and naturalise. She is British because she chooses to be. That is a good thing. Yet other people who may also have the same skills and potential are shut out. They don't get the choice.
And its the same with the hypocrites in the cabinet. Javid makes a great deal of being the son of a bus driver, whilst ensuring that future sons of bus drivers are banned from having the same opportunities he had.
This is all in your head.
Indeed. Rochdale is fighting some caricature of ‘right wing belief’ which is all in his mind. Literally delusional.
It reminds me of Remoaners who think Brexiteers are all dim, 60-something empire nostalgics who want to reinvade Kenya and bring back Bakelite phones. I’ve never met a single Brexiteer - or Leave voter - who thinks like that. Yet that is the demon in the brains of your A C Graylings
It’s partly why - against the odds - Remain lost. They conjured up a demonic opponent who made them feel morally superior - and smarter. But that wasn’t their actual opponent
Absolutely. I've made it all up. Nobody voted Brexit to get rid of the foreigners in their midst. All those TV and radio vox pops and phone ins where people say that didn't happen. That Farage "Breaking Point" poster is a figment of my deranged imagination.
Given that you are a Brexiteer who voted to LEAVE, an eternal period of silence from you on this issue would be welcome.
Rochdale voted LEAVE??!
Oh my sides. Lol
Yes. It's a daily exhibition of extreme hypocrisy.
I don't remember being asked if I was supporting today's one sided trading arrangements.
Do have to laugh though. I am a leave voter saying "this is shit". Telling me to shut up doesn't miraculously make it not shit.
Can anyone please tell me how the current massive cost only on UK exports and minimal restrictions on EU imports is a Good Thing? And if it isn't a good thing then how does my long-regretted vote not for this impact the reality?
Someone said we have a "zero tariff" trade deal. Do we Buxton, there's a long list of payable tariffs and a whole industry of paperwork and checks to manage them.
Don't blame me or come crying to me old bean.
I voted REMAIN.
At least most Leavers on here have the courage of their convictions.
Lol - I wanted to leave the European Union. We were never going to agree their direction of travel on integration. Which means at some point or other we were either going to step out to the outer ring of the "twin track" / "two speed" Europe in our own time, or be put there in theirs.
Having done that the question is what we do now. And we've chosen to demand the EU treat us like a 3rd country and thus fuck exports whilst failing to reciprocate. Not even by policy, by being shit. We haven't invested in facilities or computer systems or the people to the checks we demanded.
How does me voting leave mean I have no say on this shitfest? In what way is this non-reciprocal trade fuck a direct non-negotiable outcome of leaving the EU?
So, you're still a Leaver but you think all Leavers are morons?
Wouldn't it be easier just to argue for EEA-EFTA plus CU rather than the James O'Brien tribute act?
I DID argue for that. We aren't getting that so move on and make a trade deal that works.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Dame Cressida Dick jokes that when @metpoliceuk celebrates its 200th anniversary in 2029 “it absolutely won’t be me” as Met Police Commissioner addressing #supersconference … So, no more contract renewals after 2024?
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
(1) Remainers should argue for a Common Market 2.0 not rejoining - there'd probably be a consensus around that. (2) Labour should rebrand itself as the party of 'labour' - i.e. people working to make a living - and make everything about an inclusive, fair, positive and proudly patriotic 21st Century British vision not a TUC/Islington tribute act - there'd probably be a GE winning coalition around that
F-ck me, my political thinking is so clear I should charge for it.
Mr. Boy, ah, I just about remember those indicative votes.
Though worth noting Labour did thrice vote against May's softer deal. Then bemoaned the obvious consequence of a more anti-EU PM coming in.
Edited extra bit: Incidentally, like Socrates at the market I decided not to buy something I didn't need. This is entirely because of my iron discipline, and not because I'm enjoying Dragon Age: Origins so much that any PS5 game would be a downward step.
May's deal was just Johnson's deal with a more workable solution for the Irish border and worse PR. I am exaggerating, but as the bitterest of Remoaners I don't look back longingly at May's Brexit deal as some kind of lost soft Brexit nirvana, believe me. In fact I prefer the current deal as its idiocy is likely to manifest itself more quickly, as is indeed happening.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Substance over form applies on this.
So we'd be facing remediation action from other nations.
Now I'm going to go out on a limb and trust some legal experts and trade experts who have written reports on this, including for my firm, than you on this.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Substance over form applies on this.
So we'd be facing remediation action from other nations.
Now I'm going to go out on a limb and trust some legal experts and trade experts who have written reports on this, including for my firm, than you on this.
Remediation action like the dispute over Boeing that dragged on for two decades in the WTO?
That's pretty meaningless in the round. There have always been remediation actions facing nations like the EU and the USA and why should we be terrified of facing the same and dragging it on for as long as suits our interests?
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Not if that's not in the deal!
Its up to us what we implement and what we don't. There is no higher court that can change our laws anymore.
Wholesale price of electricity was 35p a KWh yesterday.
Yikes.
This issue could explode this winter.
We do not have sufficient power generation capacity. We are reliant on interconnectors to (almost always) import power from other markets. Or if we want to roll back the years reliant on coal imports from Venezuela or Russia (with the current +100% shipping costs...).
So yes, prices are going to shoot up because we have basically done nothing to secure sufficient power provision.
Incidentally, there is a shortage of skilled manpower as well; experts who know the CCGT systems can pretty much write their own cheques at the moment.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
(1) Remainers should argue for a Common Market 2.0 not rejoining - there'd probably be a consensus around that. (2) Labour should rebrand itself as the party of 'labour' - i.e. people working to make a living - and make everything about an inclusive, fair, positive and proudly patriotic 21st Century British vision not a TUC/Islington tribute act - there'd probably be a GE winning coalition around that
F-ck me, my political thinking is so clear I should charge for it.
It’s worth every penny that I currently pay for it, without a doubt.
Completely the right bet, but there's not so much edge in it. I'd have it as about 50% chance. I won't be making a similar bet for three reasons - don't want to tie up money, no huge edge, my life would be worse if the Tories aren't in power.
Unlike my view on pretty much all prior LD leaders, I'm pretty negative on Ed Davey. I cannot see any circumstances at all where Starmer would want to get involved with him pre-election.
The Greens represent the most interesting electoral pact possibilities. Mostly a minefield, but there's gold in them there hills.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Substance over form applies on this.
So we'd be facing remediation action from other nations.
Now I'm going to go out on a limb and trust some legal experts and trade experts who have written reports on this, including for my firm, than you on this.
Remediation action like the dispute over Boeing that dragged on for two decades in the WTO?
That's pretty meaningless in the round. There have always been remediation actions facing nations like the EU and the USA and why should we be terrified of facing the same and dragging it on for as long as suits our interests?
You're like an incel virgin telling porn stars what to do in their films.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Not if that's not in the deal!
Its up to us what we implement and what we don't. There is no higher court that can change our laws anymore.
WTO arbitration says hi. If you think we need a trade war with the rest of the world right now then go ahead.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
Then suggest to Boris that he put it in his next manifesto:
'We will continue to implement absolutely no border checks whatsoever for goods coming from the EU, while our exporters will be obliged to comply with all the paperwork, inspections and other legalities that the EU demands.'
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Not if that's not in the deal!
Its up to us what we implement and what we don't. There is no higher court that can change our laws anymore.
WTO arbitration says hi. If you think we need a trade war with the rest of the world right now then go ahead.
If you look at outstanding WTO disputes, it would be more useful to see the whole world as being in a constant low-level trade war. It's not an anomaly.
Which hard parts of the driving test are proposed to be scrapped, exactly?
Reversing
Second, tests will also be made shorter by removing the ‘reversing exercise’ element – and for vehicles with trailers, the ‘uncoupling and recoupling’ exercise – and having it tested separately by a third party.
That Met Gala really does look like The Hunger Games.
The Met Gala is an obscene display of vulgar wealth and when talking of wealth taxes there is one of your targets
Start with Miss Ocasio-Cortez - who I just remembered has a salary of $174,000 per year, before tax.
I’m going to take a wild guess that she didn’t buy her own $30,000 ticket to the ball - so who did, and what do they expect from her in return?
Her campaign has over $5m in the bank and you can see the top contributors if you are really interested. They want her to represent their views, which she is doing with the dress. Not a fan at all of US political fundraising, but her funds are raised far more democratically than most of their politicians.
So she should be spending $30K on a ball ticket (and then we have the dress).
Woman of the People!
Actually, if she wants to do that, fine. But she can stop moralising and telling the rest of us how she is so much a better person.
Socialist girls must NOT look glam and go to parties. It's just not right!
La Raducanu is presumably now a capitalist ...
She's between 18-24 years old and so statistically more likely to lean Labour than not; however, we have no evidence of her politics.
She could be straight down the road or a capitalist, as you say, given her parents occupation.
EDIT: she might also couldn't care less.
While there has been a volley of speculation about Raducanu's political match, she has never been seen at a rally and we cannot de-deuce which set she belongs to, nor whether politics is her game. Each party, to a fault, looks for an advantage, even a backhand compliment or any kind of break to net her support and rally in the polls. While politicos might court her, it is likely she has another love.
Let her choose if she becomes part of the political racket.
Balls to that!
@AOC was invited to the gala as a NY Representative:
And before haters get wild flying off the handle, New York elected officials are routinely invited to and attend the Met due to our responsibilities in overseeing and supporting the city’s cultural institutions for the public. I was one of several in attendance in this evening.🤗
@isam is spot on. A majority of 80 is tough to overturn. And Boris has the X Factor. SKS doesn’t. I do get the feeling that the next one will be a 1992 one though. The manifest problems of Tory rule stored up, ignored, or dismissed will burst out into the open. In a flood not a trickle. A credible Labour leader will be the catalyst. One who looks forward not back.
Not as tough as many imagine - it simply requires a reversal of the swing which took place between the 2017 and 2019 elections. Looking at historical examples , in 1950 the Tories reduced Attlee's majority of 146 to just 6 - in 1964 Labour wiped out Macmillan's majority of 100 - in 1970 the Tories overturned Labour's 1966 majority of 97. Even 1992 saw Thatcher's 102 majority from 1987 reduced to 21.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Not if that's not in the deal!
Its up to us what we implement and what we don't. There is no higher court that can change our laws anymore.
WTO arbitration says hi. If you think we need a trade war with the rest of the world right now then go ahead.
Look at the list of WTO arbitrations already pre-existing.
Yes I'm fine to live with the UK being on that list.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
(1) Remainers should argue for a Common Market 2.0 not rejoining - there'd probably be a consensus around that. (2) Labour should rebrand itself as the party of 'labour' - i.e. people working to make a living - and make everything about an inclusive, fair, positive and proudly patriotic 21st Century British vision not a TUC/Islington tribute act - there'd probably be a GE winning coalition around that
F-ck me, my political thinking is so clear I should charge for it.
It’s worth every penny that I currently pay for it, without a doubt.
Going back through levels through this thread, it's not hypocritical for immigrants to oppose immigration, and often they are (at least, of immigration by other groups). Immigrants are disproportionatley found in lower socio-economic groups - those hardest hit by more immigration.
The amazing thing about Emma speaking fluent Mandarin is what it represents. This is a new image of Britain forming right before our eyes. Multicultural. Multilingual. Confident. Winning. Raducanu has done for diversity what Rashford did for community. So, so good.
That’s why people who hate Boris are trying to emphasise her Romanian-ness. This can’t be allowed to reflect well on the government. It probably will though, it’s hard to make the case that immigrants are despised when the nation are cheering them
She identifies as British and was born on Canada.
Unless she self-identifies as Romanian, anyone who calls her that is being racist.
Its no different to saying that Priti Patel is Ugandan.
There's a weird assumption amongst some on the Left that British identity must be somehow based on racial purity.
It says more about them than anyone else.
It’s also repugnant. ‘She’s not really British’. You what? We’ve just spent 50 fucking years learning (rightly) that anyone who legally migrates here is British. End of. That’s it. Race is irrelevant
This is a victory for the progressive left and I salute it. Emma R is an outstanding example of how this can work so well.
Now the same progressives say ‘nah she’s not *really* British look at her racial background’, just because they hate Brexit. Fuck them
Its the opposite. The right bang on about ethnicity and nationalism and race.
The reason why her migrant status and ethnic background are being raised by progressives is to show the hypocrisy of the people who openly voted to get rid of the Romanians and now cheer one.
And before anyone says "managed migration policy" I don't hear knuckle-draggers demanding the right kind of Romanians be allowed in. They just want them gone.
What she demonstrates is that you can be a migrant and naturalise. She is British because she chooses to be. That is a good thing. Yet other people who may also have the same skills and potential are shut out. They don't get the choice.
And its the same with the hypocrites in the cabinet. Javid makes a great deal of being the son of a bus driver, whilst ensuring that future sons of bus drivers are banned from having the same opportunities he had.
This is all in your head.
Indeed. Rochdale is fighting some caricature of ‘right wing belief’ which is all in his mind. Literally delusional.
It reminds me of Remoaners who think Brexiteers are all dim, 60-something empire nostalgics who want to reinvade Kenya and bring back Bakelite phones. I’ve never met a single Brexiteer - or Leave voter - who thinks like that. Yet that is the demon in the brains of your A C Graylings
It’s partly why - against the odds - Remain lost. They conjured up a demonic opponent who made them feel morally superior - and smarter. But that wasn’t their actual opponent
Absolutely. I've made it all up. Nobody voted Brexit to get rid of the foreigners in their midst. All those TV and radio vox pops and phone ins where people say that didn't happen. That Farage "Breaking Point" poster is a figment of my deranged imagination.
Given that you are a Brexiteer who voted to LEAVE, an eternal period of silence from you on this issue would be welcome.
Rochdale voted LEAVE??!
Oh my sides. Lol
Yes. It's a daily exhibition of extreme hypocrisy.
I don't remember being asked if I was supporting today's one sided trading arrangements.
Do have to laugh though. I am a leave voter saying "this is shit". Telling me to shut up doesn't miraculously make it not shit.
Can anyone please tell me how the current massive cost only on UK exports and minimal restrictions on EU imports is a Good Thing? And if it isn't a good thing then how does my long-regretted vote not for this impact the reality?
Someone said we have a "zero tariff" trade deal. Do we Buxton, there's a long list of payable tariffs and a whole industry of paperwork and checks to manage them.
Don't blame me or come crying to me old bean.
I voted REMAIN.
At least most Leavers on here have the courage of their convictions.
Lol - I wanted to leave the European Union. We were never going to agree their direction of travel on integration. Which means at some point or other we were either going to step out to the outer ring of the "twin track" / "two speed" Europe in our own time, or be put there in theirs.
Having done that the question is what we do now. And we've chosen to demand the EU treat us like a 3rd country and thus fuck exports whilst failing to reciprocate. Not even by policy, by being shit. We haven't invested in facilities or computer systems or the people to the checks we demanded.
How does me voting leave mean I have no say on this shitfest? In what way is this non-reciprocal trade fuck a direct non-negotiable outcome of leaving the EU?
So, you're still a Leaver but you think all Leavers are morons?
Wouldn't it be easier just to argue for EEA-EFTA plus CU rather than the James O'Brien tribute act?
I DID argue for that. We aren't getting that so move on and make a trade deal that works.
Why vote Leave then if you want to stay in the EEA and CU and don't want to end free movement and don't want us to do our own trade deals?
At least in the EU we had a vote, EEA + CU means no real powers reclaimed and no vote
Which hard parts of the driving test are proposed to be scrapped, exactly?
Reversing
Second, tests will also be made shorter by removing the ‘reversing exercise’ element – and for vehicles with trailers, the ‘uncoupling and recoupling’ exercise – and having it tested separately by a third party.
Do they do parallel parking in HGV tests?
I'd pay good money to see that.
Tangentially one thing we all need to discuss is electric vehicles, they need bells on them.
A few months ago I nearly got knocked down by one in a car park because it made no noise as it will leaving the bay.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Substance over form applies on this.
So we'd be facing remediation action from other nations.
Now I'm going to go out on a limb and trust some legal experts and trade experts who have written reports on this, including for my firm, than you on this.
Remediation action like the dispute over Boeing that dragged on for two decades in the WTO?
That's pretty meaningless in the round. There have always been remediation actions facing nations like the EU and the USA and why should we be terrified of facing the same and dragging it on for as long as suits our interests?
You're like an incel virgin telling porn stars what to do in their films.
No I'm like a real-world adult saying that not everything has to mirror a porn film.
Potentially having disputes in the WTO is not the end of the world. To be frank we've always been a party to WTO disputes for decades now, so why should that be any different in the future?
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Not if that's not in the deal!
Its up to us what we implement and what we don't. There is no higher court that can change our laws anymore.
WTO arbitration says hi. If you think we need a trade war with the rest of the world right now then go ahead.
No country is going to initiate a WTO action against a UK decision to make life easier for foreign companies and much tougher for British ones. I guess that non-EU countries could claim they are being discriminated against, but they do not lose out by the maintenance of the status quo and their companies exporting to the Single Market gain a comparative advantage over UK ones because they are already used to having to comply with the measures we are just having to come to terms with.
The boundary changes significantly increase the chance of a Tory majority IMO, from about 45% to 55%, (current assessment of the odds, might/will change).
That's an excellent point - Cons gain 8 to 10 IIRC.
Ironically the Tory success in Red Wall seats is likely to diminish the impact of the boundary canges with their net gains being no more than 5 or so.
Which hard parts of the driving test are proposed to be scrapped, exactly?
Reversing
Second, tests will also be made shorter by removing the ‘reversing exercise’ element – and for vehicles with trailers, the ‘uncoupling and recoupling’ exercise – and having it tested separately by a third party.
The proposed dropping of standards for truck drivers should worry everyone. Apparently having half-trained people driving a 44 ton lethal weapon is preferable to sensible solutions to the problem.
@isam is spot on. A majority of 80 is tough to overturn. And Boris has the X Factor. SKS doesn’t. I do get the feeling that the next one will be a 1992 one though. The manifest problems of Tory rule stored up, ignored, or dismissed will burst out into the open. In a flood not a trickle. A credible Labour leader will be the catalyst. One who looks forward not back.
Not as tough as many imagine - it simply requires a reversal of the swing which took place between the 2017 and 2019 elections. Looking at historical examples , in 1950 the Tories reduced Attlee's majority of 146 to just 6 - in 1964 Labour wiped out Macmillan's majority of 100 - in 1970 the Tories overturned Labour's 1966 majority of 97. Even 1992 saw Thatcher's 102 majority from 1987 reduced to 21.
Indeed, the only party which has won a general election after more than 10 years in power in the last 100 years was Major's Tories. As you say they still lost lots of seats even then and we all remember what happened in 1997 at the subsequent election
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
(1) Remainers should argue for a Common Market 2.0 not rejoining - there'd probably be a consensus around that. (2) Labour should rebrand itself as the party of 'labour' - i.e. people working to make a living - and make everything about an inclusive, fair, positive and proudly patriotic 21st Century British vision not a TUC/Islington tribute act - there'd probably be a GE winning coalition around that
F-ck me, my political thinking is so clear I should charge for it.
It’s worth every penny that I currently pay for it, without a doubt.
Going back through levels through this thread, it's not hypocritical for immigrants to oppose immigration, and often they are (at least, of immigration by other groups). Immigrants are disproportionatley found in lower socio-economic groups - those hardest hit by more immigration.
Obviously. Some people seem to have trouble differentiating between hypocrisy and self interest. They are not the same.
Plus the points system we now have means that if we have a shortage of skills in an area migrants can still come here to meet that
Not truck drivers.
Shapps' latest wheeze is to scrap the hard parts of the driving test...
Which hard parts of the driving test are proposed to be scrapped, exactly?
No reverse gears in Brexit Britain ( this stuff writes itself)
When I did my test, many moons ago, reverse park was not guaranteed to be in the test.
I had it (both times) but Mrs Anabob didn't – she got reverse-around-a-corner and three-point turn. She passed first time and even to this day cannot reverse park even with the benefit of a very good Audi parking camera, despite it being a near-essential daily task when you live in a London suburb with on-street parking.
I'd suggest that if Shappo makes any changes, he makes reverse park a compulsory element of the test! Would save a LOT of bother in our family!! As for reverse around a corner, this is almost always dangerous to some degree and is very rarely necessary (a safer option is usually available), so Shappo could drop that in recompense perhaps?
Which hard parts of the driving test are proposed to be scrapped, exactly?
Reversing
Second, tests will also be made shorter by removing the ‘reversing exercise’ element – and for vehicles with trailers, the ‘uncoupling and recoupling’ exercise – and having it tested separately by a third party.
Do they do parallel parking in HGV tests?
I'd pay good money to see that.
Tangentially one thing we all need to discuss is electric vehicles, they need bells on them.
A few months ago I nearly got knocked down by one in a car park because it made no noise as it will leaving the bay.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Substance over form applies on this.
So we'd be facing remediation action from other nations.
Now I'm going to go out on a limb and trust some legal experts and trade experts who have written reports on this, including for my firm, than you on this.
Remediation action like the dispute over Boeing that dragged on for two decades in the WTO?
That's pretty meaningless in the round. There have always been remediation actions facing nations like the EU and the USA and why should we be terrified of facing the same and dragging it on for as long as suits our interests?
You're like an incel virgin telling porn stars what to do in their films.
No I'm like a real-world adult saying that not everything has to mirror a porn film.
Potentially having disputes in the WTO is not the end of the world. To be frank we've always been a party to WTO disputes for decades now, so why should that be any different in the future?
Because in the grand scheme of things they are low level, your scenario will involve us annoying several whole continents in one go.
As in the report we received it is likely our application for the Pacific free trade area/other trade deals could be stalled by other countries until we resolve that MFN issue.
Mr. Ping, got to show just how green and virtuous the government is (not unique to this one, all of them to Blair at least have done it). Can't nasty coal and gas power. I mean, yes, they keep the lights on but, boo! Carbon!*
Meanwhile, in China...
*I've caricatured my position slightly. I do think most renewables have some promise. But wind is stupid because it's unpredictable, and we need sufficient capacity from coal/gas/nuclear to crank out what we need. And now we're paying through the nose because politicians want to parade their green credentials and can easily afford to do so. Cf boilers.
In Portsmouth: foreground, a reach stacker for moving shipping containers; background, unfinished Border Control Post, required to carry out Brexit import checks on EU goods, one reason they’ve been postponed until July ‘22 https://twitter.com/pkelso/status/1437756346649174021/photo/1
Mr. Boy, ah, I just about remember those indicative votes.
Though worth noting Labour did thrice vote against May's softer deal. Then bemoaned the obvious consequence of a more anti-EU PM coming in.
Edited extra bit: Incidentally, like Socrates at the market I decided not to buy something I didn't need. This is entirely because of my iron discipline, and not because I'm enjoying Dragon Age: Origins so much that any PS5 game would be a downward step.
May's deal was just Johnson's deal with a more workable solution for the Irish border and worse PR. I am exaggerating, but as the bitterest of Remoaners I don't look back longingly at May's Brexit deal as some kind of lost soft Brexit nirvana, believe me. In fact I prefer the current deal as its idiocy is likely to manifest itself more quickly, as is indeed happening.
For me an upside of the alternative reality in which May's deal passed is that Boris Johnson would probably not be the Prime Minister. This is what Brexit, as it panned out, has delivered to us - him. It's not a benefit. Indeed it's the very opposite and it would take some quite stonking gains to balance the books.
1) It is 1970 since a party with this size of majority lost office at an election.
2) Boundary changes make winning many former Labour seats back just that little bit harder.
3) The aftershock of Brexit may be important but the key question is where Brexit party voters go. They appear to have been mostly disillusioned Labour voters who didn’t want to vote Tory. They have three options (1) to go the whole hog and vote Tory, as in Hartlepool, in which case another 50-odd Labour seats suddenly look vulnerable (2) to return to Labour, which is what they did in Wales at the assembly elections, in which case NOM is value or (3) to abstain.
I think probably around half will go for three on the basis neither party represents them. The rest I think it will vary by MP, which is where I think Brexiteer MPs in the red wall may get an incumbency bonus this time.
1) Beware of extrapolation from small datasets
And from a different era
The point is it doesn’t happen often, and it’s rare because under our system it’s very, very hard work.
Speaking for myself, I would love to see the Tories evicted from office, but it’s tough to see a pathway for them to lose their overall majority. A Blair style swing would do it but not much else.
What I think is more plausible is that they will end up with a majority in single figures followed a couple of years later by another election.
A 4% swing would probably be enough - effectively reversing what happened in 2019.
Mr. Ping, got to show just how green and virtuous the government is (not unique to this one, all of them to Blair at least have done it). Can't nasty coal and gas power. I mean, yes, they keep the lights on but, boo! Carbon!*
Meanwhile, in China...
*I've caricatured my position slightly. I do think most renewables have some promise. But wind is stupid because it's unpredictable, and we need sufficient capacity from coal/gas/nuclear to crank out what we need. And now we're paying through the nose because politicians want to parade their green credentials and can easily afford to do so. Cf boilers.
No, I read some articles about there's various degrees of Incels.
There's the incels that have never had a sexual experience.
There's the incels that may have had one or two sexual encounters in their youth but none for a decade plus.
Wholesale price of electricity was 35p a KWh yesterday.
Yikes.
This issue could explode this winter.
May stabilise with school hols finishing, and people going back off furlough.
What's interesting is that elec demand continues to fall at a rate of knots.
Are you on Octopus Agile? Their spot price has occasionally been up around 60p in their "expensive hour", and occasionally actually negative. You can work wonders with a programmable house control system.
I do agree with @RochdalePioneers that we have a major shortage of energy production in the UK. This is mainly because decisions in favour of power plants are rarely popular. I am as guilty of this as anyone being shocked at the deal for Hinckley Point. We need to get going on tidal barriers, offshore wind and even solar. And if that means fields covered in ugly looking panels so be it.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Substance over form applies on this.
So we'd be facing remediation action from other nations.
Now I'm going to go out on a limb and trust some legal experts and trade experts who have written reports on this, including for my firm, than you on this.
Remediation action like the dispute over Boeing that dragged on for two decades in the WTO?
That's pretty meaningless in the round. There have always been remediation actions facing nations like the EU and the USA and why should we be terrified of facing the same and dragging it on for as long as suits our interests?
You're like an incel virgin telling porn stars what to do in their films.
No I'm like a real-world adult saying that not everything has to mirror a porn film.
Potentially having disputes in the WTO is not the end of the world. To be frank we've always been a party to WTO disputes for decades now, so why should that be any different in the future?
Because in the grand scheme of things they are low level, your scenario will involve us annoying several whole continents in one go.
As in the report we received it is likely our application for the Pacific free trade area/other trade deals could be stalled by other countries until we resolve that MFN issue.
We're already doing what I proposed and was assured by you was impossible. Which parties have launched a dispute?
Considering that my proposal is what I was proposing years ago and is now actually happening it seems those headless chickens running scared of the big bad wolf of WTO are the incels.
If other MPs did vote for the EEA then I stand corrected. Remiss of me not to know of a rare instance of pro-EU MPs voting in a pro-EU way rather than alongside anti-EU Conservative backbenchers.
I am referring to the "indicative votes", as far as I am aware the only opportunity MPs had to vote for single market or customs union membership. As you will see below, Labour MPs voted overwhelmingly for these soft Brexit options, Tory MPs overwhelmingly opposed.
I'd be grateful if everyone took a look at this so we can put to bed the idea that a soft Brexit was blocked by Remainer MPs when in fact the opposite is true. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts!
Mostly agree with that, but LDs were part of the blocking of a soft Brexit. As were Labour when May offered a deal at the end of her reign. The amount of MPs I thought dealt with it all well is less than 10%.
Yep, lack of compromise from hard liners on both sides.
The hard remainers look daft now, for failing to vote for soft brexit.
Had things gone to a second referendum and remain (yeah, I know, LD dreamland - Swinson as PM too ) then the hard brexiters would look daft for failing to vote for a soft brexit.
The amazing thing about Emma speaking fluent Mandarin is what it represents. This is a new image of Britain forming right before our eyes. Multicultural. Multilingual. Confident. Winning. Raducanu has done for diversity what Rashford did for community. So, so good.
That’s why people who hate Boris are trying to emphasise her Romanian-ness. This can’t be allowed to reflect well on the government. It probably will though, it’s hard to make the case that immigrants are despised when the nation are cheering them
She identifies as British and was born on Canada.
Unless she self-identifies as Romanian, anyone who calls her that is being racist.
Its no different to saying that Priti Patel is Ugandan.
There's a weird assumption amongst some on the Left that British identity must be somehow based on racial purity.
It says more about them than anyone else.
It’s also repugnant. ‘She’s not really British’. You what? We’ve just spent 50 fucking years learning (rightly) that anyone who legally migrates here is British. End of. That’s it. Race is irrelevant
This is a victory for the progressive left and I salute it. Emma R is an outstanding example of how this can work so well.
Now the same progressives say ‘nah she’s not *really* British look at her racial background’, just because they hate Brexit. Fuck them
Its the opposite. The right bang on about ethnicity and nationalism and race.
The reason why her migrant status and ethnic background are being raised by progressives is to show the hypocrisy of the people who openly voted to get rid of the Romanians and now cheer one.
And before anyone says "managed migration policy" I don't hear knuckle-draggers demanding the right kind of Romanians be allowed in. They just want them gone.
What she demonstrates is that you can be a migrant and naturalise. She is British because she chooses to be. That is a good thing. Yet other people who may also have the same skills and potential are shut out. They don't get the choice.
And its the same with the hypocrites in the cabinet. Javid makes a great deal of being the son of a bus driver, whilst ensuring that future sons of bus drivers are banned from having the same opportunities he had.
This is all in your head.
Indeed. Rochdale is fighting some caricature of ‘right wing belief’ which is all in his mind. Literally delusional.
It reminds me of Remoaners who think Brexiteers are all dim, 60-something empire nostalgics who want to reinvade Kenya and bring back Bakelite phones. I’ve never met a single Brexiteer - or Leave voter - who thinks like that. Yet that is the demon in the brains of your A C Graylings
It’s partly why - against the odds - Remain lost. They conjured up a demonic opponent who made them feel morally superior - and smarter. But that wasn’t their actual opponent
Absolutely. I've made it all up. Nobody voted Brexit to get rid of the foreigners in their midst. All those TV and radio vox pops and phone ins where people say that didn't happen. That Farage "Breaking Point" poster is a figment of my deranged imagination.
Given that you are a Brexiteer who voted to LEAVE, an eternal period of silence from you on this issue would be welcome.
Rochdale voted LEAVE??!
Oh my sides. Lol
Yes. It's a daily exhibition of extreme hypocrisy.
I don't remember being asked if I was supporting today's one sided trading arrangements.
Do have to laugh though. I am a leave voter saying "this is shit". Telling me to shut up doesn't miraculously make it not shit.
Can anyone please tell me how the current massive cost only on UK exports and minimal restrictions on EU imports is a Good Thing? And if it isn't a good thing then how does my long-regretted vote not for this impact the reality?
Someone said we have a "zero tariff" trade deal. Do we Buxton, there's a long list of payable tariffs and a whole industry of paperwork and checks to manage them.
Don't blame me or come crying to me old bean.
I voted REMAIN.
At least most Leavers on here have the courage of their convictions.
Lol - I wanted to leave the European Union. We were never going to agree their direction of travel on integration. Which means at some point or other we were either going to step out to the outer ring of the "twin track" / "two speed" Europe in our own time, or be put there in theirs.
Having done that the question is what we do now. And we've chosen to demand the EU treat us like a 3rd country and thus fuck exports whilst failing to reciprocate. Not even by policy, by being shit. We haven't invested in facilities or computer systems or the people to the checks we demanded.
How does me voting leave mean I have no say on this shitfest? In what way is this non-reciprocal trade fuck a direct non-negotiable outcome of leaving the EU?
So, you're still a Leaver but you think all Leavers are morons?
Wouldn't it be easier just to argue for EEA-EFTA plus CU rather than the James O'Brien tribute act?
I DID argue for that. We aren't getting that so move on and make a trade deal that works.
Why vote Leave then if you want to stay in the EEA and CU and don't want to end free movement and don't want us to do our own trade deals?
At least in the EU we had a vote, EEA + CU means no real powers reclaimed and no vote
How about because what you want and think isn't what everyone wants and thinks?
The EEA is not the EU. The CU is not the EU. Membership of those is not the same as membership of the EU as demonstrated by the states who are not EU members who have EEA membership or customs unions with the EU.
Also, what are you on about with free movement? We could have deported Eu vagrants whilst still a member. That we chose not to do so was our own fault not theirs. It is the right to live and work, not to be a burden.
Mr. Pioneers, a lot of disgruntlement with the EU was down to pro-EU politicians using it as a convenient scapegoat, as if people wouldn't remember or think of the EU that way.
It still baffles me just how bad the referendum campaigns were.
I do agree with @RochdalePioneers that we have a major shortage of energy production in the UK. This is mainly because decisions in favour of power plants are rarely popular. I am as guilty of this as anyone being shocked at the deal for Hinckley Point. We need to get going on tidal barriers, offshore wind and even solar. And if that means fields covered in ugly looking panels so be it.
Its the gross stupidity of both the decisions made and the communications of the deals that baffles. We are one of the nuclear pioneers yet we say no to UK investment into the technology and yes to paying a 100% markup to the Chinese government building Hinkley Point.
There is and has been for decades a major problem with all governments refusing to plan long term and this is what we get. We need to invest heavily into green energy design and production. Fulfil the generation and local storage of green power and be a global leader in selling this to others. Or, focus on quarterly profits in the city and accept that we're always going to be reliant on others. Global Britain or not?
That Met Gala really does look like The Hunger Games.
The Met Gala is an obscene display of vulgar wealth and when talking of wealth taxes there is one of your targets
Start with Miss Ocasio-Cortez - who I just remembered has a salary of $174,000 per year, before tax.
I’m going to take a wild guess that she didn’t buy her own $30,000 ticket to the ball - so who did, and what do they expect from her in return?
Her campaign has over $5m in the bank and you can see the top contributors if you are really interested. They want her to represent their views, which she is doing with the dress. Not a fan at all of US political fundraising, but her funds are raised far more democratically than most of their politicians.
Leon your life is so empty you get off by talking about young girls on the Internet, you spend your days here because you have nothing else to do. You are lonely and alone and I can see why.
You are far younger than me. Your constant presence here is infinitely more tragic, for you. I mean that quite sincerely. You have my genuine pity, if it helps.
Which hard parts of the driving test are proposed to be scrapped, exactly?
Reversing
Second, tests will also be made shorter by removing the ‘reversing exercise’ element – and for vehicles with trailers, the ‘uncoupling and recoupling’ exercise – and having it tested separately by a third party.
Do they do parallel parking in HGV tests?
I'd pay good money to see that.
Tangentially one thing we all need to discuss is electric vehicles, they need bells on them.
A few months ago I nearly got knocked down by one in a car park because it made no noise as it will leaving the bay.
The amazing thing about Emma speaking fluent Mandarin is what it represents. This is a new image of Britain forming right before our eyes. Multicultural. Multilingual. Confident. Winning. Raducanu has done for diversity what Rashford did for community. So, so good.
That’s why people who hate Boris are trying to emphasise her Romanian-ness. This can’t be allowed to reflect well on the government. It probably will though, it’s hard to make the case that immigrants are despised when the nation are cheering them
She identifies as British and was born on Canada.
Unless she self-identifies as Romanian, anyone who calls her that is being racist.
Its no different to saying that Priti Patel is Ugandan.
There's a weird assumption amongst some on the Left that British identity must be somehow based on racial purity.
It says more about them than anyone else.
It’s also repugnant. ‘She’s not really British’. You what? We’ve just spent 50 fucking years learning (rightly) that anyone who legally migrates here is British. End of. That’s it. Race is irrelevant
This is a victory for the progressive left and I salute it. Emma R is an outstanding example of how this can work so well.
Now the same progressives say ‘nah she’s not *really* British look at her racial background’, just because they hate Brexit. Fuck them
Its the opposite. The right bang on about ethnicity and nationalism and race.
The reason why her migrant status and ethnic background are being raised by progressives is to show the hypocrisy of the people who openly voted to get rid of the Romanians and now cheer one.
And before anyone says "managed migration policy" I don't hear knuckle-draggers demanding the right kind of Romanians be allowed in. They just want them gone.
What she demonstrates is that you can be a migrant and naturalise. She is British because she chooses to be. That is a good thing. Yet other people who may also have the same skills and potential are shut out. They don't get the choice.
And its the same with the hypocrites in the cabinet. Javid makes a great deal of being the son of a bus driver, whilst ensuring that future sons of bus drivers are banned from having the same opportunities he had.
This is all in your head.
Indeed. Rochdale is fighting some caricature of ‘right wing belief’ which is all in his mind. Literally delusional.
It reminds me of Remoaners who think Brexiteers are all dim, 60-something empire nostalgics who want to reinvade Kenya and bring back Bakelite phones. I’ve never met a single Brexiteer - or Leave voter - who thinks like that. Yet that is the demon in the brains of your A C Graylings
It’s partly why - against the odds - Remain lost. They conjured up a demonic opponent who made them feel morally superior - and smarter. But that wasn’t their actual opponent
Absolutely. I've made it all up. Nobody voted Brexit to get rid of the foreigners in their midst. All those TV and radio vox pops and phone ins where people say that didn't happen. That Farage "Breaking Point" poster is a figment of my deranged imagination.
Given that you are a Brexiteer who voted to LEAVE, an eternal period of silence from you on this issue would be welcome.
Rochdale voted LEAVE??!
Oh my sides. Lol
Yes. It's a daily exhibition of extreme hypocrisy.
I don't remember being asked if I was supporting today's one sided trading arrangements.
Do have to laugh though. I am a leave voter saying "this is shit". Telling me to shut up doesn't miraculously make it not shit.
Can anyone please tell me how the current massive cost only on UK exports and minimal restrictions on EU imports is a Good Thing? And if it isn't a good thing then how does my long-regretted vote not for this impact the reality?
Someone said we have a "zero tariff" trade deal. Do we Buxton, there's a long list of payable tariffs and a whole industry of paperwork and checks to manage them.
Don't blame me or come crying to me old bean.
I voted REMAIN.
At least most Leavers on here have the courage of their convictions.
Lol - I wanted to leave the European Union. We were never going to agree their direction of travel on integration. Which means at some point or other we were either going to step out to the outer ring of the "twin track" / "two speed" Europe in our own time, or be put there in theirs.
Having done that the question is what we do now. And we've chosen to demand the EU treat us like a 3rd country and thus fuck exports whilst failing to reciprocate. Not even by policy, by being shit. We haven't invested in facilities or computer systems or the people to the checks we demanded.
How does me voting leave mean I have no say on this shitfest? In what way is this non-reciprocal trade fuck a direct non-negotiable outcome of leaving the EU?
So, you're still a Leaver but you think all Leavers are morons?
Wouldn't it be easier just to argue for EEA-EFTA plus CU rather than the James O'Brien tribute act?
I DID argue for that. We aren't getting that so move on and make a trade deal that works.
Why vote Leave then if you want to stay in the EEA and CU and don't want to end free movement and don't want us to do our own trade deals?
At least in the EU we had a vote, EEA + CU means no real powers reclaimed and no vote
How about because what you want and think isn't what everyone wants and thinks?
The EEA is not the EU. The CU is not the EU. Membership of those is not the same as membership of the EU as demonstrated by the states who are not EU members who have EEA membership or customs unions with the EU.
Also, what are you on about with free movement? We could have deported Eu vagrants whilst still a member. That we chose not to do so was our own fault not theirs. It is the right to live and work, not to be a burden.
You seem to calibrate your political positions based on maximising your level of self-righteousness over your peers.
I do agree with @RochdalePioneers that we have a major shortage of energy production in the UK. This is mainly because decisions in favour of power plants are rarely popular. I am as guilty of this as anyone being shocked at the deal for Hinckley Point. We need to get going on tidal barriers, offshore wind and even solar. And if that means fields covered in ugly looking panels so be it.
AIUI there is a major skills shortage for the 'old' plant. Who, in the last ten or twenty years, would go into the evil, polluting power industry when they can get the gals or guys by saying they work on wind turbines or solar power? If you're a college or university, 'green' has been the buzzword, and you want to create courses in that area.
Unfortunately green cannot, at the moment, provide enough juice.
(Hundreds of people are required to work on a medium-sized plant during a shutdown. As you want to keep shutdowns as short as possible, you really want experienced crew.
Which hard parts of the driving test are proposed to be scrapped, exactly?
Reversing
Second, tests will also be made shorter by removing the ‘reversing exercise’ element – and for vehicles with trailers, the ‘uncoupling and recoupling’ exercise – and having it tested separately by a third party.
So - moved to a third-party site, as in the consultation doc - not removed from tests done by truck drivers.
Which hard parts of the driving test are proposed to be scrapped, exactly?
Reversing
Second, tests will also be made shorter by removing the ‘reversing exercise’ element – and for vehicles with trailers, the ‘uncoupling and recoupling’ exercise – and having it tested separately by a third party.
So - moved to a third-party site, as in the consultation doc - not removed from the testing process.
Mr. Ping, got to show just how green and virtuous the government is (not unique to this one, all of them to Blair at least have done it). Can't nasty coal and gas power. I mean, yes, they keep the lights on but, boo! Carbon!*
Meanwhile, in China...
*I've caricatured my position slightly. I do think most renewables have some promise. But wind is stupid because it's unpredictable, and we need sufficient capacity from coal/gas/nuclear to crank out what we need. And now we're paying through the nose because politicians want to parade their green credentials and can easily afford to do so. Cf boilers.
No, I read some articles about there's various degrees of Incels.
There's the incels that have never had a sexual experience.
There's the incels that may have had one or two sexual encounters in their youth but none for a decade plus.
There's a few other categories.
Judging by the experience of many friends, in the various categories of incel, I would add:
The amazing thing about Emma speaking fluent Mandarin is what it represents. This is a new image of Britain forming right before our eyes. Multicultural. Multilingual. Confident. Winning. Raducanu has done for diversity what Rashford did for community. So, so good.
That’s why people who hate Boris are trying to emphasise her Romanian-ness. This can’t be allowed to reflect well on the government. It probably will though, it’s hard to make the case that immigrants are despised when the nation are cheering them
She identifies as British and was born on Canada.
Unless she self-identifies as Romanian, anyone who calls her that is being racist.
Its no different to saying that Priti Patel is Ugandan.
There's a weird assumption amongst some on the Left that British identity must be somehow based on racial purity.
It says more about them than anyone else.
It’s also repugnant. ‘She’s not really British’. You what? We’ve just spent 50 fucking years learning (rightly) that anyone who legally migrates here is British. End of. That’s it. Race is irrelevant
This is a victory for the progressive left and I salute it. Emma R is an outstanding example of how this can work so well.
Now the same progressives say ‘nah she’s not *really* British look at her racial background’, just because they hate Brexit. Fuck them
Its the opposite. The right bang on about ethnicity and nationalism and race.
The reason why her migrant status and ethnic background are being raised by progressives is to show the hypocrisy of the people who openly voted to get rid of the Romanians and now cheer one.
And before anyone says "managed migration policy" I don't hear knuckle-draggers demanding the right kind of Romanians be allowed in. They just want them gone.
What she demonstrates is that you can be a migrant and naturalise. She is British because she chooses to be. That is a good thing. Yet other people who may also have the same skills and potential are shut out. They don't get the choice.
And its the same with the hypocrites in the cabinet. Javid makes a great deal of being the son of a bus driver, whilst ensuring that future sons of bus drivers are banned from having the same opportunities he had.
This is all in your head.
Indeed. Rochdale is fighting some caricature of ‘right wing belief’ which is all in his mind. Literally delusional.
It reminds me of Remoaners who think Brexiteers are all dim, 60-something empire nostalgics who want to reinvade Kenya and bring back Bakelite phones. I’ve never met a single Brexiteer - or Leave voter - who thinks like that. Yet that is the demon in the brains of your A C Graylings
It’s partly why - against the odds - Remain lost. They conjured up a demonic opponent who made them feel morally superior - and smarter. But that wasn’t their actual opponent
Absolutely. I've made it all up. Nobody voted Brexit to get rid of the foreigners in their midst. All those TV and radio vox pops and phone ins where people say that didn't happen. That Farage "Breaking Point" poster is a figment of my deranged imagination.
Given that you are a Brexiteer who voted to LEAVE, an eternal period of silence from you on this issue would be welcome.
Rochdale voted LEAVE??!
Oh my sides. Lol
Yes. It's a daily exhibition of extreme hypocrisy.
I don't remember being asked if I was supporting today's one sided trading arrangements.
Do have to laugh though. I am a leave voter saying "this is shit". Telling me to shut up doesn't miraculously make it not shit.
Can anyone please tell me how the current massive cost only on UK exports and minimal restrictions on EU imports is a Good Thing? And if it isn't a good thing then how does my long-regretted vote not for this impact the reality?
Someone said we have a "zero tariff" trade deal. Do we Buxton, there's a long list of payable tariffs and a whole industry of paperwork and checks to manage them.
Don't blame me or come crying to me old bean.
I voted REMAIN.
At least most Leavers on here have the courage of their convictions.
Lol - I wanted to leave the European Union. We were never going to agree their direction of travel on integration. Which means at some point or other we were either going to step out to the outer ring of the "twin track" / "two speed" Europe in our own time, or be put there in theirs.
Having done that the question is what we do now. And we've chosen to demand the EU treat us like a 3rd country and thus fuck exports whilst failing to reciprocate. Not even by policy, by being shit. We haven't invested in facilities or computer systems or the people to the checks we demanded.
How does me voting leave mean I have no say on this shitfest? In what way is this non-reciprocal trade fuck a direct non-negotiable outcome of leaving the EU?
So, you're still a Leaver but you think all Leavers are morons?
Wouldn't it be easier just to argue for EEA-EFTA plus CU rather than the James O'Brien tribute act?
I DID argue for that. We aren't getting that so move on and make a trade deal that works.
Why vote Leave then if you want to stay in the EEA and CU and don't want to end free movement and don't want us to do our own trade deals?
At least in the EU we had a vote, EEA + CU means no real powers reclaimed and no vote
How about because what you want and think isn't what everyone wants and thinks?
The EEA is not the EU. The CU is not the EU. Membership of those is not the same as membership of the EU as demonstrated by the states who are not EU members who have EEA membership or customs unions with the EU.
Also, what are you on about with free movement? We could have deported Eu vagrants whilst still a member. That we chose not to do so was our own fault not theirs. It is the right to live and work, not to be a burden.
Norway and Iceland are in the EEA but not the customs union, Switzerland is in neither but has a close trade deal with the EU, Turkey is in a customs union with the EU but not the EEA.
Not a single European state outside the EU is in both the EEA and CU because it would be pointless, you could neither do your own trade deals nor have greater control over free movement
In Portsmouth: foreground, a reach stacker for moving shipping containers; background, unfinished Border Control Post, required to carry out Brexit import checks on EU goods, one reason they’ve been postponed until July ‘22 https://twitter.com/pkelso/status/1437756346649174021/photo/1
Whaa?? Brexit won't be done till after midsummer??
If other MPs did vote for the EEA then I stand corrected. Remiss of me not to know of a rare instance of pro-EU MPs voting in a pro-EU way rather than alongside anti-EU Conservative backbenchers.
I am referring to the "indicative votes", as far as I am aware the only opportunity MPs had to vote for single market or customs union membership. As you will see below, Labour MPs voted overwhelmingly for these soft Brexit options, Tory MPs overwhelmingly opposed.
I'd be grateful if everyone took a look at this so we can put to bed the idea that a soft Brexit was blocked by Remainer MPs when in fact the opposite is true. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts!
Mostly agree with that, but LDs were part of the blocking of a soft Brexit. As were Labour when May offered a deal at the end of her reign. The amount of MPs I thought dealt with it all well is less than 10%.
All May's deals were hard Brexit involving an end to free movement. I can't speak for the Lib Dems (a party whose sole achievement in the postwar era has been to enable a Tory government).
Mr. Boy, ah, I just about remember those indicative votes.
Though worth noting Labour did thrice vote against May's softer deal. Then bemoaned the obvious consequence of a more anti-EU PM coming in.
Edited extra bit: Incidentally, like Socrates at the market I decided not to buy something I didn't need. This is entirely because of my iron discipline, and not because I'm enjoying Dragon Age: Origins so much that any PS5 game would be a downward step.
May's deal was just Johnson's deal with a more workable solution for the Irish border and worse PR. I am exaggerating, but as the bitterest of Remoaners I don't look back longingly at May's Brexit deal as some kind of lost soft Brexit nirvana, believe me. In fact I prefer the current deal as its idiocy is likely to manifest itself more quickly, as is indeed happening.
For me an upside of the alternative reality in which May's deal passed is that Boris Johnson would probably not be the Prime Minister. This is what Brexit, as it panned out, has delivered to us - him. It's not a benefit. Indeed it's the very opposite and it would take some quite stonking gains to balance the books.
I think Boris Johnson as PM had a kind of historical inevitability about it. A country that still instinctively doffs its cap to a posho and has had such a charmed life that it thinks you can elect a joker like him and suffer no consequences was bound to end up with him in charge sooner or later. He is the leader we deserve.
Mr. HYUFD, while I share little in common with Mr. Pioneers politically, people are entitled to change their views. And, I'd add, the lack of an actual prospectus for Leave did mean voters of various differing preferences could've backed it despite their views being mutually exclusive.
Nonetheless it was extremely naive of him to think he could vote Leave reliant on the votes of working class Leavers opposed to FOM from the EEA to get over 50% and then if Leave won completely ignore them and the reason they voted Leave in the first place!
Freedom of movement was the reason leave won. How am I ignoring them? I am pointing to the hypocrisy of people like Javid who parade how their migrant dad was a bus driver whilst slamming the door shut on this generation's migrant dad drivers. Especially as we're well short of them right now.
You might regret your vote to leave, but there's insufficient leavers like yourself to really change anything now. Perhaps you'll get another chance to vote to join EEA or whatever in 40 years or so.
Right here and now that isn't needed. What is needed is for us to decide what we want. Do we want to be a 3rd country with the EU? In which case get the fuck on with building Border Control Points, recruiting customs staff, building the IT system. So that the deal we negotiated can be implemented evenly.
Or if we don't think trade barriers are a good thing (hence our refusal to implement most of it on our side) then lets agree the alignment deal so that we can get back to trading freely.
Instead we have this stupid limbo where we negotiate a deal to make trade more difficult and expensive and then only impose it on ourselves. Its a reverse trade sanction, applied by the UK on the UK.
Why such a simple-minded binary choice?
What about if we want to be a 3rd country but without Border Control Points?
Because that would be idiotic?
Why?
Seems like a good idea to me.
MFN rules mean you'd have to extend it to everyone, then explain your choice to the grieving mother who gave her kid adulterated imported Chinese baby milk.
No they don't.
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
Substance over form applies on this.
So we'd be facing remediation action from other nations.
Now I'm going to go out on a limb and trust some legal experts and trade experts who have written reports on this, including for my firm, than you on this.
Remediation action like the dispute over Boeing that dragged on for two decades in the WTO?
That's pretty meaningless in the round. There have always been remediation actions facing nations like the EU and the USA and why should we be terrified of facing the same and dragging it on for as long as suits our interests?
You're like an incel virgin telling porn stars what to do in their films.
No I'm like a real-world adult saying that not everything has to mirror a porn film.
Potentially having disputes in the WTO is not the end of the world. To be frank we've always been a party to WTO disputes for decades now, so why should that be any different in the future?
Because in the grand scheme of things they are low level, your scenario will involve us annoying several whole continents in one go.
As in the report we received it is likely our application for the Pacific free trade area/other trade deals could be stalled by other countries until we resolve that MFN issue.
We're already doing what I proposed and was assured by you was impossible. Which parties have launched a dispute?
Considering that my proposal is what I was proposing years ago and is now actually happening it seems those headless chickens running scared of the big bad wolf of WTO are the incels.
How would a headless chicken even know there was a big bad wolf nearby?
I was going to draw your attention to the secondary neural nexus in the hip area and tried to find a pic for you but googling Pelvic Nexus is definitely NSFW. The things one learns.
Which hard parts of the driving test are proposed to be scrapped, exactly?
Reversing
Second, tests will also be made shorter by removing the ‘reversing exercise’ element – and for vehicles with trailers, the ‘uncoupling and recoupling’ exercise – and having it tested separately by a third party.
So - moved to a third-party site, as in the consultation doc - not removed from tests done by truck drivers.
The third party will, for the larger operators anyway, probably be the fleet manager under instruction from their insurance company!
Mr. Pioneers, a lot of disgruntlement with the EU was down to pro-EU politicians using it as a convenient scapegoat, as if people wouldn't remember or think of the EU that way.
It still baffles me just how bad the referendum campaigns were.
As ever, I have to keep on educating you on so many things.
Comments
Owen Jones 🌹
@OwenJones84
·
3h
Ed Miliband is here providing the leadership, vision and passion that is completely missing from Keir Starmer
= more energy in the atmosphere = more wind generation. I'd lean in the direction of more windfarms as part of the overall mix.
Fortunately looks like there are shovels in the ground for the big dogger bank one https://doggerbank.com/construction/
Dogger always seems to have SOME wind whenever I listen to the shipping forecast during a test.
But I don't see any moralizing in the message. Don't YOU think the wealthy in America should be paying more tax than they do?
So yes, prices are going to shoot up because we have basically done nothing to secure sufficient power provision.
https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/indicative-votes-2-0-where-did-support-lie/
I'd be grateful if everyone took a look at this so we can put to bed the idea that a soft Brexit was blocked by Remainer MPs when in fact the opposite is true. We are all entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts!
If we want to negotiate them away now, they hold the cards do they not? As they benefit from the current impasse at our cost?
I have no problem with a free trade deal. How have we ended up with a one-sided one?
But, as we saw then, they sometimes do.
The most fitting punishment for Trudeau would be another minority with an even stronger NDP.
There was talk, a few weeks ago, of several domestic suppliers going bust because they had taken on lots of new customers with fixed deals at low prices and hadn’t hedged as prices rose.
I think the crunch point was said to be end of this month or next month when they had big payments due.
I wonder if any big names will collapse?
'Shots' another glaring omission
Hmm, I totally should have made 'rally in the polls' 'break deuce in the polls'.... Would also have saved me from 'de-deuce'. I need an editor!
As part of Channel 4’s response to a government consultation on its future, The Times understands it has submitted research showing that 76 per cent of Tory voters want the company to remain publicly owned.
Of the 2,006 people questioned by research firm Tapestry, a total of 82 per cent said they were against the idea of privatising Channel 4.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-voters-overwhelmingly-opposed-to-privatising-channel-4-survey-finds-9t652pzmb
I agree though most likely result is another minority with a stronger NDP and an even narrower Liberal lead over the Conservatives on seats. Currently most polls still have the Liberals narrowly ahead in Ontario but with the Conservatives making gains and the Liberals clearly ahead in Quebec
Though worth noting Labour did thrice vote against May's softer deal. Then bemoaned the obvious consequence of a more anti-EU PM coming in.
Edited extra bit: Incidentally, like Socrates at the market I decided not to buy something I didn't need. This is entirely because of my iron discipline, and not because I'm enjoying Dragon Age: Origins so much that any PS5 game would be a downward step.
https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2021/09/martin-s-warning--your-energy-bill-s-about-to-jump-by-p100s-and-/
Having our own rules trumps them not doing checks, and our own rules do not need to require checks to be done.
I can't speak for the Lib Dems (a party whose sole achievement in the postwar era has been to enable a Tory government).
Seems like a good idea to me.
Wouldn't it be easier just to argue for EEA-EFTA plus CU rather than the James O'Brien tribute act?
Dame Cressida Dick jokes that when @metpoliceuk celebrates its 200th anniversary in 2029 “it absolutely won’t be me” as Met Police Commissioner addressing #supersconference … So, no more contract renewals after 2024?
https://twitter.com/DannyShawNews/status/1437751388981846016
We're an independent nation, we can choose what checks we want to do and what we don't want to do.
If we're choosing not to do checks with Europe whom we have a trade deal with (as we already are) that doesn't preclude us doing checks with China whom we don't have a deal with.
(2) Labour should rebrand itself as the party of 'labour' - i.e. people working to make a living - and make everything about an inclusive, fair, positive and proudly patriotic 21st Century British vision not a TUC/Islington tribute act - there'd probably be a GE winning coalition around that
F-ck me, my political thinking is so clear I should charge for it.
I am exaggerating, but as the bitterest of Remoaners I don't look back longingly at May's Brexit deal as some kind of lost soft Brexit nirvana, believe me. In fact I prefer the current deal as its idiocy is likely to manifest itself more quickly, as is indeed happening.
So we'd be facing remediation action from other nations.
Now I'm going to go out on a limb and trust some legal experts and trade experts who have written reports on this, including for my firm, than you on this.
That's pretty meaningless in the round. There have always been remediation actions facing nations like the EU and the USA and why should we be terrified of facing the same and dragging it on for as long as suits our interests?
Completely the right bet, but there's not so much edge in it. I'd have it as about 50% chance. I won't be making a similar bet for three reasons - don't want to tie up money, no huge edge, my life would be worse if the Tories aren't in power.
Unlike my view on pretty much all prior LD leaders, I'm pretty negative on Ed Davey. I cannot see any circumstances at all where Starmer would want to get involved with him pre-election.
The Greens represent the most interesting electoral pact possibilities. Mostly a minefield, but there's gold in them there hills.
'We will continue to implement absolutely no border checks whatsoever for goods coming from the EU, while our exporters will be obliged to comply with all the paperwork, inspections and other legalities that the EU demands.'
Could we a winner.
Second, tests will also be made shorter by removing the ‘reversing exercise’ element – and for vehicles with trailers, the ‘uncoupling and recoupling’ exercise – and having it tested separately by a third party.
@AOC was invited to the gala as a NY Representative:
And before haters get wild flying off the handle, New York elected officials are routinely invited to and attend the Met due to our responsibilities in overseeing and supporting the city’s cultural institutions for the public. I was one of several in attendance in this evening.🤗
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1437638740009160705?s=19
She is a great communicator, I can see why the Hatriots don't like her.
Yes I'm fine to live with the UK being on that list.
At least in the EU we had a vote, EEA + CU means no real powers reclaimed and no vote
I'd pay good money to see that.
Tangentially one thing we all need to discuss is electric vehicles, they need bells on them.
A few months ago I nearly got knocked down by one in a car park because it made no noise as it will leaving the bay.
Potentially having disputes in the WTO is not the end of the world. To be frank we've always been a party to WTO disputes for decades now, so why should that be any different in the future?
Come on. Don’t be shits.
1. UK pays for & controls the EU's border *within* the UK
2. EU controls its border at Calais; UK does not at Dover
https://twitter.com/Joe_Mayes/status/1437713172522283013
I had it (both times) but Mrs Anabob didn't – she got reverse-around-a-corner and three-point turn. She passed first time and even to this day cannot reverse park even with the benefit of a very good Audi parking camera, despite it being a near-essential daily task when you live in a London suburb with on-street parking.
I'd suggest that if Shappo makes any changes, he makes reverse park a compulsory element of the test! Would save a LOT of bother in our family!! As for reverse around a corner, this is almost always dangerous to some degree and is very rarely necessary (a safer option is usually available), so Shappo could drop that in recompense perhaps?
As in the report we received it is likely our application for the Pacific free trade area/other trade deals could be stalled by other countries until we resolve that MFN issue.
https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1437755645990744076?s=21
Mr. Ping, got to show just how green and virtuous the government is (not unique to this one, all of them to Blair at least have done it). Can't nasty coal and gas power. I mean, yes, they keep the lights on but, boo! Carbon!*
Meanwhile, in China...
*I've caricatured my position slightly. I do think most renewables have some promise. But wind is stupid because it's unpredictable, and we need sufficient capacity from coal/gas/nuclear to crank out what we need. And now we're paying through the nose because politicians want to parade their green credentials and can easily afford to do so. Cf boilers.
https://twitter.com/pkelso/status/1437756346649174021/photo/1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BpsvLScmbZY
There's the incels that have never had a sexual experience.
There's the incels that may have had one or two sexual encounters in their youth but none for a decade plus.
There's a few other categories.
What's interesting is that elec demand continues to fall at a rate of knots.
Are you on Octopus Agile? Their spot price has occasionally been up around 60p in their "expensive hour", and occasionally actually negative. You can work wonders with a programmable house control system.
Considering that my proposal is what I was proposing years ago and is now actually happening it seems those headless chickens running scared of the big bad wolf of WTO are the incels.
The hard remainers look daft now, for failing to vote for soft brexit.
Had things gone to a second referendum and remain (yeah, I know, LD dreamland - Swinson as PM too
The EEA is not the EU. The CU is not the EU. Membership of those is not the same as membership of the EU as demonstrated by the states who are not EU members who have EEA membership or customs unions with the EU.
Also, what are you on about with free movement? We could have deported Eu vagrants whilst still a member. That we chose not to do so was our own fault not theirs. It is the right to live and work, not to be a burden.
Mr. Pioneers, a lot of disgruntlement with the EU was down to pro-EU politicians using it as a convenient scapegoat, as if people wouldn't remember or think of the EU that way.
It still baffles me just how bad the referendum campaigns were.
There is and has been for decades a major problem with all governments refusing to plan long term and this is what we get. We need to invest heavily into green energy design and production. Fulfil the generation and local storage of green power and be a global leader in selling this to others. Or, focus on quarterly profits in the city and accept that we're always going to be reliant on others. Global Britain or not?
https://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRbEg5HosBo
Unfortunately green cannot, at the moment, provide enough juice.
(Hundreds of people are required to work on a medium-sized plant during a shutdown. As you want to keep shutdowns as short as possible, you really want experienced crew.
“Fathers of very young children”
And
“Husbands married for more than 12 years”
Not a single European state outside the EU is in both the EEA and CU because it would be pointless, you could neither do your own trade deals nor have greater control over free movement