politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Brussels ups the the ante over the Johnson/Cummings EU deal ov
Comments
-
It is very easy to support Brexit and oppose this action by Johnson. Just like it is possible to support military action but oppose war crimes. It is not necessary for Johnson to break the law to secure a workable and reasonable result from the negotiations. That he is doing so speaks far more to his nature than it does to the nature of Brexit.FF43 said:
The assumption here is that all Leave and Johnson voters are deranged fanatics. I think Starmer's tactics are to win over those that just wanted to make Brexit and the EU go away and leave the fanatics to Johnson.contrarian said:
Vote against and Starmer knows he can wave goodbye to those red wall seats he wants to win back.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On an issue as important as this if Starmer fails to vote against he prostitutes his legal profession and trashes his integrityeek said:
Why Starmer is damned if he opposes and damned if he abstains - but if he abstains he can't be blamed for the consequences which he would be if the Commons blocked the act.Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Starmer abstains on a vote of this importance he is tarred with the same brush as Boriseek said:
Nope Starmer should really decide on a day trip out to some other part of the country say to investigate the fishing industry in Scotland leaving the Tories to own this disaster...Big_G_NorthWales said:I suspect the EU legal threat is just what Boris and Cummings had wished for. It is time for Starmer to stand up for the law and whip his mps to vote against this legislation but having said that, that may just be Boris and Cummings hope so they can portray themselves as UK standing up against the EU and the labour party acting in collusion with them
I have no idea where this goes but I hope it ends with Boris going
And we have a pandemic that is becoming ever increasingly serious to deal with
As we saw in the arguments earlier today where Labour was blamed for not letting May's deal go through - this time round Labour should be letting Boris do what he wants - if his party can't stop him why should the opposition try.
Where is integrity - he has to oppose
At the moment it's best to let Boris own this mess - as Starmer said earlier this week get Brexit done..
Indeed in case you missed it, for those who want Britain to be a free trading nation outside the EU going forward, this is a terrible setback.4 -
I disagree - GE too far away.contrarian said:
Vote against and Starmer knows he can wave goodbye to those red wall seats he wants to win back.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On an issue as important as this if Starmer fails to vote against he prostitutes his legal profession and trashes his integrityeek said:
Why Starmer is damned if he opposes and damned if he abstains - but if he abstains he can't be blamed for the consequences which he would be if the Commons blocked the act.Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Starmer abstains on a vote of this importance he is tarred with the same brush as Boriseek said:
Nope Starmer should really decide on a day trip out to some other part of the country say to investigate the fishing industry in Scotland leaving the Tories to own this disaster...Big_G_NorthWales said:I suspect the EU legal threat is just what Boris and Cummings had wished for. It is time for Starmer to stand up for the law and whip his mps to vote against this legislation but having said that, that may just be Boris and Cummings hope so they can portray themselves as UK standing up against the EU and the labour party acting in collusion with them
I have no idea where this goes but I hope it ends with Boris going
And we have a pandemic that is becoming ever increasingly serious to deal with
As we saw in the arguments earlier today where Labour was blamed for not letting May's deal go through - this time round Labour should be letting Boris do what he wants - if his party can't stop him why should the opposition try.
Where is integrity - he has to oppose
At the moment it's best to let Boris own this mess - as Starmer said earlier this week get Brexit done..6 -
What the assumption is is that a few clunky videos by Nigel Farage on boats in the channel got millions of views, dragged this matter to the centre of the news and rocked the government to its core.FF43 said:
The assumption here is that all Leave and Johnson voters are deranged fanatics. I think Starmer's tactics are to win over those that just wanted to make Brexit and the EU go away and leave the fanatics to Johnson.contrarian said:
Vote against and Starmer knows he can wave goodbye to those red wall seats he wants to win back.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On an issue as important as this if Starmer fails to vote against he prostitutes his legal profession and trashes his integrityeek said:
Why Starmer is damned if he opposes and damned if he abstains - but if he abstains he can't be blamed for the consequences which he would be if the Commons blocked the act.Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Starmer abstains on a vote of this importance he is tarred with the same brush as Boriseek said:
Nope Starmer should really decide on a day trip out to some other part of the country say to investigate the fishing industry in Scotland leaving the Tories to own this disaster...Big_G_NorthWales said:I suspect the EU legal threat is just what Boris and Cummings had wished for. It is time for Starmer to stand up for the law and whip his mps to vote against this legislation but having said that, that may just be Boris and Cummings hope so they can portray themselves as UK standing up against the EU and the labour party acting in collusion with them
I have no idea where this goes but I hope it ends with Boris going
And we have a pandemic that is becoming ever increasingly serious to deal with
As we saw in the arguments earlier today where Labour was blamed for not letting May's deal go through - this time round Labour should be letting Boris do what he wants - if his party can't stop him why should the opposition try.
Where is integrity - he has to oppose
At the moment it's best to let Boris own this mess - as Starmer said earlier this week get Brexit done..
That's what the assumption is.0 -
Nope - Cummings and Boris are playing games and the best advice is to just let them get on with it - heck you voted for him on multiple occasions - I never haveBig_G_NorthWales said:
Hang onBeibheirli_C said:
This Boris's mess, the Tories mess. No one forced Boris or Cummings or whoever come up with this stupid bill that caused this shambles and destroyed the country's reputation.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not leadershipydoethur said:
He can vote against without imposing a whip.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Starmer is a lawyer, anything other than voting against is a disgrace on him and his professionGallowgate said:Starmer should whip against only if he thinks he can win. Otherwise no point getting involved.
He could say as Brexit is concluded by this deal there is no point in further party politics, and he leaves it up to the conscience of his MPs as to how they respond to the government’s criminality.
Give me one reason why Starmer should stand up and take the flak for you!
I am calling for Boris to resign
Starmer was the head of the CPS and abdicating a vote against this bill is just wrong on so many levels and will trash his integrity
Also why is he taking flak for doing the right thing2 -
"Integrity"? Pshaw! This is politics, since when has there been integrity?Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Starmer abstains on a vote of this importance he is tarred with the same brush as Boriseek said:
Nope Starmer should really decide on a day trip out to some other part of the country say to investigate the fishing industry in Scotland leaving the Tories to own this disaster...Big_G_NorthWales said:I suspect the EU legal threat is just what Boris and Cummings had wished for. It is time for Starmer to stand up for the law and whip his mps to vote against this legislation but having said that, that may just be Boris and Cummings hope so they can portray themselves as UK standing up against the EU and the labour party acting in collusion with them
I have no idea where this goes but I hope it ends with Boris going
And we have a pandemic that is becoming ever increasingly serious to deal with
As we saw in the arguments earlier today where Labour was blamed for not letting May's deal go through - this time round Labour should be letting Boris do what he wants - if his party can't stop him why should the opposition try.
Where is integrity - he has to oppose
Was there "integrity" when Labour pledged to not ratify the EU Constitution - then called it the Lisbon Treaty and ratified it?
Was there "integrity" when the French and Dutch rejected the EU Constitution - so it was rebranded the Lisbon Treaty and ratified?
Was there "integrity" when Labour pledged to not introduce tuition fees - then did so?
Was there "integrity" when the Lib Dems pledged to abolish tuition fees - the trebled them?
There is no moral difference to me between breaking an international agreement and breaking a manifesto - either way you are breaking your word. Politicians have been doing that for years. The EU has facilitated that for years.
What's sauce for the goose is good for the gander. If you're prepared to see politicians break their word with the voters the moment they get their mits on the levers of power, then what is different with breaking their word with other nations?0 -
Absolutely my viewRichard_Tyndall said:
It is very easy to support Brexit and oppose this action by Johnson. Just like it is possible to support military action but oppose war crimes. It is not necessary for Johnson to break the law to secure a workable and reasonable result from the negotiations. That he is doing so speaks far more to his nature than it does to the nature of Brexit.FF43 said:
The assumption here is that all Leave and Johnson voters are deranged fanatics. I think Starmer's tactics are to win over those that just wanted to make Brexit and the EU go away and leave the fanatics to Johnson.contrarian said:
Vote against and Starmer knows he can wave goodbye to those red wall seats he wants to win back.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On an issue as important as this if Starmer fails to vote against he prostitutes his legal profession and trashes his integrityeek said:
Why Starmer is damned if he opposes and damned if he abstains - but if he abstains he can't be blamed for the consequences which he would be if the Commons blocked the act.Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Starmer abstains on a vote of this importance he is tarred with the same brush as Boriseek said:
Nope Starmer should really decide on a day trip out to some other part of the country say to investigate the fishing industry in Scotland leaving the Tories to own this disaster...Big_G_NorthWales said:I suspect the EU legal threat is just what Boris and Cummings had wished for. It is time for Starmer to stand up for the law and whip his mps to vote against this legislation but having said that, that may just be Boris and Cummings hope so they can portray themselves as UK standing up against the EU and the labour party acting in collusion with them
I have no idea where this goes but I hope it ends with Boris going
And we have a pandemic that is becoming ever increasingly serious to deal with
As we saw in the arguments earlier today where Labour was blamed for not letting May's deal go through - this time round Labour should be letting Boris do what he wants - if his party can't stop him why should the opposition try.
Where is integrity - he has to oppose
At the moment it's best to let Boris own this mess - as Starmer said earlier this week get Brexit done..
Indeed in case you missed it, for those who want Britain to be a free trading nation outside the EU going forward, this is a terrible setback.1 -
ER has definitely moved in a water melon direction - I`ve observed it from the start. I had high hopes originally.ydoethur said:
‘Infiltrated?’ It was founded by them!Stocky said:
Only 90%? Shows how the left barmy fringe has infiltrated ER.Andy_JS said:
About 90% of the population will be appalled by this.FrancisUrquhart said:0 -
When did I vote for Boris other than for the conservatives at the GEeek said:
Nope - Cummings and Boris are playing games and the best advice is to just let them get on with it - heck you voted for him on multiple occasions - I never haveBig_G_NorthWales said:
Hang onBeibheirli_C said:
This Boris's mess, the Tories mess. No one forced Boris or Cummings or whoever come up with this stupid bill that caused this shambles and destroyed the country's reputation.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not leadershipydoethur said:
He can vote against without imposing a whip.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Starmer is a lawyer, anything other than voting against is a disgrace on him and his professionGallowgate said:Starmer should whip against only if he thinks he can win. Otherwise no point getting involved.
He could say as Brexit is concluded by this deal there is no point in further party politics, and he leaves it up to the conscience of his MPs as to how they respond to the government’s criminality.
Give me one reason why Starmer should stand up and take the flak for you!
I am calling for Boris to resign
Starmer was the head of the CPS and abdicating a vote against this bill is just wrong on so many levels and will trash his integrity
Also why is he taking flak for doing the right thing
I did not vote for him in the leadership contest0 -
You dare to talk about integrity and you support that Britain-ruining shower that passes for a govt? A bunch of no-talent non-entities that have dragged the UK to the edge of ruin?Big_G_NorthWales said:
Hang onBeibheirli_C said:
This Boris's mess, the Tories mess. No one forced Boris or Cummings or whoever come up with this stupid bill that caused this shambles and destroyed the country's reputation.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not leadershipydoethur said:
He can vote against without imposing a whip.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Starmer is a lawyer, anything other than voting against is a disgrace on him and his professionGallowgate said:Starmer should whip against only if he thinks he can win. Otherwise no point getting involved.
He could say as Brexit is concluded by this deal there is no point in further party politics, and he leaves it up to the conscience of his MPs as to how they respond to the government’s criminality.
Give me one reason why Starmer should stand up and take the flak for you!
I am calling for Boris to resign
Starmer was the head of the CPS and abdicating a vote against this bill is just wrong on so many levels and will trash his integrity
Also why is he taking flak for doing the right thing
If we are on an integrity kick then you should be telling your Party Chairman to get on the phone to CCHQ and sound off or else the shards of your membership card will be in the post.
2 -
Why are you talking about 'Labour' when Big_G was talking specifically about Starmer?Philip_Thompson said:
"Integrity"? Pshaw! This is politics, since when has there been integrity?Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Starmer abstains on a vote of this importance he is tarred with the same brush as Boriseek said:
Nope Starmer should really decide on a day trip out to some other part of the country say to investigate the fishing industry in Scotland leaving the Tories to own this disaster...Big_G_NorthWales said:I suspect the EU legal threat is just what Boris and Cummings had wished for. It is time for Starmer to stand up for the law and whip his mps to vote against this legislation but having said that, that may just be Boris and Cummings hope so they can portray themselves as UK standing up against the EU and the labour party acting in collusion with them
I have no idea where this goes but I hope it ends with Boris going
And we have a pandemic that is becoming ever increasingly serious to deal with
As we saw in the arguments earlier today where Labour was blamed for not letting May's deal go through - this time round Labour should be letting Boris do what he wants - if his party can't stop him why should the opposition try.
Where is integrity - he has to oppose
Was there "integrity" when Labour pledged to not ratify the EU Constitution - then called it the Lisbon Treaty and ratified it?
Was there "integrity" when the French and Dutch rejected the EU Constitution - so it was rebranded the Lisbon Treaty and ratified?
Was there "integrity" when Labour pledged to not introduce tuition fees - then did so?
Was there "integrity" when the Lib Dems pledged to abolish tuition fees - the trebled them?
There is no moral difference to me between breaking an international agreement and breaking a manifesto - either way you are breaking your word. Politicians have been doing that for years. The EU has facilitated that for years.
What's sauce for the goose is good for the gander. If you're prepared to see politicians break their word with the voters the moment they get their mits on the levers of power, then what is different with breaking their word with other nations?
Indeed Starmer wasn't even an MP (or a candidate) when any of the things you listed took place. So you can't even blame him for supporting them from the back benches.0 -
Philip.Philip_Thompson said:
"Integrity"? Pshaw! This is politics, since when has there been integrity?Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Starmer abstains on a vote of this importance he is tarred with the same brush as Boriseek said:
Nope Starmer should really decide on a day trip out to some other part of the country say to investigate the fishing industry in Scotland leaving the Tories to own this disaster...Big_G_NorthWales said:I suspect the EU legal threat is just what Boris and Cummings had wished for. It is time for Starmer to stand up for the law and whip his mps to vote against this legislation but having said that, that may just be Boris and Cummings hope so they can portray themselves as UK standing up against the EU and the labour party acting in collusion with them
I have no idea where this goes but I hope it ends with Boris going
And we have a pandemic that is becoming ever increasingly serious to deal with
As we saw in the arguments earlier today where Labour was blamed for not letting May's deal go through - this time round Labour should be letting Boris do what he wants - if his party can't stop him why should the opposition try.
Where is integrity - he has to oppose
Was there "integrity" when Labour pledged to not ratify the EU Constitution - then called it the Lisbon Treaty and ratified it?
Was there "integrity" when the French and Dutch rejected the EU Constitution - so it was rebranded the Lisbon Treaty and ratified?
Was there "integrity" when Labour pledged to not introduce tuition fees - then did so?
Was there "integrity" when the Lib Dems pledged to abolish tuition fees - the trebled them?
There is no moral difference to me between breaking an international agreement and breaking a manifesto - either way you are breaking your word. Politicians have been doing that for years. The EU has facilitated that for years.
What's sauce for the goose is good for the gander. If you're prepared to see politicians break their word with the voters the moment they get their mits on the levers of power, then what is different with breaking their word with other nations?
You and I agree on much but we have divorced completely over this shameful bill and there is no way back for my support for Boris
He has to go but I do want to see brexit concluded at the end of the year1 -
In case my last post came out the wrong way I absolutely think there should be more integrity in politics. But like charity I think it should start at home. And I think the EU has shown a lack of good faith in the negotiations.
Your word should be your bond. Our MPs lost sight of that decades ago.0 -
Let's assume all Leavers ARE deranged fanatics (some of my best friends etc... well not many, but a couple voted Leave and are nice people in fact. They are keeping VERY quiet about it now) . OK, let's go with the assumption: Leavers are WITHOUT EXCEPTION deranged fanatics.contrarian said:
What the assumption is is that a few clunky videos by Nigel Farage on boats in the channel got millions of views, dragged this matter to the centre of the news and rocked the government to its core.FF43 said:
The assumption here is that all Leave and Johnson voters are deranged fanatics. I think Starmer's tactics are to win over those that just wanted to make Brexit and the EU go away and leave the fanatics to Johnson.contrarian said:
Vote against and Starmer knows he can wave goodbye to those red wall seats he wants to win back.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On an issue as important as this if Starmer fails to vote against he prostitutes his legal profession and trashes his integrityeek said:
Why Starmer is damned if he opposes and damned if he abstains - but if he abstains he can't be blamed for the consequences which he would be if the Commons blocked the act.Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Starmer abstains on a vote of this importance he is tarred with the same brush as Boriseek said:
Nope Starmer should really decide on a day trip out to some other part of the country say to investigate the fishing industry in Scotland leaving the Tories to own this disaster...Big_G_NorthWales said:I suspect the EU legal threat is just what Boris and Cummings had wished for. It is time for Starmer to stand up for the law and whip his mps to vote against this legislation but having said that, that may just be Boris and Cummings hope so they can portray themselves as UK standing up against the EU and the labour party acting in collusion with them
I have no idea where this goes but I hope it ends with Boris going
And we have a pandemic that is becoming ever increasingly serious to deal with
As we saw in the arguments earlier today where Labour was blamed for not letting May's deal go through - this time round Labour should be letting Boris do what he wants - if his party can't stop him why should the opposition try.
Where is integrity - he has to oppose
At the moment it's best to let Boris own this mess - as Starmer said earlier this week get Brexit done..
That's what the assumption is.
How many of those deranged fanatics do you think Starmer will ever win over? He's wasting his time.0 -
You really don't get this democracy lark do you. The views of the ERG types reflect the views of a section of the electorate. Quite a large one it seems even if I don't agree with them.Beibheirli_C said:
The Tories would have done us all a favour if, years ago, they had tossed the ERG out on their ear and then stood moderate candidates.contrarian said:
The driving force of this is not Cummings or Johnson, its Farage.Richard_Tyndall said:
I would like to think not but I suspect that even if he didn't come up with the idea he must have at least agreed to it and game played it.ydoethur said:
Hi RichardRichard_Tyndall said:
There never was going to be a satisfactory outcome for everyone. That is the nature of politics. But this has nothing to do with that. This is all about personal aggrandisement by Johnson.HYUFD said:
The problem is there is no satisfactory Brexit for everyone.Richard_Tyndall said:The very best result next week would be for Parliament to vote down the Internal Market Bill. I hope there are enough Tory rebels to make sure this does not go through.
Strangely this is not about Brexit. That is just the battlefield on which this is being played out. Brexit could happen perfectly well to the satisfaction of the vast majority of Leave voters (and given the alternative most Remain voters as well) without this idiocy.
This is all about Johnson and his delusions that he is another Churchill. A 'meh' Bexit where things basically get sorted out without a huge fanfare of 'Victory over the Enemy' doesn't suit him at all. He has an eye for history and thinks that if it isn't 'glorious' then it isn't worth doing.
Diehard Remainers stlll oppose Brexit completely and want to rejoin the EU. Moderate Remainers and moderate Leavers may accept an EEA or EEA style FTA compromise which is the most the EU will give us but most Leavers would prefer No Deal WTO terms Brexit to that
I know we have very different views on Cummings, although we agreed over his eye test. You’re a big admirer. I’m not.
I have to say I see Cummings’ hand in this. It’s exactly the sort of thing he’s done before. Come up with an idea that sounds incredibly brilliant in isolation, and will never survive contact with reality, and then drive it through to show you can. Prorogation springs to mind. (I should mention I thought that was legal, although I also thought it was a very bad idea.)
I speak from my experience of working in a sector he tried to reform, with disastrous results. You, on the other hand, have a much more detailed knowledge of his written work than I do.
Do you think Cummings has anything to do with this? I’m genuinely interested in hearing your views. Because if he did, he will surely have to quit if the government is defeated - and if he didn’t, it suggests he’s lost a lot of personal influence although his style clearly remains intact.
As I said, although it is of course pure speculation, I see the driving force here being Johnson. I think he is desperate for this to be a fight rather than a negotiation and for him to come out as the conquering hero. He believes that whatever fallout there might be will be ancient history by the time the next election comes around. He also has a well deserved reputation for being scornful of the law, whether it is international or domestic. I assume this stems from a horrendous sense of privilege.
So yes I think Cummings must have had something to do with this but unlike the previous 'wheezes' I think the driving force and the origins of this one lie firmly with Johnson.
As an aside is Cummings even back at Number 10 at the moment? I know he was out because of his much delayed operation at the start of the month.
The tories don;t fear Roger irrelevant Keir Starmer.
They fear a revival of the Brexit party, powered by a 'stab in the back' brexit and a mounting list of conservative voter grievances.
A bad brexit or a cave in finishes Johnson's government, and it finishes the tories for a generation or more.
But they lacked the courage and the nerve to do it.
It was because so many MPs, particularly the party leaderships, failed to recognise this point and failed to represent the views of their voters that we ended up with Brexit and subsequently a Johnson majority.
2 -
I am going for a hot bath and a glass of wine
Later...0 -
Genie: I shall grant you 3 wishes.
Man: I wish for a world without lawyers.
Genie: Done, you have no more wishes.
Man: But you said 3.
Genie: Sue me.5 -
-
TBH, I'm tempted to swap the volumes of wine and water.Beibheirli_C said:I am going for a hot bath and a glass of wine
Later...
Which takes us back to Divinity, I guess.0 -
Wait until the 10pm to 5.00am daily curfew comes inalex_ said:0 -
The average voter can't cripple an industry with interdependent supply chains with a stroke of a pen. This is a wild take, even for you.Philip_Thompson said:
"Integrity"? Pshaw! This is politics, since when has there been integrity?Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Starmer abstains on a vote of this importance he is tarred with the same brush as Boriseek said:
Nope Starmer should really decide on a day trip out to some other part of the country say to investigate the fishing industry in Scotland leaving the Tories to own this disaster...Big_G_NorthWales said:I suspect the EU legal threat is just what Boris and Cummings had wished for. It is time for Starmer to stand up for the law and whip his mps to vote against this legislation but having said that, that may just be Boris and Cummings hope so they can portray themselves as UK standing up against the EU and the labour party acting in collusion with them
I have no idea where this goes but I hope it ends with Boris going
And we have a pandemic that is becoming ever increasingly serious to deal with
As we saw in the arguments earlier today where Labour was blamed for not letting May's deal go through - this time round Labour should be letting Boris do what he wants - if his party can't stop him why should the opposition try.
Where is integrity - he has to oppose
Was there "integrity" when Labour pledged to not ratify the EU Constitution - then called it the Lisbon Treaty and ratified it?
Was there "integrity" when the French and Dutch rejected the EU Constitution - so it was rebranded the Lisbon Treaty and ratified?
Was there "integrity" when Labour pledged to not introduce tuition fees - then did so?
Was there "integrity" when the Lib Dems pledged to abolish tuition fees - the trebled them?
There is no moral difference to me between breaking an international agreement and breaking a manifesto - either way you are breaking your word. Politicians have been doing that for years. The EU has facilitated that for years.
What's sauce for the goose is good for the gander. If you're prepared to see politicians break their word with the voters the moment they get their mits on the levers of power, then what is different with breaking their word with other nations?0 -
In the same way a Lannister always pays his debts, the UK government has always respected rule of law. The government is changing the nature of how businesses and investors see us as a nation. That is an intangible loss which will hurt us for years to come. Tory MPs must stand up and be counted and they need to rouse opposition benches, it hurts a future Labour government as well.3
-
@Big_G_NorthWales my respect for you continues to grow, unfortunately I think Philip is trolling at this point.0
-
Thought you couldn't vote Hunt over fox hunting ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
When did I vote for Boris other than for the conservatives at the GEeek said:
Nope - Cummings and Boris are playing games and the best advice is to just let them get on with it - heck you voted for him on multiple occasions - I never haveBig_G_NorthWales said:
Hang onBeibheirli_C said:
This Boris's mess, the Tories mess. No one forced Boris or Cummings or whoever come up with this stupid bill that caused this shambles and destroyed the country's reputation.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not leadershipydoethur said:
He can vote against without imposing a whip.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Starmer is a lawyer, anything other than voting against is a disgrace on him and his professionGallowgate said:Starmer should whip against only if he thinks he can win. Otherwise no point getting involved.
He could say as Brexit is concluded by this deal there is no point in further party politics, and he leaves it up to the conscience of his MPs as to how they respond to the government’s criminality.
Give me one reason why Starmer should stand up and take the flak for you!
I am calling for Boris to resign
Starmer was the head of the CPS and abdicating a vote against this bill is just wrong on so many levels and will trash his integrity
Also why is he taking flak for doing the right thing
I did not vote for him in the leadership contest0 -
Then I am afraid you hadn't bothered to study it closely enough.Stocky said:
ER has definitely moved in a water melon direction - I`ve observed it from the start. I had high hopes originally.ydoethur said:
‘Infiltrated?’ It was founded by them!Stocky said:
Only 90%? Shows how the left barmy fringe has infiltrated ER.Andy_JS said:
About 90% of the population will be appalled by this.FrancisUrquhart said:
It was founded by a long-time Green activist and a failed farmer in urgent need of money. It was dominated by fat posh boys of limited intelligence who were annoyed that nothing went right and blamed the world rather than their general uselessness, so wanted to riot.
I do not say they do not care about the climate. I do say for them campaigning about it is primarily a means to a series of other ends.
They are BLM only even less ethnically diverse.0 -
I Cana believe it.Stuartinromford said:
TBH, I'm tempted to swap the volumes of wine and water.Beibheirli_C said:I am going for a hot bath and a glass of wine
Later...
Which takes us back to Divinity, I guess.1 -
Labour just needs to oppose this on the grounds that, apart from breaking our word, it is actually hostile to a deal with the EU, with the US and anyone else.
It’s actually anti-Brexit.
I’m not sure how easily Cummings (this has his fingerprints all over it) can turn this into a People vs Remoaner issue. I don’t sense a great desire from the usual cheerleaders in the media to follow Boris into the abyss.
Not least because he is fucking up Covid as well.2 -
0
-
Another thoroughly un-conservative policy, to have the "man from the government" going around doing this.alex_ said:
The reality is you can't policy the nation to do this, it has to be that the vast majority buy into it and you reserve the police to deal with a small minority doing things like organizing raves.0 -
Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.3
-
There are plenty of reasons to oppose this bill without even touching the issue of the EU. The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law, particularly in the area of state aid, and without reference to Parliament and without subject to judicial review. It will open up UK businesses attempting to trade abroad to the risk of significant "tit for tat" measures where ministers acting like this (against decades of Conservative orthodoxy on free trade that most Brexiters claimed to be strong supporters of) pile money into struggling businesses to pander to their current voting constituencies.
Just a big disaster all round.
And on the EU does anyone really believe that the Government is looking forward to no deal on 1st January? When they will have no ability to properly control even the borders they aspire to control for at least six months, something the EU seems far more prepared for?
The EU should have walked away before now, and forced the UK media to really focus on the impact of no deal, instead of persisting in playing the Govt's game of talking it up as a "negotiating tactic". As it is, by the time the media start focussing on the implications for the UK public it will be too late to do anything about it.1 -
Oscars: I know Mr Royale raised this earlier, but this really is outrageous.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-oscars-diversity-quest-has-gone-too-far
Biden should make a statement against this - it would do his campaign a lot of good by reassuring waverers who are being put off voting Dem by the protests and wokey stuff.1 -
I don't like the game of one-downmanship the Brexit and Covid narratives seem to be playing with each other to regain attention in the collective consciousness of the nation.
At this rate in about 8-10 weeks I expect the news for the nation to be split roughly 50/50 between the new strain "Captain Trips-20" and the nuclear destruction of Brussels.0 -
https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument0 -
Starmer should oppose this on the grounds it stops a deal being made and Johnson promised a deal.
That was pretty much his line yesterday.0 -
"The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law,"alex_ said:There are plenty of reasons to oppose this bill without even touching the issue of the EU. The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law, particularly in the area of state aid, and without reference to Parliament and without subject to judicial review. It will open up UK businesses attempting to trade abroad to the risk of significant "tit for tat" measures where ministers acting like this (against decades of Conservative orthodoxy on free trade that most Brexiters claimed to be strong supporters of) pile money into struggling businesses to pander to their current voting constituencies.
Just a big disaster all round.
And on the EU does anyone really believe that the Government is looking forward to no deal on 1st January? When they will have no ability to properly control even the borders they aspire to control for at least six months, something the EU seems far more prepared for?
The EU should have walked away before now, and forced the UK media to really focus on the impact of no deal, instead of persisting in playing the Govt's game of talking it up as a "negotiating tactic". As it is, by the time the media start focussing on the implications for the UK public it will be too late to do anything about it.
It's sort of why we elect people.0 -
If that`s all it is why are Tory MPs against it then?Omnium said:
"The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law,"alex_ said:There are plenty of reasons to oppose this bill without even touching the issue of the EU. The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law, particularly in the area of state aid, and without reference to Parliament and without subject to judicial review. It will open up UK businesses attempting to trade abroad to the risk of significant "tit for tat" measures where ministers acting like this (against decades of Conservative orthodoxy on free trade that most Brexiters claimed to be strong supporters of) pile money into struggling businesses to pander to their current voting constituencies.
Just a big disaster all round.
And on the EU does anyone really believe that the Government is looking forward to no deal on 1st January? When they will have no ability to properly control even the borders they aspire to control for at least six months, something the EU seems far more prepared for?
The EU should have walked away before now, and forced the UK media to really focus on the impact of no deal, instead of persisting in playing the Govt's game of talking it up as a "negotiating tactic". As it is, by the time the media start focussing on the implications for the UK public it will be too late to do anything about it.
It's sort of why we elect people.0 -
Er no. If ministers want to over-ride existing law then they have to persuade Parliament to change it. They can't just act by Executive fiat.Omnium said:
"The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law,"alex_ said:There are plenty of reasons to oppose this bill without even touching the issue of the EU. The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law, particularly in the area of state aid, and without reference to Parliament and without subject to judicial review. It will open up UK businesses attempting to trade abroad to the risk of significant "tit for tat" measures where ministers acting like this (against decades of Conservative orthodoxy on free trade that most Brexiters claimed to be strong supporters of) pile money into struggling businesses to pander to their current voting constituencies.
Just a big disaster all round.
And on the EU does anyone really believe that the Government is looking forward to no deal on 1st January? When they will have no ability to properly control even the borders they aspire to control for at least six months, something the EU seems far more prepared for?
The EU should have walked away before now, and forced the UK media to really focus on the impact of no deal, instead of persisting in playing the Govt's game of talking it up as a "negotiating tactic". As it is, by the time the media start focussing on the implications for the UK public it will be too late to do anything about it.
It's sort of why we elect people.1 -
Traditionally Parliament made laws, not ministers.Omnium said:
"The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law,"alex_ said:There are plenty of reasons to oppose this bill without even touching the issue of the EU. The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law, particularly in the area of state aid, and without reference to Parliament and without subject to judicial review. It will open up UK businesses attempting to trade abroad to the risk of significant "tit for tat" measures where ministers acting like this (against decades of Conservative orthodoxy on free trade that most Brexiters claimed to be strong supporters of) pile money into struggling businesses to pander to their current voting constituencies.
Just a big disaster all round.
And on the EU does anyone really believe that the Government is looking forward to no deal on 1st January? When they will have no ability to properly control even the borders they aspire to control for at least six months, something the EU seems far more prepared for?
The EU should have walked away before now, and forced the UK media to really focus on the impact of no deal, instead of persisting in playing the Govt's game of talking it up as a "negotiating tactic". As it is, by the time the media start focussing on the implications for the UK public it will be too late to do anything about it.
It's sort of why we elect people.
But hey we’re ripping everything else up, let’s get rid of Parliament as well and just directly elect a government.0 -
The really smart thing is to wait. It's Thursday evening, the votes aren't until next week, there are plenty of unhappy Conservatives.CorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer should oppose this on the grounds it stops a deal being made and Johnson promised a deal.
That was pretty much his line yesterday.
It'll be easier for them to act if Starmer says as little as possible for now.3 -
I abstainedPulpstar said:
Thought you couldn't vote Hunt over fox hunting ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
When did I vote for Boris other than for the conservatives at the GEeek said:
Nope - Cummings and Boris are playing games and the best advice is to just let them get on with it - heck you voted for him on multiple occasions - I never haveBig_G_NorthWales said:
Hang onBeibheirli_C said:
This Boris's mess, the Tories mess. No one forced Boris or Cummings or whoever come up with this stupid bill that caused this shambles and destroyed the country's reputation.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not leadershipydoethur said:
He can vote against without imposing a whip.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Starmer is a lawyer, anything other than voting against is a disgrace on him and his professionGallowgate said:Starmer should whip against only if he thinks he can win. Otherwise no point getting involved.
He could say as Brexit is concluded by this deal there is no point in further party politics, and he leaves it up to the conscience of his MPs as to how they respond to the government’s criminality.
Give me one reason why Starmer should stand up and take the flak for you!
I am calling for Boris to resign
Starmer was the head of the CPS and abdicating a vote against this bill is just wrong on so many levels and will trash his integrity
Also why is he taking flak for doing the right thing
I did not vote for him in the leadership contest0 -
If we hadn't that that election and Starmer had already taken over, we'd have had a GNU of by now0
-
We elect a legislature who then authorises the executive. If they want to give the executive that power then that's up to them. Of course, the legislature might have other ideas.Omnium said:
"The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law,"alex_ said:There are plenty of reasons to oppose this bill without even touching the issue of the EU. The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law, particularly in the area of state aid, and without reference to Parliament and without subject to judicial review. It will open up UK businesses attempting to trade abroad to the risk of significant "tit for tat" measures where ministers acting like this (against decades of Conservative orthodoxy on free trade that most Brexiters claimed to be strong supporters of) pile money into struggling businesses to pander to their current voting constituencies.
Just a big disaster all round.
And on the EU does anyone really believe that the Government is looking forward to no deal on 1st January? When they will have no ability to properly control even the borders they aspire to control for at least six months, something the EU seems far more prepared for?
The EU should have walked away before now, and forced the UK media to really focus on the impact of no deal, instead of persisting in playing the Govt's game of talking it up as a "negotiating tactic". As it is, by the time the media start focussing on the implications for the UK public it will be too late to do anything about it.
It's sort of why we elect people.0 -
In September 2000 Gore reached 51% and 50% and 49% in multiple polls, on election day he got 48% and lost the EC to Bush while still winning the popular vote.Philip_Thompson said:
Name one candidate in recent decades please who has gone backwards in absolute share from here to election day?HYUFD said:
They have after the debates, which are still to come.Philip_Thompson said:
That flashback shows why Biden should have >90% chance of winning.HYUFD said:
No candidate I can think of in recent decades has gone backwards in their poll share from here, they normally both go forwards in share. Biden's share starting at 51% . . . Trump is not POTUS if Biden gets >51% of the vote realistically.
Watch the share not the lead.
However while Biden will almost certainly win the popular vote, even if he gets 51% if Trump gets 47% or 48% he still has a chance of winning the EC
The lead can change absolutely but both candidates shares normally go up. If the lead changes its normally by one candidate getting the bulk of the "others" share, not because of a direct swing from here.
In September 1996 Bill Clinton was over 50% in all polls but one, he reached 55% in several, he got 49% on election day.
In 2000 Bush was on 52% pre debates in September, he got 50%.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_polling_for_United_States_presidential_elections#2000_United_States_presidential_election0 -
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.2 -
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.3 -
Once the legislature has ceded power to ministers it never gets it back. Imagine Parliament authorising the Government to set taxes without a Finance Act! They could do it, but it would in effect be taking us back to pre Magna Carta! This is almost unprecedented. Already there are a lot of murmurings about the powers that Ministers have been granted under the Coronavirus act, but that is at least (at the moment) time limited.OnboardG1 said:
We elect a legislature who then authorises the executive. If they want to give the executive that power then that's up to them. Of course, the legislature might have other ideas.Omnium said:
"The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law,"alex_ said:There are plenty of reasons to oppose this bill without even touching the issue of the EU. The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law, particularly in the area of state aid, and without reference to Parliament and without subject to judicial review. It will open up UK businesses attempting to trade abroad to the risk of significant "tit for tat" measures where ministers acting like this (against decades of Conservative orthodoxy on free trade that most Brexiters claimed to be strong supporters of) pile money into struggling businesses to pander to their current voting constituencies.
Just a big disaster all round.
And on the EU does anyone really believe that the Government is looking forward to no deal on 1st January? When they will have no ability to properly control even the borders they aspire to control for at least six months, something the EU seems far more prepared for?
The EU should have walked away before now, and forced the UK media to really focus on the impact of no deal, instead of persisting in playing the Govt's game of talking it up as a "negotiating tactic". As it is, by the time the media start focussing on the implications for the UK public it will be too late to do anything about it.
It's sort of why we elect people.
0 -
Exactly. Well said.Richard_Tyndall said:
It is very easy to support Brexit and oppose this action by Johnson. Just like it is possible to support military action but oppose war crimes. It is not necessary for Johnson to break the law to secure a workable and reasonable result from the negotiations. That he is doing so speaks far more to his nature than it does to the nature of Brexit.FF43 said:
The assumption here is that all Leave and Johnson voters are deranged fanatics. I think Starmer's tactics are to win over those that just wanted to make Brexit and the EU go away and leave the fanatics to Johnson.contrarian said:
Vote against and Starmer knows he can wave goodbye to those red wall seats he wants to win back.Big_G_NorthWales said:
On an issue as important as this if Starmer fails to vote against he prostitutes his legal profession and trashes his integrityeek said:
Why Starmer is damned if he opposes and damned if he abstains - but if he abstains he can't be blamed for the consequences which he would be if the Commons blocked the act.Big_G_NorthWales said:
If Starmer abstains on a vote of this importance he is tarred with the same brush as Boriseek said:
Nope Starmer should really decide on a day trip out to some other part of the country say to investigate the fishing industry in Scotland leaving the Tories to own this disaster...Big_G_NorthWales said:I suspect the EU legal threat is just what Boris and Cummings had wished for. It is time for Starmer to stand up for the law and whip his mps to vote against this legislation but having said that, that may just be Boris and Cummings hope so they can portray themselves as UK standing up against the EU and the labour party acting in collusion with them
I have no idea where this goes but I hope it ends with Boris going
And we have a pandemic that is becoming ever increasingly serious to deal with
As we saw in the arguments earlier today where Labour was blamed for not letting May's deal go through - this time round Labour should be letting Boris do what he wants - if his party can't stop him why should the opposition try.
Where is integrity - he has to oppose
At the moment it's best to let Boris own this mess - as Starmer said earlier this week get Brexit done..
Indeed in case you missed it, for those who want Britain to be a free trading nation outside the EU going forward, this is a terrible setback.
But, again, the up-their-own-arsehole Remainers don't see this and prefer to try and use it to take the battle back to Day One.0 -
At last knockings if Starmer evaluates the numbers and then orders a vote against he will have a famous defeat against the government ... but on the other hand the look of the UK government playing tough with foreign countries plays very well into into the feeling held by many of British exceptionalism. And - remember - the LP`s image is not exactly one that is based on being patriotic. Starmer knows this.Stuartinromford said:
The really smart thing is to wait. It's Thursday evening, the votes aren't until next week, there are plenty of unhappy Conservatives.CorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer should oppose this on the grounds it stops a deal being made and Johnson promised a deal.
That was pretty much his line yesterday.
It'll be easier for them to act if Starmer says as little as possible for now.
So I still think he`ll duck the issue by abstaining.0 -
Yep, the EU have walked into the trap too. Would have been better to sit silently until the legislative process took it's course.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument0 -
To be honest, does it really matter? Ultimately it's up to them who they dish out awards to. A lot of films that are nominated for Oscars tend to be rubbish anyway.Stocky said:Oscars: I know Mr Royale raised this earlier, but this really is outrageous.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-oscars-diversity-quest-has-gone-too-far
Biden should make a statement against this - it would do his campaign a lot of good by reassuring waverers who are being put off voting Dem by the protests and wokey stuff.
I guess it might mean some excellent films like The Big Short might struggle to get made, but I don't think all that many films rely upon Oscar potential to get funding.0 -
" other than for the conservatives at the GE"Big_G_NorthWales said:
When did I vote for Boris other than for the conservatives at the GEeek said:
Nope - Cummings and Boris are playing games and the best advice is to just let them get on with it - heck you voted for him on multiple occasions - I never haveBig_G_NorthWales said:
Hang onBeibheirli_C said:
This Boris's mess, the Tories mess. No one forced Boris or Cummings or whoever come up with this stupid bill that caused this shambles and destroyed the country's reputation.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not leadershipydoethur said:
He can vote against without imposing a whip.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Starmer is a lawyer, anything other than voting against is a disgrace on him and his professionGallowgate said:Starmer should whip against only if he thinks he can win. Otherwise no point getting involved.
He could say as Brexit is concluded by this deal there is no point in further party politics, and he leaves it up to the conscience of his MPs as to how they respond to the government’s criminality.
Give me one reason why Starmer should stand up and take the flak for you!
I am calling for Boris to resign
Starmer was the head of the CPS and abdicating a vote against this bill is just wrong on so many levels and will trash his integrity
Also why is he taking flak for doing the right thing
I did not vote for him in the leadership contest
That was when ;-)1 -
Yes.Gallowgate said:
Traditionally Parliament made laws, not ministers.Omnium said:
"The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law,"alex_ said:There are plenty of reasons to oppose this bill without even touching the issue of the EU. The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law, particularly in the area of state aid, and without reference to Parliament and without subject to judicial review. It will open up UK businesses attempting to trade abroad to the risk of significant "tit for tat" measures where ministers acting like this (against decades of Conservative orthodoxy on free trade that most Brexiters claimed to be strong supporters of) pile money into struggling businesses to pander to their current voting constituencies.
Just a big disaster all round.
And on the EU does anyone really believe that the Government is looking forward to no deal on 1st January? When they will have no ability to properly control even the borders they aspire to control for at least six months, something the EU seems far more prepared for?
The EU should have walked away before now, and forced the UK media to really focus on the impact of no deal, instead of persisting in playing the Govt's game of talking it up as a "negotiating tactic". As it is, by the time the media start focussing on the implications for the UK public it will be too late to do anything about it.
It's sort of why we elect people.
But hey we’re ripping everything else up, let’s get rid of Parliament as well and just directly elect a government.
On the face of it, this also seems to be a way of empowering Ministers (or certain SPADs) to spend millions or even billions on pet projects without scrutiny.
Why pay tax when you know it will be siphoned away to Cummings’s cronies?0 -
The fact that France, Holland and Ireland have measures ready to go in the event of a no deal Brexit, and we do not, simply adds to our Tory government’s shame, given that the referendum was over four years ago and no deal has always been many of their preferred outcome.alex_ said:There are plenty of reasons to oppose this bill without even touching the issue of the EU. The bill as i understand it gives Ministers wide ranging powers to over-ride existing UK law, particularly in the area of state aid, and without reference to Parliament and without subject to judicial review. It will open up UK businesses attempting to trade abroad to the risk of significant "tit for tat" measures where ministers acting like this (against decades of Conservative orthodoxy on free trade that most Brexiters claimed to be strong supporters of) pile money into struggling businesses to pander to their current voting constituencies.
Just a big disaster all round.
And on the EU does anyone really believe that the Government is looking forward to no deal on 1st January? When they will have no ability to properly control even the borders they aspire to control for at least six months, something the EU seems far more prepared for?
The EU should have walked away before now, and forced the UK media to really focus on the impact of no deal, instead of persisting in playing the Govt's game of talking it up as a "negotiating tactic". As it is, by the time the media start focussing on the implications for the UK public it will be too late to do anything about it.1 -
The media and public will expect the LO to comment on this, but I think Starmer can safely run the uncontroversial "rule of law" argument. He can also parrot back Michael Howard's excoriation in the Lords today.Stuartinromford said:
The really smart thing is to wait. It's Thursday evening, the votes aren't until next week, there are plenty of unhappy Conservatives.CorrectHorseBattery said:Starmer should oppose this on the grounds it stops a deal being made and Johnson promised a deal.
That was pretty much his line yesterday.
It'll be easier for them to act if Starmer says as little as possible for now.1 -
What trap have they walked into? I suspect they've had enough. It's not like they have any electoral considerations to take into account. If it makes them even more unpopular in the Red Wall seats so what?RH1992 said:
Yep, the EU have walked into the trap too. Would have been better to sit silently until the legislative process took it's course.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument1 -
It was quite right not to ask for an extension. It was unnecessary and prolonged uncertainty.Alistair said:
A deal was (and still is - just) doable this year, and we're not too far off.
The only rider is that it might need a further 6-18 month phase in time (or it would do in a rational world).0 -
Yet at that point you were still threatening to leave the party if Boris became PM, having spent months repeatedly posting here about his poor judgement and character.Big_G_NorthWales said:
I abstainedPulpstar said:
Thought you couldn't vote Hunt over fox hunting ?Big_G_NorthWales said:
When did I vote for Boris other than for the conservatives at the GEeek said:
Nope - Cummings and Boris are playing games and the best advice is to just let them get on with it - heck you voted for him on multiple occasions - I never haveBig_G_NorthWales said:
Hang onBeibheirli_C said:
This Boris's mess, the Tories mess. No one forced Boris or Cummings or whoever come up with this stupid bill that caused this shambles and destroyed the country's reputation.Big_G_NorthWales said:
That is not leadershipydoethur said:
He can vote against without imposing a whip.Big_G_NorthWales said:
Starmer is a lawyer, anything other than voting against is a disgrace on him and his professionGallowgate said:Starmer should whip against only if he thinks he can win. Otherwise no point getting involved.
He could say as Brexit is concluded by this deal there is no point in further party politics, and he leaves it up to the conscience of his MPs as to how they respond to the government’s criminality.
Give me one reason why Starmer should stand up and take the flak for you!
I am calling for Boris to resign
Starmer was the head of the CPS and abdicating a vote against this bill is just wrong on so many levels and will trash his integrity
Also why is he taking flak for doing the right thing
I did not vote for him in the leadership contest0 -
-
The Tory manifesto promised to end the implementation period in DecemberOnboardG1 said:
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.0 -
As Kirstie Allie has said: These new criteria are a ‘disgrace to artists everywhere ... can you imagine telling Picasso what had to be in his f**king paintings’.tlg86 said:
To be honest, does it really matter? Ultimately it's up to them who they dish out awards to. A lot of films that are nominated for Oscars tend to be rubbish anyway.Stocky said:Oscars: I know Mr Royale raised this earlier, but this really is outrageous.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-oscars-diversity-quest-has-gone-too-far
Biden should make a statement against this - it would do his campaign a lot of good by reassuring waverers who are being put off voting Dem by the protests and wokey stuff.
I guess it might mean some excellent films like The Big Short might struggle to get made, but I don't think all that many films rely upon Oscar potential to get funding.
It matters a lot. It`s a form of brainwashing, enacted by force. At attempt to normalise an unintelligent batshit-crazy censorship.
Every liberal should be up in arms about this - including the Dem Party.1 -
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.1 -
Starmer should oppose this as a point of principle. He doesn't have to say or do anything yet. No point giving Johnson time to plan a counterattack or wind up the rhetoric. Just wait until the vote next week and then, in reasonable time to encourage other opposition, make it clear he will whip against the bill.0
-
Nice misordering of words there! I think they mean Eurosceptic former leader...CorrectHorseBattery said:
0 -
A deal is no longer possible because of this wanton act.Casino_Royale said:
It was quite right not to ask for an extension. It was unnecessary and prolonged uncertainty.Alistair said:
A deal was (and still is - just) doable this year, and we're not too far off.
The only rider is that it might need a further 6-18 month phase in time (or it would do in a rational world).
The question has now shifted to a choice between agreed WTO mini deal Brexit, and hostile No Deal Brexit.
Glad my job isn't at risk with either of those.0 -
because there was an oven ready deal, AIRI?HYUFD said:
The Tory manifesto promised to end the implementation period in DecemberOnboardG1 said:
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.2 -
Indeed to be met with UK airdrops and the Royal Navy to break the blockadePhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
They've done it before. I don't mean a literal blockade. I mean closing the border. Apologies - misuse of language.Philip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
I doubt it would be much different from the days when Spain have a work for rule and create 12 hour queues on the borderPhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
Yes that is a fact. It doesn't explain why that manifesto commitment should stand in the face of a pandemic. Plenty of manifesto commitments hit the buffers of reality. Manifesto commitments are not sacred. You wouldn't even be breaking the spirit of the rule. Merely in a specific and limited context you might say. Move the transition period out 6-12 months. Explain that, dash it all, we'd have done it all without COVID but I have to put 150% of my attention span towards keeping your granny safe dont you know? This might even have looked statesman like. But Johnson is fundamentally an idiot so that didn't occur to him. Or maybe it did but he lacked the spine to stand up to the frothers and headbangers.HYUFD said:
The Tory manifesto promised to end the implementation period in DecemberOnboardG1 said:
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.0 -
Implementing full customs would be a legal requirement, not an act of war.Philip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.1 -
Indeed. You don't have to literally sail frigates into the mouth of Gibraltar Harbour to make life intolerable for the residents. Not that it's their fault, given they voted remain by 90% plus poor bastards.eek said:
I doubt it would be much different from the days when Spain have a work for rule and create 12 hour queues on the borderPhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
-
The implications of no deal for the Gibraltar border is one of those things which has been almost entirely ignored in all this.Foxy said:
Implementing full customs would be a legal requirement, not an act of war.Philip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
You and Thommo have lost the plot this evening. Act of war indeed!HYUFD said:
Indeed to be met with UK airdrops and the Royal Navy to break the blockadePhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.1 -
The only deal the EU are offering would breach the Tory manifesto commitments to regain control of our fishing waters and to end EU sovereignty over UK lawIanB2 said:
because there was an oven ready deal, AIRI?HYUFD said:
The Tory manifesto promised to end the implementation period in DecemberOnboardG1 said:
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.0 -
I wonder what happened to PB’er Geoff from Gib, who was pretty much the only Leaver in the Village.OnboardG1 said:
Indeed. You don't have to literally sail frigates into the mouth of Gibraltar Harbour to make life intolerable for the residents. Not that it's their fault, given they voted remain by 90% plus poor bastards.eek said:
I doubt it would be much different from the days when Spain have a work for rule and create 12 hour queues on the borderPhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
Customs is not a blockade.Foxy said:
Implementing full customs would be a legal requirement, not an act of war.Philip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
I swear this is why the SNP are fated to win IndyRef2, whether I like it or not. This sort of mad, uniquely English fantasy land nationalism is deeply unappealing to anyone who doesn't use the Dam Busters as the template for their world view.HYUFD said:
Indeed to be met with UK airdrops and the Royal Navy to break the blockadePhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.4 -
To be honest Spain have enough on their plate to worry about screwing over Gibraltar.OnboardG1 said:
Indeed. You don't have to literally sail frigates into the mouth of Gibraltar Harbour to make life intolerable for the residents. Not that it's their fault, given they voted remain by 90% plus poor bastards.eek said:
I doubt it would be much different from the days when Spain have a work for rule and create 12 hour queues on the borderPhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
Moved back to the mainland maybe?IanB2 said:
I wonder what happened to PB’er Geoff from Gib, who was pretty much the only Leaver in the Village.OnboardG1 said:
Indeed. You don't have to literally sail frigates into the mouth of Gibraltar Harbour to make life intolerable for the residents. Not that it's their fault, given they voted remain by 90% plus poor bastards.eek said:
I doubt it would be much different from the days when Spain have a work for rule and create 12 hour queues on the borderPhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
We may not find a vaccine until after 2024, the Tories cannot continue with transition period limbo indefinitely without losing lots of Leavers back to the Brexit Party at the next general electionOnboardG1 said:
Yes that is a fact. It doesn't explain why that manifesto commitment should stand in the face of a pandemic. Plenty of manifesto commitments hit the buffers of reality. Manifesto commitments are not sacred. You wouldn't even be breaking the spirit of the rule. Merely in a specific and limited context you might say. Move the transition period out 6-12 months. Explain that, dash it all, we'd have done it all without COVID but I have to put 150% of my attention span towards keeping your granny safe dont you know? This might even have looked statesman like. But Johnson is fundamentally an idiot so that didn't occur to him. Or maybe it did but he lacked the spine to stand up to the frothers and headbangers.HYUFD said:
The Tory manifesto promised to end the implementation period in DecemberOnboardG1 said:
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.0 -
It also promised that they had an oven-ready Withdrawal Agreement to Get Brexit Done. Whatever happened to that?HYUFD said:
The Tory manifesto promised to end the implementation period in DecemberOnboardG1 said:
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.
It wasn't oven-ready really, was it? They hadn't even started sourcing the ingredients yet.1 -
They don't have any electoral considerations to take into account, but the EU wants closer relations with us and if the Red Wall is key to that in the future in getting a more moderate government, it won't help down the line.alex_ said:
What trap have they walked into? I suspect they've had enough. It's not like they have any electoral considerations to take into account. If it makes them even more unpopular in the Red Wall seats so what?RH1992 said:
Yep, the EU have walked into the trap too. Would have been better to sit silently until the legislative process took it's course.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument0 -
Yes, but the Labour Party put up one J Corbyn esq to be PM, and given that rather salient fact, the Tories didn’t have to put up Abraham Lincoln, crossed with F D Roosevelt, with a dose of Mother Theresa, they just had to put up anyone with a pulse.CorrectHorseBattery said:If we hadn't that that election and Starmer had already taken over, we'd have had a GNU of by now
0 -
Cruella will jump to Johnson's tune.Scott_xP said:0 -
-
The manifesto only promised a deal that regained control of our fishing waters and ended EU sovereignty over our laws, the EU have refused to offer us that dealNorthern_Al said:
It also promised that they had an oven-ready Withdrawal Agreement to Get Brexit Done. Whatever happened to that?HYUFD said:
The Tory manifesto promised to end the implementation period in DecemberOnboardG1 said:
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.
It wasn't oven-ready really, was it? They hadn't even started sourcing the ingredients yet.0 -
Going DEFCON again?HYUFD said:
Indeed to be met with UK airdrops and the Royal Navy to break the blockadePhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
Here’s another promise from the same manifesto:HYUFD said:
The only deal the EU are offering would breach the Tory manifesto commitments to regain control of our fishing waters and to end EU sovereignty over UK lawIanB2 said:
because there was an oven ready deal, AIRI?HYUFD said:
The Tory manifesto promised to end the implementation period in DecemberOnboardG1 said:
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.
"We will continue to be an outward-looking country that is a champion of collective security, the rule of law, human rights, free trade, anti-corruption efforts and a rules-based international system."0 -
I never said anything about airdrops or the Navy but absolutely a "blockade" is an act of war. Always has been. Not having a deal and making things awkward and uncomfortable is one thing, but a blockade is an act of war.Mexicanpete said:
You and Thommo have lost the plot this evening. Act of war indeed!HYUFD said:
Indeed to be met with UK airdrops and the Royal Navy to break the blockadePhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
Indeed, but if there really is a public letter stating that ministers would be breaking the ministerial code by voting for this, that seems problematic...Mexicanpete said:Cruella will jump to Johnson's tune.
The "best" result would be for BoZo to lose the vote
Not sure how close we are to that, although the ERG making noises is almost too delicious0 -
You'll forgive me if I don't give the proverbial tuppeny about political considerations of Brexit in the time of a national disaster. It's the easiest time to be a statesman because the public just want the crisis to go away and will normally accept things they generally wouldn't. Who would remember a year's delay except you, a few political obsessives and the LadyG level frothing Europhobes? No one would. It would have vanished like a fart in the wind, and Johnson would futher have a boost by burying the Brexit negotiations under a vaccine drive. Instead we have more psychodrama around Europe at a critical juncture in the epidemic. This is a great example where a slavish need to permanently campaign cannot lead to good government.HYUFD said:
We may not find a vaccine until after 2024, the Tories cannot continue with transition period limbo indefinitely without losing lots of Leavers back to the Brexit Party at the next general electionOnboardG1 said:
Yes that is a fact. It doesn't explain why that manifesto commitment should stand in the face of a pandemic. Plenty of manifesto commitments hit the buffers of reality. Manifesto commitments are not sacred. You wouldn't even be breaking the spirit of the rule. Merely in a specific and limited context you might say. Move the transition period out 6-12 months. Explain that, dash it all, we'd have done it all without COVID but I have to put 150% of my attention span towards keeping your granny safe dont you know? This might even have looked statesman like. But Johnson is fundamentally an idiot so that didn't occur to him. Or maybe it did but he lacked the spine to stand up to the frothers and headbangers.HYUFD said:
The Tory manifesto promised to end the implementation period in DecemberOnboardG1 said:
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.2 -
-
Well if Spain blockades Gibraltar obviously the RAF would drop food and supplies in as long as it lastedsolarflare said:
Going DEFCON again?HYUFD said:
Indeed to be met with UK airdrops and the Royal Navy to break the blockadePhilip_Thompson said:
That would be an act of war.alex_ said:
If the UK want no deal and no future deal then that's fine. I suspect the EU can do a lot of damage in the mean time, even before we get to the pre-conditions to any future trade talks.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://twitter.com/toryboypierce/status/1304122734390190082
The whole point of this was to create this nonsense argument
I suspect an early move will be a blockade of Gibraltar.0 -
Well, you shouldn't have promised something that it wasn't in your power to deliver, should you?HYUFD said:
The manifesto only promised a deal that regained control of our fishing waters and ended EU sovereignty over our laws, the EU have refused to offer us that dealNorthern_Al said:
It also promised that they had an oven-ready Withdrawal Agreement to Get Brexit Done. Whatever happened to that?HYUFD said:
The Tory manifesto promised to end the implementation period in DecemberOnboardG1 said:
:facepalm:HYUFD said:
That depends on a vaccine which could take years, the transition period ends in DecemberAndy_JS said:Brexit shouldn't be a priority at the moment, ending the Covid-19 crisis as soon as possible should be.
For everyone else reading: Ending it might well require a vaccine. There are many policies that can be implemented to control Covid-19 and ensure it doesn't collapse the healthcare system in the winter. Those should be the entire governmental focus, not some todger-waving contest with the EU over a deal that the PM himself ran a GE campaign on, on a timeline of his own making since he could easily have extended for six months in June.
It wasn't oven-ready really, was it? They hadn't even started sourcing the ingredients yet.1
