Howdy, Stranger!

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

Winning here! Could the Lib Dems win more seats than the Tories? – politicalbetting.com

12346»

Comments

  • LeonLeon Posts: 60,928
    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,756
    Eabhal said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Eabhal said:

    Nigelb said:

    Leon said:

    Starmer just U-turned on WFP

    Not really

    Indicated he will improve thresholds but not universal
    Which, to be honest, is sensible.I know what Mr Eabhal has posted down thread, but a more tailored payment would benefit those who need it while ignoring those like me for whom it's merely nice to have.
    The problem is that the payment is small beans, so by creating a tailored threshold they create a lot of expensive bureaucracy which wipes out the savings from restricting payments.

    The threshold they decided to use at first - pension credit eligibility - meant that no new bureaucracy was created.

    They would be better off making it a universal payment than having a custom threshold. They've literally now chosen the worst possible option. Anything else would be better.
    The whole thing is at the same time economically inconsequential, and politically disastrous.

    Tinkering with it just prolongs the agony for no benefit, and absorbs government time that might be spent on something productive.
    They have simultaneously failed to pander to the pensioner lobby and failed to take on the pensioner lobby. It's hard to overstate how bad it is.

    Labour fully deserve their miserably low polling scores.
    I'm not sure they would have suffered significantly greater political damage if they had fought the pensioner lobby on the big one: the triple lock. All this aggro, and so little achieved...
    The underlying issue here is that it's almost impossible to govern this country. Even something like WFP causes insane levels of outrage. A trade deal with Europe that doesn't really change anything is "treason".

    We discuss optimistically about a variety of fiscal reforms on PB. None of them, particularly those that affect property, taxation on non-wage income or freebies for pensioners, are politically possible. We're stuck in the doom loop and we're going to need a Thatcher-type figure, on the left or right, to pull us out of it.

    The best Labour can do is sensible iterative reform. That's it, and it not enough.
    When non-political-nerdy friends engage with me about politics, we tend to gravitate to the issues of productivity/rent-seeking/parasitic behaviour and I always seem to end up saying "We're stuck in the doom loop and we're going to need a Thatcher-type figure, on the left or right, to pull us out of it".

    I'm not EXACTLY sure what I mean, but I FEEL it :)
    There will never be a thatcherite figure on the left they are too obsessed with being owen jones
    It's a Bevan type figure I'm thinking of. Imagine a politician creating the NHS nowadays - impossible. We can't even do social care.
    Nye Bevan didn't start from scratch, of course. There were schemes around South Wales which he used as models.

    We've got quite a reasonable base for a social care system. "All" it needs doing is funding properly, and, sometimes, like everything else, checking properly.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,756
    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 60,928

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
    YES

    OH MY GOD YES

    A THOUSAND TIMES YES
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 11,518
    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    Why would he be persecuted he can just point out mohammed had a 6 year old bride called aisha
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 79,481

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
    He isn't facing "certain death".
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 11,518
    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
    He isn't facing "certain death".
    Indeed he may just accidentally fall off a tall building in russian style
  • LeonLeon Posts: 60,928
    Taz said:

    Every day I see more of this on social media

    People just shoplifting so brazenly and without fear of any consequences.

    As @Leon has said. More than once. Why should people just obey the law when there are no consequences for those who don’t.

    https://x.com/aaronbastani/status/1925149614249832806?s=61

    See, this is where my New Forms of Corporal Punishment idea comes into play

    Putting that guy in jail is horribly expensive and time consuming, so we won't do it, even if we had spaces. Fines won;t deter him, I bet he's a penniless junkie. Community orders are ridiculous

    If he was tasered every day at 3pm for a week, he would never do that again, but he wouldn't be permanently damaged
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 14,288
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    Every day I see more of this on social media

    People just shoplifting so brazenly and without fear of any consequences.

    As @Leon has said. More than once. Why should people just obey the law when there are no consequences for those who don’t.

    https://x.com/aaronbastani/status/1925149614249832806?s=61

    Do you only behave morally because you fear punishments if you don't?
    Yes, you’re right, I’m the one in the wrong for posing the moral dilemma here. In spite never having shoplifted in my life. Not the person stealing without fear of any comeback.

    How very Liberal Democrat in outlook.
    I agree we need better policing with regards to shoplifting.

    But I think most people obey the law because it's the right thing to do. The right thing to do is not to steal: that is true whatever the chance of being caught. I am surprised that some are only not stealing out of fear of consequences if they don't.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 11,518
    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Every day I see more of this on social media

    People just shoplifting so brazenly and without fear of any consequences.

    As @Leon has said. More than once. Why should people just obey the law when there are no consequences for those who don’t.

    https://x.com/aaronbastani/status/1925149614249832806?s=61

    See, this is where my New Forms of Corporal Punishment idea comes into play

    Putting that guy in jail is horribly expensive and time consuming, so we won't do it, even if we had spaces. Fines won;t deter him, I bet he's a penniless junkie. Community orders are ridiculous

    If he was tasered every day at 3pm for a week, he would never do that again, but he wouldn't be permanently damaged
    Just pointing out there are people who get sexually turned on by being tasered which is why companies make the violet wand for example, and whips, chains, canes, floggers etc
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 45,227
    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    .

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.


    Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/20/starmers-reset-inflicts-real-harm-on-the-british-economy

    It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
    The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
    Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
    It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain

    The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years

    What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
    But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.

    What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?

    What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.

    Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
    You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby

    Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again

    That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset

    And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
    Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
    "We held all the cards", the Buns, Pots, Bones and especially Bung....
    I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
    I was happy with the existing one.
    It was ok - but the one before that was an absolute stonker.
    You do realise starmer hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving the french and spanish extra rights to fish our waters?
    What I realize is that you have no clue what's in it.
    Go on then pirate king enlighten me what has starmer got as a concrete thing?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czdy3r6q9mgo

    Summary above. It has give and take. Neither side would have signed up to something that was all give and no take. Why on earth would they? C'mon.
    So reading that in summary

    We gave them fishing rights, they allowed us to export food if we followed rules they imposed on it

    Everything else was for later discussion
    There you go. Fishing rights (give) vs Export access (take). Plus lots of ongoing stuff in other areas to progress and finalise. No big deal, no small deal, deal. First of many. Exactly as anticipated after Brexit.

    Your statement was just silly. Its opposite equivalent would be "You do realise the EU hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving us greater access to their food markets?"
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 11,518
    edited May 21
    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    .

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.


    Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/20/starmers-reset-inflicts-real-harm-on-the-british-economy

    It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
    The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
    Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
    It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain

    The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years

    What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
    But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.

    What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?

    What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.

    Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
    You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby

    Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again

    That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset

    And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
    Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
    "We held all the cards", the Buns, Pots, Bones and especially Bung....
    I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
    I was happy with the existing one.
    It was ok - but the one before that was an absolute stonker.
    You do realise starmer hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving the french and spanish extra rights to fish our waters?
    What I realize is that you have no clue what's in it.
    Go on then pirate king enlighten me what has starmer got as a concrete thing?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czdy3r6q9mgo

    Summary above. It has give and take. Neither side would have signed up to something that was all give and no take. Why on earth would they? C'mon.
    So reading that in summary

    We gave them fishing rights, they allowed us to export food if we followed rules they imposed on it

    Everything else was for later discussion
    There you go. Fishing rights (give) vs Export access (take). Plus lots of ongoing stuff in other areas to progress and finalise. No big deal, no small deal, deal. First of many. Exactly as anticipated after Brexit.

    Your statement was just silly. Its opposite equivalent would be "You do realise the EU hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving us greater access to their food markets?"
    But as I pointed out what we gave allows them to take less

    also you missed the point was greater access to their food markets if we agreed to follow their rules for our local food market
  • CookieCookie Posts: 15,152

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
    Yes, of course we do.
  • TazTaz Posts: 18,337
    Pulpstar said:

    Taz said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    .

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.


    Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/20/starmers-reset-inflicts-real-harm-on-the-british-economy

    It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
    The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
    Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
    It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain

    The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years

    What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
    But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.

    What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?

    What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.

    Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
    You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby

    Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again

    That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset

    And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
    Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
    "We held all the cards", the Buns, Pots, Bones and especially Bung....
    I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
    I was happy with the existing one.
    It was ok - but the one before that was an absolute stonker.
    You do realise starmer hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving the french and spanish extra rights to fish our waters?
    You mean the same rights agreed by the previous Conservative government.
    That were due to expire because they limited it to so many years

    See this is what I dont get sorry

    It allows us to export fish we catch we dont want....ok I can see that

    At the same time allowing them to come in catch the fish we dont want so they dont need those exports
    Memo to the British people. If you want a better deal for UK fishermen, eat more fish, particularly UK caught fish.
    Memo to idiots like you I eat fish and would eat more if shops would actually stock the damn stuff but they don't. I live on the coast of devon.......could I find a crab for sale could I fuck when I wanted one
    I eat plenty lf fish, as does my wife, and we get them either from, as @Gallowgate enthuses about, the wonderful North Shields Fish Quay, Latimers or a place in Gateshead.

    I love mackeral,dogfish, hake, plaice, sole, monkfish,sardines, crab, and pilchards

    I goto a sizeable supermarket fresh I get a choice of salmon, trout, cod, tuna
    I only ever had dogfish once, in Amble, it was superb.

    Hake is a favourite of mine. It was my wife’s birthday last week and I took her to the Potted Lobster in Bambrugh for her meal. I had the hake, she had the sea bream, both were superb

    Before Covid my local Sainsbury’s and Tesco had a fresh fish counter. Used to love the fresh sardines and the fresh mackerel from them.

    We also have some excellent fish stalls in the Grainger market too.

    Mind you from time to time on our estate we get people coming round selling ‘fresh fish from Grimsby’ give them MOFOs a wide berth
    Whereabouts in Amble, was it an Old Boathouse special ?
    It was actually. You’re absolutely right. On a Saturday night. We were staying at the Wellwood for the night. My wife also had a special too. Great place, great night, and we walked to Warkworth and back on the Sunday.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 45,227
    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    .

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.


    Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/20/starmers-reset-inflicts-real-harm-on-the-british-economy

    It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
    The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
    Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
    It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain

    The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years

    What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
    But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.

    What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?

    What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.

    Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
    You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby

    Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again

    That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset

    And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
    Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
    "We held all the cards", the Buns, Pots, Bones and especially Bung....
    I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
    I was happy with the existing one.
    It was ok - but the one before that was an absolute stonker.
    You do realise starmer hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving the french and spanish extra rights to fish our waters?
    What I realize is that you have no clue what's in it.
    Go on then pirate king enlighten me what has starmer got as a concrete thing?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czdy3r6q9mgo

    Summary above. It has give and take. Neither side would have signed up to something that was all give and no take. Why on earth would they? C'mon.
    So reading that in summary

    We gave them fishing rights, they allowed us to export food if we followed rules they imposed on it

    Everything else was for later discussion
    There you go. Fishing rights (give) vs Export access (take). Plus lots of ongoing stuff in other areas to progress and finalise. No big deal, no small deal, deal. First of many. Exactly as anticipated after Brexit.

    Your statement was just silly. Its opposite equivalent would be "You do realise the EU hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving us greater access to their food markets?"
    But as I pointed out what we gave allows them to take less
    It will be easier to sell into their market. That's a benefit. Supply and demand (as now) will dictate the volumes.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 60,928
    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
    Yes, of course we do.
    Given the known fact that he's a persistent child molestor, the alternative is to let him stay in the UK so he can continue to molest British kids

    So these British kids must have their lives ruined so that HIS human rights are not infringed? What about THEIR rights not to be raped?

    It's fucking insane. No sane country does this. We are not sane. Send him back tonight
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 34,756
    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
    Yes, of course we do.
    You may be content with that but I'm not. Probably I'm too soft-hearted or something.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 11,518
    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    .

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.


    Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/20/starmers-reset-inflicts-real-harm-on-the-british-economy

    It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
    The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
    Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
    It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain

    The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years

    What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
    But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.

    What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?

    What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.

    Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
    You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby

    Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again

    That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset

    And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
    Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
    "We held all the cards", the Buns, Pots, Bones and especially Bung....
    I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
    I was happy with the existing one.
    It was ok - but the one before that was an absolute stonker.
    You do realise starmer hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving the french and spanish extra rights to fish our waters?
    What I realize is that you have no clue what's in it.
    Go on then pirate king enlighten me what has starmer got as a concrete thing?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czdy3r6q9mgo

    Summary above. It has give and take. Neither side would have signed up to something that was all give and no take. Why on earth would they? C'mon.
    So reading that in summary

    We gave them fishing rights, they allowed us to export food if we followed rules they imposed on it

    Everything else was for later discussion
    There you go. Fishing rights (give) vs Export access (take). Plus lots of ongoing stuff in other areas to progress and finalise. No big deal, no small deal, deal. First of many. Exactly as anticipated after Brexit.

    Your statement was just silly. Its opposite equivalent would be "You do realise the EU hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving us greater access to their food markets?"
    But as I pointed out what we gave allows them to take less
    It will be easier to sell into their market. That's a benefit. Supply and demand (as now) will dictate the volumes.
    If they want 500 tons of something they want 500 tons of it.....you are arguing that its better to reduce their demand to 250 tons by being able to catch 250 tons themselves I struggle to see that as a gain
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,212
    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    .

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.


    Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/20/starmers-reset-inflicts-real-harm-on-the-british-economy

    It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
    The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
    Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
    It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain

    The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years

    What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
    But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.

    What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?

    What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.

    Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
    You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby

    Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again

    That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset

    And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
    Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
    "We held all the cards", the Buns, Pots, Bones and especially Bung....
    I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
    I was happy with the existing one.
    It was ok - but the one before that was an absolute stonker.
    You do realise starmer hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving the french and spanish extra rights to fish our waters?
    What I realize is that you have no clue what's in it.
    Go on then pirate king enlighten me what has starmer got as a concrete thing?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czdy3r6q9mgo

    Summary above. It has give and take. Neither side would have signed up to something that was all give and no take. Why on earth would they? C'mon.
    So reading that in summary

    We gave them fishing rights, they allowed us to export food if we followed rules they imposed on it

    Everything else was for later discussion
    There you go. Fishing rights (give) vs Export access (take). Plus lots of ongoing stuff in other areas to progress and finalise. No big deal, no small deal, deal. First of many. Exactly as anticipated after Brexit.

    Your statement was just silly. Its opposite equivalent would be "You do realise the EU hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving us greater access to their food markets?"
    But as I pointed out what we gave allows them to take less
    It will be easier to sell into their market. That's a benefit. Supply and demand (as now) will dictate the volumes.
    If they want 500 tons of something they want 500 tons of it.....you are arguing that its better to reduce their demand to 250 tons by being able to catch 250 tons themselves I struggle to see that as a gain
    They were catching 250 tons in British waters already. They're now more likely to buy the remaining 250 tons from British fishers than they were before. That's a net gain.
  • TazTaz Posts: 18,337

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
    We only have his, and his legal teams word of it he faces a ‘fatwa’.

    If we let him stay how do we protect the young girls who are his prey ?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 122,035

    NEW THREAD

  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 45,227
    Leon said:

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
    Yes, of course we do.
    Given the known fact that he's a persistent child molestor, the alternative is to let him stay in the UK so he can continue to molest British kids

    So these British kids must have their lives ruined so that HIS human rights are not infringed? What about THEIR rights not to be raped?

    It's fucking insane. No sane country does this. We are not sane. Send him back tonight
    Tonight sounds a bit of a stretch.
  • TazTaz Posts: 18,337
    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Every day I see more of this on social media

    People just shoplifting so brazenly and without fear of any consequences.

    As @Leon has said. More than once. Why should people just obey the law when there are no consequences for those who don’t.

    https://x.com/aaronbastani/status/1925149614249832806?s=61

    See, this is where my New Forms of Corporal Punishment idea comes into play

    Putting that guy in jail is horribly expensive and time consuming, so we won't do it, even if we had spaces. Fines won;t deter him, I bet he's a penniless junkie. Community orders are ridiculous

    If he was tasered every day at 3pm for a week, he would never do that again, but he wouldn't be permanently damaged
    Just pointing out there are people who get sexually turned on by being tasered
    What !!!!
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 54,138
    Pulpstar said:

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
    He isn't facing "certain death".
    "Your sentence has been commuted from certain death to probable death!"
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 45,227
    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    .

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.


    Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/20/starmers-reset-inflicts-real-harm-on-the-british-economy

    It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
    The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
    Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
    It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain

    The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years

    What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
    But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.

    What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?

    What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.

    Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
    You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby

    Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again

    That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset

    And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
    Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
    "We held all the cards", the Buns, Pots, Bones and especially Bung....
    I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
    I was happy with the existing one.
    It was ok - but the one before that was an absolute stonker.
    You do realise starmer hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving the french and spanish extra rights to fish our waters?
    What I realize is that you have no clue what's in it.
    Go on then pirate king enlighten me what has starmer got as a concrete thing?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czdy3r6q9mgo

    Summary above. It has give and take. Neither side would have signed up to something that was all give and no take. Why on earth would they? C'mon.
    So reading that in summary

    We gave them fishing rights, they allowed us to export food if we followed rules they imposed on it

    Everything else was for later discussion
    There you go. Fishing rights (give) vs Export access (take). Plus lots of ongoing stuff in other areas to progress and finalise. No big deal, no small deal, deal. First of many. Exactly as anticipated after Brexit.

    Your statement was just silly. Its opposite equivalent would be "You do realise the EU hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving us greater access to their food markets?"
    But as I pointed out what we gave allows them to take less
    It will be easier to sell into their market. That's a benefit. Supply and demand (as now) will dictate the volumes.
    If they want 500 tons of something they want 500 tons of it.....you are arguing that its better to reduce their demand to 250 tons by being able to catch 250 tons themselves I struggle to see that as a gain
    Well if you're correct in your understanding of the consequences it means that the export benefits the UK team has negotiated are actually non-existent, or even negative. I find this unlikely. Rather more likely, imo, is that you've got the wrong end of the stick. It does happen sometimes, I imagine?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 15,152

    Cookie said:

    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Hey, @Leon, seen this.

    Nonce from Pakistan wins right to stay in UK he faces ‘fatwa’ if deported.

    😳🙄

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14734579/Pakistani-paedophile-teenage-girl-UK-fatwa.html

    Another million votes for Reform

    Don't the powers-that-be realise what they are doing? These idiot lawyers? These wanker judges?

    Maybe they do, and they simply do not care
    So we send the nasty whatsit back to face certain death? However nasty he is, however vile his crime?
    Yes, of course we do.
    You may be content with that but I'm not. Probably I'm too soft-hearted or something.
    The logical conclusion of your position is that we invite anyone whise crimes warrant the death penalty in their home country to come here. That is not a position any sane country, ever, had advocated.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 2,143

    Foxy said:

    Any thoughts on El Shitico tonight?

    Spurs have beaten Manchester United three times this season.

    Or are we expecting Spurs to be Spursy again?

    Last time Spurs met an English side in a European final.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VzNx27VAXw

    It's pretty damning that a major European trophy will go to one or other British team just above the relegation zone in their domestic league.
    It proves the Premier League is the best league in the world.

    There's a reason why England has won an extra place in next season's Champions League.
    The real reason is direct entry into the league stages for all but one of your teams, and a bloated financial support system that ensures a mid table club can afford a team worth more than Benfica or twice that of the Dutch or Belgian champions.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 2,143
    tlg86 said:

    Any thoughts on El Shitico tonight?

    Spurs have beaten Manchester United three times this season.

    Or are we expecting Spurs to be Spursy again?

    Last time Spurs met an English side in a European final.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VzNx27VAXw

    Hard to care either way. Mildly amusing that Nice made the Champions League. Guess there will be a workaround so that both Nice and Man Utd can compete in the Champions League next season if Man Utd win tonight.
    Or Palace and Lyon, or Forest and Olympiakos etc. etc. Rich backers write their own rules.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 2,143
    DoctorG said:

    Any thoughts on El Shitico tonight?

    Spurs have beaten Manchester United three times this season.

    Or are we expecting Spurs to be Spursy again?

    Last time Spurs met an English side in a European final.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VzNx27VAXw

    Spurs to win as per my predictions comment at end January (I've cursed them now)

    Has any other UEFA nation ever had 6 Champions League entrants in a season?
    It's only been a possibility for a couple of seasons.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 11,518
    edited May 21

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    .

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.


    Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/20/starmers-reset-inflicts-real-harm-on-the-british-economy

    It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
    The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
    Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
    It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain

    The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years

    What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
    But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.

    What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?

    What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.

    Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
    You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby

    Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again

    That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset

    And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
    Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
    "We held all the cards", the Buns, Pots, Bones and especially Bung....
    I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
    I was happy with the existing one.
    It was ok - but the one before that was an absolute stonker.
    You do realise starmer hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving the french and spanish extra rights to fish our waters?
    What I realize is that you have no clue what's in it.
    Go on then pirate king enlighten me what has starmer got as a concrete thing?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czdy3r6q9mgo

    Summary above. It has give and take. Neither side would have signed up to something that was all give and no take. Why on earth would they? C'mon.
    So reading that in summary

    We gave them fishing rights, they allowed us to export food if we followed rules they imposed on it

    Everything else was for later discussion
    There you go. Fishing rights (give) vs Export access (take). Plus lots of ongoing stuff in other areas to progress and finalise. No big deal, no small deal, deal. First of many. Exactly as anticipated after Brexit.

    Your statement was just silly. Its opposite equivalent would be "You do realise the EU hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving us greater access to their food markets?"
    But as I pointed out what we gave allows them to take less
    It will be easier to sell into their market. That's a benefit. Supply and demand (as now) will dictate the volumes.
    If they want 500 tons of something they want 500 tons of it.....you are arguing that its better to reduce their demand to 250 tons by being able to catch 250 tons themselves I struggle to see that as a gain
    They were catching 250 tons in British waters already. They're now more likely to buy the remaining 250 tons from British fishers than they were before. That's a net gain.
    But if the agreement had been allowed to lapse they wouldn't be catching 250 tons here....why is this so hard to understand?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,212
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Pagan2 said:

    kinabalu said:

    Dopermean said:

    Leon said:

    .

    Leon said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Leon said:

    FF43 said:

    What puzzles me about this reset saga is why Labour is still in thrall to the EU since a) it is an increasingly reactionary project and b) it is in serious economic trouble.


    Why does Labour want our laws to be set by the parties of Marine Le Pen, Giorgia Meloni, Geert Wilders or by Alternative for Germany, rather than by our own parliament?

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/05/20/starmers-reset-inflicts-real-harm-on-the-british-economy

    It's the necessary damage limitation to Brexit. If you don't fix your mistake, you need to learn to live with it. Apart from May, belatedly, only Starmer has realised in the nine(!) years since the referendum what needs to be done. Unlike May, Starmer has a majority to put it into practice.
    The “deal” is laughably bad. He didn’t even get e-gates
    Is there a list of actual concrete things the eu got and concrete things the uk got anywhere...ie excluding all the we will explore items on each side?
    It’s all incredibly vague, but the outlines are bad for Britain

    The one definite decision is on fish: Starmer, who wanted to offer a deal for one year, and denied he would give away four years, got bullied at the last moment and gave away 12 years

    What’s more, the EU has got text in the agreement such that: if a future UK government with more bollocks (like, say, Reform) tries to amend this terrible fishing deal, the EU is allowed to hit us with trade sanctions. Yes
    But it's *the existing Boris deal* on fishing rights.

    What did you imagine would happen after that expired? We negotiate a deal where we deny their access to our waters and maintain our access to their waters?

    What's now been added on top is that having landed fish we now have the ability to trade it freely to the market we need to sell it to.

    Of course the Tories think it's a bad deal. They are fucking morons.
    You’re clueless. We had tremendous leverage. The French were terrified we were going to play hardball and take back all our fish. French governments are all fearful of the fishing and farming lobby

    Instead we handed over TWELVE years of UK fish and we got…. Literally nothing. Everything else is an agreement to continue negotiating - but we are certainly going to be paying money and taking EU law again

    That’s it. That’s the Starmer reset

    And he didn’t even get e-gates. Which aptly summarises his total incompetence. Labour thought they had a great retail offer - trivial but nice - no more passport queues - and they didn’t even get that, in the end
    Starmer would have viewed playing hardball as ungentlemanly behaviour.
    "We held all the cards", the Buns, Pots, Bones and especially Bung....
    I foresee neverending "betrayal wail", there will always be a "Brexit deal" that was better
    I was happy with the existing one.
    It was ok - but the one before that was an absolute stonker.
    You do realise starmer hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving the french and spanish extra rights to fish our waters?
    What I realize is that you have no clue what's in it.
    Go on then pirate king enlighten me what has starmer got as a concrete thing?
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czdy3r6q9mgo

    Summary above. It has give and take. Neither side would have signed up to something that was all give and no take. Why on earth would they? C'mon.
    So reading that in summary

    We gave them fishing rights, they allowed us to export food if we followed rules they imposed on it

    Everything else was for later discussion
    There you go. Fishing rights (give) vs Export access (take). Plus lots of ongoing stuff in other areas to progress and finalise. No big deal, no small deal, deal. First of many. Exactly as anticipated after Brexit.

    Your statement was just silly. Its opposite equivalent would be "You do realise the EU hasn't actually changed anything from the previous deal except giving us greater access to their food markets?"
    But as I pointed out what we gave allows them to take less
    It will be easier to sell into their market. That's a benefit. Supply and demand (as now) will dictate the volumes.
    If they want 500 tons of something they want 500 tons of it.....you are arguing that its better to reduce their demand to 250 tons by being able to catch 250 tons themselves I struggle to see that as a gain
    They were catching 250 tons in British waters already. They're now more likely to buy the remaining 250 tons from British fishers than they were before. That's a net gain.
    But if the agreement had been allowed to lapse they wouldn't be catching 250 tons here....why is this so hard to understand?
    Sure, I understand that. You don't seem to understand that there are plenty more fish in the sea for the Europeans to buy instead of ours.
Sign In or Register to comment.