|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Dec 20, 2019 14:46:30 GMT
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 20, 2019 14:57:44 GMT
"Mr Brexit", twenty years an MEP...and he doesn't know what the term third country means. He's being sarcastic and making the point that the UK will not be defined by EU terms....we are not ( and no one is) a " third country"....we are simply s nation state... otherwise known as a " country"...he does know what the EU mean but he is being s bit subtle for some.
|
|
|
Post by hoffgreen on Dec 20, 2019 15:01:20 GMT
I don't get the virtue signalling about unaccompanied underaged migrants. Why are we obliged to house the third world on our tiny island? I don't want it, my family doesn't want it and everyone I've spoken to doesn't want it.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Dec 20, 2019 15:02:48 GMT
Logic. Get sacked without appeal, I'll have that because I'll have a big blue passport to stare at on the mantlepiece because I wont be able to afford to go on holiday!
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Dec 20, 2019 15:06:42 GMT
I don't get the virtue signalling about unaccompanied underaged migrants. Why are we obliged to house the third world on our tiny island? I don't want it, my family doesn't want it and everyone I've spoken to doesn't want it. They're children! As a result of this policy will be considering getting into dinghies or freezer containers to be reunited with their families. It's about decency, something so obviously lacking in the Government and its supporters.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Dec 20, 2019 15:10:58 GMT
So the Bill is starting today. Straightaway Corbyn opposes it The public have voted for Brexit repeatedley including last weeks overwhelming elections results Labour are not learning Their way forward should be to let it go through and then hold the government to account over rights etc It seems there policy of getting back in is to hope it fails so they can clean up the mess What on earth would he support it? These piss taking charlatans have already reneged on workers right, environmental protections and of course the despicable abandonment of unaccompanied child refugees. All that is left in this tawdry bill is deregulation, a race to the bottom and a bonfire of workers rights. It is a filthy piece of legislation. With a majority of 80 anything they passed into law they could overturn the next day I would rather they pass properly drafted legislation, this bill is symbolic confirmation that we are leaving the EU. Child refugees should be dealt with as part of the immigration and asylum legislation, workers right a seperate bill has already been announced.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Dec 20, 2019 15:16:07 GMT
Logic. Get sacked without appeal, I'll have that because I'll have a big blue passport to stare at on the mantlepiece because I wont be able to afford to go on holiday! Get sacked without appeal really have you ever sacked anyone I had to do it once amazing how many things had to be lined up / checked first and this was for someone who failed a pre employment drugs test, started at 9am I had to sack him at 11 30am useless HR wankers.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Dec 20, 2019 15:20:38 GMT
"Mr Brexit", twenty years an MEP...and he doesn't know what the term third country means. He's being sarcastic and making the point that the UK will not be defined by EU terms....we are not ( and no one is) a " third country"....we are simply s nation state... otherwise known as a " country"...he does know what the EU mean but he is being s bit subtle for some. Okay, I stand corrected. He's acting like a twat then. Just like these idiots....
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Dec 20, 2019 15:24:23 GMT
Logic. Get sacked without appeal, I'll have that because I'll have a big blue passport to stare at on the mantlepiece because I wont be able to afford to go on holiday! Get sacked without appeal really have you ever sacked anyone I had to do it once amazing how many things had to be lined up / checked first and this was for someone who failed a pre employment drugs test, started at 9am I had to sack him at 11 30am useless HR wankers. You can basically do anything you want to get rid of staff with less than two years continuous service. The onus is then on the member of staff to prove you have broken a law outside of employment law (such as discrimination) at their own cost to take you to account. I think we may see this extended and tribunal fees reintroduced. You know, the Donald model.
|
|
|
Post by hoffgreen on Dec 20, 2019 15:24:30 GMT
I don't get the virtue signalling about unaccompanied underaged migrants. Why are we obliged to house the third world on our tiny island? I don't want it, my family doesn't want it and everyone I've spoken to doesn't want it. They're children! As a result of this policy will be considering getting into dinghies or freezer containers to be reunited with their families. It's about decency, something so obviously lacking in the Government and its supporters. I get that. They are only coming here because the streets are paved with gold. Ie welfare, come here and the least you'll have is a roof over your head and food.... Have a look at the .Gov website to look at what asylum seekers are entitled to. It's an insult to every law abiding taxpayer what we're giving to these freeloaders Time we thought about the indigenous British first instead of worrying about the rest of the world
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 20, 2019 15:56:28 GMT
He's being sarcastic and making the point that the UK will not be defined by EU terms....we are not ( and no one is) a " third country"....we are simply s nation state... otherwise known as a " country"...he does know what the EU mean but he is being s bit subtle for some. Okay, I stand corrected. He's acting like a twat then. Just like these idiots.... I don't think so, he's had a long battle and every now and again I think he likes to make a point about the project in the EU parliament. Most of those in there, on the gravy train, are not used to anything/ their world view/ European construct being questioned as they nod things through.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Dec 20, 2019 16:12:25 GMT
I don't get the virtue signalling about unaccompanied underaged migrants. Why are we obliged to house the third world on our tiny island? I don't want it, my family doesn't want it and everyone I've spoken to doesn't want it. They're children! As a result of this policy will be considering getting into dinghies or freezer containers to be reunited with their families. It's about decency, something so obviously lacking in the Government and its supporters. If their families were so concerned about them why did they leave them behind, I am presuming the families of these children are here legally if so they can apply legally to bring their children here, if not they have no rights and should be deported back to their children.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Dec 20, 2019 17:00:57 GMT
They're children! As a result of this policy will be considering getting into dinghies or freezer containers to be reunited with their families. It's about decency, something so obviously lacking in the Government and its supporters. If their families were so concerned about them why did they leave them behind, I am presuming the families of these children are here legally if so they can apply legally to bring their children here, if not they have no rights and should be deported back to their children. Anecdotally some people claim the families get the money together to pay people trafficers to get their child into the country and then apply legally to come and join the child as bringing the family back together, I am sure it has happened but I dont think it is as regular as some people believe As a reasonably well off country we should be accepting some refugees but at some point perhaps it needs to change to only taking people directly from the country or refugee camps rather than those travelling here.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Dec 20, 2019 19:48:01 GMT
If their families were so concerned about them why did they leave them behind, I am presuming the families of these children are here legally if so they can apply legally to bring their children here, if not they have no rights and should be deported back to their children. Anecdotally some people claim the families get the money together to pay people trafficers to get their child into the country and then apply legally to come and join the child as bringing the family back together, I am sure it has happened but I dont think it is as regular as some people believe As a reasonably well off country we should be accepting some refugees but at some point perhaps it needs to change to only taking people directly from the country or refugee camps rather than those travelling here. It would make more sense to do it that way at least we would have some idea who they are and why they are coming to the UK, at the moment many seem to be coming here for free housing, benefits, health care etc. , we can make room for genuine asylum seekers by deporting the illegals already here.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Dec 21, 2019 10:30:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Dec 21, 2019 12:57:34 GMT
Only downside is the maggots....
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Dec 21, 2019 14:49:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Dec 23, 2019 11:30:24 GMT
The poles and Spanish thinking of leaving now
All it took was for one of the big three countries to leave and their is a massive risk of it crashing down
Somehow I don’t think it will. The parliments in Strasbourg and Brussels are a massive industry in themselves
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Dec 23, 2019 17:13:58 GMT
The poles and Spanish thinking of leaving now All it took was for one of the big three countries to leave and their is a massive risk of it crashing down Somehow I don’t think it will. The parliments in Strasbourg and Brussels are a massive industry in themselves The Spanish are currently upset over interference by the EU courts over Catalonia. The Poles are being threatened over their judiciary policies. So much for sovereignty. The Italians are being instructed what to do with their budgets and the Greeks are being emasculated. It's a matter of time before someone more militant than the UK kicks off.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Dec 23, 2019 17:29:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Dec 23, 2019 18:12:22 GMT
Considering the environmental impact how the Eu can lecture on any environmental issues is so hypocritical
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Dec 23, 2019 18:31:00 GMT
Considering the environmental impact how the Eu can lecture on any environmental issues is so hypocritical Where did you get the idea that the EU is concerned about the environment? They have just forced the British government to increase the VAT on solar panels. data-economy.com/hmrc-blame-eu-law-requirements-for-planned-increase-in-vat-of-renewable-energy-sources-installations/This was to conform with the European Coal & Steel community. The VAT on coal remains low at 5%. Since we joined the EEC over 40 years ago our coal and steel industries have been decimated. The UK is the 5th biggest economy in the world but 17th in terms of total CO2 emissions, and very much lower in the list in terms of emissions per head of population. Meanwhile Spain, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, and Sweden have all increased the size of their steel industries.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 23, 2019 18:42:33 GMT
Considering the environmental impact how the Eu can lecture on any environmental issues is so hypocritical Where did you get the idea that the EU is concerned about the environment? They have just forced the British government to increase the VAT on solar panels. data-economy.com/hmrc-blame-eu-law-requirements-for-planned-increase-in-vat-of-renewable-energy-sources-installations/This was to conform with the European Coal & Steel community. The VAT on coal remains low at 5%. Since we joined the EEC over 40 years ago our coal and steel industries have been decimated. The UK is the 5th biggest economy in the world but 17th in terms of total CO2 emissions, and very much lower in the list in terms of emissions per head of population. Meanwhile Spain, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, and Sweden have all increased the size of their steel industries. In fairness MrCoke, haven't we exported our carbon foótprint to China and developing countries
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Dec 23, 2019 20:52:10 GMT
Where did you get the idea that the EU is concerned about the environment? They have just forced the British government to increase the VAT on solar panels. data-economy.com/hmrc-blame-eu-law-requirements-for-planned-increase-in-vat-of-renewable-energy-sources-installations/This was to conform with the European Coal & Steel community. The VAT on coal remains low at 5%. Since we joined the EEC over 40 years ago our coal and steel industries have been decimated. The UK is the 5th biggest economy in the world but 17th in terms of total CO2 emissions, and very much lower in the list in terms of emissions per head of population. Meanwhile Spain, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, and Sweden have all increased the size of their steel industries. In fairness MrCoke, haven't we exported our carbon foótprint to China and developing countries That is very true. My point is the greens beat the drum about the UK doing more to protect the planet. The reality is there are 16 countries emitted more CO2 in 2017 than the UK, surprisingly including South Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico , Brazil, South Africa, Turkey, and Australia. In terms of our contribution to the total it is 1% of the total world CO2 emissions, compared with China emitting 29% of the world's CO2. So it doesn't make much difference if all our steel making went to China to the effect of our country's (or China's) contribution. Nor does it make much difference if the UK were to stop 100% of our emissions to the world climate. I'm afraid I am with Trump on this, what is the point of us destroying our economies if China, India, and Japan do very little. we can all "die" with a clear conscience that it wasn't the UK's fault? If the main emitters were to drastically cut back then yes we should also, but they are actually increasing their emissions of CO2. All the countries I have mentioned above have increased their emissions of CO2 since 1990. The only countries that have substantially reduced CO2 emissions are the UK (>35%), and Germany (>21%). France, Italy, and Poland have significantly reduced emissions by circa 15%, and the USA are about the same as they were in 1990, having take a massive reduction in their heavy industry.
|
|
|
Post by franklin66 on Dec 23, 2019 20:55:12 GMT
It's quite exciting to see what happens, good times ahead.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 23, 2019 20:56:55 GMT
In fairness MrCoke, haven't we exported our carbon foótprint to China and developing countries That is very true. My point is the greens beat the drum about the UK doing more to protect the planet. The reality is there are 16 countries emitted more CO2 in 2017 than the UK, surprisingly including South Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico , Brazil, South Africa, Turkey, and Australia. In terms of our contribution to the total it is 1% of the total world CO2 emissions, compared with China emitting 29% of the world's CO2. So it doesn't make much difference if all our steel making went to China to the effect of our country's (or China's) contribution. Nor does it make much difference if the UK were to stop 100% of our emissions to the world climate. I'm afraid I am with Trump on this, what is the point of us destroying our economies if China, India, and Japan do very little. we can all "die" with a clear conscience that it wasn't the UK's fault? If the main emitters were to drastically cut back then yes we should also, but they are actually increasing their emissions of CO2. All the countries I have mentioned above have increased their emissions of CO2 since 1990. The only countries that have substantially reduced CO2 emissions are the UK (>35%), and Germany (>21%). France, Italy, and Poland have significantly reduced emissions by circa 15%, and the USA are about the same as they were in 1990, having take a massive reduction in their heavy industry. That may be true and I accept your point...but I wonder what our " reduction" would actually be if we added on the bit that China produces on our behalf?....in other words how much of the reduction since 1990 is because" we " simply produce it abroad. Perhaps we should measure consumption per capita?
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Dec 23, 2019 21:58:15 GMT
That is very true. My point is the greens beat the drum about the UK doing more to protect the planet. The reality is there are 16 countries emitted more CO2 in 2017 than the UK, surprisingly including South Korea, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Canada, Indonesia, Mexico , Brazil, South Africa, Turkey, and Australia. In terms of our contribution to the total it is 1% of the total world CO2 emissions, compared with China emitting 29% of the world's CO2. So it doesn't make much difference if all our steel making went to China to the effect of our country's (or China's) contribution. Nor does it make much difference if the UK were to stop 100% of our emissions to the world climate. I'm afraid I am with Trump on this, what is the point of us destroying our economies if China, India, and Japan do very little. we can all "die" with a clear conscience that it wasn't the UK's fault? If the main emitters were to drastically cut back then yes we should also, but they are actually increasing their emissions of CO2. All the countries I have mentioned above have increased their emissions of CO2 since 1990. The only countries that have substantially reduced CO2 emissions are the UK (>35%), and Germany (>21%). France, Italy, and Poland have significantly reduced emissions by circa 15%, and the USA are about the same as they were in 1990, having take a massive reduction in their heavy industry. That may be true and I accept your point...but I wonder what our " reduction" would actually be if we added on the bit that China produces on our behalf?....in other words how much of the reduction since 1990 is because" we " simply produce it abroad. Perhaps we should measure consumption per capita? I've not seen figures for that, but there are stats for countries' energy consumption. The UK is 11th highest and about that for energy consumption per head. Surprisingly the highest per head is Canada not the USA, which the highest total consumption by far. Of course consumption includes renewable energy as well as fossil fuels. China and the USA are the world leaders in the total amount of renewable energy but are still major coal consumers. UK coal consumption is now down to 5% of our energy usage. The leading countries in terms of % renewable energy are generally small like Costa Rica, the largest of these best performers is I believe Sweden who are racing to be the first country to be totally renewable. Of the large countries Germany (driven by votes for the Green Party) and UK are very good, and Scotland is now capable of producing 100% of its energy by wind, when the wind blows. (When the UK has paid for everything, they will go independant!) Yorkshire and Lincolnshire are gradually being covered by solar panels. On your point about producing abroad, I am reminded of an Environment Agency inspector cautioning a group of councillors some 30 years ago, who had the impression that most pollution was from industry. He told them that most energy is used in heat, light, power, transport, etc. consumed by the general public and that they were unreasonable to expect industry to produce the major part of future reduction. The reduction in industry has been a major contributor to the emissions reduction, but the larger part is down to renewables, including wood chip, recycling, better insulation , etc.
|
|
|
Post by CalgaryPotter on Dec 23, 2019 22:04:51 GMT
Canada's population is 37.5mm and has one of the largest oil reserves on the planet.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Dec 23, 2019 22:22:24 GMT
Canada's population is 37.5mm and has one of the largest oil reserves on the planet. Is it because of climate that Canada's energy consumption per head is so high? Everyone knows how cold it can get, but I have been to the middle east and India but the hottest place I remember going to was Toronto! It was so insufferably hot you had to stay inside air conditioned buildings.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Dec 24, 2019 8:09:55 GMT
That may be true and I accept your point...but I wonder what our " reduction" would actually be if we added on the bit that China produces on our behalf?....in other words how much of the reduction since 1990 is because" we " simply produce it abroad. Perhaps we should measure consumption per capita? I've not seen figures for that, but there are stats for countries' energy consumption. The UK is 11th highest and about that for energy consumption per head. Surprisingly the highest per head is Canada not the USA, which the highest total consumption by far. Of course consumption includes renewable energy as well as fossil fuels. China and the USA are the world leaders in the total amount of renewable energy but are still major coal consumers. UK coal consumption is now down to 5% of our energy usage. The leading countries in terms of % renewable energy are generally small like Costa Rica, the largest of these best performers is I believe Sweden who are racing to be the first country to be totally renewable. Of the large countries Germany (driven by votes for the Green Party) and UK are very good, and Scotland is now capable of producing 100% of its energy by wind, when the wind blows. (When the UK has paid for everything, they will go independant!) Yorkshire and Lincolnshire are gradually being covered by solar panels. On your point about producing abroad, I am reminded of an Environment Agency inspector cautioning a group of councillors some 30 years ago, who had the impression that most pollution was from industry. He told them that most energy is used in heat, light, power, transport, etc. consumed by the general public and that they were unreasonable to expect industry to produce the major part of future reduction. The reduction in industry has been a major contributor to the emissions reduction, but the larger part is down to renewables, including wood chip, recycling, better insulation , etc. It just seems to me MrCoke, that if , let's say China, are producing goods on our behalf and they are transported to us then we have some responsibility for the Carbon used in that production and transportation.
|
|