|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 19, 2020 20:16:13 GMT
I don’t know anyone who hates their country. A negotiation is not about being better than the other side. It’s about what you each have to offer and how much each side wants it. Every individual actually involved in the negotiations on both sides will be supremely competent. You've a funny way of showing the love of your country. Don't you think Lord Kerr is wrong in talking about one party" coming to heel"? Hardly shows mutual respect....and he's a British Lord. So by your reckoning if the two sides of this current negotiation, being supremely competent, cannot agree, it is best , regrettably, to end in no-deal and move on. It is better than either side relinquishing their integrity. If you love your country you voted remain. If you hate your country and want it poorer and to break up the UK, you voted leave.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 20:18:14 GMT
Most of the reason for uncertainty on our part is because of Remainers being unable to accept the fact that most people who voted in the UK wanted to leave and they have done( and still are doing) everything they can to prevent us from leaving ( Hard/ soft Brexit, Miller, deceitful Remainer May, Confirmatory referendums/ Bollox to Brexit). From the Spectator: I have always loved the story of Hiroo Onoda, a Japanese soldier who refused to believe the Second World War was over and stayed hiding in the Philippines until his former commanding officer was brought out of retirement and ordered him to surrender. That was in, 1974, 29 years after the end of hostilities. But I wouldn’t bet on the final Remainer holdouts giving up their struggle so quickly. If Lord Kerr of Kinlochard can be gently persuaded out from behind one of the red benches in the House of Lords before 2049 – when he’ll be 106 – I would consider it a triumph of negotiation. It would be an even greater wonder if Lords Adonis and Heseltine could be tempted out by the same date. www.spectator.co.uk/article/lord-kerr-s-stupid-brexit-jibe-shows-some-remainers-have-learned-nothingRubbish. It’s the brexiteers who have caused the uncertainty. Boris johnson promising to have the cake and eat it. The leave campaign saying we will have the benefits of eu membership with none of the downsides etc. All the lies have come home to roost. Rubbish. It's the Remainers who have resisted democracy, colluded with the EU and caused delay and confusion. Farage would not have done so. Bollocks to Brexit ...yes , that's really impressive.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 19, 2020 20:19:53 GMT
You've a funny way of showing the love of your country. Don't you think Lord Kerr is wrong in talking about one party" coming to heel"? Hardly shows mutual respect....and he's a British Lord. So by your reckoning if the two sides of this current negotiation, being supremely competent, cannot agree, it is best , regrettably, to end in no-deal and move on. It is better than either side relinquishing their integrity. If you love your country you voted remain. If you hate your country and want it poorer and to break up the UK, you voted leave. I don't agree. It IS possible to vote Remain and to love your country....but many of you Remainers simply cannot accept that people may think differently from you. Democracy.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 19, 2020 20:25:10 GMT
blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/05/21/long-read-does-the-eu-stop-britain-from-using-state-aid-to-help-its-economy/Meanwhile many countries in the EU turn a blind eye to state aid and rules. I have given countless examples in previous posts of German cartel, ignoring CE marking rules, lower standards on safety of guarding and electrical regulations across the EU, funding of environmental projects in The Netherlands, government loans to Italian and Irish steel, environment laws ignored by Italian steelworks. I have posted countless links to examples of these. I used to Chair a European committee and the Germans had the largest representation, because they had the largest industry. What the German said was what happened, and all their neighbouring countries towed the line. Or maybe that should be "came to heel". The post on German car investment initiated this latest discussion. Some of us haven't forgotten "dieselgate". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal So the only way to invest in jobs and industry in the uk is by direct state aid!? Also we often haven’t used as much state aid as available to us. So, again, why would state aid suddenly increase when it could have during our time within the eu? Because the conservatives want to keep the former red line blue
|
|
|
Post by Soro's Sorrows on Nov 19, 2020 20:27:58 GMT
You've a funny way of showing the love of your country. Don't you think Lord Kerr is wrong in talking about one party" coming to heel"? Hardly shows mutual respect....and he's a British Lord. So by your reckoning if the two sides of this current negotiation, being supremely competent, cannot agree, it is best , regrettably, to end in no-deal and move on. It is better than either side relinquishing their integrity. If you love your country you voted remain. If you hate your country and want it poorer and to break up the UK, you voted leave. You really believe that 51% of people in the UK who voted hate their country? 70% of the voters in Stoke hate their country do they? The only hate I can see is coming from you and it's against your countrymen and in particular the people of Stoke for not sharing your opinion.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 19, 2020 20:29:52 GMT
You've a funny way of showing the love of your country. Don't you think Lord Kerr is wrong in talking about one party" coming to heel"? Hardly shows mutual respect....and he's a British Lord. So by your reckoning if the two sides of this current negotiation, being supremely competent, cannot agree, it is best , regrettably, to end in no-deal and move on. It is better than either side relinquishing their integrity. If you love your country you voted remain. If you hate your country and want it poorer and to break up the UK, you voted leave. Absolute bollocks Thousands of people who voted leave have risked their lives Day in day out for this country fighting real people who hate this country That post is a disgrace
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 19, 2020 20:36:45 GMT
I fully agree. None EU exports have been growing much faster than exports to the EU though are that is the market we need to be in in the future as it is forcast to grow much faster by the EU' s own reports. Everyone is in deficit trading with China and worryingly China is buying up a lot of businesses, which some people welcome as inward investment! I think there is huge potential for us to grow our trade with the USA but currently we are too dependant on them for IT, etc. Africa is interesting. The fastest growing economies are now in Africa, but they are still small of course. Nevertheless there is a huge opportunity to grow our trade with them, particularly importing cheaper food and reducing our dependence on the EU (France notably). India is the main country IMO we will have long term opportunity to grow our trade with. I think that we should also revitalise our relationship with Australia and New Zealand ( and Canada...we never seem to have had a very close relationship?), develop relationships through the Commonwealth and also with specific developing countries.....it would be good to use trade rather than aid to help them.....hasn't someone ( Andrew Mitchell?)recently proposed that for every Medic that we recruit( poach/ pinch?) from a developing country, we should find 2 health workers in that country? I agree. I fully expect to see New Zealand butter back on the supermarket shelves. I was in favour of joining the EEC in the 1970s, but it did leave a sour taste turning our backs on the Commonwealth. I have said I expect all sorts of problems leaving the EU in the short term while we adjust. Just as when we joined the EEC we had a sugar crisis because the West Indies were restricted in what they could sell to us due to quotas, so they found a much better market for themselves in North America. We used to buy huge amounts of iron ore and coal from Australia and Canada when we had a steel industry but sadly that has largely disappeared in the last 45 years. As I indicated in my last post above, I see huge potential in India and countries like Nigeria and South Africa, but it will take time. But for many of those countries to buy off the UK, they need foreign exchange and that is best done by them selling food products to us at lower cost than the food we import from the EU. With the huge budget problems the EU now faces with the UK leaving, the pandemic economic effect, and the damage the Euro is doing to southern EU states, it is inevitable that the CAP funding will be cut (Macron has already indicated so). That will result in rising EU food prices, which Europhiles will naturally blame Brexit for. My step son was a CEO in logistics, based for a number of years in Singapore. He sees massive potential for the UK to increase trade with far east countries, aside from China.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 19, 2020 21:09:22 GMT
blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/05/21/long-read-does-the-eu-stop-britain-from-using-state-aid-to-help-its-economy/Meanwhile many countries in the EU turn a blind eye to state aid and rules. I have given countless examples in previous posts of German cartel, ignoring CE marking rules, lower standards on safety of guarding and electrical regulations across the EU, funding of environmental projects in The Netherlands, government loans to Italian and Irish steel, environment laws ignored by Italian steelworks. I have posted countless links to examples of these. I used to Chair a European committee and the Germans had the largest representation, because they had the largest industry. What the German said was what happened, and all their neighbouring countries towed the line. Or maybe that should be "came to heel". The post on German car investment initiated this latest discussion. Some of us haven't forgotten "dieselgate". en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal So the only way to invest in jobs and industry in the uk is by direct state aid!? Also we often haven’t used as much state aid as available to us. So, again, why would state aid suddenly increase when it could have during our time within the eu? You make a very valid point. I think it criminal the way British banks and successive British governments of all persuasions have failed to invest in Britain. I can only think of climate change where governments have invested lots of money in industry, plus Crossrail, and HS2 but are they industry? Of course Labour governments pre Thatcher used to pour tax payers money into inefficient nationalised industry. Anyone starting a business or large companies seeking capital to grow get little change out of British banks unlike what happens in Germany and France. I worked for a company 16 years ago that was engaged in a management buy out. Finance was provided by the Yorkshire Bank. Very good you might think till you realise that at the time Yorkshire Bank was owned by an Australian bank! The people who directly contributed to the 2008 financial crisis, facilitated by lack of Labour government controls, would not provide the investment.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Nov 20, 2020 6:08:44 GMT
If you love your country you voted remain. If you hate your country and want it poorer and to break up the UK, you voted leave. Absolute bollocks Thousands of people who voted leave have risked their lives Day in day out for this country fighting real people who hate this country That post is a disgrace Think this may be a 'whoosh' over your head moment. Clearly a statement like that is bollocks. As bollocks as leavers constant claims that all Remainers do is moan, criticise their own country and hinder Brexit. The reason it's taken so long to leave is because the government hasn't had the backbone to do a hard break. 'If' Farage could or would have done it by now, then so could our government. Either it was or wasn't possible by now. There is no need to look elsewhere for blame. Any other finger pointing just makes those who do it sound like cry babys.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 20, 2020 6:29:51 GMT
Absolute bollocks Thousands of people who voted leave have risked their lives Day in day out for this country fighting real people who hate this country That post is a disgrace Think this may be a 'whoosh' over your head moment. Clearly a statement like that is bollocks. As bollocks as leavers constant claims that all Remainers do is moan, criticise their own country and hinder Brexit. The reason it's taken so long to leave is because the government hasn't had the backbone to do a hard break. 'If' Farage could or would have done it by now, then so could our government. Either it was or wasn't possible by now. There is no need to look elsewhere for blame. Any other finger pointing just makes those who do it sound like cry babys. No one's crying, well there could still be some Remainers, I don't know.. We've left the EU , let's hope we don't get a "trade deal" that compromises our independence. Most of the reason for uncertainty on our part is because of Remainers being unable to accept the fact that most people who voted in the UK wanted to leave and they have done( and still are doing) everything they can to prevent us from leaving ( Hard/ soft Brexit, Miller, deceitful Remainer May, Confirmatory referendums/ Bollox to Brexit).....the political class and others in cahoots with the EU.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Nov 20, 2020 6:44:52 GMT
Think this may be a 'whoosh' over your head moment. Clearly a statement like that is bollocks. As bollocks as leavers constant claims that all Remainers do is moan, criticise their own country and hinder Brexit. The reason it's taken so long to leave is because the government hasn't had the backbone to do a hard break. 'If' Farage could or would have done it by now, then so could our government. Either it was or wasn't possible by now. There is no need to look elsewhere for blame. Any other finger pointing just makes those who do it sound like cry babys. No one's crying, well there could still be some Remainers, I don't know.. We've left the EU , let's hope we don't get a "trade deal" that compromises our independence. Most of the reason for uncertainty on our part is because of Remainers being unable to accept the fact that most people who voted in the UK wanted to leave and they have done( and still are doing) everything they can to prevent us from leaving ( Hard/ soft Brexit, Miller, deceitful Remainer May, Confirmatory referendums/ Bollox to Brexit).....the political class and others in cahoots with the EU. I think it’s worth distinguishing between Remainers and Remoaners. Not all the former are the latter (of course, the latter are are also the former). The “lost” years following Brexit are entirely down to Parliament. They sought to undermine Brexit with the expressed view by many to overturn it. No wonder the EU didn’t take Britain seriously. Why should it. May’s Government was culpable, as was Labour (particularly Starmer as the principal agitator and Corbyn as the vacuous leader) not to mention the Bollocks to Brexit crew. I’d include the SNP in this but their objection had some justification in that they recognised the view of the Scottish people not the UK as a whole - and no one really paid them much attention anyway). Parliament, since Johnson’s victory, seems to have come to terms with Brexit. Regular contributors to this thread still seem stuck in the early stages of the grief cycle.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 20, 2020 6:59:54 GMT
No one's crying, well there could still be some Remainers, I don't know.. We've left the EU , let's hope we don't get a "trade deal" that compromises our independence. Most of the reason for uncertainty on our part is because of Remainers being unable to accept the fact that most people who voted in the UK wanted to leave and they have done( and still are doing) everything they can to prevent us from leaving ( Hard/ soft Brexit, Miller, deceitful Remainer May, Confirmatory referendums/ Bollox to Brexit).....the political class and others in cahoots with the EU. I think it’s worth distinguishing between Remainers and Remoaners. Not all the former are the latter (of course, the latter are are also the former). The “lost” years following Brexit are entirely down to Parliament. They sought to undermine Brexit with the expressed view by many to overturn it. No wonder the EU didn’t take Britain seriously. Why should it. May’s Government was culpable, as was Labour (particularly Starmer as the principal agitator and Corbyn as the vacuous leader) not to mention the Bollocks to Brexit crew. I’d include the SNP in this but their objection had some justification in that they recognised the view of the Scottish people not the UK as a whole - and no one really paid them much attention anyway). Parliament, since Johnson’s victory, seems to have come to terms with Brexit. Regular contributors to this thread still seem stuck in the early stages of the grief cycle. I agree. Obviously there are a range of responses to the Referendum result. I believe that the silent vast majority of Remainers Would have simply accepted the result and got on with it. But there was a definite attempt by some Remainers who had power, influence or just a public presence, Tory, Labour, Lib Democrats, Legal and non political who tried to prevent Brexit. This gave hope to others and clearly delayed leaving.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Nov 20, 2020 7:10:43 GMT
I think it’s worth distinguishing between Remainers and Remoaners. Not all the former are the latter (of course, the latter are are also the former). The “lost” years following Brexit are entirely down to Parliament. They sought to undermine Brexit with the expressed view by many to overturn it. No wonder the EU didn’t take Britain seriously. Why should it. May’s Government was culpable, as was Labour (particularly Starmer as the principal agitator and Corbyn as the vacuous leader) not to mention the Bollocks to Brexit crew. I’d include the SNP in this but their objection had some justification in that they recognised the view of the Scottish people not the UK as a whole - and no one really paid them much attention anyway). Parliament, since Johnson’s victory, seems to have come to terms with Brexit. Regular contributors to this thread still seem stuck in the early stages of the grief cycle. I agree. Obviously there are a range of responses to the Referendum result. I believe that the silent vast majority of Remainers Would have simply accepted the result and got on with it. But there was a definite attempt by some Remainers who had power, influence or just a public presence, Tory, Labour, Lib Democrats, Legal and non political who tried to prevent Brexit. This gave hope to others and clearly delayed leaving. I agree with the delay... But I also believe that if those in charge really had the conviction to leave, as they claimed, then they could have done it long ago.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Nov 20, 2020 8:02:29 GMT
I agree. Obviously there are a range of responses to the Referendum result. I believe that the silent vast majority of Remainers Would have simply accepted the result and got on with it. But there was a definite attempt by some Remainers who had power, influence or just a public presence, Tory, Labour, Lib Democrats, Legal and non political who tried to prevent Brexit. This gave hope to others and clearly delayed leaving. I agree with the delay... But I also believe that if those in charge really had the conviction to leave, as they claimed, then they could have done it long ago. Apart from a Labour mp bringing in an act of parliament stopping the uk leaving without a deal of course which wasted several months as the EU had no need to negotiate seriously at that point.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 20, 2020 8:12:04 GMT
So the only way to invest in jobs and industry in the uk is by direct state aid!? Also we often haven’t used as much state aid as available to us. So, again, why would state aid suddenly increase when it could have during our time within the eu? Because the conservatives want to keep the former red line blue A no deal brexit will hit those in that red line hardest
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 20, 2020 8:13:20 GMT
I agree with the delay... But I also believe that if those in charge really had the conviction to leave, as they claimed, then they could have done it long ago. Apart from a Labour mp bringing in an act of parliament stopping the uk leaving without a deal of course which wasted several months as the EU had no need to negotiate seriously at that point. Dominic cummings said triggering article 50 was a massive error and has completely hamstrung us in negotiations as it started a clock ticking
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 20, 2020 8:17:22 GMT
From your link( see below) "the UK had wanted to maintain the same access to shared databases that it has now, but the EU says that is not on offer to non-members"..........perhaps the EU should make it on offer to allies in the fight against terrorism? Neil Basu told the BBC's Newscast podcast a deal was "incredibly important for the safety and security of our country". He said he was hopeful of a better security and law enforcement agreement than the UK currently has. The government said the safety and security of citizens was a priority. Talks between the UK and EU are ongoing ahead of the 31 December deadline for a deal. The UK left the EU on 31 January, but continues to follow current EU rules until the end of the year while negotiations take place. Any deal would need to be ratified by parliaments on both sides. On security, the UK had wanted to maintain the same access to shared databases that it has now, but the EU says that is not on offer to non-members. Classic brexiteer. You think the eu should give us access to their databases for nothing. You fell for the lies completely. Do you think anything we invent in this country or have access to that could benefit others should be given away for free to any other nation? Should the EU get free and unfettered access to our fishing waters with nothing coming back to us in exchange? And our benefits system? Nothing democratic about a once in a generation vote tainted by lies which you (and many others) fell for. The majority have never wanted to leave without a deal. Yet that seems a very good chance
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Nov 20, 2020 8:24:08 GMT
Apart from a Labour mp bringing in an act of parliament stopping the uk leaving without a deal of course which wasted several months as the EU had no need to negotiate seriously at that point. Dominic cummings said triggering article 50 was a massive error and has completely hamstrung us in negotiations as it started a clock ticking He said triggering it without a plan and legal preparations for no deal was a massive error he wasn't wrong was he.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Nov 20, 2020 8:28:13 GMT
From your link( see below) "the UK had wanted to maintain the same access to shared databases that it has now, but the EU says that is not on offer to non-members"..........perhaps the EU should make it on offer to allies in the fight against terrorism? Neil Basu told the BBC's Newscast podcast a deal was "incredibly important for the safety and security of our country". He said he was hopeful of a better security and law enforcement agreement than the UK currently has. The government said the safety and security of citizens was a priority. Talks between the UK and EU are ongoing ahead of the 31 December deadline for a deal. The UK left the EU on 31 January, but continues to follow current EU rules until the end of the year while negotiations take place. Any deal would need to be ratified by parliaments on both sides. On security, the UK had wanted to maintain the same access to shared databases that it has now, but the EU says that is not on offer to non-members. Classic brexiteer. You think the eu should give us access to their databases for nothing. You fell for the lies completely. Do you think anything we invent in this country or have access to that could benefit others should be given away for free to any other nation? Should the EU get free and unfettered access to our fishing waters with nothing coming back to us in exchange? And our benefits system? Nothing democratic about a once in a generation vote tainted by lies which you (and many others) fell for. The majority have never wanted to leave without a deal. Yet that seems a very good chance Access for nothing I'd suggest we had contributed significantly to the cost during our membership its a bit weird of the EU to demand money for budget commitments we agreed too and then deny access to something we already paid for but the truth is remainers lap up every threat from the EU then cry if the UK takes any action to defend itself.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 20, 2020 8:37:07 GMT
From your link( see below) "the UK had wanted to maintain the same access to shared databases that it has now, but the EU says that is not on offer to non-members"..........perhaps the EU should make it on offer to allies in the fight against terrorism? Neil Basu told the BBC's Newscast podcast a deal was "incredibly important for the safety and security of our country". He said he was hopeful of a better security and law enforcement agreement than the UK currently has. The government said the safety and security of citizens was a priority. Talks between the UK and EU are ongoing ahead of the 31 December deadline for a deal. The UK left the EU on 31 January, but continues to follow current EU rules until the end of the year while negotiations take place. Any deal would need to be ratified by parliaments on both sides. On security, the UK had wanted to maintain the same access to shared databases that it has now, but the EU says that is not on offer to non-members. Classic brexiteer. You think the eu should give us access to their databases for nothing. You fell for the lies completely. Do you think anything we invent in this country or have access to that could benefit others should be given away for free to any other nation? Should the EU get free and unfettered access to our fishing waters with nothing coming back to us in exchange? And our benefits system? Nothing democratic about a once in a generation vote tainted by lies which you (and many others) fell for. The majority have never wanted to leave without a deal. Yet that seems a very good chance The essence of the article is that we need to cooperate on counter terrorism....and that the government gets that. The article says.... "Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Mr Basu told BBC Newscast: "We need to negotiate a security treaty that either retains or improves on the current position that we've got today" "It's incredibly important for the safety and security of our country. And I know the government gets that. And I know that that is what it's aiming for." When asked what a no-deal Brexit would mean for UK security, he said: "The country would be less safe in a non-negotiated outcome where a security treaty wasn't forthcoming. That's the bottom line." I would not have thought anyone could disagree with that.....perhaps the EU might for political reasons. I think that we should cooperate to oppose terrorism. Apparently we have some of the best intelligence and expertise in counter terrorism, based upon the experience during the Troubles....should we charge the EU for access? And by the way....my stance on wanting to leave the EU preceded the referendum by at least, at least 10 years.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 20, 2020 8:54:11 GMT
Classic brexiteer. You think the eu should give us access to their databases for nothing. You fell for the lies completely. Do you think anything we invent in this country or have access to that could benefit others should be given away for free to any other nation? Should the EU get free and unfettered access to our fishing waters with nothing coming back to us in exchange? And our benefits system? Nothing democratic about a once in a generation vote tainted by lies which you (and many others) fell for. The majority have never wanted to leave without a deal. Yet that seems a very good chance Access for nothing I'd suggest we had contributed significantly to the cost during our membership its a bit weird of the EU to demand money for budget commitments we agreed too and then deny access to something we already paid for but the truth is remainers lap up every threat from the EU then cry if the UK takes any action to defend itself. We’ve left. Get over it. I thought leave meant leave etc
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 20, 2020 8:57:17 GMT
Classic brexiteer. You think the eu should give us access to their databases for nothing. You fell for the lies completely. Do you think anything we invent in this country or have access to that could benefit others should be given away for free to any other nation? Should the EU get free and unfettered access to our fishing waters with nothing coming back to us in exchange? And our benefits system? Nothing democratic about a once in a generation vote tainted by lies which you (and many others) fell for. The majority have never wanted to leave without a deal. Yet that seems a very good chance The essence of the article is that we need to cooperate on counter terrorism....and that the government gets that. The article says.... "Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Mr Basu told BBC Newscast: "We need to negotiate a security treaty that either retains or improves on the current position that we've got today" "It's incredibly important for the safety and security of our country. And I know the government gets that. And I know that that is what it's aiming for." When asked what a no-deal Brexit would mean for UK security, he said: "The country would be less safe in a non-negotiated outcome where a security treaty wasn't forthcoming. That's the bottom line." I would not have thought anyone could disagree with that.....perhaps the EU might for political reasons. I think that we should cooperate to oppose terrorism. Apparently we have some of the best intelligence and expertise in counter terrorism, based upon the experience during the Troubles....should we charge the EU for access? But I thought leave meant leave!? You can’t leave something and expect membership benefits to continue. There are poor people in this country. They need to feed their kids. Nobody could disagree with that? So do we give everyone automatic access to benefits regardless of circumstances so they can feed and house their children ?
|
|
|
Post by foster on Nov 20, 2020 9:01:43 GMT
Classic brexiteer. You think the eu should give us access to their databases for nothing. You fell for the lies completely. Do you think anything we invent in this country or have access to that could benefit others should be given away for free to any other nation? Should the EU get free and unfettered access to our fishing waters with nothing coming back to us in exchange? And our benefits system? Nothing democratic about a once in a generation vote tainted by lies which you (and many others) fell for. The majority have never wanted to leave without a deal. Yet that seems a very good chance The essence of the article is that we need to cooperate on counter terrorism....and that the government gets that. The article says.... "Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Mr Basu told BBC Newscast: "We need to negotiate a security treaty that either retains or improves on the current position that we've got today" "It's incredibly important for the safety and security of our country. And I know the government gets that. And I know that that is what it's aiming for." When asked what a no-deal Brexit would mean for UK security, he said: "The country would be less safe in a non-negotiated outcome where a security treaty wasn't forthcoming. That's the bottom line." I would not have thought anyone could disagree with that.....perhaps the EU might for political reasons. I think that we should cooperate to oppose terrorism. Apparently we have some of the best intelligence and expertise in counter terrorism, based upon the experience during the Troubles....should we charge the EU for access? TBH, I fail to see what the whole point concerning security is. Nothing has or hasn't been agreed yet, according to your own quotes. In which case, what's the point in people pissing their pants over it. It's simple, we don't give anything for nothing, the EU doesn't give anything for nothing. We're not a member so we lose the member benefits. If we're worse off (as is widely acknowledged) then so be it. At least we can say that we have sovereignty, independence and all the other guff that doesn't actually help improve poverty, human rights, sustainability, etc. in this country.
|
|
|
Post by Kilo on Nov 20, 2020 9:15:57 GMT
Security has got fuck all to do with trade. It's not about 'us' using 'their' database, it's about sharing information between both sides to prevent crime. Anybody who thinks its right to use security as a bargaining chip in the negotiations is an idiot and anyone in any position of power should be removed if they think the same.
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 20, 2020 9:30:08 GMT
Because the conservatives want to keep the former red line blue A no deal brexit will hit those in that red line hardest In your opinion
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 20, 2020 9:32:53 GMT
The essence of the article is that we need to cooperate on counter terrorism....and that the government gets that. The article says.... "Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Mr Basu told BBC Newscast: "We need to negotiate a security treaty that either retains or improves on the current position that we've got today" "It's incredibly important for the safety and security of our country. And I know the government gets that. And I know that that is what it's aiming for." When asked what a no-deal Brexit would mean for UK security, he said: "The country would be less safe in a non-negotiated outcome where a security treaty wasn't forthcoming. That's the bottom line." I would not have thought anyone could disagree with that.....perhaps the EU might for political reasons. I think that we should cooperate to oppose terrorism. Apparently we have some of the best intelligence and expertise in counter terrorism, based upon the experience during the Troubles....should we charge the EU for access? TBH, I fail to see what the whole point concerning security is. Nothing has or hasn't been agreed yet, according to your own quotes. In which case, what's the point in people pissing their pants over it. It's simple, we don't give anything for nothing, the EU doesn't give anything for nothing. We're not a member so we lose the member benefits. If we're worse off (as is widely acknowledged) then so be it. At least we can say that we have sovereignty, independence and all the other guff that doesn't actually help improve poverty, human rights, sustainability, etc. in this country. I'd hope that no one is pissing their pants. For my part I was simply responding to Foghorn' s posting. He posted the link, with, I believe, the implication that " Brexit = threat of terrorism= UK's fault "...that isn't exactly what the article says. It is clearly in the interests of the ordinary people who died as a result of Extreme Islam in the Bataclan attacks, the Charlie Hebdo attacks,the MEN bombings, the next one to cooperate in the best ways possible irrespective of money and politics.....I don't think any Brexiteer would say that we shouldn't.....let's hope the negotiations think the same. Edit: I should have read Kilo's post first....he put it better than me.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Nov 20, 2020 9:37:34 GMT
I think it’s worth distinguishing between Remainers and Remoaners. Not all the former are the latter (of course, the latter are are also the former). The “lost” years following Brexit are entirely down to Parliament. They sought to undermine Brexit with the expressed view by many to overturn it. No wonder the EU didn’t take Britain seriously. Why should it. May’s Government was culpable, as was Labour (particularly Starmer as the principal agitator and Corbyn as the vacuous leader) not to mention the Bollocks to Brexit crew. I’d include the SNP in this but their objection had some justification in that they recognised the view of the Scottish people not the UK as a whole - and no one really paid them much attention anyway). Parliament, since Johnson’s victory, seems to have come to terms with Brexit. Regular contributors to this thread still seem stuck in the early stages of the grief cycle. I agree. Obviously there are a range of responses to the Referendum result. I believe that the silent vast majority of Remainers Would have simply accepted the result and got on with it. But there was a definite attempt by some Remainers who had power, influence or just a public presence, Tory, Labour, Lib Democrats, Legal and non political who tried to prevent Brexit. This gave hope to others and clearly delayed leaving. and I totally agree with you bj. The reason Johnson won a huge majority (apart from the voting system issue*) was because he caught the mood of the country by saying "let's get Brexit done". People were sick and tired of the politicians bickering. The MPs who surprisingly won their seats, and those that nearly lost them, now see the writing on the wall and will keep quiet till the dust settles. * Much as I didn't want Johnson or Corbyn as my PM, a worse outcome under proportional representation would have been a puppet PM with a Scottish or Irish hand up his backside which is what happens with coalitions. Imagine a government with Corbyn as MP and bribing relying on Sturgeon to stay in power.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Nov 20, 2020 9:45:09 GMT
TBH, I fail to see what the whole point concerning security is. Nothing has or hasn't been agreed yet, according to your own quotes. In which case, what's the point in people pissing their pants over it. It's simple, we don't give anything for nothing, the EU doesn't give anything for nothing. We're not a member so we lose the member benefits. If we're worse off (as is widely acknowledged) then so be it. At least we can say that we have sovereignty, independence and all the other guff that doesn't actually help improve poverty, human rights, sustainability, etc. in this country. I'd hope that no one is pissing their pants. For my part I was simply responding to Foghorn' s posting. He posted the link, with, I believe, the implication that " Brexit = threat of terrorism= UK's fault "...that isn't exactly what the article says. It is clearly in the interests of the ordinary people who died as a result of Extreme Islam in the Bataclan attacks, the Charlie Hebdo attacks,the MEN bombings, the next one to cooperate in the best ways possible irrespective of money and politics.....I don't think any Brexiteer would say that we shouldn't.....let's hope the negotiations think the same. Edit: I should have read Kilo's post first....he put it better than me. Discussing security is totally irrelevant at this point as it clearly shouldn't be an issue. Saying that, homeland security, acting in the interest of public safety and arresting/prosecuting perpetrators is nowhere near where it should be, both here and in the EU.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Nov 20, 2020 9:48:04 GMT
I agree. Obviously there are a range of responses to the Referendum result. I believe that the silent vast majority of Remainers Would have simply accepted the result and got on with it. But there was a definite attempt by some Remainers who had power, influence or just a public presence, Tory, Labour, Lib Democrats, Legal and non political who tried to prevent Brexit. This gave hope to others and clearly delayed leaving. and I totally agree with you bj. The reason Johnson won a huge majority (apart from the voting system issue*) was because he caught the mood of the country by saying "let's get Brexit done". People were sick and tired of the politicians bickering. The MPs who surprisingly won their seats, and those that nearly lost them, now see the writing on the wall and will keep quiet till the dust settles. * Much as I didn't want Johnson or Corbyn as my PM, a worse outcome under proportional representation would have been a puppet PM with a Scottish or Irish hand up his backside which is what happens with coalitions. Imagine a government with Corbyn as MP and bribing relying on Sturgeon to stay in power. Imagine a right-wing government with an 80 seat majority elected via a FPTP system fucking things up on a daily basis. Oh, we don't have to...
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 20, 2020 9:54:30 GMT
The essence of the article is that we need to cooperate on counter terrorism....and that the government gets that. The article says.... "Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner Mr Basu told BBC Newscast: "We need to negotiate a security treaty that either retains or improves on the current position that we've got today" "It's incredibly important for the safety and security of our country. And I know the government gets that. And I know that that is what it's aiming for." When asked what a no-deal Brexit would mean for UK security, he said: "The country would be less safe in a non-negotiated outcome where a security treaty wasn't forthcoming. That's the bottom line." I would not have thought anyone could disagree with that.....perhaps the EU might for political reasons. I think that we should cooperate to oppose terrorism. Apparently we have some of the best intelligence and expertise in counter terrorism, based upon the experience during the Troubles....should we charge the EU for access? But I thought leave meant leave!? You can’t leave something and expect membership benefits to continue. There are poor people in this country. They need to feed their kids. Nobody could disagree with that? So do we give everyone automatic access to benefits regardless of circumstances so they can feed and house their children ? I've no idea what you are talking about. Governments should represent people, particularly make an effort to include the downtrodden and excluded,strive to get a system whereby each contributes to their ability and receives the benefits of that society. No one should starve or be homeless or depend upon benefits as a lifestyle choice. I think that you are saying that all the above exist whilst we are in the EU? I think that you might be trying to get the moral high ground and equate it to Brexit.
|
|