What now for Brexit?

[mrcoke]

Jun 30, 2024 9:36:01 GMT Seymour Beaver said:

Jun 30, 2024 9:31:52 GMT mrcoke said:

Where have I said the UK is doing brilliantly?
I am saying the economy is doing much better than the doom and groomers say it is.

Obviously the pandemic brought a lot of suffering and the war a lot of inflation, but the UK is actually doing better than the left wing media keep portraying and the statistics I keep posting links to prove that.

Most people's wage increases are much higher than their European counterparts, unless you are unlucky enough to work for government like health.

craftguildofchefs.org/news/uk-hospitality-salaries-outpace-national-average-almost-3#:~:text=The%20latest%20research%20shows%20UK,at%2011.5%25%20and%2011.2%25.

It isn't just the super rich better off.  From the 1990s savings decline ed in the UK but since the referendum savings have been increasing. In recent weeks household ISAs issued have been a record levels. There is a lot of money about.
news.sky.com/story/isa-deposits-hit-record-high-bank-of-england-says-13145994

But were is also far more inequality which got better foremost of the 20 th century but stopped improving when the UK joined the EEC and the UK started handing over wealth to Europe and abandoning industry. Things got a whole lot worse after Maastricht and East European countries joined the EU.

Got a whole lot worse after we keft the EU as well

That is very true.
We have suffered because of the pandemic and the inflation due to the war and Tory mismanagement, 4 PMs is going some, chopping and changing economic policy.

Nevertheless, maybe because of, or, thanks to Brexit, the UK has done better over the last 5 year period than other European G7 countries. The compound average growth rate from 2018 to 2023 at 1.1% has been the same as Italy, whose GDP is still lower than it was many years ago, and the UK growth has been greater than Germany (0.4%) and France (0.9%).

www.worldeconomics.com/Countries-With-Highest-Growth/Germany.aspx

There are other European countries that have done better than the UK and others that have done worse. Most of those that have done better have been getting huge regional aid from the EU, thanks in part to British tax payers till 2020.

Brexit is being falsely blamed for UK economic woes. Why do you think many European citizens are getting sick of their governments and swinging towards the right? Many EU countries have the same problems of poverty, low growth, long hospital waiting lists, drug shortages. Most have higher unemployment than the UK, twice as high in France. Many have dreadfully high youth unemployment. 

[wannabee]

Jun 30, 2024 8:52:40 GMT mrcoke said:

Jun 29, 2024 23:16:46 GMT wannabee said:

I see now you may not be Gaslighting or Deluded but perhaps just  naive or maybe disengenuous or just perhaps simply you lack knowledge of how these multi million  £ international investments work

I have no expectation you will reply to my 4th or 5th time asking your opinion on "Secret Courts" because you have studiously avoided it in the past

www.globaljustice.org.uk/blog/2023/03/why-the-uk-needs-to-drop-corporate-courts-from-the-pacific-trade-deal/

Besides their appalling nature, they break a fundamental principle by which you claim to stand by. Specifically they bind a future Parliament to actions of a previous Parliament. Of course there can ultimately be disregarded in litigation in "Secret Court" by UK Government paying compensation. This is a position the EU would never countenance but in desperation UK has.

The contingency of Astra Zenica Investment is marginally dependent on Planning Approval, but fundamentally is more obviously dependant on Government subsidy. Moreover why is Astra Zenica not in a position to commit investment without third-party agreement, other than UK Government.

I wouldn't hold my breath that Investment will proceed,  particularly with a change in Government, nor will I that you will answer a straight question for the 4th / 5th time

You keep banging on about "Secret courts". I addressed this issue 4 years ago, on page 1,232; it's called sovereignty.

I said:
"Naturally if we agree treaties with other nations such as trade agreements we should comply with those regulations we have freely entered into. In reality this means that future UK governments can determine UK foreign policy and not be tied to EU foreign policy, establish trade agreements with non EU countries, set immigration laws, decide on what aid the UK regions require, set tax policy, decide on aid to farming, industry, sports, and the arts, etc., set our own competition rules, human rights, environment and food standards, health and safety standards, equality standards, employment law, and those other matters that have been dictated by the EU in the past. Naturally there will be some losses depending on what the final agreed relationships with the EU are, but there are no sensible reasons why the UK could not agree many of the reciprocal rights with the EU which existed when the UK was a full member, such as travel, security, policing, etc."

Assuming there is new government in a week's time, they are perfectly free to introduce any law to change what the Tories have done, including re-joining the EU.
UK government and laws are subject to the collective will of the British people since Brexit, not bureaucrats in Brussels.

Astra Zenica cannot invest without planning permission. Planning will set terms. We have a judicial system in this country that prevents government doing or authorising what it wants as the present government is finding over deporting illegal immigrants. The freedom of judicial rulings in this country are another benefit of Brexit. It's all there on page 1,232.

Planning permission has bugger all to do with what I'm talking about, you are just using it as a distraction 

I'm talking about Investor State Dispute Settlement ISDS clauses which are contained in CPTPP that allows Private Companies to sue current and future Governments in SECRET COURTS if a Government enacts Laws which harm the profits of those companies e.g. increase in minimum wage, change to environmental laws, workers rights etc

Furthermore some of the Countries within CPTPP have lower Environmental and Human Rights Standards than UK (and EU)  but the consumer buying those goods will not be aware 

The Constitutional Reform and Government Act 2010 CRAG is not fit for purpose because it doesn't give Parliament Sovereignty over scrutiny of Trade Deals and the Government and Ministers are exceeding its Perogative Power

This is not just my opinion but that of the HoC Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee PACAC who submitted its findings to Government. Understandably Government partially agreed with some findings and disagreed with others "Well they would say that, wouldn't they"

The process began by Government presenting the CPTPP for scrutiny 

Following this process, the agreement will be subject to pre-ratification scrutiny under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRaG).

www.gov.uk/government/publications/cptpp-agreement-summary/the-accession-of-the-uk-to-the-cptpp-agreement-summary-web-version

PACAC found that CRAG was not fit for purpose and laid out its reasons to Government 

Under CRAG, the Government is required to lay some treaties, along with an explanatory memorandum, and after a period of 21-sitting days, if the Commons has not voted to delay ratification, a treaty can be ratified. The evidence we received was clear that CRAG has been an insufficient legislative tool to facilitate meaningful Parliamentary scrutiny of treaties. We identified three main areas of concern with the current system for parliamentary scrutiny of international agreements under CRAG:

the current legislation provides only a passive role for Parliament and as such there is no opportunity for Parliament to express its explicit approval or disapproval of a treaty.
several categories of treaty are not captured by CRAG at all.
the 21-sitting day period is an arbitrary and, in many cases, wholly insufficient period for the scrutiny of treaties, especially in light of their increasing length, complexity and impact on the domestic level.

In order for the arrangements for entering into treaties to respect the core constitutional principle of Parliamentary sovereignty, Parliament must be given the opportunity to give its express approval to all treaties before they can be ratified or enter into force. We recommend that CRAG be amended to implement new arrangements to give effect to this principle and propose a new system by which the House of Commons must indicate its explicit approval of international agreements for them to bind the UK.

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubadm/204/summary.html

PACAC laid out its SPECIFIC issues with CPTPP

The CPTPP deal undermines high standards of human rights and labour rights protections

The CPTPP trade agreement contains Investor-State Dispute Settlement provisions which are incompatible with corporate accountability, democracy and the protection of human rights

For these reasons, the UK should not accede to the CPTPP agreement

The CPTPP agreement contains Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions. These allow corporations to sue states through a secretive parallel legal system if government polices threaten their future profits – even if those policies are aimed at protecting human rights and the environment. 

Corporations have already used ISDS to sue governments more than a thousand times, including over laws aimed at raising minimum wages, guaranteeing affordable water to citizens and phasing out the use of fossil fuels.

committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/110788/html/

This is the detailed findings PACAC submitted to Government which were rejected partially or in whole

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubadm/685/report.html

It surprises me that on the one hand your core principle is Parliamentary Sovereignty yet CPTPP specifically and the Parliamentary scrutiny of Trade Deals generally is a clear affront to that.

We shall reap what we sow, the excesses and unconstitutional acts this Administration has engaged in for the last 14 will not be rowed back but rather exceeded particularly if the Polls are any way correct in the size of Majority. The only solution I can see long term is a written Constitution Magna Carta is out of date.

[stokeson]

Its now becoming obvious that the nation as a whole lost the Brexit vote. To pretend otherwise is just foolish.........

[mrcoke]

Jun 30, 2024 11:07:02 GMT wannabee said:

Jun 30, 2024 8:52:40 GMT mrcoke said:

You keep banging on about "Secret courts". I addressed this issue 4 years ago, on page 1,232; it's called sovereignty.

I said:
"Naturally if we agree treaties with other nations such as trade agreements we should comply with those regulations we have freely entered into. In reality this means that future UK governments can determine UK foreign policy and not be tied to EU foreign policy, establish trade agreements with non EU countries, set immigration laws, decide on what aid the UK regions require, set tax policy, decide on aid to farming, industry, sports, and the arts, etc., set our own competition rules, human rights, environment and food standards, health and safety standards, equality standards, employment law, and those other matters that have been dictated by the EU in the past. Naturally there will be some losses depending on what the final agreed relationships with the EU are, but there are no sensible reasons why the UK could not agree many of the reciprocal rights with the EU which existed when the UK was a full member, such as travel, security, policing, etc."

Assuming there is new government in a week's time, they are perfectly free to introduce any law to change what the Tories have done, including re-joining the EU.
UK government and laws are subject to the collective will of the British people since Brexit, not bureaucrats in Brussels.

Astra Zenica cannot invest without planning permission. Planning will set terms. We have a judicial system in this country that prevents government doing or authorising what it wants as the present government is finding over deporting illegal immigrants. The freedom of judicial rulings in this country are another benefit of Brexit. It's all there on page 1,232.

Planning permission has bugger all to do with what I'm talking about, you are just using it as a distraction 

I'm talking about Investor State Dispute Settlement ISDS clauses which are contained in CPTPP that allows Private Companies to sue current and future Governments in SECRET COURTS if a Government enacts Laws which harm the profits of those companies e.g. increase in minimum wage, change to environmental laws, workers rights etc

Furthermore some of the Countries within CPTPP have lower Environmental and Human Rights Standards than UK (and EU)  but the consumer buying those goods will not be aware 

The Constitutional Reform and Government Act 2010 CRAG is not fit for purpose because it doesn't give Parliament Sovereignty over scrutiny of Trade Deals and the Government and Ministers are exceeding its Perogative Power

This is not just my opinion but that of the HoC Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee PACAC who submitted its findings to Government. Understandably Government partially agreed with some findings and disagreed with others "Well they would say that, wouldn't they"

The process began by Government presenting the CPTPP for scrutiny 

Following this process, the agreement will be subject to pre-ratification scrutiny under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRaG).

www.gov.uk/government/publications/cptpp-agreement-summary/the-accession-of-the-uk-to-the-cptpp-agreement-summary-web-version

PACAC found that CRAG was not fit for purpose and laid out its reasons to Government 

Under CRAG, the Government is required to lay some treaties, along with an explanatory memorandum, and after a period of 21-sitting days, if the Commons has not voted to delay ratification, a treaty can be ratified. The evidence we received was clear that CRAG has been an insufficient legislative tool to facilitate meaningful Parliamentary scrutiny of treaties. We identified three main areas of concern with the current system for parliamentary scrutiny of international agreements under CRAG:

the current legislation provides only a passive role for Parliament and as such there is no opportunity for Parliament to express its explicit approval or disapproval of a treaty.
several categories of treaty are not captured by CRAG at all.
the 21-sitting day period is an arbitrary and, in many cases, wholly insufficient period for the scrutiny of treaties, especially in light of their increasing length, complexity and impact on the domestic level.

In order for the arrangements for entering into treaties to respect the core constitutional principle of Parliamentary sovereignty, Parliament must be given the opportunity to give its express approval to all treaties before they can be ratified or enter into force. We recommend that CRAG be amended to implement new arrangements to give effect to this principle and propose a new system by which the House of Commons must indicate its explicit approval of international agreements for them to bind the UK.

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubadm/204/summary.html

PACAC laid out its SPECIFIC issues with CPTPP

The CPTPP deal undermines high standards of human rights and labour rights protections

The CPTPP trade agreement contains Investor-State Dispute Settlement provisions which are incompatible with corporate accountability, democracy and the protection of human rights

For these reasons, the UK should not accede to the CPTPP agreement

The CPTPP agreement contains Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions. These allow corporations to sue states through a secretive parallel legal system if government polices threaten their future profits – even if those policies are aimed at protecting human rights and the environment. 

Corporations have already used ISDS to sue governments more than a thousand times, including over laws aimed at raising minimum wages, guaranteeing affordable water to citizens and phasing out the use of fossil fuels.

committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/110788/html/

This is the detailed findings PACAC submitted to Government which were rejected partially or in whole

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubadm/685/report.html

It surprises me that on the one hand your core principle is Parliamentary Sovereignty yet CPTPP specifically and the Parliamentary scrutiny of Trade Deals generally is a clear affront to that.

We shall reap what we sow, the excesses and unconstitutional acts this Administration has engaged in for the last 14 will not be rowed back but rather exceeded particularly if the Polls are any way correct in the size of Majority. The only solution I can see long term is a written Constitution Magna Carta is out of date.

So the next government can withdraw from the CPTPP like the US if it wants to. That's sovereignty.

Iam with David Starkey and totally opposed to a written constitution.

[wannabee]

Jun 30, 2024 11:15:31 GMT mrcoke said:

Jun 30, 2024 11:07:02 GMT wannabee said:

Planning permission has bugger all to do with what I'm talking about, you are just using it as a distraction 

I'm talking about Investor State Dispute Settlement ISDS clauses which are contained in CPTPP that allows Private Companies to sue current and future Governments in SECRET COURTS if a Government enacts Laws which harm the profits of those companies e.g. increase in minimum wage, change to environmental laws, workers rights etc

Furthermore some of the Countries within CPTPP have lower Environmental and Human Rights Standards than UK (and EU)  but the consumer buying those goods will not be aware 

The Constitutional Reform and Government Act 2010 CRAG is not fit for purpose because it doesn't give Parliament Sovereignty over scrutiny of Trade Deals and the Government and Ministers are exceeding its Perogative Power

This is not just my opinion but that of the HoC Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee PACAC who submitted its findings to Government. Understandably Government partially agreed with some findings and disagreed with others "Well they would say that, wouldn't they"

The process began by Government presenting the CPTPP for scrutiny 

Following this process, the agreement will be subject to pre-ratification scrutiny under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 (CRaG).

www.gov.uk/government/publications/cptpp-agreement-summary/the-accession-of-the-uk-to-the-cptpp-agreement-summary-web-version

PACAC found that CRAG was not fit for purpose and laid out its reasons to Government 

Under CRAG, the Government is required to lay some treaties, along with an explanatory memorandum, and after a period of 21-sitting days, if the Commons has not voted to delay ratification, a treaty can be ratified. The evidence we received was clear that CRAG has been an insufficient legislative tool to facilitate meaningful Parliamentary scrutiny of treaties. We identified three main areas of concern with the current system for parliamentary scrutiny of international agreements under CRAG:

the current legislation provides only a passive role for Parliament and as such there is no opportunity for Parliament to express its explicit approval or disapproval of a treaty.
several categories of treaty are not captured by CRAG at all.
the 21-sitting day period is an arbitrary and, in many cases, wholly insufficient period for the scrutiny of treaties, especially in light of their increasing length, complexity and impact on the domestic level.

In order for the arrangements for entering into treaties to respect the core constitutional principle of Parliamentary sovereignty, Parliament must be given the opportunity to give its express approval to all treaties before they can be ratified or enter into force. We recommend that CRAG be amended to implement new arrangements to give effect to this principle and propose a new system by which the House of Commons must indicate its explicit approval of international agreements for them to bind the UK.

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubadm/204/summary.html

PACAC laid out its SPECIFIC issues with CPTPP

The CPTPP deal undermines high standards of human rights and labour rights protections

The CPTPP trade agreement contains Investor-State Dispute Settlement provisions which are incompatible with corporate accountability, democracy and the protection of human rights

For these reasons, the UK should not accede to the CPTPP agreement

The CPTPP agreement contains Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) provisions. These allow corporations to sue states through a secretive parallel legal system if government polices threaten their future profits – even if those policies are aimed at protecting human rights and the environment. 

Corporations have already used ISDS to sue governments more than a thousand times, including over laws aimed at raising minimum wages, guaranteeing affordable water to citizens and phasing out the use of fossil fuels.

committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/110788/html/

This is the detailed findings PACAC submitted to Government which were rejected partially or in whole

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm5804/cmselect/cmpubadm/685/report.html

It surprises me that on the one hand your core principle is Parliamentary Sovereignty yet CPTPP specifically and the Parliamentary scrutiny of Trade Deals generally is a clear affront to that.

We shall reap what we sow, the excesses and unconstitutional acts this Administration has engaged in for the last 14 will not be rowed back but rather exceeded particularly if the Polls are any way correct in the size of Majority. The only solution I can see long term is a written Constitution Magna Carta is out of date.

So the next government can withdraw from the CPTPP like the US if it wants to. That's sovereignty.

Iam with David Starkey and totally opposed to a written constitution.

So no comment on Parliamentary Sovereignty or that the Executive can bypass the Peoples Representatives, MPs, who have been delegated to make decisions on their behalf for a time limited period and enter Secret Deals without scrutiny. OK

[Seymour Beaver]

Jun 30, 2024 11:06:26 GMT mrcoke said:

Jun 30, 2024 9:36:01 GMT Seymour Beaver said:

Got a whole lot worse after we keft the EU as well

That is very true.
We have suffered because of the pandemic and the inflation due to the war and Tory mismanagement, 4 PMs is going some, chopping and changing economic policy.

Nevertheless, maybe because of, or, thanks to Brexit, the UK has done better over the last 5 year period than other European G7 countries. The compound average growth rate from 2018 to 2023 at 1.1% has been the same as Italy, whose GDP is still lower than it was many years ago, and the UK growth has been greater than Germany (0.4%) and France (0.9%).

www.worldeconomics.com/Countries-With-Highest-Growth/Germany.aspx

There are other European countries that have done better than the UK and others that have done worse. Most of those that have done better have been getting huge regional aid from the EU, thanks in part to British tax payers till 2020.

Brexit is being falsely blamed for UK economic woes. Why do you think many European citizens are getting sick of their governments and swinging towards the right? Many EU countries have the same problems of poverty, low growth, long hospital waiting lists, drug shortages. Most have higher unemployment than the UK, twice as high in France. Many have dreadfully high youth unemployment. 

I didn't say it was because if Brexit, I said since - and it's only forecast to get worse

fairnessfoundation.com/the-canaries

I'm not particularly interested in 0.000% differences in growth that could be lost in rounding if it doesn't address inequality.

If immigration was #1 Brexit issue then inequality was also well up there. On both it has manifestly failed and continues to fail. It was pointless. And in being pointless it's also been a distraction for the best part if 10 years from running the country. A lost generation.

And I don't see why people shouldn't blame Brexit, you're all to happy to blame membership of the EU for all manner of problems.

On a more conciliatory note - I do agree with your point about the threat of the Far Right if people's grievances are left to fester.

[skemstokie]

Jun 30, 2024 11:10:15 GMT stokeson said:

Its now becoming obvious that the nation as a whole lost the Brexit vote. To pretend otherwise is just foolish.........

To me it was also obvious before the vote.

[mrcoke]

Jun 30, 2024 13:49:30 GMT Seymour Beaver said:

Jun 30, 2024 11:06:26 GMT mrcoke said:

That is very true.
We have suffered because of the pandemic and the inflation due to the war and Tory mismanagement, 4 PMs is going some, chopping and changing economic policy.

Nevertheless, maybe because of, or, thanks to Brexit, the UK has done better over the last 5 year period than other European G7 countries. The compound average growth rate from 2018 to 2023 at 1.1% has been the same as Italy, whose GDP is still lower than it was many years ago, and the UK growth has been greater than Germany (0.4%) and France (0.9%).

www.worldeconomics.com/Countries-With-Highest-Growth/Germany.aspx

There are other European countries that have done better than the UK and others that have done worse. Most of those that have done better have been getting huge regional aid from the EU, thanks in part to British tax payers till 2020.

Brexit is being falsely blamed for UK economic woes. Why do you think many European citizens are getting sick of their governments and swinging towards the right? Many EU countries have the same problems of poverty, low growth, long hospital waiting lists, drug shortages. Most have higher unemployment than the UK, twice as high in France. Many have dreadfully high youth unemployment. 

I didn't say it was because if Brexit, I said since - and it's only forecast to get worse

fairnessfoundation.com/the-canaries

I'm not particularly interested in 0.000% differences in growth that could be lost in rounding if it doesn't address inequality.

If immigration was #1 Brexit issue then inequality was also well up there. On both it has manifestly failed and continues to fail. It was pointless. And in being pointless it's also been a distraction for the best part if 10 years from running the country. A lost generation.

And I don't see why people shouldn't blame Brexit, you're all to happy to blame membership of the EU for all manner of problems.

On a more conciliatory note - I do agree with your point about the threat of the Far Right if people's grievances are left to fester.

Apologies if I am guilty of instinctively jumping in to defend Brexit.

I linked the economic performance because there are constant claims that the UK economy is performing worse because of Brexit, when it is performing just as well as our peer countries if not better.

I think uncontrolled immigration was the issue at the time of the referendum. It is still an issue in terms of illegal but legal immigration is high for justifiable reasons, namely relatives, refugees, students, and workers coming to fill needed jobs like the NHS.

We are agreed on the far right, if is very worrying and the UK is not immune.
www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jun/30/a-deeply-unfair-and-unequal-country-report-warns-of-unprecedented-far-right-gains-in-uk

I support our electoral system because it prevents minorities having a strong influence. 

[numpty40]

We have Brexit to blame for everything shit that is happening in this country, the rest of the EU don't have that luxury so turn to right wing parties.
Strange times.

[wannabee]

Jun 30, 2024 21:41:02 GMT numpty40 said:

We have Brexit to blame for everything shit that is happening in this country, the rest of the EU don't have that luxury so turn to right wing parties.
Strange times.

Right Wing or Far Right Party's are the largest Party's in Switzerland, the Ruling Party in Italy and Hungary., part of the Finnish Government (reduced vote share in recent EU Elections) and in Sweden and Serbia they support the Government 

Yet if you read/listen to Media, Europe is "Lurching" to the Right. Strange Dat.

[phileetin]

the shit hits the fan when the DFB ( ? ) in Germany rule the roost . Imagine the headlines in the Guardian then .

[Rednwhitenblue]

Jul 1, 2024 10:58:06 GMT phileetin said:

the shit hits the fan when the DFB ( ? ) in Germany rule the roost . Imagine the headlines in the Guardian then .

Probably something like "German Football Association seizes control of country".

To be fair, that would be newsworthy.

[CBUFAWKIPWH]

Well it appears another ardent Brexit supporter is showing his true colours

The Tory Party and it's backers wanted Brexit as part of a globalist free market agenda and basically conned a large section of the electorate into thinking it was all about a pro-nationalist agenda. This election demonstrates that the unholy alliance has fractured with Reform UK reclaiming the nationalist vote. It's very hard to see how the Tories can pull off re-uniting the globalists and the nationalist vote again.

Dyson's take on post Brexit immigration is also somewhat at odds with the Reform agenda.

[oggyoggy]

Jul 9, 2024 12:25:57 GMT CBUFAWKIPWH said:

Well it appears another ardent Brexit supporter is showing his true colours

The Tory Party and it's backers wanted Brexit as part of a globalist free market agenda and basically conned a large section of the electorate into thinking it was all about a pro-nationalist agenda. This election demonstrates that the unholy alliance has fractured with Reform UK reclaiming the nationalist vote. It's very hard to see how the Tories can pull off re-uniting the globalists and the nationalist vote again.

Dyson's take on post Brexit immigration is also somewhat at odds with the Reform agenda.

Dyson is a disgrace and a massive hypocrite. For what it is worth, I never buy his products.

[wannabee]

Something VERY significant happened in the Kings Speech last week and Charlie didn't even actually say it but it was contained in the Government Briefing  Notes. It goes well beyond what I could have hoped for.

Not yet as far as I know widely picked up by MSM but a  piece of proposed legislation under the anodyne title of Product Safety and Metrology Bill was introduced 

The vast majority of UK Standards Law is derived from decades of EU Legislation. Despite best efforts to introduce nonsense gimmicks like a Pints of Wine and Turbo Charged Vacuum Cleaners and a duplication of UK Standard Marking UKCA the majority of this remains.

In the small print of this remarkable piece of Legislation is this : “enabling [the UK] to make the sovereign choice to mirror or diverge from updated EU rules, so that we can maintain high product safety while supporting businesses and economic growth”.

The extremely clever wording by including "Sovereign " to appease the Gammons is that not only will UK retain EU high Standards as they exist but will update them as EU raise Standards. All this can be done by the relevant Minister without recourse to Parliament at the stroke of a pen  using Secondary Legislation once the Primary Bill has been passed. Genius. 

I had thought an SPS Agreement was the limit of ambition but this goes far beyond.

The next step and I don't wish to underestimate the task but feel confident the Government will appoint competent negotiators unlike the idiots that negotiated TCA will be to get EU to agree EQUIVALENCE of Standards. This is Single Market by the Backdoor. If both EU and UK are Manufacturing and producing Food to the same Standards then in theory there is no requirement to inspect at the respective Borders. I'm sure Border facilities will be maintained for appearance purposes but it would be light touch and random 

www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=01b3f0e4-ab21-4e7e-81b0-33a4c126c1ff

I doff my Chapeau to whoever came up with this "cunning plan" and they can't even brag about it lest they frighten the horses 

[Rednwhitenblue]

It's great to see that the first steps towards undoing this mess are taking place.

There is clearly a fresh willingness on both sides to engage in a more productive and helpful manner. Very welcome.

Even some small progress on boat crossings that never happened under the Tories.

Who really cares about the ideology of Brexit? It's what's best for Britain as a whole that matters and Brexit so obviously isn't it. It was only ever a tactic to try to put it to bed as an issue that threatened to split the Tory Party, regardless of the damage it'd do to the country. Such patriots they are. And even that approach has failed with Reform preparing to destroy the Tories.

Softly, softly, catchee monkey. No need to make a big fuss about it or rub Brexiteers' noses in it, just carefully undo the shit and fix the mess it's created and we'll all be better off for it.

[lordb]

Jul 20, 2024 8:41:29 GMT wannabee said:

Something VERY significant happened in the Kings Speech last week and Charlie didn't even actually say it but it was contained in the Government Briefing  Notes. It goes well beyond what I could have hoped for.

Not yet as far as I know widely picked up by MSM but a  piece of proposed legislation under the anodyne title of Product Safety and Metrology Bill was introduced 

The vast majority of UK Standards Law is derived from decades of EU Legislation. Despite best efforts to introduce nonsense gimmicks like a Pints of Wine and Turbo Charged Vacuum Cleaners and a duplication of UK Standard Marking UKCA the majority of this remains.

In the small print of this remarkable piece of Legislation is this : “enabling [the UK] to make the sovereign choice to mirror or diverge from updated EU rules, so that we can maintain high product safety while supporting businesses and economic growth”.

The extremely clever wording by including "Sovereign " to appease the Gammons is that not only will UK retain EU high Standards as they exist but will update them as EU raise Standards. All this can be done by the relevant Minister without recourse to Parliament at the stroke of a pen  using Secondary Legislation once the Primary Bill has been passed. Genius. 

I had thought an SPS Agreement was the limit of ambition but this goes far beyond.

The next step and I don't wish to underestimate the task but feel confident the Government will appoint competent negotiators unlike the idiots that negotiated TCA will be to get EU to agree EQUIVALENCE of Standards. This is Single Market by the Backdoor. If both EU and UK are Manufacturing and producing Food to the same Standards then in theory there is no requirement to inspect at the respective Borders. I'm sure Border facilities will be maintained for appearance purposes but it would be light touch and random 

www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=01b3f0e4-ab21-4e7e-81b0-33a4c126c1ff

I doff my Chapeau to whoever came up with this "cunning plan" and they can't even brag about it lest they frighten the horses 

But you appear to be saying that generally, often, mostly, always EU standards are something to aspire to?
Surely we'll be overtaking EU standards any day now so we don't need to do this
Successive UK governments have shown their capabilities, we don't need to do this...

Sorry couldn't resist

In all seriousness are there any UK standards we can point to and say, look at us we do this best?

Always felt our road signs were possibly the best standard?

[Rednwhitenblue]

No-one cares, Daily Express, no-one cares. It's a non-issue for most people these days, they've more important things to be arsed about like the cost of living, jobs, whether their NHS appointment will go ahead, etc.

If a heathier relationship with the EU helps with those concerns, most people will happily accept that.

No-one is talking about rejoining. Such clowns at that paper and its readership.

[lordb]

Jul 21, 2024 8:23:23 GMT Rednwhitenblue said:

No-one cares, Daily Express, no-one cares. It's a non-issue for most people these days, they've more important things to be arsed about like the cost of living, jobs, whether their NHS appointment will go ahead, etc.

If a heathier relationship with the EU helps with those concerns, most people will happily accept that.

No-one is talking about rejoining. Such clowns at that paper and its readership.

When we do rejoin by that time The Express will cease to exist

[bigjohnritchie]

The Left always presume they talk for everyone and know what people think.

[numpty40]

I think the conversation regarding Brexit has quietened because many Brexiteers have been battered into submission by the constant whingeing and bitching by remainers.
Important to remember though that over twice as many people voted to leave the EU than voted for our latest government.
I've accepted that we'll end up integrated into some kind of partial EU 'membership' in the coming years.
God help us.

[wannabee]

Jul 21, 2024 8:23:23 GMT Rednwhitenblue said:

No-one cares, Daily Express, no-one cares. It's a non-issue for most people these days, they've more important things to be arsed about like the cost of living, jobs, whether their NHS appointment will go ahead, etc.

If a heathier relationship with the EU helps with those concerns, most people will happily accept that.

No-one is talking about rejoining. Such clowns at that paper and its readership.

This is exactly what I wrote about above Single Market by the back with Equivalence of Standards including any new Standards introduced by EU without needing to consult Parliament just a direction by the Minister to the relevant Regulatory body to update.

Together with an SPS Agreement this will cover both  Goods and Agri food  and keep UK and EU in lockstep on Standards 

Obviously this has implications for UK Trade Deals like CPTPP not yet signed and any new Trade Deals 

[bigjohnritchie]

As a Brexiteer I'm all for the very closest relationship with our European friends.
I don't want Political and economic union, free movement, the Euro nor decision making centered on Brussels( to which the British public have never related and never will).

It is only since Brexit that people have felt more Politically motivated and involved ( to some degree) in decision making.
It is up to the electorate to elect a " good" government. And clearly he UK does play a significant role on world affairs ( I wish it didn't) unlike what the propaganda tries to tell us.
I'm all for giving Starmer a chance. Obviously he is a Remainer, if he paves the way to full membership/ rejoining then the working class will have been betrayed, as usual. They must come to heal.

[Rednwhitenblue]

Jul 21, 2024 11:30:42 GMT bigjohnritchie said:

The Left always presume they talk for everyone and know what people think.

That statement is a massive presumption in itself 😂

[bigjohnritchie]

Jul 21, 2024 13:36:56 GMT Rednwhitenblue said:

Jul 21, 2024 11:30:42 GMT bigjohnritchie said:

The Left always presume they talk for everyone and know what people think.

That statement is a massive presumption in itself 😂

Pretty accurate though, you should know

[Rednwhitenblue]

Jul 21, 2024 13:42:47 GMT bigjohnritchie said:

Jul 21, 2024 13:36:56 GMT Rednwhitenblue said:

That statement is a massive presumption in itself 😂

Pretty accurate though, you should know

Think someone might need to explain irony to you, John 😂

[Rednwhitenblue]

Jun 30, 2024 11:06:26 GMT mrcoke said:

Jun 30, 2024 9:36:01 GMT Seymour Beaver said:

Got a whole lot worse after we keft the EU as well

That is very true.
We have suffered because of the pandemic and the inflation due to the war and Tory mismanagement, 4 PMs is going some, chopping and changing economic policy.

Nevertheless, maybe because of, or, thanks to Brexit, the UK has done better over the last 5 year period than other European G7 countries. The compound average growth rate from 2018 to 2023 at 1.1% has been the same as Italy, whose GDP is still lower than it was many years ago, and the UK growth has been greater than Germany (0.4%) and France (0.9%).

www.worldeconomics.com/Countries-With-Highest-Growth/Germany.aspx

There are other European countries that have done better than the UK and others that have done worse. Most of those that have done better have been getting huge regional aid from the EU, thanks in part to British tax payers till 2020.

Brexit is being falsely blamed for UK economic woes. Why do you think many European citizens are getting sick of their governments and swinging towards the right? Many EU countries have the same problems of poverty, low growth, long hospital waiting lists, drug shortages. Most have higher unemployment than the UK, twice as high in France. Many have dreadfully high youth unemployment. 

Are your growth figures correct? You posted the figures below previously which show that both the EU as a whole and the Eurozone outperformed the UK since the referendum.

"But to answer your question, using trading economics data valuing GDPs in US $:
Since 2016 GDP to 2022 GDP the change in GDP are:
UK 14.5% ($bn2699 to $bn3071) , Germany 17.3%, France 12.5%, Italy 7%, Japan -15.4%, Canada 40%, US 36%, Euro zone 17.2%, EU 19.8%"

Not that it really matters if, as seems likely, we are moving slowly and steadily in the right direction to undo as much of the damage Brexit has caused as we can, without yet rejoining.

[stokeson]

UGov 4th July 2024

Then 51.86% leave
48.11% remain

July 4th 2024
Of the 51.86 17% think it was wrong
" " " 11% are unsure if it was wrong

If there was a vote today
56.14% remain
32.01% leave
11.85% unsure

It was a pup sold by snakeoil salesman and people can now see it.

[Rednwhitenblue]

Jul 21, 2024 13:53:11 GMT stokeson said:

UGov 4th July 2024

Then 51.86% leave
48.11% remain

July 4th 2024
Of the 51.86 17% think it was wrong
" " " 11% are unsure if it was wrong

If there was a vote today
56.14% remain
32.01% leave
11.85% unsure

It was a pup sold by snakeoil salesman and people can now see it.

Yep, got at least another decade of damage to endure yet though before we can even think about rejoining.

[foghornsgleghorn]

Jul 21, 2024 12:48:57 GMT bigjohnritchie said:

It is only since Brexit that people have felt more Politically motivated and involved ( to some degree) in decision making.

Are you sure?

All I've seen is a falling turnout at a General Election and the Farage faithful whingeing that he's not got control of the political agenda with a mere 15% vote share.