• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics (so long and thanks for all the fish)

SpurMeUp said:
. They get to veto and choose what they want.
Click to expand...
No they don't.

See employment law switched to H&S law to avoid the UK veto. Simple standardisation laws become environmental laws to do the same.

Then look at the new EU constitution, which was renamed a treaty so the UK couldn't refuse it with a referendum.
 
monkeybarry said:
I suspect if the UK govt out forward a sensible solution to the backstop, then a small tweaking would be possible.
But right we are just throwing our toys out of the pram and offering nothing but rhetoric.
Sadly, I have heard little more than that from leavers since 2016.
Click to expand...
There is no sensible solution as the problem will not be solved by technology. This was known early doors and the fact that the backstop is even a thing is an admission that nothing will be forthcoming in the transition period. Everyone knows this but there is still air given to this nonsense. The solution is border posts or a border in the Irish sea. That's it.
 
scaramanga said:
The UK have shown plenty of willing to negotiate, but the EU has to forget everything negotiated to this point. Everything May gave away is back on the table, and we start again.
Click to expand...
Yeah that is not going to happen. The UK government negotiated the UK backstop and now are trying the renege on their own proposed solution. Sure, May was bad at her job, but she had plenty of company. What is undeniable is that she was negotiating from a position of weakness and the outcome ultimately proved that was the case. It left the UK with only one card to play, which was threatening no deal, and this is where we are now. Ironically exactly where the project fear guy you quoted earlier said it would end. IMO it is no deal now unless Corbyns lot somehow pull the plug.
 
Time to revoke Article 50 and be done with it. The damage the tory party has done to this country since 2010 knows no bounds. There was no need for a referendum in the first place, only called by David Cameron to try and appease some of the old tories in the 1922.

The country has been screwed over. The country is torn, a massive rise in the far right, a rise an racism and more. All caused by this bull brick.

Sadly the opposition is also currently incompetent.

What a mess.
 
Rorschach said:
Yeah that is not going to happen. The UK government negotiated the UK backstop and now are trying the renege on their own proposed solution. Sure, May was bad at her job, but she had plenty of company. What is undeniable is that she was negotiating from a position of weakness and the outcome ultimately proved that was the case. It left the UK with only one card to play, which was threatening no deal, and this is where we are now. Ironically exactly where the project fear guy you quoted earlier said it would end. IMO it is no deal now unless Corbyns lot somehow pull the plug.
Click to expand...
That's not true, the UK had plenty of cards and May gave them all away for free.

There's 10s of £Bns to discuss, the future rights of EU citizens in the UK, UK anti-terrorist support, etc. All of these were given away by May.

But they should be up for discussion again now - nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
 
scaramanga said:
That's not true, the UK had plenty of cards and May gave them all away for free.

There's 10s of £Bns to discuss, the future rights of EU citizens in the UK, UK anti-terrorist support, etc. All of these were given away by May.

But they should be up for discussion again now - nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
Click to expand...

Just the things it would have been morally reprehensible for us to try and politicise then.
 
scaramanga said:
That's not true, the UK had plenty of cards and May gave them all away for free.

There's 10s of £Bns to discuss, the future rights of EU citizens in the UK, UK anti-terrorist support, etc. All of these were given away by May.

But they should be up for discussion again now - nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
Click to expand...
Well that's sort of what I meant. She conceded the little leverage she had early and was left with the current situation. In truth the billions and EU citizens rights etc. and were not great bargaining chips anyway. If you consider that there are millions of UK citizens in the EU and most of them old then this somewhat counterbalances the EU citizens in the UK. If the UK decide not to pay the divorce settlement then this will fudge them on future trade negotiations. A bad hand played badly is a reasonable characterisation of the way things went IMO.
 
Last edited:
Rorschach said:
Well that's sort of what I meant. She conceded the little leverage she had early and was left with the current situation. In truth the billions and EU citizens rights etc. and were not great bargaining chips anyway. If you consider that there are millions of UK citizens in the EU and most of them old then this somewhat counterbalances the EU citizens in the UK. If the UK decided not to pay the divorce settlement then this will fudge them on future trade negotiations. A bad hand played badly is a reasonable characterisation of the way things went IMO.
Click to expand...
We'll agree to disagree on the strength of our hand.

Either way, nothing was agreed and the negotiations were continuing. Johnson needs to tell the EU they need to think again on those issues.
 
Last edited:
scaramanga said:
No they don't.

See employment law switched to H&S law to avoid the UK veto. Simple standardisation laws become environmental laws to do the same.

Then look at the new EU constitution, which was renamed a treaty so the UK couldn't refuse it with a referendum.
Click to expand...

We were talking about an EU army. I have no idea about health and safty law. What laws are you refering to? What use or impact do they have on you or on keeping people safe?
 
Last edited:
Hootnow said:
@Danishfurniturelover

One thing I'll say however..

As much as we are diametrically opposed on brexit (and I imagine quite a few other political points!) I appreciate the fact that you've always taken these conversations in good faith and never done a hit and run when it comes to discussing them.
Click to expand...

I imagine it is only on the EU and perhaps so called travellers that we would be on different sides.

I have hated the EU for years. It was not a fear stoked up by immigration or the right wing media. I am one of the originals. Had a sticker from Jimmy Goldsmith and his car back in the 90s.

Pretty much every other issue I am very liberal. My wife who works in social care and has worked in prisons has even convinced me that criminals whose crimes are drug linked should not be in prison.
 
monkeybarry said:
Tell me why (with detail, not rhetoric) that couldn't have happened as an EU member state?
Click to expand...

Pretty much what gutterboy said about covers it.

The is no denying immigration played a big part in the referendum result. I know if you even mention immigration your a racist piece of brick, if you want a points based system like so much of the world your a racist. Well we don't have control of our borders.

Got to say immigration has not had the impact on me except too much traffic on the roads round my way. I am financially very secure so the amount does not bother me.

But when the EU says we can not refuse entry to migrants with criminal records I wonder what the hell there up to exactly. Spain should not have to accept our scum criminals and we should not have to take in other countries. We have enough of our own problems to deal with.
 
SpurMeUp said:
We were talking about an EU army. I have no idea about health and safty law. What laws are you refering to? What use or impact do they have on you or on keeping people safe?
Click to expand...
The Working Time Directive started as employment law, the UK made it clear they would use their veto and the EU redefined it as H&S law.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back