Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff" You know that thing about advantages to being member of a “club” … something happened a while back .. can’t remember when exactly, people campaigned that they didn’t want to be part of that club anymore And they told lies about being able to “have their cake and eat it” And enough people were sold the snake oil they were told…… Yeah…. That!  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff" They want to take the fish from our waters and inflict unfettered migration, we need to be more like Hungary and ignore the eu directives. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff They want to take the fish from our waters and inflict unfettered migration, we need to be more like Hungary and ignore the eu directives." Absolutely and why not? The UK does not follow any EU directives (if you recall, the UK left the EU) so I am unsure where you are coming from. If you don't want to trade with the EU then don't! Your choice - the fact that the UK trades more with the EU than with any other country is neither here or there. Sovereign nation and no migrants - that's what it's all about! Trade elsewhere and keep your fish if that is what you want - nobody is stopping you! I suggest that you make sure that the Labour party knows your feelings as they appear to be the ones wanting to reset not the EU. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff They want to take the fish from our waters and inflict unfettered migration, we need to be more like Hungary and ignore the eu directives. Absolutely and why not? The UK does not follow any EU directives (if you recall, the UK left the EU) so I am unsure where you are coming from. If you don't want to trade with the EU then don't! Your choice - the fact that the UK trades more with the EU than with any other country is neither here or there. Sovereign nation and no migrants - that's what it's all about! Trade elsewhere and keep your fish if that is what you want - nobody is stopping you! I suggest that you make sure that the Labour party knows your feelings as they appear to be the ones wanting to reset not the EU. " Fair enough, but that should not require us to compromise on environmental issues like fish restocking. Denmark and Netherlands want to suck up 1,000s tonnes of sand eels to feed to pigs. The result is that out coastal marine life collapses. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff They want to take the fish from our waters and inflict unfettered migration, we need to be more like Hungary and ignore the eu directives. Absolutely and why not? The UK does not follow any EU directives (if you recall, the UK left the EU) so I am unsure where you are coming from. If you don't want to trade with the EU then don't! Your choice - the fact that the UK trades more with the EU than with any other country is neither here or there. Sovereign nation and no migrants - that's what it's all about! Trade elsewhere and keep your fish if that is what you want - nobody is stopping you! I suggest that you make sure that the Labour party knows your feelings as they appear to be the ones wanting to reset not the EU. Fair enough, but that should not require us to compromise on environmental issues like fish restocking. Denmark and Netherlands want to suck up 1,000s tonnes of sand eels to feed to pigs. The result is that out coastal marine life collapses. " Again - your choice! Denmark and Netherland fishermen are the least of our worries. Factory ships which decimate areas and destroy feeding grounds are a bigger concern. The scallop boats that dredge the sea bed destroying their own livelihoods as they go along. The quotas which mean that fish of the wrong species are thrown overboard dead if caught in the nets. Fishing needs to be looked at across the board. Personally, I doubt if anything is going to be agreed as the current status quo is working quite well and it is what the UK voted for - why rock the boat? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU seems to making any 'reset' as difficult as possible with last minute demands on fishing, student fees etc. We do need a sound basis for trading with the EU - but not at any price." What the fuck did people expect, the UK had the best deal of any EU country and told them to fuck off so expect a very very difficult negotiation with lots of compromise to take back a fraction of what you had. Suck it up buttercup comes to mind | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff They want to take the fish from our waters and inflict unfettered migration, we need to be more like Hungary and ignore the eu directives. Absolutely and why not? The UK does not follow any EU directives (if you recall, the UK left the EU) so I am unsure where you are coming from. If you don't want to trade with the EU then don't! Your choice - the fact that the UK trades more with the EU than with any other country is neither here or there. Sovereign nation and no migrants - that's what it's all about! Trade elsewhere and keep your fish if that is what you want - nobody is stopping you! I suggest that you make sure that the Labour party knows your feelings as they appear to be the ones wanting to reset not the EU. " The UK still follows laws which they signed up as part of the EU. The whole sovereignty, control of laws and borders is wearing very thin. Time to let that myth go. We all know the reality. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff They want to take the fish from our waters and inflict unfettered migration, we need to be more like Hungary and ignore the eu directives. Absolutely and why not? The UK does not follow any EU directives (if you recall, the UK left the EU) so I am unsure where you are coming from. If you don't want to trade with the EU then don't! Your choice - the fact that the UK trades more with the EU than with any other country is neither here or there. Sovereign nation and no migrants - that's what it's all about! Trade elsewhere and keep your fish if that is what you want - nobody is stopping you! I suggest that you make sure that the Labour party knows your feelings as they appear to be the ones wanting to reset not the EU. The UK still follows laws which they signed up as part of the EU. The whole sovereignty, control of laws and borders is wearing very thin. Time to let that myth go. We all know the reality." Yes we do but the EU haters and their illustrious leader Herr Farage bang on about it Ad infinitum. That and migration even though, since leaving the EU, migration has actually increased! Of course, this is due to it being not the right type of Brexshit! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff They want to take the fish from our waters and inflict unfettered migration, we need to be more like Hungary and ignore the eu directives. Absolutely and why not? The UK does not follow any EU directives (if you recall, the UK left the EU) so I am unsure where you are coming from. If you don't want to trade with the EU then don't! Your choice - the fact that the UK trades more with the EU than with any other country is neither here or there. Sovereign nation and no migrants - that's what it's all about! Trade elsewhere and keep your fish if that is what you want - nobody is stopping you! I suggest that you make sure that the Labour party knows your feelings as they appear to be the ones wanting to reset not the EU. Fair enough, but that should not require us to compromise on environmental issues like fish restocking. Denmark and Netherlands want to suck up 1,000s tonnes of sand eels to feed to pigs. The result is that out coastal marine life collapses. Again - your choice! Denmark and Netherland fishermen are the least of our worries. Factory ships which decimate areas and destroy feeding grounds are a bigger concern. The scallop boats that dredge the sea bed destroying their own livelihoods as they go along. The quotas which mean that fish of the wrong species are thrown overboard dead if caught in the nets. Fishing needs to be looked at across the board. Personally, I doubt if anything is going to be agreed as the current status quo is working quite well and it is what the UK voted for - why rock the boat?" Yes, EU factory fishing vessels will just fish-out our coastal waters and destroy marine habitats if we allow it to happen. My point is, the EU want to inflict environmental damage as a price for a trade deal. In that regard, Trump is right, the EU are 'nasty' in their dealings with non-bloc members. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff They want to take the fish from our waters and inflict unfettered migration, we need to be more like Hungary and ignore the eu directives. Absolutely and why not? The UK does not follow any EU directives (if you recall, the UK left the EU) so I am unsure where you are coming from. If you don't want to trade with the EU then don't! Your choice - the fact that the UK trades more with the EU than with any other country is neither here or there. Sovereign nation and no migrants - that's what it's all about! Trade elsewhere and keep your fish if that is what you want - nobody is stopping you! I suggest that you make sure that the Labour party knows your feelings as they appear to be the ones wanting to reset not the EU. Fair enough, but that should not require us to compromise on environmental issues like fish restocking. Denmark and Netherlands want to suck up 1,000s tonnes of sand eels to feed to pigs. The result is that out coastal marine life collapses. Again - your choice! Denmark and Netherland fishermen are the least of our worries. Factory ships which decimate areas and destroy feeding grounds are a bigger concern. The scallop boats that dredge the sea bed destroying their own livelihoods as they go along. The quotas which mean that fish of the wrong species are thrown overboard dead if caught in the nets. Fishing needs to be looked at across the board. Personally, I doubt if anything is going to be agreed as the current status quo is working quite well and it is what the UK voted for - why rock the boat? Yes, EU factory fishing vessels will just fish-out our coastal waters and destroy marine habitats if we allow it to happen. My point is, the EU want to inflict environmental damage as a price for a trade deal. In that regard, Trump is right, the EU are 'nasty' in their dealings with non-bloc members." If I remember correctly the Hull based and owned factory ship suffered under the Brexit deal and was stuck in port. It is not only EU countries that have factory ships. Having been brought up in a Scottish fishing village and been out on a seine netter in the north sea, I have seen the decline of fishing with my own eyes. It is not any single country that is to blame as the fishermen themselves got greedy, built bigger ships, bought licences to allow them to catch more and sold licences to the highest bidder (not always in the same country). Blame the EU all you like but look closer to home at an industry that brings in a very small revenue to the UK and overfished thus destroying its own future. I remember the herring communities and all the work that brought in - now fishermen are struggling to catch cod! I also remember the British MEP who represented the UK when we were in the EU for fishing - yes, the one and only Herr Farage. He turned up to one or two meetings that discussed fishing but, as he is doing now, didn't attend the other forty or so as he had more important things to do. Had he bothered to do what he was elected and paid to do, things may well have been different. It is a strange coincidence that for things that are not going well, the EU are to blame. As I have said on here before, the UK left the EU. That's over. Done and dusted. Finito. If the UK want more from the deal that Frosty the noman happily agreed to and Boris Johnson hailed as such a good deal then they are going to have to negotiate. The UK left the club - they don't get back in for free so there is no point in moaning about it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If the UK wants more from the EU than they already have they have to reach an agreement as does any country. The UK is not a special case (I appreciate that this may surprise many on here) so will and should not get any special terms.totally agree but neither should the EU " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff They want to take the fish from our waters and inflict unfettered migration, we need to be more like Hungary and ignore the eu directives. Absolutely and why not? The UK does not follow any EU directives (if you recall, the UK left the EU) so I am unsure where you are coming from. If you don't want to trade with the EU then don't! Your choice - the fact that the UK trades more with the EU than with any other country is neither here or there. Sovereign nation and no migrants - that's what it's all about! Trade elsewhere and keep your fish if that is what you want - nobody is stopping you! I suggest that you make sure that the Labour party knows your feelings as they appear to be the ones wanting to reset not the EU. The UK still follows laws which they signed up as part of the EU. The whole sovereignty, control of laws and borders is wearing very thin. Time to let that myth go. We all know the reality. Yes we do but the EU haters and their illustrious leader Herr Farage bang on about it Ad infinitum. That and migration even though, since leaving the EU, migration has actually increased! Of course, this is due to it being not the right type of Brexshit!that's mostly down to are coward politicians they wouldn't no hard if you hit them with your cock " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Labour government continue to live in the past, reliving yesterdays battles. Totally out of touch, incompetent, none of them any idea about the real world. They bizarrely think the failing EU is the future. Like it’s 1975. They seem to have a load of weird fixations that literally nobody outside of the Labour Party cares about: Chagos Islands, school fees, rejoining the EU. And their response to being trounced at the polls? More niche North London policies. It doesn’t matter what Labour agrees with the EU. In 2029 they will get booted out big time and it will all be reversed. The EU is stupid agreeing anything with a government elected by 20% of the electorate." Since when has the EU ever bothered about any percentage of the electorate? Hold a referendum, oops sorry wrong result. Best keep voting until you get it right. Besides, 20% of the electorate is a landslide in parts of the EU. In Germany SPD are part of the government with only 16% of the actual vote, of the total electorate it will probably be around 10/12%. Both France and Spain have minority governments propped up by party's with single figure support. Starmer's 20% will not enter "Flinten Ushi's" head for a second. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If Starmer keeps pushing hard on the closer ties / faint possibility of rejoining the EU, would that be enough to split the Reform and Tory votes, leading labour into another term? " In some parts of the country that could be true. But I think a lot of the "red wall" seats in the north would double down on their Brexit instincts. Ditto many seats in eastern England. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If Starmer keeps pushing hard on the closer ties / faint possibility of rejoining the EU, would that be enough to split the Reform and Tory votes, leading labour into another term? In some parts of the country that could be true. But I think a lot of the "red wall" seats in the north would double down on their Brexit instincts. Ditto many seats in eastern England." I can see that happening too, but I think enough of the red wall might now be rethinking their original choice. I can also see Starmer going all in with nothing to lose and everything to gain from this approach, Johnson in reverse. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"“given that UK has the strongest military power in Europe” I think a bland statement like that needs slightly more detail.. For a start France has more nuclear capability than the UK, and several countries have a larger standing army. Here we go again: “They need us more than we need them” I DON’T THINK SO!" The Polish are aiming for half a million soldiers. While UK Military is shrinking by 300 a Month | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think the UK lost more, from us leaving, than they did. There are probably zero surprises on all sides, about what requests and requirements there are. Our businesses who have been hit hard - and indirectly us, through reduced tax payments - are the main potential ones who can gain a lot back. It's got to be win/win and there have to be compromises - anything else, would be fantasy and reflective of a lack of critical thinking " Universities, Erasmus and less eu students as well. Plymouth university has a 10% drop in income this year and laying of 8% of staff (200 people). Student numbers fallen from 31,000 in 2012 to 19,000 last year. The number of EU students coming to the UK for higher education significantly decreased in 2024. Specifically, the number of EU students starting full-time undergraduate courses fell by 68% between 2020 and 2024, reaching the lowest level since 1994. This decline is largely attributed to changes in immigration policies after Brexit, including higher fees and the loss of eligibility for fee loans for new EU students | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer’s net favourability rating is down to -46, and is crashing with Labour voters. Instead of working out why and changing course, he is spending his time on an “EU Reset” that nobody needs. Expect things to go from bad to worse for Labour and Starmer." He probably bet on immigration policy changes to get back some votes. He lost many die hard labour supporters who are very much pro-immigration by doing this. And he will get the anti-immigration votes only when his policies have impact on the numbers, which will take a couple of years at least if it even works. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" He probably bet on immigration policy changes to get back some votes. He lost many die hard labour supporters who are very much pro-immigration by doing this. And he will get the anti-immigration votes only when his policies have impact on the numbers, which will take a couple of years at least if it even works." Like him or loathe him, he's done some impressive things, politically speaking. By being quiet, patient, boring and centrist, he's managed to pull his party out of the trash heap, win an election and maintain control of his party for much longer than many thought. He's purged most serious dissent down to a tolerable level. He's pissing many people off a little, some a lot, but he's generally able to get on with things by being bland, boring and almost competent - not something we've had for a while. He's not currently in election mode - he's laying the groundwork and getting unpopular things done (or should be...). The question also is: to where is he losing the votes? If he loses 15% of his votes to Greens and Lib Dems, but picks up 20% of Conservative/Reform swing votes, that strengthens him. He has astutely realised that the centre (and some right) is where he can get the most traction. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" He probably bet on immigration policy changes to get back some votes. He lost many die hard labour supporters who are very much pro-immigration by doing this. And he will get the anti-immigration votes only when his policies have impact on the numbers, which will take a couple of years at least if it even works. Like him or loathe him, he's done some impressive things, politically speaking. By being quiet, patient, boring and centrist, he's managed to pull his party out of the trash heap, win an election and maintain control of his party for much longer than many thought. He's purged most serious dissent down to a tolerable level. He's pissing many people off a little, some a lot, but he's generally able to get on with things by being bland, boring and almost competent - not something we've had for a while. He's not currently in election mode - he's laying the groundwork and getting unpopular things done (or should be...). The question also is: to where is he losing the votes? If he loses 15% of his votes to Greens and Lib Dems, but picks up 20% of Conservative/Reform swing votes, that strengthens him. He has astutely realised that the centre (and some right) is where he can get the most traction." Totally agree. I don't like some of his moves, like the Employer NI increase or nationalisation of rail. But he has been much mature. It's been a breath of fresh air compared to the Tories who were doing a lot of talking but nothing in action. We have to wait and see any clear impact of his policies. But he has a lot of time. As far as the votes are concerned, he definitely lost a bit to Reform and some to LibDems. I don't think he is losing any votes to the Tories. The immigration policy changes which he proposed are exactly what a moderate Tory voter expected the Tories to do. So they don't have a reason to vote for Tories if Starmer can deliver what they expect. The reform voters from working class could be pulled back if his immigration policies actually work and he could keep the economy going. As long as he can keep the far left and progressives away from power in the party, he has a good chance next elections. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Plus in four years time I can envisage many Green and LibDem supporters holding their noses and voting tactically for Labour if the alternative was a Reform / MBGA government." Jury’s out for me where this may go Tory and Labour lost 67% and 65% local election seats respectively to Reform and LibDem. And nobody going to forget the attacks on pensioners, farmers and the disabled. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Labour government continue to live in the past, reliving yesterdays battles. Totally out of touch, incompetent, none of them any idea about the real world. They bizarrely think the failing EU is the future. Like it’s 1975. They seem to have a load of weird fixations that literally nobody outside of the Labour Party cares about: Chagos Islands, school fees, rejoining the EU. And their response to being trounced at the polls? More niche North London policies. It doesn’t matter what Labour agrees with the EU. In 2029 they will get booted out big time and it will all be reversed. The EU is stupid agreeing anything with a government elected by 20% of the electorate. Since when has the EU ever bothered about any percentage of the electorate? Hold a referendum, oops sorry wrong result. Best keep voting until you get it right. Besides, 20% of the electorate is a landslide in parts of the EU. In Germany SPD are part of the government with only 16% of the actual vote, of the total electorate it will probably be around 10/12%. Both France and Spain have minority governments propped up by party's with single figure support. Starmer's 20% will not enter "Flinten Ushi's" head for a second. " What was the percentage of the total electorate votes for Brexit? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff You know that thing about advantages to being member of a “club” … something happened a while back .. can’t remember when exactly, people campaigned that they didn’t want to be part of that club anymore And they told lies about being able to “have their cake and eat it” And enough people were sold the snake oil they were told…… Yeah…. That! "Or maybe enough people could see the benefits that it COULD bring, weren't the thick as shit individuals they're often portrayed as, maybe some were prepared to accept a financial hit and they were the majority | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer’s net favourability rating is down to -46, and is crashing with Labour voters. Instead of working out why and changing course, he is spending his time on an “EU Reset” that nobody needs. Expect things to go from bad to worse for Labour and Starmer." The likely easier change to make for trade, is with our closest neighbours. Especially if you make trade less cumbersome and expensive, due to excessive bureaucratic paperwork etc. Near frictionless trade would be better, reducing high overheads that businesses must pay - and the public indirectly. We should be able to increase trade volumes, reduce business costs and potentially increase tax revenue. The country should come first, irrespective of leadership | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer’s net favourability rating is down to -46, and is crashing with Labour voters. Instead of working out why and changing course, he is spending his time on an “EU Reset” that nobody needs. Expect things to go from bad to worse for Labour and Starmer. The likely easier change to make for trade, is with our closest neighbours. Especially if you make trade less cumbersome and expensive, due to excessive bureaucratic paperwork etc. Near frictionless trade would be better, reducing high overheads that businesses must pay - and the public indirectly. We should be able to increase trade volumes, reduce business costs and potentially increase tax revenue. The country should come first, irrespective of leadership " If everyone one had been told the truth about Brexit and not lied to by Boris it would never have happened. The amount of people I have spoken to and said if they would have known what Brent entailed would have voted to stay in and we wouldn't need all this Brexit reset. We have lost so ease of trade with all the red tape and free movement. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The Labour government continue to live in the past, reliving yesterdays battles. Totally out of touch, incompetent, none of them any idea about the real world. They bizarrely think the failing EU is the future. Like it’s 1975. They seem to have a load of weird fixations that literally nobody outside of the Labour Party cares about: Chagos Islands, school fees, rejoining the EU. And their response to being trounced at the polls? More niche North London policies. It doesn’t matter what Labour agrees with the EU. In 2029 they will get booted out big time and it will all be reversed. The EU is stupid agreeing anything with a government elected by 20% of the electorate. Since when has the EU ever bothered about any percentage of the electorate? Hold a referendum, oops sorry wrong result. Best keep voting until you get it right. Besides, 20% of the electorate is a landslide in parts of the EU. In Germany SPD are part of the government with only 16% of the actual vote, of the total electorate it will probably be around 10/12%. Both France and Spain have minority governments propped up by party's with single figure support. Starmer's 20% will not enter "Flinten Ushi's" head for a second. What was the percentage of the total electorate votes for Brexit?" No idea, but it was quite a high turnout so I would guess somewhere in the low/mid 40's. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"What was the percentage of the total electorate votes for Brexit?" "No idea, but it was quite a high turnout so I would guess somewhere in the low/mid 40's." It was 37.4%. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer’s net favourability rating is down to -46, and is crashing with Labour voters. Instead of working out why and changing course, he is spending his time on an “EU Reset” that nobody needs. Expect things to go from bad to worse for Labour and Starmer. The likely easier change to make for trade, is with our closest neighbours. Especially if you make trade less cumbersome and expensive, due to excessive bureaucratic paperwork etc. Near frictionless trade would be better, reducing high overheads that businesses must pay - and the public indirectly. We should be able to increase trade volumes, reduce business costs and potentially increase tax revenue. The country should come first, irrespective of leadership If everyone one had been told the truth about Brexit and not lied to by Boris it would never have happened. The amount of people I have spoken to and said if they would have known what Brent entailed would have voted to stay in and we wouldn't need all this Brexit reset. We have lost so ease of trade with all the red tape and free movement. " you havent talked to anyone who voted brexit, you can tell from your previous posts on the subject that you have nothing but disdain for people who voted for it, and now you expect people to belive you have spoken to these people lol | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU sends tens of thousands of migrants our way already, why would we want to make it legal for them? If they don’t want us in their club, no problem. Just don’t expect our help when the Russians come knocking on your door. They will get to Poland and Germany long before they think about crossing the channel " The EU does not send any migrants to any country. The UK has taken in more migrants since leaving the EU. The UK left the club and if the UK wants to rejoin then that is the choice of the UK -the EU certainly is not asking the UK to rejoin! If the Russians attack mainland Europe, the least of your worries would be if the UK was part of the EU or not. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"you havent talked to anyone who voted brexit, you can tell from your previous posts on the subject that you have nothing but disdain for people who voted for it, and now you expect people to belive you have spoken to these people lol" We have many friends whom we could name who voted for Brexit, regret it, and say "we were lied to". | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU sends tens of thousands of migrants our way already, why would we want to make it legal for them? If they don’t want us in their club, no problem. Just don’t expect our help when the Russians come knocking on your door. They will get to Poland and Germany long before they think about crossing the channel The EU does not send any migrants to any country. The UK has taken in more migrants since leaving the EU. The UK left the club and if the UK wants to rejoin then that is the choice of the UK -the EU certainly is not asking the UK to rejoin! If the Russians attack mainland Europe, the least of your worries would be if the UK was part of the EU or not." France are part of the EU. They usher boats across the channel most days. The word wanted to use is not allowed The Russians have already attacked mainland Europe and the EU countries have done very little. Germany didn’t even want to block buying Russian natural gas. They do whatever suits them, they don’t give a fuck about Ukraine and they certainly don’t want to spend money defending them. The only EU countries taking this remotely seriously is Poland and the Baltic states. All the rest are doing is talk, while the Russians are getting on the job training killing innocent people | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer’s net favourability rating is down to -46, and is crashing with Labour voters. Instead of working out why and changing course, he is spending his time on an “EU Reset” that nobody needs. Expect things to go from bad to worse for Labour and Starmer. The likely easier change to make for trade, is with our closest neighbours. Especially if you make trade less cumbersome and expensive, due to excessive bureaucratic paperwork etc. Near frictionless trade would be better, reducing high overheads that businesses must pay - and the public indirectly. We should be able to increase trade volumes, reduce business costs and potentially increase tax revenue. The country should come first, irrespective of leadership If everyone one had been told the truth about Brexit and not lied to by Boris it would never have happened. The amount of people I have spoken to and said if they would have known what Brent entailed would have voted to stay in and we wouldn't need all this Brexit reset. We have lost so ease of trade with all the red tape and free movement. you havent talked to anyone who voted brexit, you can tell from your previous posts on the subject that you have nothing but disdain for people who voted for it, and now you expect people to belive you have spoken to these people lol" You don't need to have spoken to anyone about Brexit to know we were lied to. From the figures on the NHS bus to 70 million Turks supposedly relocating to the UK unless we left the EU. It was a pack of lies. Mrs x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Germany didn’t even want to block buying Russian natural gas. They do whatever suits them, they don’t give a fuck about Ukraine and they certainly don’t want to spend money defending them." Germany stopped direct imports of gas from Russia in 2022 but you are right they still buy it via third parties. On German support for Ukraine, I think it's been about 48 billion euros and they've taken in about 1.2 million refugees. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Expect the free movement system to be abused as non-eu people with visas come over. Dozy UK immigration will just wave them in." That is how I see it. Germany has a big problem with young male migrants. Most of whom have German residency. While UK eyes are on Reform Germany has got the AfD which made huge inroads in the German GE earlier this year. What better way to blunt AfD than shovelling off a good few thousand of them across the channel? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Starmer’s net favourability rating is down to -46, and is crashing with Labour voters. Instead of working out why and changing course, he is spending his time on an “EU Reset” that nobody needs. Expect things to go from bad to worse for Labour and Starmer. The likely easier change to make for trade, is with our closest neighbours. Especially if you make trade less cumbersome and expensive, due to excessive bureaucratic paperwork etc. Near frictionless trade would be better, reducing high overheads that businesses must pay - and the public indirectly. We should be able to increase trade volumes, reduce business costs and potentially increase tax revenue. The country should come first, irrespective of leadership If everyone one had been told the truth about Brexit and not lied to by Boris it would never have happened. The amount of people I have spoken to and said if they would have known what Brent entailed would have voted to stay in and we wouldn't need all this Brexit reset. We have lost so ease of trade with all the red tape and free movement. you havent talked to anyone who voted brexit, you can tell from your previous posts on the subject that you have nothing but disdain for people who voted for it, and now you expect people to belive you have spoken to these people lol You don't need to have spoken to anyone about Brexit to know we were lied to. From the figures on the NHS bus to 70 million Turks supposedly relocating to the UK unless we left the EU. It was a pack of lies. Mrs x" i didnt say it wasnt lies, you seem to think i voted in the referendum i did not, i was just pointing out from the previous posts from the person saying the people he has talked to who voted brexit have regreted it, he is either lying or after all the vitriol he posted about brexiters in the past he isnt being true to himself, a few years ago he thought these people were uneducated why would he now belive people who in the past he thought were thick racists? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Expect the free movement system to be abused as non-eu people with visas come over. Dozy UK immigration will just wave them in." Someone has to do this… What the fuck are you talking about!!!!! The deal is strictly a uk-eu deal… nothing outside of that changes! The only freedom of movement I see in any of the documents I have seen so far is potentially Erasmus coming back for university students… and I have zero issues with that | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Expect the free movement system to be abused as non-eu people with visas come over. Dozy UK immigration will just wave them in. Someone has to do this… What the fuck are you talking about!!!!! " Someone had to do it, indeed  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The EU sends tens of thousands of migrants our way already, why would we want to make it legal for them? If they don’t want us in their club, no problem. Just don’t expect our help when the Russians come knocking on your door. They will get to Poland and Germany long before they think about crossing the channel The EU does not send any migrants to any country. The UK has taken in more migrants since leaving the EU. The UK left the club and if the UK wants to rejoin then that is the choice of the UK -the EU certainly is not asking the UK to rejoin! If the Russians attack mainland Europe, the least of your worries would be if the UK was part of the EU or not." and the UK ain't asking to come back just labour giving it away for me they can do one we voted leave at any cost business can either close down or suck it up | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"like I said and I've been proved right time and time again, 1st January 2021 was the furthest we will ever be from the EU ... since then this country is in ever closer alignment with europe. in ten years time the alignment will be much closer again, and a new once in a generation vote will be getting called for." It'll be interesting to see if you're still right after the next general election. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"free movement for those aged under 30 ..... next up free movement for touring artists "Not quite freedom of movement… it is going to be an additional visa…. But yes for example touring artists, au pairs, those taking working gap years overseas ect Also work to expanding it to Erasmus | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"III. Putting people at the centre of the European Union – United Kingdom relationship 12. The United Kingdom and the European Commission share the view that it is in the mutual interest to deepen our people-to-people ties, particularly for the younger generation. 13. Therefore, the European Commission and the United Kingdom should work towards a balanced youth experience scheme on terms to be mutually agreed. The scheme should facilitate the participation of young people from the European Union and the United Kingdom in various activities, such as work, studies, au-pairing, volunteering, or simply travelling, for a limited period of time. It should provide a dedicated visa path and ensure that the overall number of participants is acceptable to both sides. 14. Furthermore, the United Kingdom and the European Commission should work towards the association of the United Kingdom to the European Union Erasmus+ programme. The specific terms of this association, including mutually agreed financial terms, should be determined as part of that process in order to ensure a fair balance as regards the contributions of and benefits to the United Kingdom. The association should be in accordance with the European Union Multiannual Financial Framework and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement. 15. The European Commission and the United Kingdom recognise the value of travel and cultural and artistic exchanges, including the activities of touring artists. They will continue their efforts to support travel and cultural exchange. 16. The United Kingdom and the European Commission will continue their exchanges on smooth border management for the benefit of their citizens, including the potential use of eGates where appropriate. They note that European Union citizens can use eGates in the United Kingdom and that there will be no legal barriers to eGate use for British Nationals traveling to and from European Union Member States after the introduction of the European Union Entry/Exit System." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Need a “digital nomad” visa. Everyone forgets that and it would make things a lot easier." I think various EU countries have such schemes but they are beyond many DN's means. For instance in Portugal there's a D8 visa that I've been looking at but it's only available to those earning 3,480 euros or more every month. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Need a “digital nomad” visa. Everyone forgets that and it would make things a lot easier. I think various EU countries have such schemes but they are beyond many DN's means. For instance in Portugal there's a D8 visa that I've been looking at but it's only available to those earning 3,480 euros or more every month." If that's gross, then that's fairly low for the average digital nomad. Even with that they're not bringing much disposable income to the country. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If that's gross, then that's fairly low for the average digital nomad. Even with that they're not bringing much disposable income to the country." It's roughly twice the average income of people in Portugal. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If that's gross, then that's fairly low for the average digital nomad. Even with that they're not bringing much disposable income to the country. It's roughly twice the average income of people in Portugal." Yes, and four times the national minimum wage. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Need a “digital nomad” visa. Everyone forgets that and it would make things a lot easier. I think various EU countries have such schemes but they are beyond many DN's means. For instance in Portugal there's a D8 visa that I've been looking at but it's only available to those earning 3,480 euros or more every month." That’s pretty low, something to look at if France doesn’t work out. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"you havent talked to anyone who voted brexit, you can tell from your previous posts on the subject that you have nothing but disdain for people who voted for it, and now you expect people to belive you have spoken to these people lol We have many friends whom we could name who voted for Brexit, regret it, and say "we were lied to"."
The majority of people who voted for it, now think it was the wrong choice for the UK.
In any event, as you say, we're not rejoining; we're amending some of the bureaucratic measures that were implemented and still harm us | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"It must really require some spectacular level of stupid to see your voters disappearing and think “Hmm what we really need to get us out of this mess is closer alignment with the EU”. Difficult to know whether Starmer just doesn’t understand the country he is living in (outside of north London) or whether he such an ideologue that he doesn’t care." How is maintaining trade barriers with The UK's largest export & import market, in a cost of living crisis, going to make the UK's current situation better? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Asylum cases have already been settled and agree on the basis that McDonalds chicken nuggets don’t taste the same outside the UK." This sounded so unlikely to be true that I looked up the case UI-2024-004546. It was about whether the impact of a deportation order of a man on a child C would pass a "stay and go" analysis test. The case was concerned with the lack of confidence and self-esteem, literacy delay, emotional dysregulation and social communication difficulties of child C including episodes of C pulling his own hair. The appeal concluded "We remit the matter to the First-tier Tribunal to be heard by a different judge to decide the sole issue of whether the consequences of deportation would be unduly harsh on C". This appears to be on the grounds that the educational psychologist involved was a trainee and that the judge didn't take this into account. The mention of chicken nuggets was plucked out by the media to sensationalize the original error of judgement. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I broadly agree, however it was Charles de Gaulle not Jacques Chirac who vetoed the UK in 1961 and 1967. " Oops ! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff You know that thing about advantages to being member of a “club” … something happened a while back .. can’t remember when exactly, people campaigned that they didn’t want to be part of that club anymore And they told lies about being able to “have their cake and eat it” And enough people were sold the snake oil they were told…… Yeah…. That! "Never got any cake. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The UK were the ones to play hard ball. They more or less told the EU to fuck off! The EU were always willing to listen and look for a solution but the UK wanted a hard Brexit. The UK believed Boris and Farage in that they got an oven ready deal yet now, the EU are to blame for the deal being not so oven ready. It was band d about at the time that the UK wanted it's cake and to eat it and look how that still rings true today. The EU has rules. The UK had as much as much say as any other country in the making of those rules when they were a member. When the UK joined the EU the UK economy was poor and it therefore benefited from being a member. Initially the UK was refused entry by Chirac but eventually they were accepted. The UK will not rejoin the EU in the foreseeable future. Neither the UK or the EU want that so what is happening now is that areas of mutual benefit are being reviewed and if there is a way to benefit both parties, agreements made. Some in the UK want (and expect) all th benefits of being in the EU without giving anything away but this will not happen. The EU is the biggest trading partner for the UK yet the UK hails trade deals with India, Australia and Japan as being landslide victories which wouldn't have happened had they not had their sovereignty (which they always had anyway). The people of Britain were duped by politicians whose interest was not in the country but in their own bank accounts. They are still being duped. Nationalism is a great flag to fly and patriotism is a great button to push. Politicians and the media know that too well and too many people fall for it again and again hoping for a better life that will never materialise (why - because th conditions were never right or because it was someone else's fault). Unfortunately, this will never change and so we continue on this merry-go-round of hatred and accusations which suit our political masters " Yup turkeys voted for Christmas as the rich got richer and the poor got poorer, hey at least the NHS is getting 350 million a week. Hang on,,, | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My ex husband wants to move here but won't be able to despite having 3 British citizen kids, so why people have the idea that it's easy to migrate here is just wrong. " Ah, but he is trying to do it legally. I thought it was pretty easy. Isn’t the main criteria a (fairly low) income requirement. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My ex husband wants to move here but won't be able to despite having 3 British citizen kids, so why people have the idea that it's easy to migrate here is just wrong. Ah, but he is trying to do it legally. I thought it was pretty easy. Isn’t the main criteria a (fairly low) income requirement." £38,700 pa | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The UK were the ones to play hard ball." Spoken like a true remainer. It’s subjective to some extent of course. We had a referendum vote to leave, so yes that’s a hard Brexit. But the reality wasn’t that simple. The NI border issue being an obvious one but there were many others. A straight forward free trade agreement would have benefited both side but the EU more so but they didn’t want that. They wanted to punish the petulant child that had the nerve to say no. " The UK had as much as much say as any other country in the making of those rules when they were a member. " Yes it did. But zero say in changing a rule after. Cameron tried and said he’d be all but forced to have a referendum if he didn’t comeback with something and that if the vote was for leave we would leave. As you put it, they told him to fuck off. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"" The UK had as much as much say as any other country in the making of those rules when they were a member. " Yes it did. But zero say in changing a rule after." The UK had the same power as any other EU member to change existing rules. Now if we want to trade with the EU we now have to follow their rules. "Cameron tried and said he’d be all but forced to have a referendum if he didn’t comeback with something and that if the vote was for leave we would leave. As you put it, they told him to fuck off." Cameron might have tried to force the hand of other EU members but by then they'd become tired of the UK's constant moaning. They knew that any concessions they'd make wouldn't satisfy the eurosceptics. To him being PM was a fun game he'd somehow managed to get to play but he didn't really care much about the future of the UK as he knew he and his mates would all be OK no matter what happened. Do you remember him leaving the podium in Downing Street humming a little tune to himself happily relieved that he wouldn't have to deal with the fallout of his decisions? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"" The UK had as much as much say as any other country in the making of those rules when they were a member. " Yes it did. But zero say in changing a rule after. The UK had the same power as any other EU member to change existing rules. Now if we want to trade with the EU we now have to follow their rules. Cameron tried and said he’d be all but forced to have a referendum if he didn’t comeback with something and that if the vote was for leave we would leave. As you put it, they told him to fuck off. Cameron might have tried to force the hand of other EU members but by then they'd become tired of the UK's constant moaning. They knew that any concessions they'd make wouldn't satisfy the eurosceptics. To him being PM was a fun game he'd somehow managed to get to play but he didn't really care much about the future of the UK as he knew he and his mates would all be OK no matter what happened. Do you remember him leaving the podium in Downing Street humming a little tune to himself happily relieved that he wouldn't have to deal with the fallout of his decisions? " That’s very revisionist, considering Cameron campaigned hard to remain.... Cameron didn’t push for a referendum due to not caring, he was losing ground to UKIP and under serious pressure from within his own party. The referendum pledge was a political move to close down the UKIP threat and keep the Tory base united, with the prospect of another hung parliament being the outcome of the GE. He gambled, by assuming the country would vote Remain and that it would settle the issue once and for all. Instead, it backfired and contrary to your thinking he was shocked by the result. He new immediately that he’d made a historic mistake and resigned because he knew he couldn’t lead Brexit with any credibility. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"" The UK had as much as much say as any other country in the making of those rules when they were a member. " Yes it did. But zero say in changing a rule after. The UK had the same power as any other EU member to change existing rules. Now if we want to trade with the EU we now have to follow their rules. Cameron tried and said he’d be all but forced to have a referendum if he didn’t comeback with something and that if the vote was for leave we would leave. As you put it, they told him to fuck off. Cameron might have tried to force the hand of other EU members but by then they'd become tired of the UK's constant moaning. They knew that any concessions they'd make wouldn't satisfy the eurosceptics. To him being PM was a fun game he'd somehow managed to get to play but he didn't really care much about the future of the UK as he knew he and his mates would all be OK no matter what happened. Do you remember him leaving the podium in Downing Street humming a little tune to himself happily relieved that he wouldn't have to deal with the fallout of his decisions? That’s very revisionist, considering Cameron campaigned hard to remain.... Cameron didn’t push for a referendum due to not caring, he was losing ground to UKIP and under serious pressure from within his own party. The referendum pledge was a political move to close down the UKIP threat and keep the Tory base united, with the prospect of another hung parliament being the outcome of the GE. He gambled, by assuming the country would vote Remain and that it would settle the issue once and for all. Instead, it backfired and contrary to your thinking he was shocked by the result. He new immediately that he’d made a historic mistake and resigned because he knew he couldn’t lead Brexit with any credibility. " **************** Spot on. Thank you.  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"" The UK had as much as much say as any other country in the making of those rules when they were a member. " Yes it did. But zero say in changing a rule after. The UK had the same power as any other EU member to change existing rules. Now if we want to trade with the EU we now have to follow their rules. Cameron tried and said he’d be all but forced to have a referendum if he didn’t comeback with something and that if the vote was for leave we would leave. As you put it, they told him to fuck off. Cameron might have tried to force the hand of other EU members but by then they'd become tired of the UK's constant moaning. They knew that any concessions they'd make wouldn't satisfy the eurosceptics. To him being PM was a fun game he'd somehow managed to get to play but he didn't really care much about the future of the UK as he knew he and his mates would all be OK no matter what happened. Do you remember him leaving the podium in Downing Street humming a little tune to himself happily relieved that he wouldn't have to deal with the fallout of his decisions? " Yes, the same power as any other nation to change an existing rule, none! And no we don’t have to do what they say and follow their rules, quite the opposite in fact. But we can’t force them to follow our rules either. So….. So what happens is what happens with every other trade deal between nations or blocks of nations. We negotiate and come to an agreement. We don’t bow down like naughty little children. You seem to forget, they send more than three times the value of stuff our way as we do there’s. Why should bow down and do what they say? It’s that type of attitude that triggered the referendum in the first place | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The agreements from the talks yesterday have in my opinion lined us up for EFTA membership. We have allowed EU regulations to influence us without being able to influence policy and I think free movement is on table, but the government are worried it would damage their chances at the next GE. I believe Starmer could float this and depending on the mood of the UK could become a dead cert for the next GE. I'm not sure he has the appetite for such a challenge though. " I think you are forgetting how many safe Labour seats went to the conservatives just to get Brexit done. Yeah I’m sure there are a fair few people who have changed their opinion and perhaps regret the way they voted. But that’s not the same as wanting to rejoin. I hold the opposite view. I think it just as easily be the final nail in his political coffin. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The agreements from the talks yesterday have in my opinion lined us up for EFTA membership. We have allowed EU regulations to influence us without being able to influence policy and I think free movement is on table, but the government are worried it would damage their chances at the next GE. I believe Starmer could float this and depending on the mood of the UK could become a dead cert for the next GE. I'm not sure he has the appetite for such a challenge though. I think you are forgetting how many safe Labour seats went to the conservatives just to get Brexit done. Yeah I’m sure there are a fair few people who have changed their opinion and perhaps regret the way they voted. But that’s not the same as wanting to rejoin. I hold the opposite view. I think it just as easily be the final nail in his political coffin. " There is no rejoining, that is getting thrown about by those who are thinking Starmer is plotting to do that. It would make absolute sense to go EFTA, it gives a balance that I would think most could recognise the benefits of after seeing brexit unfold. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"you havent talked to anyone who voted brexit, you can tell from your previous posts on the subject that you have nothing but disdain for people who voted for it, and now you expect people to belive you have spoken to these people lol We have many friends whom we could name who voted for Brexit, regret it, and say "we were lied to".
The majority of people who voted for it, now think it was the wrong choice for the UK.
In any event, as you say, we're not rejoining; we're amending some of the bureaucratic measures that were implemented and still harm us "The majority? What’s your source for this? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"No, I knew what you meant, I was just stating that some people will view any moves towards closer ties with the EU as the first steps towards rejoining. Free trade wouldn’t be an outstanding achievement and certainly won’t be enough to save his arse. I think if he hasn’t turned their opinion poll ratings around in 3 years time there will be moves to replace him. " I think it would placate the remainers. With the ability of the 4 EFTA members to negotiate their own trade deals it ticks a few boxes for those who want the best of both worlds without full EU membership. He has problems ahead with the economy, his clear way out of that will be to replace Reeves, which I would think will boost his ratings against the odds. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"My ex husband wants to move here but won't be able to despite having 3 British citizen kids, so why people have the idea that it's easy to migrate here is just wrong. Ah, but he is trying to do it legally. I thought it was pretty easy. Isn’t the main criteria a (fairly low) income requirement. £38,700 pa" That’s what I said, a fairly low income requirement. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That’s very revisionist, considering Cameron campaigned hard to remain...." He just assumed, like many others at the time, that a referendum would go the other way as the case for Brexit was so weak. "Cameron didn’t push for a referendum due to not caring, he was losing ground to UKIP and under serious pressure from within his own party." I didn't say he did. Once he'd seen himself cornered by the eurosceptics he gambled and lost. I think we agree on this. "Instead, it backfired and contrary to your thinking he was shocked by the result. He new immediately that he’d made a historic mistake and resigned because he knew he couldn’t lead Brexit with any credibility." Again I didn't say he wasn't shocked by the result. My point about his apparent lack of caring is just an impression I have based on him taking a massive gamble and at the end of the day when he lost he didn't seem too bothered about the consequences so walked away from the mess with a light-hearted don't give a damn tune in his mind. I actually think Cameron is underrated as a politician because he was a very clever and charismatic person compared with some other PMs. But I think he viewed politics as an interesting hobby rather than something that had profound impact on peoples' lives. It's just my opinion and I respect that you and others may have a totally different perspective. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"That’s very revisionist, considering Cameron campaigned hard to remain.... He just assumed, like many others at the time, that a referendum would go the other way as the case for Brexit was so weak. Cameron didn’t push for a referendum due to not caring, he was losing ground to UKIP and under serious pressure from within his own party. I didn't say he did. Once he'd seen himself cornered by the eurosceptics he gambled and lost. I think we agree on this. Instead, it backfired and contrary to your thinking he was shocked by the result. He new immediately that he’d made a historic mistake and resigned because he knew he couldn’t lead Brexit with any credibility. Again I didn't say he wasn't shocked by the result. My point about his apparent lack of caring is just an impression I have based on him taking a massive gamble and at the end of the day when he lost he didn't seem too bothered about the consequences so walked away from the mess with a light-hearted don't give a damn tune in his mind. I actually think Cameron is underrated as a politician because he was a very clever and charismatic person compared with some other PMs. But I think he viewed politics as an interesting hobby rather than something that had profound impact on peoples' lives. It's just my opinion and I respect that you and others may have a totally different perspective." I met Cameron a handful of times and I can assure you he was a very serious politician. However he had a very unstable party being coerced by Farage and Cummings, not to mention Johnson eyeing up his opportunities. We are approaching a similar set of circumstances in terms of influence, with that comes a possibility of a hung parliament. If Starmer wants to survive he must learn from the mistakes of Cameron and be strong in his direction. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Hmmmm, you can only be part of our defence pact if you you give up rights to migration, fishing etc...hardly the words of friendship...call their bluff" Best news since 2016, about bloody time | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I met Cameron a handful of times and I can assure you he was a very serious politician. However he had a very unstable party being coerced by Farage and Cummings, not to mention Johnson eyeing up his opportunities. We are approaching a similar set of circumstances in terms of influence, with that comes a possibility of a hung parliament. If Starmer wants to survive he must learn from the mistakes of Cameron and be strong in his direction." That's interesting. For what it's worth I would rate Cameron higher than Starmer even though I'm very much on the left. I think Cameron was completely wrong on austerity and lost a foolish gamble on Brexit but he was reasonably honest and I think he'll be judged well by history. Starmer doesn't present as a man of prinicple or deep belief. I struggle to trust him. On the other hand I do think he's trying his best to navigate the UK though a difficult situation. But I don't think he has a "direction" as you put it. He seems to be making things up as he goes along, but perhaps that's a good approach in such volatile times. I really don't know. In an idea world we would have some form of PR rather than FPTP and Parliament would be more representative of the people, warts and all. But this isn't going to happen any time soon so there will be difficult judgements to be made by voters in 2029. A future hung Parliament might be the least worst outcome for an electorate so divided. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
" Starmer doesn't present as a man of prinicple or deep belief. I struggle to trust him. On the other hand I do think he's trying his best to navigate the UK though a difficult situation. But I don't think he has a "direction" as you put it. He seems to be making things up as he goes along, but perhaps that's a good approach in such volatile times. I really don't know. In an ideal world we would have some form of PR rather than FPTP and Parliament would be more representative of the people, warts and all. But this isn't going to happen any time soon so there will be difficult judgements to be made by voters in 2029. A future hung Parliament might be the least worst outcome for an electorate so divided. " I agree Starmer definitely lacks direction. He couldn’t even decide if woman can have a penis or not until someone else told him the answer. Yes times change quickly sometimes but you need to have goals and plans to achieve them. Changing plans is one thing but not your goals. His flagship goal at the moment seems to be to be the workers rights bill which contains some good ideas and some very scary ones. I think if we had PR we’d have a permanently hung parliament. Some people might say that will force them to cooperate. But if you put Angela Rayner and Nigel Fararge in the same room and wait for them to agree, it’s unlikely they’d agree on what time the tea break should be. So would having a fairly balanced number of left and right wing MPs in parliament be any different? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think if we had PR we’d have a permanently hung parliament. Some people might say that will force them to cooperate. But if you put Angela Rayner and Nigel Fararge in the same room and wait for them to agree, it’s unlikely they’d agree on what time the tea break should be. So would having a fairly balanced number of left and right wing MPs in parliament be any different?" The reason why PR is more democratic than FPTP and is favoured by the vast majority of countries is that only policies that have broad support tend to get implemented. If a coalition can't be formed that's strong enough to represent the concensus then unpopular policies often stall at the first step. This is a good thing generally. There isn't a prefect form of government but proportional representative democracy with separation of powers between the administration, legislature and judiciary with a bicameral legislature (where one house changes at a much slower pace than the other) all backed up by rules-based international treaties and augmented by sensible amounts of devolution is the best option in my opinion. PR is widely used in various UK elections but not in general elections and this is a deficit in UK democracy. Other aspects of the UK system are very messy but in practice have managed to work resonably well. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I think if we had PR we’d have a permanently hung parliament. Some people might say that will force them to cooperate. But if you put Angela Rayner and Nigel Fararge in the same room and wait for them to agree, it’s unlikely they’d agree on what time the tea break should be. So would having a fairly balanced number of left and right wing MPs in parliament be any different?" "The reason why PR is more democratic than FPTP and is favoured by the vast majority of countries is that only policies that have broad support tend to get implemented. If a coalition can't be formed that's strong enough to represent the concensus then unpopular policies often stall at the first step. This is a good thing generally." I lived for several years in a European country with PR, and I can report that every single political discussion I had eventually ended up with people saying "the trouble with this country is that you can't get anything done, the politicians can never agree". Almost everyone I asked about this said that they'd prefer to have our system as it actually gets things done. I feel it's a case of 'grass is always greener', on both sides. On the upside, I never encountered the sort of people that refused to talk to a supporter of the opposition, or anyone that just rubbished any policy they didn't agree with. They all seemed to understand that people can have different opinions without having to hate each other. But it was one of the more sensible countries, so maybe they were just generally nicer. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
