BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴
Comments
-
Is it not more that if you're as young as Draver, and have friends elsewhere in the world, you were quite possibly vaccinated after them. Despite living in a country that was apparently "world beating"TheBigBean said:
It's all a conspiracy, why won't people listen. "3. These facts have not only been concealed by Gov and media alike".pinkbikini said:
It’s not new, but the thread dissects the ongoing Tory claim that the vaccine rollout was one of the big calls Spaffer got right. It’s about the only flag the Tories have got to fly. It’s a highly disputed fact (you could almost call it a lie) that is continually peddled by Johnson supporters.TheBigBean said:
Keep flying the flag.ddraver said:
Is that the flag you meant?
The whole thing was discussed at length at the time. I would have thought only Ursula's mum would have been quite so keen to keep the fight going, but it appears that there are some others too.
In my eyes, the only mistake the UK government made on vaccines was not vaccinating even earlier i.e. they were too cautious. I do understand the counter argument though.
I'm also not sure you need to be a fortune teller to know that vaccines might be a good idea in a pandemic.
Not taking part in the EU purchasing process was a good decision. But to listen to some of the criticism, you'd think that the difference between the UK and EU overall pandemic performance was remarkable, when that really doesn't seem to be the case.
0 -
Let's limit it to actual political bodies/individuals with actual campaign budgets being spent on pushing to rejoin rather than random nobodies venting on the Internet. I'll give you Count Binface 😁 who else?Stevo_666 said:
I could name a couple who are ousting that agenda or something that effectively means rejoining, such as rejoining the SM. All I am trying to do here is inject a spot of realism so that people's energies can be better spent on things that might yield results.rjsterry said:
Not sure who you have in mind here. Genuinely not seen anyone actively campaigning to rejoin.Stevo_666 said:
Starmer reportedly to announce no return to Freedom of Movement and no rejoining the Single Market or customs union. Not looking great for those who think we can just waltz back in as it now requires the pro-rejoin parties (Lib Dems and the SNP?) to get control at the next election: squadron of pigs on standby.tailwindhome said:Labour positioning as 'Make Brexit Work'
And that's assuming the EU would have trouble makers like us back...
1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
Did I say otherwise? I don't really have any interest in this discussion. As I said, the status is known by everyone.rjsterry said:
Last time I checked, GB is not a state.TheBigBean said:
Complete in GB, not in NI. No idea why so much is debated about this.rjsterry said:
Sfo it's still incomplete.TheBigBean said:
They're trying to sort that out for you.tailwindhome said:
Can the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he decides to do so, reduce VAT on fuel to 0% in the UK?0 -
So now being in the single market means effectively being in the EU?Stevo_666 said:
I could name a couple who are ousting that agenda or something that effectively means rejoining, such as rejoining the SM. All I am trying to do here is inject a spot of realism so that people's energies can be better spent on things that might yield results.rjsterry said:
Not sure who you have in mind here. Genuinely not seen anyone actively campaigning to rejoin.Stevo_666 said:
Starmer reportedly to announce no return to Freedom of Movement and no rejoining the Single Market or customs union. Not looking great for those who think we can just waltz back in as it now requires the pro-rejoin parties (Lib Dems and the SNP?) to get control at the next election: squadron of pigs on standby.tailwindhome said:Labour positioning as 'Make Brexit Work'
And that's assuming the EU would have trouble makers like us back...
0 -
What if we said we wanted to extend the UK's current membership of the single market?0
-
Don't go all blancmange on me here. Joining the SM is not rejoining the EU.Stevo_666 said:
I could name a couple who are ousting that agenda or something that effectively means rejoining, such as rejoining the SM. All I am trying to do here is inject a spot of realism so that people's energies can be better spent on things that might yield results.rjsterry said:
Not sure who you have in mind here. Genuinely not seen anyone actively campaigning to rejoin.Stevo_666 said:
Starmer reportedly to announce no return to Freedom of Movement and no rejoining the Single Market or customs union. Not looking great for those who think we can just waltz back in as it now requires the pro-rejoin parties (Lib Dems and the SNP?) to get control at the next election: squadron of pigs on standby.tailwindhome said:Labour positioning as 'Make Brexit Work'
And that's assuming the EU would have trouble makers like us back...
Membership of the EU is very binary.0 -
-
Yet, somehow we don't seem to be able to agree that Brexit isn't done, without changing either the definition of the UK or the definition of BrexitTheBigBean said:
Did I say otherwise? I don't really have any interest in this discussion. As I said, the status is known by everyone.rjsterry said:
Last time I checked, GB is not a state.TheBigBean said:
Complete in GB, not in NI. No idea why so much is debated about this.rjsterry said:
Sfo it's still incomplete.TheBigBean said:
They're trying to sort that out for you.tailwindhome said:
Can the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he decides to do so, reduce VAT on fuel to 0% in the UK?
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
They aren't sorting it out for me.TheBigBean said:
They're trying to sort that out for you.tailwindhome said:
Can the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he decides to do so, reduce VAT on fuel to 0% in the UK?
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
rick_chasey said:
Also, on the whole Starmer promises *no-one will believe him anyway so why make the promise*
Because that's how politics work (sadly) ?0 -
I think you need to be credible first. And say things people think are credible.briantrumpet said:rick_chasey said:Also, on the whole Starmer promises *no-one will believe him anyway so why make the promise*
Because that's how politics work (sadly) ?
If you don't have that, what is the point.
This promise is not credible.
What is credible is to say "'m not going to focus on that because the political will is not there, nor is the public's, but I'll take wins in the national interest if they present themselves"0 -
"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”tailwindhome said:
Yet, somehow we don't seem to be able to agree that Brexit isn't done, without changing either the definition of the UK or the definition of BrexitTheBigBean said:
Did I say otherwise? I don't really have any interest in this discussion. As I said, the status is known by everyone.rjsterry said:
Last time I checked, GB is not a state.TheBigBean said:
Complete in GB, not in NI. No idea why so much is debated about this.rjsterry said:
Sfo it's still incomplete.TheBigBean said:
They're trying to sort that out for you.tailwindhome said:
Can the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he decides to do so, reduce VAT on fuel to 0% in the UK?0 -
Quitesurrey_commuter said:
"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”tailwindhome said:
Yet, somehow we don't seem to be able to agree that Brexit isn't done, without changing either the definition of the UK or the definition of BrexitTheBigBean said:
Did I say otherwise? I don't really have any interest in this discussion. As I said, the status is known by everyone.rjsterry said:
Last time I checked, GB is not a state.TheBigBean said:
Complete in GB, not in NI. No idea why so much is debated about this.rjsterry said:
Sfo it's still incomplete.TheBigBean said:
They're trying to sort that out for you.tailwindhome said:
Can the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he decides to do so, reduce VAT on fuel to 0% in the UK?“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
NI isn't a member?
Just has to follow some of the rulz0 -
rick_chasey said:
I think you need to be credible first. And say things people think are credible.briantrumpet said:rick_chasey said:Also, on the whole Starmer promises *no-one will believe him anyway so why make the promise*
Because that's how politics work (sadly) ?
If you don't have that, what is the point.
This promise is not credible.
What is credible is to say "'m not going to focus on that because the political will is not there, nor is the public's, but I'll take wins in the national interest if they present themselves"
I rarely think what politicians 'promise' is credible, so you have to go with a mixture of track record and general thrust behind the words. Given that I don't currently trust a single word the Tories spew, Starmer comes out as more credible But he can't win without the people who were hoodwinked by the Tories at the last election.
The Brexit prospectus was the most flagrant example of promising all things to all people, all totally unrealistic, yet people still voted that pile of manure.0 -
Brexit voters won't believe Starmer. Simple. Go ask any Brexiter and ask them if they believe Starmer's promise. I'd be surprised if you find anyone who does.
So why take the cost associated with the promise for no gain?
Even the remainer defence of the position boils down to "he doesn't really believe it, as long as it gets him in". Punters see through that cynicism.
BoJo used to be thought of as authentic, as he seemed incapable of being media trained...hence his electoral success, despite any evidence of his competence.0 -
I think the reality is that Starmer is right to try and steer clear of remainer/leaver arguments. They are poison. Simultaneously he needs to make it clear that the whole subject is purely a Conservative mess, the years of deadlock in Parliament, the revisiting of treaties where the ink hasn't had a chance to dry, these are all Tory party failings. Not just that, but they are all the deeply dull Westminster bubble type stuff that "real people" aren't really concerned about.rick_chasey said:
I think you need to be credible first. And say things people think are credible.briantrumpet said:rick_chasey said:Also, on the whole Starmer promises *no-one will believe him anyway so why make the promise*
Because that's how politics work (sadly) ?
If you don't have that, what is the point.
This promise is not credible.
What is credible is to say "'m not going to focus on that because the political will is not there, nor is the public's, but I'll take wins in the national interest if they present themselves"
0 -
rick_chasey said:
Brexit voters won't believe Starmer. Simple. Go ask any Brexiter and ask them if they believe Starmer's promise. I'd be surprised if you find anyone who does.
So why take the cost associated with the promise for no gain?
Even the remainer defence of the position boils down to "he doesn't really believe it, as long as it gets him in". Punters see through that cynicism.
BoJo used to be thought of as authentic, as he seemed incapable of being media trained...hence his electoral success, despite any evidence of his competence.
I'd still argue that even if they see through the ploy, enough people still are more likely to vote for him than if he sets out something more radical. I wish it weren't so. Think about all the devious ploys you try to get children to do things they wouldn't do if you just asked them straight... well, the electorate are like children, but less intelligent, en masse.0 -
OK.Jezyboy said:NI isn't a member?
Just has to follow some of the rulz
So Brexit is done - if we bin everything about taking back control of laws, money and borders, and everything about leaving the SM and/or CU
And accept that Tories/Brexiteers are now applying a definition of Brexit to NI which they wouldn't accept for the whole UK, to the extent of defenestrating a PM
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
Bodes well for the Labour Party, that agreeing to abide in perpetuity with EU rules is now compatible with Brexit.“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0
-
Just wondering whether the concept of 'Cake and eat it' is still a thing...0
-
A more interesting discussion would be why so many people in GB no longer feel like NI is the same country.0
-
You have to cross water to get there?TheBigBean said:A more interesting discussion would be why so many people in GB no longer feel like NI is the same country.
The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
tailwindhome said:
Bodes well for the Labour Party, that agreeing to abide in perpetuity with EU rules is now compatible with Brexit.
Schrodinger's Brexit?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
could you indicate which of these countries you consider to be EU members;tailwindhome said:
Quitesurrey_commuter said:
"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”tailwindhome said:
Yet, somehow we don't seem to be able to agree that Brexit isn't done, without changing either the definition of the UK or the definition of BrexitTheBigBean said:
Did I say otherwise? I don't really have any interest in this discussion. As I said, the status is known by everyone.rjsterry said:
Last time I checked, GB is not a state.TheBigBean said:
Complete in GB, not in NI. No idea why so much is debated about this.rjsterry said:
Sfo it's still incomplete.TheBigBean said:
They're trying to sort that out for you.tailwindhome said:
Can the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he decides to do so, reduce VAT on fuel to 0% in the UK?
Turkey
Norway
Ukraine0 -
*sigh*surrey_commuter said:
could you indicate which of these countries you consider to be EU members;tailwindhome said:
Quitesurrey_commuter said:
"Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”tailwindhome said:
Yet, somehow we don't seem to be able to agree that Brexit isn't done, without changing either the definition of the UK or the definition of BrexitTheBigBean said:
Did I say otherwise? I don't really have any interest in this discussion. As I said, the status is known by everyone.rjsterry said:
Last time I checked, GB is not a state.TheBigBean said:
Complete in GB, not in NI. No idea why so much is debated about this.rjsterry said:
Sfo it's still incomplete.TheBigBean said:
They're trying to sort that out for you.tailwindhome said:
Can the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he decides to do so, reduce VAT on fuel to 0% in the UK?
Turkey
Norway
Ukraine
Can you indicate which of those countries have a relationship with the EU which the Conservative Party, who claim Brexit is done, would have accepted for the UK as representing Brexit being *done*
If either met the definition of Brexit, they wouldn't be fannying about with the Protocol Bill, they'd simply join the Single Market and customs union
“New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!0 -
So let's hear your proposal for unravelling the bits that you think are bad/dislike and then let's see what that actually entails and whether it is feasible.briantrumpet said:rick_chasey said:Am getting pretty fed up for the Remainer apologists for Starmer's position on the CU and SM.
Basically giving him a pass because he's not BoJo.
F*ck no. It's working against the national interest. One party needs to stand up for it ffs. This narrative that you need to go along with populist nonsense to get elected just isn't right.
Making promises like that is just a route to a kicking - if you promise something that is demonstrably bad for the nation, eventually if you do make it to PM you'll either cost the nation or go back on your promise.
Why?
Just be honest. "Brexit is not something any of us would like to revisit. We recognise the vote, and recognise the short comings of the current situation. We do not want to paralyse government and parliaments across the UK by making wholesale change to our relationship with Europe, but we recognise there are ways to improve it that respect the result"
It's not that hard. There's a f*cktonne of stuff that needs fixing that they can focus on.
F*cking useless labour leadership. Basic. The guy is a classic lawyer - lacks any f*cking strategy and big picture thinking, and is stuck in the weeds.
Hmm, part of me agrees, but then we might be in the territory of doing the right thing but not getting anywhere near power to be able to put it into action (see the rabid lefties ad nauseam who hanker for a pure socialist stance that the electorate will never choose).
Stevo seems to think that because unravelling the worst aspects of Brexit is going to take a long time, it's not worth doing at all, but if we are going to unravel it, the first step is to get rid of this bunch of incompetents, and then demonstrate that closer working with the EU brings tangible economic benefits. Then, and only then, might the debate change far enough to be able to make bolder suggestions."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Most people, true. There are a still a few clinging onto the hope.kingstongraham said:
LITERALLY NOBODY THINKS WE'RE ABOUT TO REJOIN THE EU ANY TIME SOON. NOBODY HAS FOR YEARS NOW.Stevo_666 said:
Agree with your last paragraph for sure.rick_chasey said:Am getting pretty fed up for the Remainer apologists for Starmer's position on the CU and SM.
Basically giving him a pass because he's not BoJo.
F*ck no. It's working against the national interest. One party needs to stand up for it ffs. This narrative that you need to go along with populist nonsense to get elected just isn't right.
Making promises like that is just a route to a kicking - if you promise something that is demonstrably bad for the nation, eventually if you do make it to PM you'll either cost the nation or go back on your promise.
Why?
Just be honest. "Brexit is not something any of us would like to revisit. We recognise the vote, and recognise the short comings of the current situation. We do not want to paralyse government and parliaments across the UK by making wholesale change to our relationship with Europe, but we recognise there are ways to improve it that respect the result"
It's not that hard. There's a f*cktonne of stuff that needs fixing that they can focus on.
F*cking useless labour leadership. Basic. The guy is a classic lawyer - lacks any f*cking strategy and big picture thinking, and is stuck in the weeds.
I think your post is a recognition that Labour were the last hope to get back into the EU in some shape or form (as let's face it they are the only party other than the Tories who could feasibly form a government) - and they have just turned round and said thay are not interested in rejoining.
Disappointing for some of you, but reality appears to be catching up with those that were missed first time round."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Could start with an FTA that includes services?Stevo_666 said:
So let's hear your proposal for unravelling the bits that you think are bad/dislike and then let's see what that actually entails and whether it is feasible.briantrumpet said:rick_chasey said:Am getting pretty fed up for the Remainer apologists for Starmer's position on the CU and SM.
Basically giving him a pass because he's not BoJo.
F*ck no. It's working against the national interest. One party needs to stand up for it ffs. This narrative that you need to go along with populist nonsense to get elected just isn't right.
Making promises like that is just a route to a kicking - if you promise something that is demonstrably bad for the nation, eventually if you do make it to PM you'll either cost the nation or go back on your promise.
Why?
Just be honest. "Brexit is not something any of us would like to revisit. We recognise the vote, and recognise the short comings of the current situation. We do not want to paralyse government and parliaments across the UK by making wholesale change to our relationship with Europe, but we recognise there are ways to improve it that respect the result"
It's not that hard. There's a f*cktonne of stuff that needs fixing that they can focus on.
F*cking useless labour leadership. Basic. The guy is a classic lawyer - lacks any f*cking strategy and big picture thinking, and is stuck in the weeds.
Hmm, part of me agrees, but then we might be in the territory of doing the right thing but not getting anywhere near power to be able to put it into action (see the rabid lefties ad nauseam who hanker for a pure socialist stance that the electorate will never choose).
Stevo seems to think that because unravelling the worst aspects of Brexit is going to take a long time, it's not worth doing at all, but if we are going to unravel it, the first step is to get rid of this bunch of incompetents, and then demonstrate that closer working with the EU brings tangible economic benefits. Then, and only then, might the debate change far enough to be able to make bolder suggestions.0 -
Stevo_666 said:
So let's hear your proposal for unravelling the bits that you think are bad/dislike and then let's see what that actually entails and whether it is feasible.briantrumpet said:rick_chasey said:Am getting pretty fed up for the Remainer apologists for Starmer's position on the CU and SM.
Basically giving him a pass because he's not BoJo.
F*ck no. It's working against the national interest. One party needs to stand up for it ffs. This narrative that you need to go along with populist nonsense to get elected just isn't right.
Making promises like that is just a route to a kicking - if you promise something that is demonstrably bad for the nation, eventually if you do make it to PM you'll either cost the nation or go back on your promise.
Why?
Just be honest. "Brexit is not something any of us would like to revisit. We recognise the vote, and recognise the short comings of the current situation. We do not want to paralyse government and parliaments across the UK by making wholesale change to our relationship with Europe, but we recognise there are ways to improve it that respect the result"
It's not that hard. There's a f*cktonne of stuff that needs fixing that they can focus on.
F*cking useless labour leadership. Basic. The guy is a classic lawyer - lacks any f*cking strategy and big picture thinking, and is stuck in the weeds.
Hmm, part of me agrees, but then we might be in the territory of doing the right thing but not getting anywhere near power to be able to put it into action (see the rabid lefties ad nauseam who hanker for a pure socialist stance that the electorate will never choose).
Stevo seems to think that because unravelling the worst aspects of Brexit is going to take a long time, it's not worth doing at all, but if we are going to unravel it, the first step is to get rid of this bunch of incompetents, and then demonstrate that closer working with the EU brings tangible economic benefits. Then, and only then, might the debate change far enough to be able to make bolder suggestions.
See Starmer's initial menu.
Then, maybe, further down the line, see what the appetite is for a Norway model, given that's what Farage suggested.0
