Positivity - The Future
Discussion
SpeckledJim said:
Time to reassure Germany that we want to be bezzie, BEZZIE buds. They also want to be bezzie buds with us.
If the UK and Germany work together on this, Brussels won't stand a chance.
Money (in the form of continued trade) will talk
It's always been a great leveller in all debates.If the UK and Germany work together on this, Brussels won't stand a chance.
Money (in the form of continued trade) will talk
From what I can gather , the Ports and Harbours directive is potentially harmfull to UK facilities so would seem a priority to bin it , or if not implemented , to not do so.
Would seem something to be sorted sooner rather than ;later.
Fact is, there must be entire rafts of EU legislatipon we can scrutinise, keep whats good sense, and bin the rest.
Would seem something to be sorted sooner rather than ;later.
Fact is, there must be entire rafts of EU legislatipon we can scrutinise, keep whats good sense, and bin the rest.
Great posts , this is what we need now a positive outlook. Lets not forget the DC said he would vote out if he did not get a better deal for the uk, he went back on that but proves he does believe we will be just fine with out the EU. Also have you seen the chaos in Europe now there are plenty of countries that want to follow us or change a lot about how the EU works so it can't be such a wrong decision.
In fact we should be proud we have had the balls to say enough from those dictators that run the EU and think they know better than all of us, well done UK we have made the right decision!
In fact we should be proud we have had the balls to say enough from those dictators that run the EU and think they know better than all of us, well done UK we have made the right decision!
RobinOakapple said:
He may have upset them, but that won't matter because they will vote for the PM that has the best chance of each of them retaining their seat and the Tories staying in power at the next election. It's all about the votes baby, and he will get them.
Do you reckon he's the best option for that?He is the face of exit. By the time of the next election we will be in the throws of the problems exit will give us. Many voters will be sticking pins in his effigy. On top of that he will put up plenty of blacks in the process. There will be scandal and whilst he's left his mayoral duties, there are some problems there that have not gone away and are just waiting to be exploited.
The decision as to who will be the next PM is a vital one. The role is one which, if given to a clown, could divide the country. We need stability, good sense and a unifying presence. If labour choose a new leader then they will have 40 months to build a PR face. If they pick one uncontaminated with either referendum camp then they will point to the state of the economy in the same way that Thatcher pointed to the unemployed.
That said, Johnson's been suggesting some form of Norwegian clone as the method of exit. That's the most sensible option and probably the ones his real supporters favour. not sure how that will go down with the voters though.
Hm, lets see. Across the UK, millions decide to start learning Mandarin, Hindi, Spanish, Thai etc. as they realise that they can now sell to the rest of the world, not just the EU. Indian banks start to outsource to UK call centres, as they can find large pools of people fluent in multiple languages, as well as English
At the same time, people get on their proverbial bikes, and start picking peas in East Anglia, cleaning toilets in London, wiping old peoples' arses in care homes.
Pass rates in GCSE maths jump, as kids realise that STEM subjects are the ones worth doing, now that the Premier League is not seen as the best path to wealth. Promising footballers get beaten up by promising app coders and the chess club in school playgrounds, with athletic kids begging their parents to buy them glasses so they don't get picked on by the nerds.
At the same time, people get on their proverbial bikes, and start picking peas in East Anglia, cleaning toilets in London, wiping old peoples' arses in care homes.
Pass rates in GCSE maths jump, as kids realise that STEM subjects are the ones worth doing, now that the Premier League is not seen as the best path to wealth. Promising footballers get beaten up by promising app coders and the chess club in school playgrounds, with athletic kids begging their parents to buy them glasses so they don't get picked on by the nerds.
don4l said:
The first to go would be the European Water Framework directive. It has caused flooding and great devastation to wildlife.
Next up would be the WEEE directive. It looks great on paper, but in practice it achieves nothing and is a burden on business.
All the climate change nonsense should be chucked out the window ASAP.
The landfill/waste laws are suitable for the low countries, but they are monumentally stupid for us.
Next up would be the WEEE directive. It looks great on paper, but in practice it achieves nothing and is a burden on business.
All the climate change nonsense should be chucked out the window ASAP.
The landfill/waste laws are suitable for the low countries, but they are monumentally stupid for us.
A breathtaking density of utter b
ks, even for you. You've outdone yourself.SpeckledJim said:
Time to reassure Germany that we want to be bezzie, BEZZIE buds. They also want to be bezzie buds with us.
If the UK and Germany work together on this, Brussels won't stand a chance.
Money (in the form of continued trade) will talk.
If the UK and Germany work together on this, Brussels won't stand a chance.
Money (in the form of continued trade) will talk.
EG: UK vehicle sales 2015
Audi 170,000
BMW 167,000
Mercedes 154,000
VW 217,000
Throw that away...No chance
minimoog said:
don4l said:
The first to go would be the European Water Framework directive. It has caused flooding and great devastation to wildlife.
Next up would be the WEEE directive. It looks great on paper, but in practice it achieves nothing and is a burden on business.
All the climate change nonsense should be chucked out the window ASAP.
The landfill/waste laws are suitable for the low countries, but they are monumentally stupid for us.
Next up would be the WEEE directive. It looks great on paper, but in practice it achieves nothing and is a burden on business.
All the climate change nonsense should be chucked out the window ASAP.
The landfill/waste laws are suitable for the low countries, but they are monumentally stupid for us.
A breathtaking density of utter b
ks, even for you. You've outdone yourself.
How about answering each point?
If you can!
minimoog said:
don4l said:
The first to go would be the European Water Framework directive. It has caused flooding and great devastation to wildlife.
Next up would be the WEEE directive. It looks great on paper, but in practice it achieves nothing and is a burden on business.
All the climate change nonsense should be chucked out the window ASAP.
The landfill/waste laws are suitable for the low countries, but they are monumentally stupid for us.
Next up would be the WEEE directive. It looks great on paper, but in practice it achieves nothing and is a burden on business.
All the climate change nonsense should be chucked out the window ASAP.
The landfill/waste laws are suitable for the low countries, but they are monumentally stupid for us.
A breathtaking density of utter b
ks, even for you. You've outdone yourself.Please cease this well worded assault on my convictions before my defences wither and fall.
Not sure I should have to unpick Don's remarks when all he's said is 'All this stuff is st!' without any detailed explanation, but ok:
Water framework directive: specifically intended to prevent groundwater pollution by limiting the introduction of harmful substances into our groundwater, thereby protecting our drinking water supplies (huge areas of the UK including most of the SE rely on groundwater abstraction for potable water). Also groundwater provides baseflow to our rivers and lakes, therefore preventing its pollution protects the wildlife, habitats, and amenity values of those waters. And it works.
WEEE directive. Not my subject. If it doesn't work for some reason I'll listen to reasons why.
Climate change stuff: I'm taking the 5th on this I'm afraid. Deal with it.
Landfill Directive: I'd be interested to hear why this is ok for the Low Countries and not for us. The directive prescribes standards for the design and operation of landfill sites so as to prevent pollution of controlled waters (especially groundwater) and to prevent blowing people up in their homes due to uncontrolled landfill gas migration. Oh and for climate change purposes too in theory. It also ensures landfill gas is collected used as fuel to generate electricity where viable. All that is very, very relevant to the Uk, which is heavily reliant on landfill (we have lots of holes to fill, unlike the Low Countries, who landfill almost nothing). And again, it works very well.
t!' without any detailed explanation, but ok:Water framework directive: specifically intended to prevent groundwater pollution by limiting the introduction of harmful substances into our groundwater, thereby protecting our drinking water supplies (huge areas of the UK including most of the SE rely on groundwater abstraction for potable water). Also groundwater provides baseflow to our rivers and lakes, therefore preventing its pollution protects the wildlife, habitats, and amenity values of those waters. And it works.
WEEE directive. Not my subject. If it doesn't work for some reason I'll listen to reasons why.
Climate change stuff: I'm taking the 5th on this I'm afraid. Deal with it.
Landfill Directive: I'd be interested to hear why this is ok for the Low Countries and not for us. The directive prescribes standards for the design and operation of landfill sites so as to prevent pollution of controlled waters (especially groundwater) and to prevent blowing people up in their homes due to uncontrolled landfill gas migration. Oh and for climate change purposes too in theory. It also ensures landfill gas is collected used as fuel to generate electricity where viable. All that is very, very relevant to the Uk, which is heavily reliant on landfill (we have lots of holes to fill, unlike the Low Countries, who landfill almost nothing). And again, it works very well.
TeamD said:
I should have known that I was wasting my time, so many of you are completely unable to debate without resorting to insults. 
Sorry, petty response to a troll.We need to carefully look at each and every piece of European legislation and bin it IMHO. Anything in there which is worthy of using we should debate and draft into our own laws. I dislike the idea of a trade agreement with the EU, they are petty and spiteful enough to punish us, I prefer the idea of dealing directly with individual industries so if for example exorbitant trade tariffs are levied against German cars then the German government can try and explain this decision to the unions.
We can now deal with any country we please, I hope fences can be mended with the commonwealth countries we so rudely ditched in 1972, I would like to see an apology and a touch of humility from our great leaders but will not be holding my breath.
We have thrived despite the restraints and financial toll of being in the EU.
Doubt we'll founder outside of it.
ETA Troll comment happily withdrawn now he's engaging in debate
Edited by stitched on Monday 27th June 16:03
minimoog said:
Not sure I should have to unpick Don's remarks when all he's said is 'All this stuff is st!' without any detailed explanation, but ok:
Water framework directive: specifically intended to prevent groundwater pollution by limiting the introduction of harmful substances into our groundwater, thereby protecting our drinking water supplies (huge areas of the UK including most of the SE rely on groundwater abstraction for potable water). Also groundwater provides baseflow to our rivers and lakes, therefore preventing its pollution protects the wildlife, habitats, and amenity values of those waters. And it works.
WEEE directive. Not my subject. If it doesn't work for some reason I'll listen to reasons why.
Climate change stuff: I'm taking the 5th on this I'm afraid. Deal with it.
Landfill Directive: I'd be interested to hear why this is ok for the Low Countries and not for us. The directive prescribes standards for the design and operation of landfill sites so as to prevent pollution of controlled waters (especially groundwater) and to prevent blowing people up in their homes due to uncontrolled landfill gas migration. Oh and for climate change purposes too in theory. It also ensures landfill gas is collected used as fuel to generate electricity where viable. All that is very, very relevant to the Uk, which is heavily reliant on landfill (we have lots of holes to fill, unlike the Low Countries, who landfill almost nothing). And again, it works very well.
Well that's bettert!' without any detailed explanation, but ok:Water framework directive: specifically intended to prevent groundwater pollution by limiting the introduction of harmful substances into our groundwater, thereby protecting our drinking water supplies (huge areas of the UK including most of the SE rely on groundwater abstraction for potable water). Also groundwater provides baseflow to our rivers and lakes, therefore preventing its pollution protects the wildlife, habitats, and amenity values of those waters. And it works.
WEEE directive. Not my subject. If it doesn't work for some reason I'll listen to reasons why.
Climate change stuff: I'm taking the 5th on this I'm afraid. Deal with it.
Landfill Directive: I'd be interested to hear why this is ok for the Low Countries and not for us. The directive prescribes standards for the design and operation of landfill sites so as to prevent pollution of controlled waters (especially groundwater) and to prevent blowing people up in their homes due to uncontrolled landfill gas migration. Oh and for climate change purposes too in theory. It also ensures landfill gas is collected used as fuel to generate electricity where viable. All that is very, very relevant to the Uk, which is heavily reliant on landfill (we have lots of holes to fill, unlike the Low Countries, who landfill almost nothing). And again, it works very well.
The water directive is positive legislation which has been poorly thought out, It has caused the lack of dredging which you may have noticed caused some of us to get wet feet, It also prevents the use of old mill sites as micro generation sites, far more effective and controllable than those bloody windmills.
Climate change legislation, a hugely expensive millstone around our necks to combat an unproven effect. Even if every one of us relied purely on solar panels, ate homegrown tofu, walked everywhere, drank rainwater and bought a cow the net impact on CO2 would be around 0.00001% worldwide.
Landfill legislation is I'm afraid out of my experience.
stitched said:
minimoog said:
Not sure I should have to unpick Don's remarks when all he's said is 'All this stuff is st!' without any detailed explanation, but ok:
Water framework directive: specifically intended to prevent groundwater pollution by limiting the introduction of harmful substances into our groundwater, thereby protecting our drinking water supplies (huge areas of the UK including most of the SE rely on groundwater abstraction for potable water). Also groundwater provides baseflow to our rivers and lakes, therefore preventing its pollution protects the wildlife, habitats, and amenity values of those waters. And it works.
WEEE directive. Not my subject. If it doesn't work for some reason I'll listen to reasons why.
Climate change stuff: I'm taking the 5th on this I'm afraid. Deal with it.
Landfill Directive: I'd be interested to hear why this is ok for the Low Countries and not for us. The directive prescribes standards for the design and operation of landfill sites so as to prevent pollution of controlled waters (especially groundwater) and to prevent blowing people up in their homes due to uncontrolled landfill gas migration. Oh and for climate change purposes too in theory. It also ensures landfill gas is collected used as fuel to generate electricity where viable. All that is very, very relevant to the Uk, which is heavily reliant on landfill (we have lots of holes to fill, unlike the Low Countries, who landfill almost nothing). And again, it works very well.
Well that's bettert!' without any detailed explanation, but ok:Water framework directive: specifically intended to prevent groundwater pollution by limiting the introduction of harmful substances into our groundwater, thereby protecting our drinking water supplies (huge areas of the UK including most of the SE rely on groundwater abstraction for potable water). Also groundwater provides baseflow to our rivers and lakes, therefore preventing its pollution protects the wildlife, habitats, and amenity values of those waters. And it works.
WEEE directive. Not my subject. If it doesn't work for some reason I'll listen to reasons why.
Climate change stuff: I'm taking the 5th on this I'm afraid. Deal with it.
Landfill Directive: I'd be interested to hear why this is ok for the Low Countries and not for us. The directive prescribes standards for the design and operation of landfill sites so as to prevent pollution of controlled waters (especially groundwater) and to prevent blowing people up in their homes due to uncontrolled landfill gas migration. Oh and for climate change purposes too in theory. It also ensures landfill gas is collected used as fuel to generate electricity where viable. All that is very, very relevant to the Uk, which is heavily reliant on landfill (we have lots of holes to fill, unlike the Low Countries, who landfill almost nothing). And again, it works very well.
The water directive is positive legislation which has been poorly thought out, It has caused the lack of dredging which you may have noticed caused some of us to get wet feet, It also prevents the use of old mill sites as micro generation sites, far more effective and controllable than those bloody windmills.
Climate change legislation, a hugely expensive millstone around our necks to combat an unproven effect. Even if every one of us relied purely on solar panels, ate homegrown tofu, walked everywhere, drank rainwater and bought a cow the net impact on CO2 would be around 0.00001% worldwide.
Landfill legislation is I'm afraid out of my experience.
As with a lot of EU legislation, it has to be a one size fits all solution, which isn't ever 100% suitable for all geographies, economies etc.
Hopefully will mean we can start to modify much of the legislation we have to better suit our needs rather than having a solution imposed which suits no-one properly.
Mark Benson said:
Landfill legislation is also about how much is put into landfill, it's disingenuous of minimoog to just focus on the other aspects. It's implementation saw the increase in price of putting waste in landfill, which we aren't short of space for in the UK (they are in the Netherlands).
Pollution control measures cost money shock. Who knew.Obviously if you don't value protecting the environment then such measures are just another example of pesky red tape stopping business from making more money. Why am I not surprised that view is held here. Let's all go back to the 1960s when such things weren't regulated and let the good times roll.
Yes there is a requirement to reduce biodegradeable municipal waste to landfill, to improve waste recycling and treatment. More pesky red tape eh?
Edited by minimoog on Monday 27th June 17:31
minimoog said:
Not sure I should have to unpick Don's remarks when all he's said is 'All this stuff is st!' without any detailed explanation, but ok:
Water framework directive: specifically intended to prevent groundwater pollution by limiting the introduction of harmful substances into our groundwater, thereby protecting our drinking water supplies (huge areas of the UK including most of the SE rely on groundwater abstraction for potable water). Also groundwater provides baseflow to our rivers and lakes, therefore preventing its pollution protects the wildlife, habitats, and amenity values of those waters. And it works.
I have no problem with protecting groundwater from pollution. The part that I dislike is the bit that says that rivers should not be dredged. Planting trees upstream is good, but on its own, leads to flooding.t!' without any detailed explanation, but ok:Water framework directive: specifically intended to prevent groundwater pollution by limiting the introduction of harmful substances into our groundwater, thereby protecting our drinking water supplies (huge areas of the UK including most of the SE rely on groundwater abstraction for potable water). Also groundwater provides baseflow to our rivers and lakes, therefore preventing its pollution protects the wildlife, habitats, and amenity values of those waters. And it works.
minimoog said:
WEEE directive. Not my subject. If it doesn't work for some reason I'll listen to reasons why.
The Waste electrical and electronic equipment says that any manufacturor or importer (into EU) must provide for the free and safe disposal of their equipment when it comes to the end of service.I have to pay a disposal facility £495 each year, and I have to pay DEFRA the same amount as a registration fee.
Unfortunately, not a single customer since 1992 has sent anything back.
This money does nothing for the environment. All it does is add to my operating costs.
minimoog said:
Climate change stuff: I'm taking the 5th on this I'm afraid. Deal with it.
Landfill Directive: I'd be interested to hear why this is ok for the Low Countries and not for us. The directive prescribes standards for the design and operation of landfill sites so as to prevent pollution of controlled waters (especially groundwater) and to prevent blowing people up in their homes due to uncontrolled landfill gas migration. Oh and for climate change purposes too in theory. It also ensures landfill gas is collected used as fuel to generate electricity where viable. All that is very, very relevant to the Uk, which is heavily reliant on landfill (we have lots of holes to fill, unlike the Low Countries, who landfill almost nothing). And again, it works very well.
The Low countries had very restricted space for landfill. We have plenty of space.Landfill Directive: I'd be interested to hear why this is ok for the Low Countries and not for us. The directive prescribes standards for the design and operation of landfill sites so as to prevent pollution of controlled waters (especially groundwater) and to prevent blowing people up in their homes due to uncontrolled landfill gas migration. Oh and for climate change purposes too in theory. It also ensures landfill gas is collected used as fuel to generate electricity where viable. All that is very, very relevant to the Uk, which is heavily reliant on landfill (we have lots of holes to fill, unlike the Low Countries, who landfill almost nothing). And again, it works very well.
The way the system is implemented here means that an item is considered "recycled" if the council collect it from a recycle bin.
Much of it gets mixed up at the depot and sent to landfill anyway. Again just plain bonkers.
Some of these lunacies are down to how we have decided to implement the directives. This I accept. However, now would be a good time to discuss these issues.
don4l said:
The Low countries had very restricted space for landfill. We have plenty of space.
It's not an issue of space. Saying 'we've got loads of room so we should be able to landfill as much as we like and not bother with recyling' is short-sighted and increases the risk of polluting our green and pleasant land. And we haven't got so much of that that it doesn't matter where or how we dispose of our waste.don4l said:
The way the system is implemented here means that an item is considered "recycled" if the council collect it from a recycle bin.
Much of it gets mixed up at the depot and sent to landfill anyway. Again just plain bonkers.
That's not unknown, yes. Historically it was usually when the arse fell out of the recyclables market, but it happens from time to time on a local scale due to infrastructure/operational problems. It's not an accepted way to fudge the figures, or at least it shouldn't be.Much of it gets mixed up at the depot and sent to landfill anyway. Again just plain bonkers.
I'm surprised you need to pay for WEEE registration if you never recycle anything, but if that's the case you have my sympathies.
PositronicRay said:
I wish I could claim this, it's a plan.
Right. fk this. We're ALL up st creek and we need a paddle. Now, not in three months.
Fellow Remain voters: Enough already. Yes, we're all pissed off but navel gazing ain't gonna help. Not all 17 million Leave voters can possibly be racist northern pensioners without an O level to their name. Maybe they have a point about this quitting the EU thing? Maybe not. Whatever, we are where we are and no amount a whinging is gonna change that. Allegedly we're the intelligent ones, so get your thinking caps on.
Leave voters. Well done. Good game. We hear you. Now you need to get stuck in to the aftermath and not just ps off back to Wetherspoons. (Just banter, tts!). And the first person to say they "want their country back" gets deported to fking Gibraltar. OK?
Politicians.
David. fk off. Shut the door behind you. Now.
George. You may be a tt but you're our tt. Plus you know the passwords for our Junior Savers account. Get your calculator. Drop the face-like-a-slapped-ass routine. You're on.
Boris. Sorry mate. That photo of you abseiling by your scrotum over the London Olympics while waving a Union Jack can't ever be un-taken. Plus, you'll never be able to appear on Question Time again without some sturdy Glaswegian nurse asking where the fk her 350 million quid is. Not only will she have a very good point, she'll be wearing a T shirt that shows you gurning in front of that fking bus! No captains hat for you I'm afraid.
Theresa. You're in charge love. Get the biggest shoulder pads you've got. We need Ming The Merciless in drag and you'll scare the st out of 'em.
Nicola. Yep. Fair cop. You probably could get us on a technicality, as could London. But we fking love shortbread. And oil. And to be honest you're probably the best politician we've got, so we need you on side. Sort your lot out and we promise never to mention that Jimmy Krankie thing again (although it is pretty uncanny) and we'll make you a Dame once we're sorted. Bring Ruth Davidson. She kicks ass.
Opposition party. We'll need one. Someone take Jeremy and John back to the British Legion Club where you found them. Take Nigel as well. Give back their sandals, buy them a pint, then go to Heathrow and collect David Milliband. fk it. Lets gets Ed Balls as well. He keeps George on his toes. I think he works on the lottery kiosk at Morrisons now?
Oh. And Mark Carney. Give him a knighthood and tell him to keep that st coming. We definitely need more of that good st!
Everyone set? Right. Hold the Easyjet. We're going to Brussels and this ain't no hen party.
?#?weneedaplan? Share!
Thank you Adele.Right. f
k this. We're ALL up st creek and we need a paddle. Now, not in three months.Fellow Remain voters: Enough already. Yes, we're all pissed off but navel gazing ain't gonna help. Not all 17 million Leave voters can possibly be racist northern pensioners without an O level to their name. Maybe they have a point about this quitting the EU thing? Maybe not. Whatever, we are where we are and no amount a whinging is gonna change that. Allegedly we're the intelligent ones, so get your thinking caps on.
Leave voters. Well done. Good game. We hear you. Now you need to get stuck in to the aftermath and not just p
s off back to Wetherspoons. (Just banter, tts!). And the first person to say they "want their country back" gets deported to fking Gibraltar. OK?Politicians.
David. f
k off. Shut the door behind you. Now.George. You may be a t
t but you're our tt. Plus you know the passwords for our Junior Savers account. Get your calculator. Drop the face-like-a-slapped-ass routine. You're on.Boris. Sorry mate. That photo of you abseiling by your scrotum over the London Olympics while waving a Union Jack can't ever be un-taken. Plus, you'll never be able to appear on Question Time again without some sturdy Glaswegian nurse asking where the f
k her 350 million quid is. Not only will she have a very good point, she'll be wearing a T shirt that shows you gurning in front of that fking bus! No captains hat for you I'm afraid.Theresa. You're in charge love. Get the biggest shoulder pads you've got. We need Ming The Merciless in drag and you'll scare the s
t out of 'em.Nicola. Yep. Fair cop. You probably could get us on a technicality, as could London. But we f
king love shortbread. And oil. And to be honest you're probably the best politician we've got, so we need you on side. Sort your lot out and we promise never to mention that Jimmy Krankie thing again (although it is pretty uncanny) and we'll make you a Dame once we're sorted. Bring Ruth Davidson. She kicks ass.Opposition party. We'll need one. Someone take Jeremy and John back to the British Legion Club where you found them. Take Nigel as well. Give back their sandals, buy them a pint, then go to Heathrow and collect David Milliband. f
k it. Lets gets Ed Balls as well. He keeps George on his toes. I think he works on the lottery kiosk at Morrisons now?Oh. And Mark Carney. Give him a knighthood and tell him to keep that s
t coming. We definitely need more of that good st!Everyone set? Right. Hold the Easyjet. We're going to Brussels and this ain't no hen party.
?#?weneedaplan? Share!
RobinOakapple said:
Derek Smith said:
RobinOakapple said:
Anyone who thinks Boris won't be the next PM is dreaming.
There's little chance he will be the next leader of the tories. Their voting system is internal and he's upset too many MPs for them to vote for him without being forced to. If he does get the job, and self destruct is an option for the tories, then I won't vote for his party.
I'm positive about that.
who should be shot. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff