Theresa May (Vol.2)
Discussion
glazbagun said:
jtremlett said:
Greg66 said:
...Calling for the removal of your party leader *and* calling on others to come forward and join you is very different...
If that was an offence requiring removal from a party then there wouldn't be enough Labour MPs left to fill their front bench after what a lot of them said about Corbyn.She's broken her manifesto pledges, her deal is the worst parts of Leave and Remain married together, she utterly blew the easiest election the Tories have faced in twenty years. Just how badly do you need to fail to be sacked in Conservative land?
glazbagun said:
Almost as depressing as how crap everything is is that Corbyn can survive a vote of no confidence and May can't even upset enough Tories to spark one.
She's broken her manifesto pledges, her deal is the worst parts of Leave and Remain married together, she utterly blew the easiest election the Tories have faced in twenty years. Just how badly do you need to fail to be sacked in Conservative land?
Be patient. I think you'll find out at, or shortly before, the next election.She's broken her manifesto pledges, her deal is the worst parts of Leave and Remain married together, she utterly blew the easiest election the Tories have faced in twenty years. Just how badly do you need to fail to be sacked in Conservative land?
The Irish border is such a non-issue.
There need not be any question of a 'hard border' in the sense of the Berlin wall going up.
In fact we don't need a border at all.
We need not worry about the exchequer suffering as everyone streams over to Eire to fill up with cheap booze, petrol and tobacco as Eire doesn't have particularly cheap booze, petrol or tobacco. It's about the same price as here. If a few people near the border pop over to fill up so be it.
For immigration, they will have already entered the Republic, which has border controls the same as ours, being part of the Common Travel Area established in 1923, which is one reason the jungle is in Calais and not Dundalk. Again if a few EU nationals with no work visa pop over from the Republic with an Irish building contractor to build a wall in Northern Ireland, so what? If caught in the act they could get some appropriate slap on the wrist, but again it's hardly something that undermines fundamental sovereignty or control of our own domain.
In both cases most enforcement will be done in country, as it is already.
If shops are selling duty free goods then they are committing a crime which can be dealt with here. HMRC and police deal with this all the time, and seldom with goods from Ireland. If someone is living and working in the UK when they have no right to be then they can be caught here, and sanctioned accordingly. Again this happens anyway.
We don't need to do anything very much about the Irish border. Perhaps step up in country checks a notch or two, but it isn't something I would lose sleep over. Canada and the United States have 5,500 miles of border, the vast majority of which is unguarded and can be crossed at will in remote forest and prairie. If the EU wants to go around stirring up troubles by erecting razor wire fences and watchtowers along its border that is their concern, and not something we should accept as a reason to compromise fundamental national sovereignty.
There need not be any question of a 'hard border' in the sense of the Berlin wall going up.
In fact we don't need a border at all.
We need not worry about the exchequer suffering as everyone streams over to Eire to fill up with cheap booze, petrol and tobacco as Eire doesn't have particularly cheap booze, petrol or tobacco. It's about the same price as here. If a few people near the border pop over to fill up so be it.
For immigration, they will have already entered the Republic, which has border controls the same as ours, being part of the Common Travel Area established in 1923, which is one reason the jungle is in Calais and not Dundalk. Again if a few EU nationals with no work visa pop over from the Republic with an Irish building contractor to build a wall in Northern Ireland, so what? If caught in the act they could get some appropriate slap on the wrist, but again it's hardly something that undermines fundamental sovereignty or control of our own domain.
In both cases most enforcement will be done in country, as it is already.
If shops are selling duty free goods then they are committing a crime which can be dealt with here. HMRC and police deal with this all the time, and seldom with goods from Ireland. If someone is living and working in the UK when they have no right to be then they can be caught here, and sanctioned accordingly. Again this happens anyway.
We don't need to do anything very much about the Irish border. Perhaps step up in country checks a notch or two, but it isn't something I would lose sleep over. Canada and the United States have 5,500 miles of border, the vast majority of which is unguarded and can be crossed at will in remote forest and prairie. If the EU wants to go around stirring up troubles by erecting razor wire fences and watchtowers along its border that is their concern, and not something we should accept as a reason to compromise fundamental national sovereignty.
olimain said:
Jimboka said:
Technology won’t stop EU citizens walking into UK & vice versa at the NI border
Therefore we won’t have Brexited
Quite how people still don’t get this I don’t understand. It does, however, explain why the misinformed were throwing around the racist card so much.Therefore we won’t have Brexited
It is not about stopping people travelling to the UK. What you describe above is not an issue for all but the lunatic fringe.
Why would EU let non EU citizens come & go? and vice versa
May as well stop passport control at Dover too, what’s the difference?
Greg66 said:
It’s obvious you get this but your admiration for JRM and dislike for TM has taken your objectivity from you.
I don't give a stuff about JRM. Whilst his Christianity has been weaponised against him, I'm very nervous of people who lambaste everything a person says because they happen to hold contrary opinions in a completely unrelated area. Blair is strongly Christian, but it's not appropriate to use that as a means of division.On the other hand I'm happy to see contrarian views in parliament. From McDonnell to Boris, parliament is meant to represent the breadth of views in the country - they're not meant to be a monoculture of socially acceptable middle managers. That's the point of a democratic representative - we can openly discuss different beliefs and decide which are worth building on.
In the case of the negotiations, May's micro management has gone the other way in cutting out cabinet, her party and parliament. Which would you rather have? People robustly sharing their views, or someone acting on theirs in secret?
As for people getting their knickers in a twist over 'hate figures'... I give you:
deadslow said:
JRM is an extremist ideologue and religious fundamentalist who would have us all living under Vatican sharia law. The far right's equivalent of Bob Crow. Previously charming oddity, now dangerous nutter.
Coolbanana said:
esxste said:
You can't compare the Scottish with NI. The situations are different. Scotland joined with England as a Union of crowns; its nominally a more equal relationship. Some Scots want Independence,some Scots wanted to stay in the Union. They (mostly) all see themselves and each other as Scottish, and thus have an equal say.
NI is different because it is the result of England/Britain invading Ireland and the events that unfolded after that. Before the RoI gained independence, the Irish considered themselves an occupied nation. In Northern Ireland, you have people who consider themselves Irish - the republicans. They still consider Britain an occupying power. They cannot democratically get what they want in a referendum, because the Unionists, mostly descendants of British colonists, are in the majority and they consider themselves British. The Republicans want NI returned to RoI. Neither side wants to become an independent nation. The problem is further complicated by the time period involved... most Unionists are many generations down from the original colonists. They and they're families have been there 100's of years now, and feel they have just as much right to be there and get what they want as the Republicans do.
It can't be considered a UK internal issue, because one of side the argument do not consider themselves to be British. That's why the GFA involves the RoI.
Fair points NI is different because it is the result of England/Britain invading Ireland and the events that unfolded after that. Before the RoI gained independence, the Irish considered themselves an occupied nation. In Northern Ireland, you have people who consider themselves Irish - the republicans. They still consider Britain an occupying power. They cannot democratically get what they want in a referendum, because the Unionists, mostly descendants of British colonists, are in the majority and they consider themselves British. The Republicans want NI returned to RoI. Neither side wants to become an independent nation. The problem is further complicated by the time period involved... most Unionists are many generations down from the original colonists. They and they're families have been there 100's of years now, and feel they have just as much right to be there and get what they want as the Republicans do.
It can't be considered a UK internal issue, because one of side the argument do not consider themselves to be British. That's why the GFA involves the RoI.
My UK History is only what I've read myself rather than taught, having been raised abroad. Still, so what you are in essence suggesting, is that the NI issue is one of Great Britain's own making historically via invasion. Therefore, the people of Great Britain should be sensitive to the problems in NI and respect that if they took NI into the EU willingly as part of the UK, then to extract NI unwillingly is somewhat of a major problem. The EU's in the extent of ROI and the GFA, but more GB's as to how to deal with the UK (and the GFA) as a whole when wanting to Brexit.
So...for GB to extract the whole of the UK from the EU...it ought to have NI's and ROI's permission first? If that is refused, then GB cannot leave...
Obviously London won't want to pander to NI as much as that but that is the dilemma it faces to avoid a bloodbath in NI - it has to resolve a NI/ROI Border issue that isn't really replicated anywhere else in the EU and its trading partners so there is no template to follow. Whilst easy for me and other Britons to see it as a 'silly issue' it really is very serious and one of GB's own making. It can't drag NI around at will from one Treaty to another without first ensuring it is perfectly happy to do so.
I'm still trying to understand so bear with me but is that a reasonable summary? Happy to be wrong as I've assumed it was 'easier' than that and Max Fac and a bit of Policing should be accepted as 'reasonable'.
The invasion of Ireland is, to most people outside of Ireland, ancient history. I'm not sure I could generate any ire against the Normans despite them invading and pressing the population into slavery for hundreds of years. It was a Norman who looked westwards for new territory.
I would suggest that London will 'pander', not perhaps the word I'd use but let's run with it, to NI. Had it not been for the border and what is euphemistically called The Troubles – civil war being a more accurate definition – the deal that May was more or less forced into would have been very different. It is a whip that the EU holds over us.
The border issue is a critical one. It would a tragedy of monumental proportions if a hard brexit forces a border in NI. The rest of the UK owes it to NI to act responsibly.
glazbagun said:
Almost as depressing as how crap everything is is that Corbyn can survive a vote of no confidence and May can't even upset enough Tories to spark one.
She's broken her manifesto pledges, her deal is the worst parts of Leave and Remain married together, she utterly blew the easiest election the Tories have faced in twenty years. Just how badly do you need to fail to be sacked in Conservative land?
There's a certain logic to not wanting a new PM. It's by no means impossible that the next Tory leader would be a remainer, and then they'd have a mandate for that - so it's not without risk.She's broken her manifesto pledges, her deal is the worst parts of Leave and Remain married together, she utterly blew the easiest election the Tories have faced in twenty years. Just how badly do you need to fail to be sacked in Conservative land?
If they'd got over the line with the 48 letters already, the confidence vote would have been done by the end of the week and the ERG would be a busted flush.
Instead JR-M and the rest of them are still on the front pages, even if they're being called nasty names - and that means that the PM's "It's really a great deal!" narrative isn't getting much of a look-in.
Combine that with the DUP (and since BoJo is speaking at the DUP conference this weekend I think it's a reasonable assumption that they are collaborating with the ERG) and it almost....almost looks like they've controlled the media narrative to try and stop the PM from building a majority for the deal.
Whether it's that, or just infinite monkeys with typewriters, I can't be sure.
jsf said:
Once again.
The EU, UK and EIRE have siad there wont be a hard border in Ireland, irrespective of the outcome of the negotiations.
There has been a border in Ireland since 1922.
yep - keep reminding peopleThe EU, UK and EIRE have siad there wont be a hard border in Ireland, irrespective of the outcome of the negotiations.
There has been a border in Ireland since 1922.
However there will be some sort of border arrangements somewhere
The deal on the table is supposed to be the best compromise theyve managed to thrash out
With no deal there'll be some sort of tarrif arrangement
And a border somewhere - maybe in the Irish Sea
Edited by saaby93 on Tuesday 20th November 23:43
JagLover said:
The Times has a headline that voters are "rallying behind May", when the last opinion poll I saw had support for the Tories dropping five points since the deal was announced.
Is that two different things?Support for May herself has increased due to her relisiance or view of brexit or pity.
Support for the Conservative party dropping, due to behaviour of ERG and endless infighting.
El stovey said:
JagLover said:
The Times has a headline that voters are "rallying behind May", when the last opinion poll I saw had support for the Tories dropping five points since the deal was announced.
Is that two different things?Support for May herself has increased due to her relisiance or view of brexit or pity.
Support for the Conservative party dropping, due to behaviour of ERG and endless infighting.
"A week ago 33 per cent of voters backed Mrs May staying in her post and 47 per cent wanted her to go, a YouGov poll for The Times showed. Now 46 per cent say that she should stay and 34 per cent want her to stand down."
Jimboka said:
olimain said:
Jimboka said:
Technology won’t stop EU citizens walking into UK & vice versa at the NI border
Therefore we won’t have Brexited
Quite how people still don’t get this I don’t understand. It does, however, explain why the misinformed were throwing around the racist card so much.Therefore we won’t have Brexited
It is not about stopping people travelling to the UK. What you describe above is not an issue for all but the lunatic fringe.
Why would EU let non EU citizens come & go? and vice versa
May as well stop passport control at Dover too, what’s the difference?
Surprised you've not heard of the concept, it's pretty well known
JuanCarlosFandango said:
The Irish border is such a non-issue.
It certainly is an issue.The matter of cheaper fags, booze and fuel is not the issue - as you say, price differential is minimal.
The issue relates to the import and export of parts, produce and products and the controls on taxes, tariffs and quotas. In a frictionless trade scenario, these are not problems. Without such benefit - and with the means of physical checks - you are reliant upon honesty. How many times have you seen anyone voluntarily walk into the red 'Something to Declare' zone at airports?
Added to which is that there are many people in the Republic that work in Northern Ireland and vice-versa.
StevieBee said:
It certainly is an issue.
The matter of cheaper fags, booze and fuel is not the issue - as you say, price differential is minimal.
The issue relates to the import and export of parts, produce and products and the controls on taxes, tariffs and quotas. In a frictionless trade scenario, these are not problems. Without such benefit - and with the means of physical checks - you are reliant upon honesty. How many times have you seen anyone voluntarily walk into the red 'Something to Declare' zone at airports?
Added to which is that there are many people in the Republic that work in Northern Ireland and vice-versa.
Which parts? How many companies are going to go to the trouble of detouring through the Republic of Ireland and risk prosecution for tax evasion to avoid a 3 or 4 % import duty (if we even choose to impose one at all, which we don't have to) on parts?The matter of cheaper fags, booze and fuel is not the issue - as you say, price differential is minimal.
The issue relates to the import and export of parts, produce and products and the controls on taxes, tariffs and quotas. In a frictionless trade scenario, these are not problems. Without such benefit - and with the means of physical checks - you are reliant upon honesty. How many times have you seen anyone voluntarily walk into the red 'Something to Declare' zone at airports?
Added to which is that there are many people in the Republic that work in Northern Ireland and vice-versa.
Yes people cross the border for work, as people cross the Swiss border to work. This happens at the moment, and we already have a double taxation agreement with Ireland independent of the EU
http://borderpeople.info/a-z/taxation.html
A few forms to fill in but no reason for anyone to be left queing at the border for hours on their way to work, or for companies to stop employing people who live across the border.
t sandwich is spsi310398 said:
glazbagun said:
Almost as depressing as how crap everything is is that Corbyn can survive a vote of no confidence and May can't even upset enough Tories to spark one.
She's broken her manifesto pledges, her deal is the worst parts of Leave and Remain married together, she utterly blew the easiest election the Tories have faced in twenty years. Just how badly do you need to fail to be sacked in Conservative land?
Be patient. I think you'll find out at, or shortly before, the next election.She's broken her manifesto pledges, her deal is the worst parts of Leave and Remain married together, she utterly blew the easiest election the Tories have faced in twenty years. Just how badly do you need to fail to be sacked in Conservative land?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff