Theresa May (Vol.2)
Discussion
PurpleMoonlight said:
Where was that in the Withdrawal Agreement?
It isn't in there.What is being discussed is the political declaration, which isn't worth the paper its printed on anyway.The EU will not be changing the WA.
The EU will not be removing the leverage they will have over the UK for the future FTA talks if the WA is signed.
May, yet again, is wasting time with the EU, she needs to get it into her thick head she has f
ked it up and isn't getting this deal into a state it will be allowed to pass through the HOC. The continued spin from the government that this is a good deal is bizarre.bhstewie said:
hstewie said: Income less, outgoings more, pound worth less, whatever - I'm pretty sure nobody voted to be poorer in whatever terms.
AIUI all the forecasts prepared by the Government / Treasury / BoE (Remain, May's Deal, No-Deal) showed that the UK economy will grow and we will be better off - suggesting you might only be relatively poorer rather than actually poorer.You might have to buy Sainsbury's own brand beans rather than Heinz
.thetrickcyclist said:
"The continued spin from the government CIVIL SERVICE that this is a good deal is bizarre entirely in line with every other government pronouncement to date..EFA
Its government ministers bombarding my TV, radio and SM platforms at the moment, with the occasional war criminal getting in on the act.Edited by thetrickcyclist on Friday 14th December 10:06
jsf said:
It isn't in there.What is being discussed is the political declaration, which isn't worth the paper its printed on anyway.
The EU will not be changing the WA.
The EU will not be removing the leverage they will have over the UK for the future FTA talks if the WA is signed.
May, yet again, is wasting time with the EU, she needs to get it into her thick head she has fked it up and isn't getting this deal into a state it will be allowed to pass through the HOC. The continued spin from the government that this is a good deal is bizarre.
But it does strike to the core issue. The EU were never, ever, ever going to make this a good or easy deal. The EU will not be changing the WA.
The EU will not be removing the leverage they will have over the UK for the future FTA talks if the WA is signed.
May, yet again, is wasting time with the EU, she needs to get it into her thick head she has f
ked it up and isn't getting this deal into a state it will be allowed to pass through the HOC. The continued spin from the government that this is a good deal is bizarre.Not because they can't, but because of mix fear and arrogance.
Ignoring for one moment who from the UK was negotiating and our red lines/demands (just for a moment).
Look at it from the European perspective. Exiting the EU strikes to the very heart of the powerful federal European ideal at every single level. If one of the big partners thinks it is no longer, on balance, attractive to stay, then what happens next?
- Contagion
- Fragmentation of the European
- Devaluation of the trading area and the economic power that it brings (you slice off a rich bit meaning DE and FR have to bear more of the economic growth, etc)
There cannot be any possible signal from Europe to the other countries that exiting is anything other than painful, destabilising and negative economically (at least in the short term), lest the "wrong" countries leave next (the richer ones) leaving FR and DE to carry GR, IT, ES, etc economically.
A Nordic trading bloc might make sense (NO,SW, UK and maybe FI) but that would hurt the EU massively, etc
Anyway, enough of my rant. I am tired of the whole thing.
My point is that the deal is not about May or her abilities. Or it it had been better negotiators or more powerful characters. My point is that Europe knew all along that they were going to make it impossible and that UK politics would fragment along the pro/anti Europe dividing lines (all parties).
Yes, May has made mistakes, but this deal is Europe's making, not ours.
Just thought i'd remind myself what i said to my sister, who is a massive Corbyn fan and was celebrating her "win" after the 2017 General election.
She posted this Pie video, which is great. https://youtu.be/qsGVghRBdKI
I replied
"Thing is, even with an abysmal campaign and a leader that has the personality of a wet Lettuce, plus the youth vote finally getting off their arses and voting in big numbers, Labour are still 57 seats down on the conservatives and 67 seats down on having any power even if they had a coalition of every party except the DUP, who will never work with Corbyn due to his IRA links.
It may feel like a victory, because the bar was set so low for Corbyn, but he is nowhere near forming a Government and I really can’t see that ever happening for him either. What we now have is a hung parliament, with the Tories in power with the help of the DUP.
That is a dreadful situation to be in going into the Brexit talks and may well lead to us staying in the single market and customs union. That means no end to free movement, no end to the jurisdiction of the EU courts, no ability to set our own trade agreements with the rest of the world, no ability to reduce the cost of imports or trade more fairly with the developing world. It's a hideous day for anyone who voted to leave the EU with the intent to grow the economy, cut tax waste and embrace the part of the world that is not about to implode the way the EU will soon do.
Maybe a way will be found to still leave the single market and customs union whilst managing the Northern Ireland issues, but its going to be a tougher task now.
Well done to Corbyn for doing far better than anyone predicted, a pox on May for producing a dreadful manifesto and explaining the better parts of it even more poorly.
The country lost last night, this has the potential to damage us for generations if my concerns are founded, i hope i am wrong.
The only good thing to come out of last night, is the damage inflicted to the SNP, it's clear the Scottish want to stay part of the UK, that is a great thing for the UK and Scotland."
Seems to have panned out as i feared.
She posted this Pie video, which is great. https://youtu.be/qsGVghRBdKI
I replied
"Thing is, even with an abysmal campaign and a leader that has the personality of a wet Lettuce, plus the youth vote finally getting off their arses and voting in big numbers, Labour are still 57 seats down on the conservatives and 67 seats down on having any power even if they had a coalition of every party except the DUP, who will never work with Corbyn due to his IRA links.
It may feel like a victory, because the bar was set so low for Corbyn, but he is nowhere near forming a Government and I really can’t see that ever happening for him either. What we now have is a hung parliament, with the Tories in power with the help of the DUP.
That is a dreadful situation to be in going into the Brexit talks and may well lead to us staying in the single market and customs union. That means no end to free movement, no end to the jurisdiction of the EU courts, no ability to set our own trade agreements with the rest of the world, no ability to reduce the cost of imports or trade more fairly with the developing world. It's a hideous day for anyone who voted to leave the EU with the intent to grow the economy, cut tax waste and embrace the part of the world that is not about to implode the way the EU will soon do.
Maybe a way will be found to still leave the single market and customs union whilst managing the Northern Ireland issues, but its going to be a tougher task now.
Well done to Corbyn for doing far better than anyone predicted, a pox on May for producing a dreadful manifesto and explaining the better parts of it even more poorly.
The country lost last night, this has the potential to damage us for generations if my concerns are founded, i hope i am wrong.
The only good thing to come out of last night, is the damage inflicted to the SNP, it's clear the Scottish want to stay part of the UK, that is a great thing for the UK and Scotland."
Seems to have panned out as i feared.
Edited by anonymous-user on Friday 14th December 10:49
Tuna said:
I think you should re-read what I said.
All three parties - Remain, Leave and the EU said that leaving would probably involve exit from SM, CU and ECJ. There was no 'believing' - it was just a fact stated by all of the main actors during the referendum. A handful of people talked about alternatives that looked a lot like parts of the current arrangement ('a union of customs'), and that idea is still around. None of that was described as 'project fear' in any meaningful way.
It's pretty simple and a matter of record - you can go check the history on this forum, in the news sites or elsewhere. Saying otherwise is either a remarkable bit of revisionist history, simply disingenuous, or the first sign of dementia.
That's a nasty dig at the back end, in more ways than one, of your post. All three parties - Remain, Leave and the EU said that leaving would probably involve exit from SM, CU and ECJ. There was no 'believing' - it was just a fact stated by all of the main actors during the referendum. A handful of people talked about alternatives that looked a lot like parts of the current arrangement ('a union of customs'), and that idea is still around. None of that was described as 'project fear' in any meaningful way.
It's pretty simple and a matter of record - you can go check the history on this forum, in the news sites or elsewhere. Saying otherwise is either a remarkable bit of revisionist history, simply disingenuous, or the first sign of dementia.
I don't think it applies to me though as it seems there are quite a few who have forgotten what the official leave campaign said, not to mention Farage. These are the 'handful' you referred to I assume. You know, Johnson, Gove and on just one option, Davis. My apologies if reminding you of it has upset you enough to post personal attacks. Revisionist indeed.
Why would they make it easy?
We are leaving their club, to go off and forge our own path in competition with them. We are weakening their position in the world.
We can't agree amongst ourselves what we want, and TM has thrown away whatever authority she and her government had at every opportunity so our position is pathetic.
Of course they are looking out for themselves, not to do so would be a betrayal of the remaining 27 members.
We are leaving their club, to go off and forge our own path in competition with them. We are weakening their position in the world.
We can't agree amongst ourselves what we want, and TM has thrown away whatever authority she and her government had at every opportunity so our position is pathetic.
Of course they are looking out for themselves, not to do so would be a betrayal of the remaining 27 members.
Bill said:
Why would they make it easy?
We are leaving their club, to go off and forge our own path in competition with them. We are weakening their position in the world.
We can't agree amongst ourselves what we want, and TM has thrown away whatever authority she and her government had at every opportunity so our position is pathetic.
Of course they are looking out for themselves, not to do so would be a betrayal of the remaining 27 members.
Exactly. By definition they have to strengthen the 27. We are leaving their club, to go off and forge our own path in competition with them. We are weakening their position in the world.
We can't agree amongst ourselves what we want, and TM has thrown away whatever authority she and her government had at every opportunity so our position is pathetic.
Of course they are looking out for themselves, not to do so would be a betrayal of the remaining 27 members.
History shows that we were never going to agree. Both parties have been split on the topic for years (though maybe not during Blair's labour years, but then it was all milk and honey, and Brown kept us out of the euro - best thing he ever did...)
Derek Smith said:
That's a nasty dig at the back end, in more ways than one, of your post.
I don't think it applies to me though as it seems there are quite a few who have forgotten what the official leave campaign said, not to mention Farage. These are the 'handful' you referred to I assume. You know, Johnson, Gove and on just one option, Davis. My apologies if reminding you of it has upset you enough to post personal attacks. Revisionist indeed.
The issues regarding the SM and CU were very clear from both sides. Tuna is right, you are incorrect. Perhaps your research isn't all it is cracked up to be!I don't think it applies to me though as it seems there are quite a few who have forgotten what the official leave campaign said, not to mention Farage. These are the 'handful' you referred to I assume. You know, Johnson, Gove and on just one option, Davis. My apologies if reminding you of it has upset you enough to post personal attacks. Revisionist indeed.
Bill said:
Why would they make it easy?
We are leaving their club, to go off and forge our own path in competition with them. We are weakening their position in the world.
We can't agree amongst ourselves what we want, and TM has thrown away whatever authority she and her government had at every opportunity so our position is pathetic.
Of course they are looking out for themselves, not to do so would be a betrayal of the remaining 27 members.
Deliberate anti-competitive behaviour! - Aren't there some sort of EU laws regulating anti-competitive conduct to ensure that they promote competition and do not create cartels and monopolies that would damage the interests of society?We are leaving their club, to go off and forge our own path in competition with them. We are weakening their position in the world.
We can't agree amongst ourselves what we want, and TM has thrown away whatever authority she and her government had at every opportunity so our position is pathetic.
Of course they are looking out for themselves, not to do so would be a betrayal of the remaining 27 members.
Or are we not "society" now we are trying to leave the Ponzi scheme?
Blackpuddin said:
Trophy Husband said:
amusingduck said:
There's a big difference between "things cost 20% more" and "I have 20% less income" IMO.
Aren't imports from the EU about 15% more expensive since the referendum because of GDP falling?
I have a pal who has a small chain of pizzerias. His costs in real terms have gone up 27% since the leave vote.Aren't imports from the EU about 15% more expensive since the referendum because of GDP falling?
pistonheads2018 said:
The issues regarding the SM and CU were very clear from both sides. Tuna is right, you are incorrect. Perhaps your research isn't all it is cracked up to be!
If you say I'm wrong, you have to be suggesting that Johnson and Gove, and to a limited extent Davis, did not say, in their positions in the official leave campaign, that the Norwegian option and the Icelandic options were possible alternative as that is, in essence, all I'm saying. Oh, and Farage, but he was just sniping from the sidelines.This isn't the £350m lie that they stuck on the side of buses and then said they didn't mean; this was clear, unambiguous statements.
Derek Smith said:
If you say I'm wrong, you have to be suggesting that Johnson and Gove, and to a limited extent Davis, did not say, in their positions in the official leave campaign, that the Norwegian option and the Icelandic options were possible alternative as that is, in essence, all I'm saying. Oh, and Farage, but he was just sniping from the sidelines.
This isn't the £350m lie that they stuck on the side of buses and then said they didn't mean; this was clear, unambiguous statements.
Do some more 'research' (and try and understand what Project Fear actually referred to.This isn't the £350m lie that they stuck on the side of buses and then said they didn't mean; this was clear, unambiguous statements.
Derek Smith said:
This isn't the £350m lie that they stuck on the side of buses and then said they didn't mean; this was clear, unambiguous statements.
What lie was that? The sum mentioned was approximately correct. There was a suggestion (lets) that we fund the NHS better. Only someone who is quasi illiterate would take that as a promise to put the mentioned amount into the NHS. It could be said that we fund foreign aid to approx 12 billion, lets better fund the NHS instead, that doesnt mean 12 billion goes to the NHS.Derek Smith said:
Tuna said:
I think you should re-read what I said.
All three parties - Remain, Leave and the EU said that leaving would probably involve exit from SM, CU and ECJ. There was no 'believing' - it was just a fact stated by all of the main actors during the referendum. A handful of people talked about alternatives that looked a lot like parts of the current arrangement ('a union of customs'), and that idea is still around. None of that was described as 'project fear' in any meaningful way.
It's pretty simple and a matter of record - you can go check the history on this forum, in the news sites or elsewhere. Saying otherwise is either a remarkable bit of revisionist history, simply disingenuous, or the first sign of dementia.
That's a nasty dig at the back end, in more ways than one, of your post. All three parties - Remain, Leave and the EU said that leaving would probably involve exit from SM, CU and ECJ. There was no 'believing' - it was just a fact stated by all of the main actors during the referendum. A handful of people talked about alternatives that looked a lot like parts of the current arrangement ('a union of customs'), and that idea is still around. None of that was described as 'project fear' in any meaningful way.
It's pretty simple and a matter of record - you can go check the history on this forum, in the news sites or elsewhere. Saying otherwise is either a remarkable bit of revisionist history, simply disingenuous, or the first sign of dementia.
I don't think it applies to me though as it seems there are quite a few who have forgotten what the official leave campaign said, not to mention Farage. These are the 'handful' you referred to I assume. You know, Johnson, Gove and on just one option, Davis. My apologies if reminding you of it has upset you enough to post personal attacks. Revisionist indeed.
The point remains though. If you want to make your assertions, feel free to provide evidence, but remember the debunkings that were made of some of the claims about what the Leave campaign said.
pistonheads2018 said:
Derek Smith said:
If you say I'm wrong, you have to be suggesting that Johnson and Gove, and to a limited extent Davis, did not say, in their positions in the official leave campaign, that the Norwegian option and the Icelandic options were possible alternative as that is, in essence, all I'm saying. Oh, and Farage, but he was just sniping from the sidelines.
This isn't the £350m lie that they stuck on the side of buses and then said they didn't mean; this was clear, unambiguous statements.
Do some more 'research' (and try and understand what Project Fear actually referred to.This isn't the £350m lie that they stuck on the side of buses and then said they didn't mean; this was clear, unambiguous statements.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Fear_(Britis...
Nickgnome said:
That could prove interesting because it was used by both sides to describe different things.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Fear_(Britis...
It was most commonly used by the Leave side to describe the economic catastrophe that prominent Retainers claimed would occur immediately following a vote to Leave.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Fear_(Britis...
Indeed, the first comment on the post you linked to is:
"The term "Project Fear" has been used in British politics, during and after the 2016 UK referendum on EU membership by Brexiteers campaigning to leave the European Union. It puts forward claims that the economic and socio-political dangers of leaving the E.U. are just scaremongering and pessimism employed by those in favour of remaining in the EU.[1] "
Edited by pistonheads2018 on Friday 14th December 11:43
pistonheads2018 said:
It was most commonly used by the Leave side to describe the economic catastrophe that prominent Retainers claimed would occur immediately following a vote to Leave.
Indeed, the first comment on the post you linked to is:
"The term "Project Fear" has been used in British politics, during and after the 2016 UK referendum on EU membership by Brexiteers campaigning to leave the European Union. It puts forward claims that the economic and socio-political dangers of leaving the E.U. are just scaremongering and pessimism employed by those in favour of remaining in the EU.[1] "
Nice selective post from the link. Indeed, the first comment on the post you linked to is:
"The term "Project Fear" has been used in British politics, during and after the 2016 UK referendum on EU membership by Brexiteers campaigning to leave the European Union. It puts forward claims that the economic and socio-political dangers of leaving the E.U. are just scaremongering and pessimism employed by those in favour of remaining in the EU.[1] "
Edited by pistonheads2018 on Friday 14th December 11:43
You even conveniently missed the originator of the term which was in relation to Scottish Independence back in 2014.
and
Alistair Darling says that "Project Fear? In fact, it is a reality check. The kind anyone would take before making such an enormous decision in their lives. David Cameron, who resigned as Prime Minister after the E.U. verdict, rejected any allegations of fear-mongering, saying that "The only project I'm interested in is Project Fact. Project Fact is about saying: 'Stay in and you know what you'll get.'"[8] Others, such as the mayor of London Sadiq Khan, have also pointed out that the Leave side were in fact scaremongering with false claims of imminent Turkish accession to the EU[9], and with the well-documented use of a hightech company - world experts in election-propaganda, Cambridge Analytica - being engaged by the LeaveEU campaigns in order to systematically create fear and confusion in voters minds for the purpose of influencing the vote for the Brexit side, the phrase "project fear" was employed for those same goals. When Iain Duncan Smith claimed if we stay in the EU terrorists would find it easier to get into the UK, the hypocrisy is clear ."[10][11]
So how about you putting your two penneth worth of what Project Fearv means to you and we can wait for the other 17 odd million of the other interpretations.
Nickgnome said:
Nice selective post from the link.
My post was quite explicit, stating that I was quoting the first comment in the entry.Nickgnome said:
You even conveniently missed the originator of the term which was in relation to Scottish Independence back in 2014.
You must have 'conveniently missed' that we were discussing Project Fear in the context of Brexit.Nickgnome said:
Alistair Darling says that "Project Fear? In fact, it is a reality check. The kind anyone would take before making such an enormous decision in their lives. David Cameron, who resigned as Prime Minister after the E.U. verdict, rejected any allegations of fear-mongering, saying that "The only project I'm interested in is Project Fact. Project Fact is about saying: 'Stay in and you know what you'll get.'"[8] Others, such as the mayor of London Sadiq Khan, have also pointed out that the Leave side were in fact scaremongering with false claims of imminent Turkish accession to the EU[9], and with the well-documented use of a hightech company - world experts in election-propaganda, Cambridge Analytica - being engaged by the LeaveEU campaigns in order to systematically create fear and confusion in voters minds for the purpose of influencing the vote for the Brexit side, the phrase "project fear" was employed for those same goals. When Iain Duncan Smith claimed if we stay in the EU terrorists would find it easier to get into the UK, the hypocrisy is clear ."[10][11]
Which supports my point that 'Project Fear' was the Brexiters' dismissal of the economic claims made by Remainers.You really should read the things you link to, before pretending that they support your opinion!
Edited by pistonheads2018 on Friday 14th December 12:01
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff