mad

Brexit, and all it entails

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

This is bloody ridiculous, there's been a consistent rise in the "stay" vote ever since the initial referendum. Demonstrating that many people with a "stay" opinion just didn't vote.

Too fucking bad.  That's why there was a vote.  They had their chance.  It would be like demanding a "do over" vote on electing trump because not enough people came out to vote.  Elections (and referendums) have consequences.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Too fucking bad.  That's why there was a vote.  They had their chance.  It would be like demanding a "do over" vote on electing trump because not enough people came out to vote.  Elections (and referendums) have consequences.  

elections get redone every 3-4 years.

Referenda not so much...which is why there's usually more than a simple majority needed to pass. (constitutional referendums)

This one (Britex) isn't even legally binding as I understand..and as no one seems happy. Do it again.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Shortforbob said:

Referenda not so much...which is why there's usually more than a simple majority needed to pass. (constitutional referendums)

 

You mean this one? I understand it isn't even legally binding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Hypercapnic Tom said:

 

You mean this one? I understand it isn't even legally binding.

The UK doesn't have a single codified constitution. They rely on honour...and it's worked pretty well for a bit longer than yours is shaping up to.

Good thing the USA has a constitution though, a nation of carpetbaggers such as the USA is.:P

Though it's only purpose is seemingly to keep lawyers employed..I ask you..how many of the founding fathers were lawyers...Hmmmm?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2019 at 11:21 PM, Shortforbob said:

elections get redone every 3-4 years.

Referenda not so much...which is why there's usually more than a simple majority needed to pass. (constitutional referendums)

This one (Britex) isn't even legally binding as I understand..and as no one seems happy. Do it again.

 

The last election had both major parties have following through on the result as part of their manifesto. Once elected many have decided that they don'tgive a toss on what they promised or the majority asked for.

Still, why should that matter, fuck it, not like the answer let's just run it again until I do like it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Gissie said:

Once elected many have decided that they don'tgive a toss on what they promised or the majority asked for.

$-))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/20/2019 at 1:52 AM, Shootist Jeff said:

Too fucking bad.  That's why there was a vote.  They had their chance.  It would be like demanding a "do over" vote on electing trump because not enough people came out to vote.  Elections (and referendums) have consequences.  

:lol: Referenda are not irreversible dumbfuck. Don't like the results, hold another. In the US there are methods for removing Presidents, dumbfuck. There are amendments to the Constitution.

Looking back up at my post from 10 months ago I'm wondering if you have figured out what the fuck you are cheering for yet moron? Or are you still just chanting BREXIT! BREXIT! BREXIT! and cheerleading for something you can't define and blaming people you don't like for things you don't understand .i.e. is it just another day in Jeffreauxs life?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

Can someone explain what just happened? Are they doing it or not?

Hard to tell.  No matter what is done there is someone who will just say no.

I think the goal is to stall and stall and stall.

From my couple of weeks in England this year most of the folks on both side of the political spectrum want the fucking idiots to get off their asses, get out, and get to work governing without Brussels giving them orders.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

:lol: Referenda are not irreversible dumbfuck. Don't like the results, hold another. In the US there are methods for removing Presidents, dumbfuck. There are amendments to the Constitution.

Looking back up at my post from 10 months ago I'm wondering if you have figured out what the fuck you are cheering for yet moron? Or are you still just chanting BREXIT! BREXIT! BREXIT! and cheerleading for something you can't define and blaming people you don't like for things you don't understand .i.e. is it just another day in Jeffreauxs life?

I'm cheerleading for nothing.  I don't have a dog in the brexit fight.  All I want to see is that the people's will be honored. 

And yes, referenda can be reversed with another referendum vote.  If they want to have a do-over, then fucking hold the vote.  But until that happens, the current vote is the one they should be honoring.  What the remainers are trying to do is undermine the will of the majority, irregardless of how close it was, through underhanded tricks.  That's just plain wrong.  The leavers won, get over it.  So either have another vote or get the fuck on with implementing the decision of the majority rather than just being whiney fucking cry babies because they couldn't be bothered to get off their lazy asses and vote the first time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I'm cheerleading for nothing.  I don't have a dog in the brexit fight.  All I want to see is that the people's will be honored. 

And yes, referenda can be reversed with another referendum vote.  If they want to have a do-over, then fucking hold the vote.  But until that happens, the current vote is the one they should be honoring.  What the remainers are trying to do is undermine the will of the majority, irregardless of how close it was, through underhanded tricks.  That's just plain wrong.  The leavers won, get over it.  So either have another vote or get the fuck on with implementing the decision of the majority rather than just being whiney fucking cry babies because they couldn't be bothered to get off their lazy asses and vote the first time.

Is there really any point in quoting that idiot? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, mad said:

Is there really any point in quoting that idiot? 

No, not really

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a really interesting article in the Sunday NY Times about Boris' tactical losses but potentially strategic success re bexit.

Sorry for the Copy/paste but its a registration site: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/20/world/europe/brexit-boris-johnson-parliament.html

Despite Litany of Failures, Boris Johnson Is in Striking Distance of Brexit Success

The prime minister will try again this week to get his draft deal through Parliament. He has one key thing going for him: a divided opposition.

 
 
20brexit-articleLarge.jpg?quality=75&aut
 
Prime Minister Boris Johnson is still within distance of a majority in Parliament for his Brexit plan.CreditTolga 
 

LONDON — He suspended Parliament and was rebuked by Britain’s top court. He purged his party and lost a string of votes. After trying to strong-arm lawmakers into supporting his new Brexit plan, Prime Minister Boris Johnson was forced to ask for a delay for withdrawal from the European Union, a request he had vowed never to make.

Yet, while this litany of failures should be spectacularly good news for opponents of Brexit, who came out in huge crowds onto the streets of London on Saturday, Mr. Johnson still has a surprisingly good chance of leading Britain out of the bloc.

Mr. Johnson is not just still in the game, despite a remarkable succession of miscalculations, but he is also within striking distance of a majority vote in Parliament for his Brexit plan. The foreign secretary, Dominic Raab, predicted on Sunday that the government proposal would pass.

The odds are better than ever because three years of Brexit chaos has left the nation angry, frustrated and tired, the opposition is divided, and many expect a general election for which Mr. Johnson has been gearing up, with speeches highlighting platform issues such as more money for the police force.

The situation is fluid and the math is tight, so the votes expected this week could go either way. But even if they go against him, Mr. Johnson is well placed for the general election that everyone expects soon, analysts say.

Anand Menon, a professor of European studies at King’s College London, described it as a “remarkable turnaround.”

According to Mr. Menon, the prime minister is the beneficiary of “two or three contextual changes” that put him in a better position than his predecessor, Theresa May, who failed three times to win approval for her Brexit deal.

“There is a palpable sense of fatigue about Brexit that is a lot more marked than it was earlier in the year,” Mr. Menon said. “And there is an election coming soon, so everyone is thinking of that.”

But Mr. Johnson is also lucky in that his opponents are divided, unsure of their tactics and fretting about upsetting voters who voted “leave” in the 2016 referendum.

The main opposition Labour Party has always wanted to keep closer economic ties to the European Union. And on Sunday, Labour said it would try to sabotage Mr. Johnson’s new proposal in Parliament with amendments tying Britain more closely to the bloc and putting his plan back to the people in a second referendum, with remaining in the European Union as the alternative.
 

Anti-Brexit demonstrators marched through Trafalgar Square in London on Saturday. Anti-Brexit demonstrators marched through Trafalgar Square in London on Saturday.CreditVictoria Jones/Press Association, via Associated Press

“They have now arrived at the position where they can agree that whatever deal there is, they want to attach a referendum to it,” said Steven Fielding, a professor of political history at the University of Nottingham. “But they have taken a heck of a long time to get there.”

Reaching this point illustrates the limits of cooperation among opposition parties that expect to be fighting one another soon in an election. No serious effort to oust Mr. Johnson has been made because the Liberal Democrats, a smaller centrist force, do not want Labour’s left-wing leader, Jeremy Corbyn, as prime minister — even on a temporary basis.

Mr. Corbyn’s profile, as a lifelong critic of the European Union and a committed socialist, makes cooperation harder. And anything that would propel him into 10 Downing Street is too much for some critics of Brexit to contemplate.

“They think that Jeremy Corbyn would be an absolute disaster for the country,” Mr. Menon said.

Mr. Corbyn, for his part, has rejected the idea of allowing a less-divisive figure into Downing Street as a caretaker prime minister. But his party is split on whether to have a speedy election — which some fear they would lose — or to hold a referendum first.

The Scottish National Party, which hopes to advance its own cause, independence for Scotland, is pressing for a quick election, calculating that would be to its advantage.

And though the opposition parties have a good chance of preventing Mr. Johnson from rushing his deal through by Oct. 31 by wrecking his accelerated timetable for ratification, agreement on more fundamental points has proved elusive.

“Up to now they haven’t had the votes for a second referendum, so a lot of it has been positioning and posturing between Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the Scottish National Party,” Mr. Fielding said.

So while Mr. Johnson’s tactical plays have blown up in his face and his harsh rhetoric has caused outrage, the campaign for a second referendum has yet to gain traction. Even if lawmakers vote for one this week, the prospects of passing the complex legislation needed to make it happen are remote.

 

 

Anything that would propel Jeremy Corbyn, the opposition Labour leader, into 10 Downing Street is too much for some critics of Brexit to contemplate. Anything that would propel Jeremy Corbyn, the opposition Labour leader, into 10 Downing Street is too much for some critics of Brexit to contemplate. CreditIsabel Infantes/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Still, Mr. Johnson has opened the door to that possibility through a series of errors, most recently by striking a Brexit deal that alienated the 10 lawmakers from the Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland, who normally prop up the government. They were furious about the draft deal, saying it would risk cleaving Northern Ireland from the United Kingdom.

The Democratic Unionists look likely to vote against him in Parliament this week, as they did on Saturday when they backed a last-ditch amendment to force a delay, and they even seem to be flirting with the idea of supporting a second referendum.

 
BREXIT VOTE
 Here’s what happened in Saturday’s vote in Parliament.
 

Angering the Northern Irish party was only the latest in a series of miscalculations. Since becoming prime minister in July, Mr. Johnson has enraged lawmakers by seeking to suspend Parliament for five weeks. That brought him a rare rebuke from the Supreme Court and galvanized his critics to push through a law designed to prevent Britain from leaving the European Union without an agreement.

Mr. Johnson expelled 21 members of his own party for supporting that legislation, which kicked in on Saturday night, forcing him to request another Brexit extension, something he said he would rather be “dead in a ditch” than do.

The biggest risk Mr. Johnson faces now, Mr. Menon said, is how the European Union would time its decision on whether to grant Britain an extension. If Brussels did so before Parliament held another vote on the draft deal, it would deprive Mr. Johnson of a potent argument to fence-sitters: Vote for my deal or face the danger of leaving Europe without any deal.

But that looks unlikely. European Union ambassadors in Brussels met for only 15 minutes on Sunday — deciding to forward Mr. Johnson’s deal to the European Parliament for ratification — and did not even discuss granting an extension. Their strategy appears to be to wait and see if Mr. Johnson can win a majority this week before deciding whether to give Britain more time.

Some influential figures in the bloc would like to grant Britain a leisurely extension, as long as a year, so that the country can resolve its Brexit deadlock once and for all, either through an election or a second referendum.

The European Union “should now grant a final long one, giving the U.K. time to sort itself out & prepare for all possible resolutions,” including a second referendum, Norbert Röttgen, the chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the German Parliament, said in a Twitter post on Sunday. Mr. Röttgen is considered close to Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Other Europeans, however, are fed up with Britain’s anguished indecision and are more than ready for it to leave.

While Mr. Johnson’s tactical gambits have backfired, there is a strategic thread to them, analysts say, that may ultimately prove successful.

He has relentlessly courted hard-line Brexit supporters, Mr. Menon said, in the hopes of staving off a challenge in the next general election from the populist Brexit Party, led by Nigel Farage, that wants a clean break with the European Union.

For the most part, Mr. Menon added, Mr. Johnson has succeeded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Rat's ass said:

US should sign up. Give away sovereignty for the good of the collective. 

I think an apt analogy of Brexit, the EU and the Leaver's mindset would be:

What if NAFTA evolved well beyond a trade union and instead into a Canada, US, Mexico social compact where most all decisions on laws, human rights, economic decisions, education, standards, and immigration in the member nations were being made from Mexico City.  

Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And around we go

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-25/boris-johnson-to-call-general-election/11638070

Prime Minister Boris Johnson has called for a general election on December 12 to break Britain's Brexit impasse, conceding for the first time he will not meet his "do or die" deadline to leave the European Union next week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I think an apt analogy of Brexit, the EU and the Leaver's mindset would be:

What if NAFTA evolved well beyond a trade union and instead into a Canada, US, Mexico social compact where most all decisions on laws, human rights, economic decisions, education, standards, and immigration in the member nations were being made from Mexico City.  

Just saying.

You know the most recent "brexit deal" from Boris was outsourcing decisions on several of those to the EU? Or are you still bullshitting with your geriatric understanding of the world dumbfuck?

anyways Brexit looks to perhaps destroy the UK. Good riddance to bad rubbish. let little england live in poverty and penury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I think an apt analogy of Brexit, the EU and the Leaver's mindset would be:

What if NAFTA evolved well beyond a trade union and instead into a Canada, US, Mexico social compact where most all decisions on laws, human rights, economic decisions, education, standards, and immigration in the member nations were being made from Mexico City.  

Just saying.

It will only cost the UK the "United"

There's really no reason for NI to be part of the UK anyway, and once they leave, the Scots will be free to go. Which will leave London and the Deplorables.  Best part is that I can take my wife there for cheap now. She loves London.

I guess anything for Putin to have a WIN is ok with Jeffreaux.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I think an apt analogy of Brexit, the EU and the Leaver's mindset would be:

What if NAFTA evolved well beyond a trade union and instead into a Canada, US, Mexico social compact where most all decisions on laws, human rights, economic decisions, education, standards, and immigration in the member nations were being made from Mexico City.  

Just saying.

Physically in Mexico City maybe, but presumably Canada and the USA would have 2/3s of the votes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/24/2019 at 9:14 AM, Shootist Jeff said:

I think an apt analogy of Brexit, the EU and the Leaver's mindset would be:

What if NAFTA evolved well beyond a trade union and instead into a Canada, US, Mexico social compact where most all decisions on laws, human rights, economic decisions, education, standards, and immigration in the member nations were being made from Mexico City.  

Just saying.

Not very apt Jeff. 
All members of the EU have representation and can vote on any of the upcoming amendments etc. 
No different than being in Florida and represented in Washington. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mad said:

Not very apt Jeff. 
All members of the EU have representation and can vote on any of the upcoming amendments etc. 
No different than being in Florida and represented in Washington. 

No that doesn’t work at all.  FL and DC are in the same country governed  by a Single federal govt that runs the whole country. While the EU, while it has reps from every member country, still are coming from completely sovereign countries. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

No that doesn’t work at all.  FL and DC are in the same country governed  by a Single federal govt that runs the whole country. While the EU, while it has reps from every member country, still are coming from completely sovereign countries. 

And that's exactly how the EU was set-up to work.......its a union of sovereign countries.......whatever the Brexit wankers say about trying to get the sovereignty back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, mad said:
2 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

No that doesn’t work at all.  FL and DC are in the same country governed  by a Single federal govt that runs the whole country. While the EU, while it has reps from every member country, still are coming from completely sovereign countries. 

And that's exactly how the EU was set-up to work.......its a union of sovereign countries.......whatever the Brexit wankers say about trying to get the sovereignty back.

But from what I understand by talking to Brits from both sides of the Brexit fence.... that is the entire main reason Brexit came about anyway.  That initially the EU was set up to be a "Trade Union" of sovereign countries and instead it evolved into a governing body that imposed all sorts of non-trade related issues and policies onto the member nations and essentially removed their sovereignty and ability to make independent decision for their own country.  

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/586742/European-Union-barmy-decisions-rules-regulations-Britain-EU

Had the EU stuck to being a trade union, none of this Brexit shit would ever exist.  But the EU morphed into being a legislative body with binding powers over other state's internal affairs which had little to no relationship to free trade.  In other words, they got a bit too big for their britches.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

But from what I understand by talking to Brits from both sides of the Brexit fence.... that is the entire main reason Brexit came about anyway.  That initially the EU was set up to be a "Trade Union" of sovereign countries and instead it evolved into a governing body that imposed all sorts of non-trade related issues and policies onto the member nations and essentially removed their sovereignty and ability to make independent decision for their own country.  

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/586742/European-Union-barmy-decisions-rules-regulations-Britain-EU

Had the EU stuck to being a trade union, none of this Brexit shit would ever exist.  But the EU morphed into being a legislative body with binding powers over other state's internal affairs which had little to no relationship to free trade.  In other words, they got a bit too big for their britches.....

Some how I doubt that the EU magically 'gained' those powers.  If the EU was out of bounds by attempting to exercise them, then Britain should have told them to go to hell.  But.... they didn't.  That smells way more like Britain's politicians bargained certain things away and are getting bitten in the ass by it.

Indeed, it's interesting the divide between educated and non-educated people in the polling for Brexit.  This whole thing smells VERY much like what Trump's got going on over here.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shootist Jeff said:

But from what I understand by talking to Brits from both sides of the Brexit fence.... that is the entire main reason Brexit came about anyway.  That initially the EU was set up to be a "Trade Union" of sovereign countries and instead it evolved into a governing body that imposed all sorts of non-trade related issues and policies onto the member nations and essentially removed their sovereignty and ability to make independent decision for their own country.  

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/586742/European-Union-barmy-decisions-rules-regulations-Britain-EU

Had the EU stuck to being a trade union, none of this Brexit shit would ever exist.  But the EU morphed into being a legislative body with binding powers over other state's internal affairs which had little to no relationship to free trade.  In other words, they got a bit too big for their britches.....

Reading the Express will only lower your IQ level, don't waste your time on that right wing rag.

Most of the regulations relate to standards of part and food manufacture, health and worker rights, environment laws etc........none of which have a bad effect on the member states including the UK.  Workers right are going to be cut for the UK, lets see how well they like that when they realise.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

EU mulls Brexit delay as leak raises fears of PM plan to cut workers’ rights

article_update_2.47330149.jpg
A leaked document suggests the UK could look to diverge from EU worker and environmental protections after BrexitPhoto: Stefan Rousseau/PA

Deliberations in Brussels over a Brexit delay have continued into the weekend, as a leaked document indicates the UK could deviate away from EU employee and environmental rights after exit day.

After a meeting of European Union ambassadors on Friday, a Brussels source said there was “full agreement on the need for an extension” and that “work will continue over the weekend”.

A final decision on whether they will opt for an extension until January or a shorter November delay – thought to be favoured by French President Emmanuel Macron – is not expected until Monday or Tuesday.

The weekend talks among the EU27’s teams are likely to be coloured by a leaked document, seen by the Financial Times, that indicates the Government could look to diverge away from the bloc’s rules on workers’ rights and environmental protections after Brexit.

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-10-26/eu-mulls-brexit-delay-as-leak-raises-fears-of-pm-plan-to-cut-workers-rights/

Quote

 

    The British government is planning to diverge from the EU on regulation and workers’ rights after Brexit, despite its pledge to maintain a “level playing field” in prime minister Boris Johnson’s deal, according to an official paper shared by ministers this week. 

The government paper drafted by Dexeu, the Brexit department, with input from Downing Street stated that the UK was open to significant divergence, even though Brussels is insisting on comparable regulatory provisions. 

The issue will come to a head when the UK begins the next phase of talks with the EU to forge a new trade deal. However, the UK in effect still faces the prospect of a no-deal Brexit next week unless EU states agree a new extension date for when the UK will leave the bloc. France was on Friday pushing for a shorter extension date than the one Mr Johnson has requested.

In a passage that could alarm Labour MPs who have backed the Brexit bill, the leaked government document also said the drafting of workers’ rights and environmental protection commitments “leaves room for interpretation”.

The paper, titled “Update to EPSG on level playing field negotiations”, appears to contradict comments made by Mr Johnson on Wednesday when he said the UK was committed to “the highest possible standards” for workers’ rights and environmental standards.
 

https://www.ft.com/content/5eb0944e-f67c-11e9-9ef3-eca8fc8f2d65

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, mad said:

Most of the regulations relate to standards of part and food manufacture, health and worker rights, environment laws etc........none of which have a bad effect on the member states including the UK.  Workers right are going to be cut for the UK, lets see how well they like that when they realise.  

Why is ANY of that up to the EU to mandate how a Sovereign country deals with those internal policy issues?  Some of these laws may make perfect sense, but that's not and should not be the EU's call to force others to think they way they do, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Why is ANY of that up to the EU to mandate how a Sovereign country deals with those internal policy issues?  

'cause consent via agreement that the UK ratified, dummy.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, MR.CLEAN said:

'cause consent via agreement that the UK ratified, dummy

I don't think the UK consented to any of this "Mission Creep" back in 1993.  Dummy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Why is ANY of that up to the EU to mandate how a Sovereign country deals with those internal policy issues?  Some of these laws may make perfect sense, but that's not and should not be the EU's call to force others to think they way they do, IMHO.

That's your opinion Jeff, and you're welcome to have your own views. 

The basis is that there is free travel, free import and export between all member states.  Basically a level playing field to ensure we all play by the same rules, the rules proposed by the Brexit deal, back track on many of these to detriment of the UK.  The EU has, by its size as a trading bloc negotiated deals around the world, The UK is under the blind illusion that it can strike out on its own and achieve better trade deals by itself, this is lunacy.

All the arguments used by the Pro-Brexit lobby are just drummed up nationalistic bullshit.  Can you name some of the (oppressive) laws that have been forced onto member states?  If they were that oppressive? how were they voted in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I don't think the UK consented to any of this "Mission Creep" back in 1993.  Dummy.

We did, we were there and had representation.

Pop over to the SA thread, its very educational and has posters from every side including quite a few mainland EU posters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I don't think the UK consented to any of this "Mission Creep" back in 1993.  Dummy.

Did they consent to the legislative apparatus? Did they consent to the regulatory apparatus?  Did they acknowledge that the UK would not be able to unilaterally control these mechanisms?  I know you're no scholar but these are very easy yes or no questions.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff, try here for more information on what the government are trying to railroad through...........It has very little to do with regaining sovereignty, its a fucking power grab by a desperate group who have a lot to lose if it doesn't go ahead.

https://infacts.org/latest_infacts/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I don't think the UK consented to any of this "Mission Creep" back in 1993.  Dummy.

Did the UK consent to any of this Mission Creep when they ratified the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1999?

Did the UK consent to any of this Mission Creep when they ratified the Treaty of Nice in 2003?

Did the UK consent to any of this Mission Creep when they ratified the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Why is ANY of that up to the EU to mandate how a Sovereign country deals with those internal policy issues?  Some of these laws may make perfect sense, but that's not and should not be the EU's call to force others to think they way they do, IMHO.

 don't you argue for such "internal policy issues" to be on the table when the US is making trade deals? :lol:

i must admit I like watching conservatives run into walls over and over and over again because they can't learn and can't figure out their garbage media intake is rotting their brain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have thought this pretty bleeding obvious from the get go.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/04/johnsons-brexit-would-be-thatcherism-on-steroids-says-corbyn

Johnson's Brexit would be Thatcherism on steroids, says Corbyn

 

 

Jeremy Corbyn is to accuse Boris Johnson of seeking to “hijack” Britain’s exit from the EU in order to unleash “Thatcherism on steroids” by slashing workers’ rights and throwing the NHS open to US corporations.

With Labour’s stance on Brexit under intense scrutiny, Corbyn will promise an audience in the leave-supporting Tory-held seat of Harlow, Essex, on Tuesday that he will “get Brexit sorted” within six months.

***

Corbyn is to say: “A vote for Johnson’s Conservatives is a vote to betray our NHS in a sell-out to Trump. Johnson’s Trump-deal Brexit puts a price tag on our NHS. So we’ll say it again and again until the message gets through to the White House: our NHS is not for sale.”

Johnson has highlighted the UK’s ability to strike free trade deals with non-EU countries, including the US, as a key benefit of his Brexit agreement over Theresa May’s, although Trump himself has raised doubts about that.

The prime minister’s deal also shifted assurances about labour laws and environmental standards from the legally-binding withdrawal agreement into the non legally-binding political declaration. Corbyn will warn that means the government is preparing to slash workers’ rights.

“What Boris Johnson’s Conservatives want is to hijack Brexit to unleash Thatcherism on steroids,” he will say. “Margaret Thatcher’s attack on the working people of our country left scars that have never healed and communities that have never recovered.

“The Conservatives know they can’t win support for what they’re planning to do in the name of Thatcherism. So they’re trying to do it under the banner of Brexit instead.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now