UK Politics Thread

[STEED]

The fact is we have no deals in place and the result would be suicidal, so lets just stay put and the voters of this country kick HoC up the backside real hard. We should all stop voting for these wasters they are all a wast of time money and resources. This Brexit mess is clear both sides have made a mess of this.


Just to add MayBot laid into Mad Dog Jezzer about him repeating himself she can talk that is all she is like...PARROTS!

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by Jimbuna

So who does Mr Schinas represent then?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-46961982

Originally Posted by Catfish

He represents reason. He does not say that the EU will build a "hard border", he points out that if there is no deal, England will most probably end up with exactly that.
And b.t.w. all parties have signed the "backstop" agreement to guarantee Ireland's open borders.
Does not anyone think by now it would be better to settle the legal status of a neighbouring Ireland once and for all. Can it be at least economically independent as part of the UK, or not. If that is the problem

Looks like 'reason' is beginning to wear a little thin...

The EU believes a hard border on the island of Ireland is an "obvious" result of a "no-deal" Brexit - as signs of a split with Dublin emerged over the issue.

Brussels, Dublin and London have all stated they do no want a hard border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland after Brexit.

But the EU has given apparent confirmation they would enforce such a scenario should the UK leave the bloc without a withdrawal agreement, known as a no-deal outcome.https://news.sky.com/story/eu-says-h...ublin-11614837

Only confirmation awaited now is who would do the enforcing....no doubt the Irish would be the reluctant choice.

[Catfish]

"Both the EU and UK could face sanctions under the World Trade Organisation rulebook if they fail to enforce the border. Under the agreement, countries cannot treat another country more favourably than any other country without a formalised trade agreement."

So all don't want it but it's international law, when there's no deal?

[Jimbuna]

^ Quite worrying though if you factor in the possibility of 'the troubles' coming back to the fore

Interesting what British people have to say about Brexit, who live and work in Germany or even in Europe.

Translater:
http://translate.google.com/translat...a-1248386.html

Original:
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutsc...a-1248386.html

[CDR DPH]

By in large, I am not too interested in the opinions of British expats as their comments tend to be about their personal situation on how Brexit will affect them. Very few Britons residing elsewhere in Europe or other European citizens residing in Britain seem able to transcend their personal situations and preferences and speak to what would be best for Britain as a country.

This particular British expat has lived abroad for longer than 5 years, has no intention of returning to Britain anytime soon and has applied for German citizenship. Clearly his personal motivations and interests lie outside the sphere of the pros/cons of the Brexit discussion; Thus all of his printed comments are irrelevant to the national discussion of what is best for the country as a whole.

Originally Posted by CDR DPH

... to the national discussion of what is best for the country as a whole.

Well then clear up, because so far I understand this opportunistic (similar to a whore) behavior by no means.
Fifty years ago, GB was literally begging for admission to the EEC, because its empire is literally broken apart ... it is no more. So continue in the text.

[CDR DPH]

The premise being similar to an apples vs oranges discussion.

The preservation of the sovereignty of Britain is for British people to decide.

Fact #1:

The British parliament seems to have already made up their minds and are attempting to do everything possible to change the outcome of the referendum and pursue a completely different objective.

Fact #2:

The potential for the sudden loss/change of the personal advantages enjoyed by British expats living in Europe under the current arrangements clouds that discussion. Expats can no more separate their personal biases than can the chocoholic that works in a candy store. Inevitably those in this situation do not wish their current circumstances to change regardless of the perceived benefits to Britain.

Fact 3:

This is not a historical discussion. It is very much a discussion dealing with how Britain will conduct its affairs going forward. The conditions and circumstances 50 years ago are irrelevant today. This is very much a backlash against the EU's run away politicization of everything it touches. Countries that do not mind giving up some sovereignty to achieve a communal benefit are free to hitch their wagons to the EU. Those countries who wish to retain some say as to their own immigration, trade, foreign relations policies have no choice but to leave the union or not join in the first place. No other mechanism seems to exist within the current framework.

The EU has come a long way from it's stated purpose all those years ago of being an economic union of countries that share similar interests and objectives. Overtime, the EU has changed its purpose and mandate to something other than what some countries initially agreed to when they applied for membership.

In recognition of these changes, if the EU now refuses to allow countries to effectively withdraw, it is no longer the European Union but now the European Gulag.

In the beginning, Britain wanted better and more efficient and cost effective access to other European countries and trading deals that could better be negotiated by a larger block of countries. It is my understanding that at no time did the common British citizen ever agree to accept immigration guidelines, wealth redistribution, natural resource management or a central currency controlled from outside the UK.

Trade does not equal the abandonment of sovereignty and self determination. The EU has not asked its member countries to solicit such a mandate from their respective populations, so the EU has no basis upon which to impose terms beyond those that existed at the time a country joined the Union or those which a country has subsequently agreed to take on.

One could make the same argument about any EU member country. Those populations to the best of my knowledge have not given their respective governments a mandate to negotiate or change the deal in any way that relinquishes local control over those aspects of the individual countries sovereignty or right to choose their own futures.

The EU was not founded on this sort of a premise, nothing has been put to the people that gives the EU such power or authority and since no one ever considered that a member country might wish to leave, the exit process is a bit of a mess as is usually the case in any first go situation.

This is an issue whereby the The British people and their overly irreverent politicians need to decide once and for all. Either all in to the EU as it exists today and may exist tomorrow or get out now and retain the very control that the EU wishes to exercise itself.

All in or all out. Who gets to decide? Well it should be the British people, lots of whom appear to have been asleep during the referendum if their claims are to be believed. This is certainly not an issue for the politicians to decide as their interests couldn't be further from those of the fisherman, farmer, shop keeper or stay-at-home mom. Even the interests of the multinational corporations are skewed away from any given population towards their own profit generating potential - corporations are not people, they have no social responsibility or accountability beyond generating more and more revenue for shareholders by any means available. Corporate interests almost never align with those of any given population.

[Catfish]

I wanted to write a long answer, but i plain decided to get out of here.
I have no idea what you or "England" really want and why, really.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by Catfish

I wanted to write a long answer, but i plain decided to get out of here.
I have no idea what you or "England" really want and why, really.

Free toilet paper and the right to hug a German.

[STEED]

Tory MP David Davis will earn £60,000 for 20 hours of work as an adviser to manufacturing company JCB.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46981440


Money for old rope, clearly I'm in the wrong job.

[Deepseadiver]

Originally Posted by STEED

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46981440


Money for old rope, clearly I'm in the wrong job.

what a cnut

[ikalugin]

I may be overly cynical, but is UK capable of enforcing it's own full soverenity?

[Catfish]

Originally Posted by STEED

Free toilet paper and the right to hug a German.

^

The second wish may be ok - after you used that paper


I do not know what I want, and I want it now !!

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Bleiente

Well then clear up, because so far I understand this opportunistic (similar to a whore) behavior by no means.
Fifty years ago, GB was literally begging for admission to the EEC, because its empire is literally broken apart ... it is no more. So continue in the text.

Actually the UK founded EFTA as an opposing part to the EEC and a challenge to it, together with several other European countries that opposed the EEC of that time. Also, the majprity of the EEC countries of that time originally did not want the British in it, Frane and de Gaulle vetoed twice against Britain when EFTA was not the hoped-for success and the british ECONOMY (not the people) feared to lose in competition with the bloc.


And already three or four years after the Brits finally had joined (after deGaule withdrawel), the had their first referendum on whether or not staying in the EEC.



Since then, time and again the UK showed policies and hesitations that illustrate clearly that it never was really at comfort wit the EEC/EU. It demanded a Brit rabate. It demanded opt-out clauses for Shengen. It stayed out of the Euro. And in this all, they were not alone, few other countries also voted against the enforced EEC/EU unification repeatedly.


We are not all a happy one family, you know. For the brtis and their traditonal civil understanding of liberty and freedom (not necessarily manign their porked political establishment), the continetal union never was their natural habitat. The traditions and understandings on what freedom and liberty is, are very different. Historical reasons, and a different mentality I assume.


I had posted the bot-translation link of this in the germany thread already, her eis the German text again, for you.
https://www.achgut.com/artikel/marga...er_deutschland

Nicht nur der Fall Relotius hat gezeigt, dass die Deutschen wieder dabei sind, Wahrheit, Prinzipien und Freiheit einem höheren Ziel unterzuordnen – und alle marschieren mit.