Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2019 18:39:58 GMT 1
Three more Labour peers have resigned this afternoon with another expected to follow due to antisemitism. "My sad conclusion is that the Labour party is very plainly institutionally antisemitic, and its leader and his circle are antisemitic, having never once made the right judgment call about an issue reflecting deep prejudice. The number of examples is shocking." Another for Matron and the like to sweep under the carpet. Disgraceful. Eh? What’s this got to do with me? To be fair though if I were still a party member I’d probably be ejected for antisemetism myself for supporting Palestinian rights and criticising Israeli foreign policy towards them. In my opinion the clear difference between antisemetism, anti Zionism and criticism of Israeli foreign policy has and is being deliberately blurred to stop criticism of Israel and its continue abuse of the Palestinians. Anything else I can help you with Martin? Tying your shoe laces maybe? 😂 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2019 18:55:57 GMT 1
Three more Labour peers have resigned this afternoon with another expected to follow due to antisemitism. "My sad conclusion is that the Labour party is very plainly institutionally antisemitic, and its leader and his circle are antisemitic, having never once made the right judgment call about an issue reflecting deep prejudice. The number of examples is shocking." Another for Matron and the like to sweep under the carpet. Disgraceful. Eh? What’s this got to do with me? To be fair though if I were still a party member I’d probably be ejected for antisemetism myself for supporting Palestinian rights and criticising Israeli foreign policy towards them. In my opinion the clear difference between antisemetism, anti Zionism and criticism of Israeli foreign policy has and is being deliberately blurred to stop criticism of Israel and its continue abuse of the Palestinians. Anything else I can help you with Martin? Tying your shoe laces maybe? 😂 There's plenty of Jewish support for Corbyn and the Labour Party. jewsforjeremy.org/skwawkbox.org/2018/03/26/labour-jews-call-emergency-rally-today-to-support-corbyn-condemn-selective-outrage/www.jewishvoiceforlabour.org.uk/article/in-full-support-of-jeremy-corbyn/This is the Labour Party's version of the internecine in the Tory Party over the EU. It's a clear battle between the Left and the Right of the party. |
|
|
|
Post by darkshrew on Jul 9, 2019 18:57:48 GMT 1
Three more Labour peers have resigned this afternoon with another expected to follow due to antisemitism. "My sad conclusion is that the Labour party is very plainly institutionally antisemitic, and its leader and his circle are antisemitic, having never once made the right judgment call about an issue reflecting deep prejudice. The number of examples is shocking." Another for Matron and the like to sweep under the carpet. Disgraceful. Eh? What’s this got to do with me? To be fair though if I were still a party member I’d probably be ejected for antisemetism myself for supporting Palestinian rights and criticising Israeli foreign policy towards them. In my opinion the clear difference between antisemetism, anti Zionism and criticism of Israeli foreign policy has and is being deliberately blurred to stop criticism of Israel and its continue abuse of the Palestinians. Anything else I can help you with Martin? Tying your shoe laces maybe? 😂 I had a colleague at work who used to do this. In a meeting where he was clearly out of his depth and had lost the argument he would divert the subject to something else. His best ever was to say to a colleague he was arguing with in a meeting " did the sexual harassment case from X against you go away then ?" - everyone forgot completely the discussion and the guy he was arguing with was struck dumb - worked a treat. |
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Jul 9, 2019 19:34:56 GMT 1
That's it, sweep it under the carpet like it doesn't matter. How many more need to leave citing antisemitism before you and your leader take it seriously? The peer has suggested it's "unsafe" for Jewish people to be part of the Labour party. That is quite some statement considering you claim it "rubbish". You mean just like the Tories sweep rampant Islamophobia under the carpet in their party with the help of the Tory Press. I'm part of one of the biggest Facebook Conservative groups and I can tell you 100% there is no rampant islamophobia. There's no rampant anti semitism in Labour either. Labour's problem is they haven't dealt with the cases they've had. They remove Campbell from the party in a day for voting lib dem and now it comes out they're using gagging orders stopping staff speaking out. Beyond belief really. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 9, 2019 23:05:39 GMT 1
You mean just like the Tories sweep rampant Islamophobia under the carpet in their party with the help of the Tory Press. I'm part of one of the biggest Facebook Conservative groups and I can tell you 100% there is no rampant islamophobia. There's no rampant anti semitism in Labour either. Labour's problem is they haven't dealt with the cases they've had. They remove Campbell from the party in a day for voting lib dem and now it comes out they're using gagging orders stopping staff speaking out. Beyond belief really. In 2018, the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) issued numerous calls for an independent inquiry into Islamophobia in the party. These calls have been backed by Baroness Warsi, Baron Mohamed Sheikh and Mohammed Amin of the Conservative Muslim Forum, 350 mosques and 11 umbrella organisations across the United Kingdom, and former Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne. |
|
|
|
Post by camdenshrew on Jul 10, 2019 8:06:58 GMT 1
GATT 24 is not up in the air at all - the WTO have confirmed that it requires an agreement with the EU to come into force; and the EU have said that they would not agree to it being implemented in the event of a 'no deal'. How on earth do you expect the EU to play ball if all they hear is posturing about us not paying the €39bn and being up for a 'no deal' ? If we keep taking no deal off the table the EU won't move on its position though as they know we aren't actually leaving.... GATT 24 is up in the air/in play as the bones of an agreement could be drawn up overnight and signed if both sides agree. The EU want their money and both sides don't want an interruption in trade so you'd think something could be agreed on. No, this stuff about GATT 24, which even Johnson has rowed back from, is just not true.
WTO Director General Roberto Azevêdo himself has directly contradicted the Brextieer claims on no-deal tariffs and GATT 24.
In an interview with Prospect magazine, he said: "If there is no agreement, then Article XXIV would not apply, and the standard WTO terms would."
|
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Jul 10, 2019 9:15:02 GMT 1
There is no agreement at the moment. That could change very quickly and I think most on here would welcome that.
|
|
|
|
Post by percy on Jul 10, 2019 11:57:33 GMT 1
There is no agreement at the moment. That could change very quickly and I think most on here would welcome that. This is where we started. You are right in saying that people are warming to the May deal simply because it is better than "no deal" - that does not make it good. The deal that has been negotiated and is on offer from the EU is exceptionally bad - focus has been put on the backstop but that is peripheral to the real problems. Yet solving the backstop is all the candidates are saying is needed. Even with the backstop solved arch-Brexiteer Steve Baker said that it was better to stay in the EU than to leave with the May deal. |
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Jul 10, 2019 12:36:42 GMT 1
I meant there is no agreement for GATT 24.Yet. No one wants May's deal back!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2019 20:41:34 GMT 1
No one wants May's deal back! At least that is something we can agree on.
I have a couple of honest questions for you:
1: Would you accept that no-deal will 'at least potentially' have a detrimental effect on the economy and the country as a whole?
2: Would you be prepared for Article 50 to be revoked and for a cross party negotiation team to go back to Europe to try and sort out a deal that will work for all sides and will not alienate half of the population?
Please answer honestly as I have no desire to carry on a slagging match and would much rather find some common ground. Perhaps if more people were to do the same we could actually start to move forward.
I don't want to leave the EU at all, but if we do have to leave I would much rather we did it in a civilised manner.
|
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Jul 10, 2019 21:39:48 GMT 1
No need for Article 50 to be revoked for a cross party committee. When Parliament took control of business, to sort out brexit, they achieved nothing.
A no deal brexit would obviously be extremely bad for some businesses. You'd hope the government and Bank of England would do as much as possible to negate this. The 31st of October needs to be kept to as the uncertainty is causing just as much trouble. If the new PM sticks to his guns on a no deal then I'd be very surprised if some kind of agreement wasn't signed off on allowing the implementation period to kick in. Probably at about 11:30pm on the 31st.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 11, 2019 6:59:53 GMT 1
No need for Article 50 to be revoked for a cross party committee. When Parliament took control of business, to sort out brexit, they achieved nothing. A no deal brexit would obviously be extremely bad for some businesses. You'd hope the government and Bank of England would do as much as possible to negate this. The 31st of October needs to be kept to as the uncertainty is causing just as much trouble. If the new PM sticks to his guns on a no deal then I'd be very surprised if some kind of agreement wasn't signed off on allowing the implementation period to kick in. Probably at about 11:30pm on the 31st. Parliament didn't take control though did they? The Tories went in to the talks with their red lines and refused to budge, Labour asked for a common sense approach and were rebuffed, so walked away.
I'm glad that you accept that for some no-deal will be extremely bad, but it won't just be businesses, it will be holiday makers, it will be food prices in the shops, it will be less money in the economy. Richard Branson has said that no deal will likely devalue the pound so much it could even be as low as $1 - £1 which would mean maybe 0.9 euros, maybe even less. I don't know how old you are, but I can remember the pre-euro days when currencies like the pound, the dollar, the mark and the swiss and french franc were considered hard currencies, while the escudo, peseta, lira and drachma were soft, which meant that they weren't as highly valued outside their own countries. These days there are only really three mainstream currencies that are considered as hard; pound, dollar and euro. The pound is really only there because of the City and the currencies global history. If it drops to parity with the dollar and below parity with the Euro it will inevitably drop off that list and will never be able get back onto it. Therefore our bargaining power will be less and less over the next few years and any favourable trade deals will be harder to get.
Yes you would hope that the government would do as much as possible to negate any consequencies of a no-deal, but we currently have a Tory government and probably Boris Johnson in charge. Do you really think that someone who thinks we should cut taxes for high earners is fiscally aware enough to put the interests of the country before those of his peers in the top 10%? I'm guessing that you don't fall into that demographic, I certainly don't and I don't expect a Tory govt. to give a s**t about me and I doubt they care about you either.
As for your last point. If there is no-deal, there is no implementation period. Is that so difficult for you to grasp. The implementation period will allow all the points of the deal to be worked through. If there is no-deal there are no points to finetune, ergo no need for an implementation period.
|
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Jul 11, 2019 9:55:15 GMT 1
I clearly say that I'd expect something to get signed off, at the last hour, which would ALLOW the implementation period to kick in.
Even some kind of outline on a future trade deal being signed might be enough for GATT 24 to be able to apply.
|
|
|
|
Post by percy on Jul 12, 2019 7:58:03 GMT 1
Sadly there is next to no hope for the agreement you think can come through at the 11th hour. The agreement is far more than trade, but if it were just trade then to go to an FTA from where we are now is such a big change that would require so many approvals in the time frame that it is impossible - there are simply too many people with the power to say “no”.
It is looking more and more like the choice we have now is the same choice that we have had since the end of last year - May’s deal, revoke, or “no deal”. Boris’ macho posing rules out May’s deal. Revoke would damage the Tory party and lose Boris his job. “No deal” would give Boris the opportunity to pretend to be Churchill.
There is only one way this is going and it will damage the country immensely. The tariffs that will be erected will kill most businesses that export overnight - we are a trading nation, so that is quite a few.
|
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on Jul 12, 2019 8:07:31 GMT 1
Out of interest salop27, what exactly are your credentials, to be so sure of all this?
|
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Jul 12, 2019 9:34:10 GMT 1
Out of interest salop27, what exactly are your credentials, to be so sure of all this? Common sense and optimism. |
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Jul 12, 2019 9:46:24 GMT 1
Sadly there is next to no hope for the agreement you think can come through at the 11th hour. The agreement is far more than trade, but if it were just trade then to go to an FTA from where we are now is such a big change that would require so many approvals in the time frame that it is impossible - there are simply too many people with the power to say “no”. It is looking more and more like the choice we have now is the same choice that we have had since the end of last year - May’s deal, revoke, or “no deal”. Boris’ macho posing rules out May’s deal. Revoke would damage the Tory party and lose Boris his job. “No deal” would give Boris the opportunity to pretend to be Churchill. There is only one way this is going and it will damage the country immensely. The tariffs that will be erected will kill most businesses that export overnight - we are a trading nation, so that is quite a few. Majority of stuff in May's deal is perfectly acceptable. If it wasn't for the backstop it would have gone through parliament by now. Therefore it's perfectly reasonable that most of this could be signed off on, at very short notice. You can say that there are many people who can so no to a last minute deal but in reality as long as Macron, Merkel and a couple of EU officials are on board everyone else would fall in. |
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on Jul 12, 2019 9:57:42 GMT 1
If you weren't already aware that politicians have no principles whatsoever when climbing the greasy pole, just look at this latest piece of news:-
"Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd has dropped her opposition to No Deal.
She said she now accepted it would be ‘part of the armoury’ in negotiations.
Boris Johnson has said he will only appoint ministers to his top team if they are ‘reconciled’ to the possibility of a No Deal Brexit this autumn".
She has allegedly been earmarked for the post of Foreign Secretary.
February 23: ‘Far from Brexit resulting in a newly independent UK stepping boldly into the wider world, crashing out on March 29 would see us poorer, less secure and potentially splitting up. We must be the party that promotes business, protects our security and preserves the Union. None of this would be achieved by pursuing a No Deal Brexit.’
Yesterday: ‘Both candidates have said that No Deal is part of the armoury in the negotiations. And I have accepted that. The situation is that we are leaving by the end of October, but it would be so much better to get a deal.’
|
|
|
|
Post by percy on Jul 12, 2019 10:09:47 GMT 1
Sadly there is next to no hope for the agreement you think can come through at the 11th hour. The agreement is far more than trade, but if it were just trade then to go to an FTA from where we are now is such a big change that would require so many approvals in the time frame that it is impossible - there are simply too many people with the power to say “no”. It is looking more and more like the choice we have now is the same choice that we have had since the end of last year - May’s deal, revoke, or “no deal”. Boris’ macho posing rules out May’s deal. Revoke would damage the Tory party and lose Boris his job. “No deal” would give Boris the opportunity to pretend to be Churchill. There is only one way this is going and it will damage the country immensely. The tariffs that will be erected will kill most businesses that export overnight - we are a trading nation, so that is quite a few. Majority of stuff in May's deal is perfectly acceptable. If it wasn't for the backstop it would have gone through parliament by now. Therefore it's perfectly reasonable that most of this could be signed off on, at very short notice. You can say that there are many people who can so no to a last minute deal but in reality as long as Macron, Merkel and a couple of EU officials are on board everyone else would fall in. Clearly you have not read the agreement - please see the original post to this thread. The backstop is a red herring; there is plenty more in those pages that make this a bad deal. Unfortunately even a bad deal looks good next to no deal (if you are of one persuasion), or next to revoke (if you are of the other) - that was always May’s proposition. |
|
|
|
Post by stfcfan87 on Jul 12, 2019 10:16:56 GMT 1
Sadly there is next to no hope for the agreement you think can come through at the 11th hour. The agreement is far more than trade, but if it were just trade then to go to an FTA from where we are now is such a big change that would require so many approvals in the time frame that it is impossible - there are simply too many people with the power to say “no”. It is looking more and more like the choice we have now is the same choice that we have had since the end of last year - May’s deal, revoke, or “no deal”. Boris’ macho posing rules out May’s deal. Revoke would damage the Tory party and lose Boris his job. “No deal” would give Boris the opportunity to pretend to be Churchill. There is only one way this is going and it will damage the country immensely. The tariffs that will be erected will kill most businesses that export overnight - we are a trading nation, so that is quite a few. Majority of stuff in May's deal is perfectly acceptable. If it wasn't for the backstop it would have gone through parliament by now. Therefore it's perfectly reasonable that most of this could be signed off on, at very short notice. You can say that there are many people who can so no to a last minute deal but in reality as long as Macron, Merkel and a couple of EU officials are on board everyone else would fall in. But they're not going to suddenly drop the backstop so..... |
|
|
|
Post by darkshrew on Jul 12, 2019 10:23:57 GMT 1
Majority of stuff in May's deal is perfectly acceptable. If it wasn't for the backstop it would have gone through parliament by now. Therefore it's perfectly reasonable that most of this could be signed off on, at very short notice. You can say that there are many people who can so no to a last minute deal but in reality as long as Macron, Merkel and a couple of EU officials are on board everyone else would fall in. Clearly you have not read the agreement - please see the original post to this thread. The backstop is a red herring; there is plenty more in those pages that make this a bad deal. Unfortunately even a bad deal looks good next to no deal (if you are of one persuasion), or next to revoke (if you are of the other) - that was always May’s proposition. According to Boris (who cannot be arsed with details) the facts don’t matter so long as we are optimistic. According to Salop27 (who has not read the agreement) everything will be alright because of common sense as well as optimism. We are ****ed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2019 10:38:45 GMT 1
Well I’m sold!!
If it’s a choice between Percy and his lifetime of working in the financial sector, wealth of knowledge and experience, and Salop27 with his common sense and optimism, I’m with Salop27 all the way.
Bring on brexit. Nothing can can wrong cos we’re british and we are ace.
Woo Hoo!! 👍👍👍
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2019 10:50:40 GMT 1
Out of interest salop27, what exactly are your credentials, to be so sure of all this? Common sense and optimism. I'm sold. |
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jul 12, 2019 10:57:53 GMT 1
This thread just keeps getting better and better, the gift that just keeps giving...  |
|
|
|
Post by sheltonsalopian on Jul 12, 2019 11:56:39 GMT 1
Been a lurker on these forums for a while, reading both sides of the argument. I voted leave in 2016 (didn't really have an interest in politics and mainly copied my parents political choices because I thought they knew what was best.) I still like to consider myself a swing voter but I can't for the life of me understand why people are still so intent on causing economic damage by wanting to leave? The only reason I see posted again and again is that the 17.4 million voted to leave three years ago and that we should honour that result no matter what the consequences.
As one of the 17.4 million I can quite plainly say I didn't expect my daily life to change at all if we voted to leave but find it hard to dispute the economic evidence that I have essentially voted to make myself poorer (especially with a no deal brexit). I have no great affinity for the EU but with the recent events with the US ambassador it's obvious to me that if we left we'd go from being a key world player to america's little brother. For what it's worth I think a second referendum is the only way out of this mess, in which I'd obviously vote remain.
Just my two cents, sorry for the paragraphs and up the salop!
|
|
|
|
Post by salop27 on Jul 12, 2019 12:23:13 GMT 1
I've just had the detailed breakdown of the agreement presented to me at work - suffice to say that my view is that it is a VERY VERY bad deal for the UK. May started off by saying that "no deal is better than a bad one" - she is now presenting a very bad deal and trying to tell us that it is better than no deal. I know that nobody wants to go to a second referendum but surely we cannot let this deal be done - this deal is just bafflingly bad for UK. I hope that this is rejected in the commons and we get a referendum that is a straight - 'Hard Brexit' or 'Remain' choice to settle the matter and forget negotiating with the EU 27 because we will never get a fair deal. Original post doesn't actually say why its a very very bad deal. Just that it is a very very bad deal. |
|
|
|
Post by highlandshrew on Jul 12, 2019 12:26:45 GMT 1
Been a lurker on these forums for a while, reading both sides of the argument. I voted leave in 2016 (didn't really have an interest in politics and mainly copied my parents political choices because I thought they knew what was best.) I still like to consider myself a swing voter but I can't for the life of me understand why people are still so intent on causing economic damage by wanting to leave? The only reason I see posted again and again is that the 17.4 million voted to leave three years ago and that we should honour that result no matter what the consequences. As one of the 17.4 million I can quite plainly say I didn't expect my daily life to change at all if we voted to leave but find it hard to dispute the economic evidence that I have essentially voted to make myself poorer (especially with a no deal brexit). I have no great affinity for the EU but with the recent events with the US ambassador it's obvious to me that if we left we'd go from being a key world player to america's little brother. For what it's worth I think a second referendum is the only way out of this mess, in which I'd obviously vote remain. Just my two cents, sorry for the paragraphs and up the salop! Excellent contribution to the discussion, many thanks. The responses will be interesting . . . .  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 12, 2019 16:56:34 GMT 1
This thread just keeps getting better and better, the gift that just keeps giving... Glad you think it's funny sat in Germany. If you had an ounce of self-awareness you'd realise that at least one contributor to this thread has already felt the effects of Brexit. |
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on Jul 12, 2019 17:32:52 GMT 1
Out of interest salop27, what exactly are your credentials, to be so sure of all this? Common sense and optimism. Also known as "wishful thinking". |
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jul 12, 2019 17:43:11 GMT 1
This thread just keeps getting better and better, the gift that just keeps giving... Glad you think it's funny sat in Germany. If you had an ounce of self-awareness you'd realise that at least one contributor to this thread has already felt the effects of Brexit.  Yes, nicko. Because my life and that of my family here in Germany is in no way whatsoever impacted by all this. Not one bit. Nor that of my family and friends in the UK. You keep pushing this line and frankly I find it embarrassing. Not entirely sure you have bothered with the withdrawal agreement but there is a section in that that touches on citizens rights, and that very much has an impact on me. As our situation is to change quite dramatically come what may, deal or no deal. And what comes after is still very much all up in the air, all to be decided. I am very much aware. I think its blatantly obvious that I was referring to the exchanges on here. |
|
