[Rich]

BoJo didn't negotiate a thing, he accepted the deal the EU originally offered and that May had rejected.

Absolutely well said!

I have great respect for Boris as a masterful political operator, but little but contempt for his fanbois.

Boris had a very privileged upbringing, but even so he's been amazingly successful getting to number 10 and so far staying there. But what has he ever delivered? Did he do anything to stop the de-Britification of London? Has he stopped runway 3? a major concern to his constituents. What social conservative or populist policy has he delivered on or even significantly contributed to delivering on? He delivered London for the Tories and he will probably deliver an overall majority for them at the General Election. But if you are not a Tory party partisan what an earth reason is there for putting your faith in Boris?

[B0ycey]

I've been resigned to the view that a Tory party overall majority is highly likely.

Don't be pessimistic Rich. Farage plans on having a candidate for every seat meaning for the Tories to retain their lead Johnson is going to have to sell his deal to the Brexiteers. Tough ask as it's bollocks.

[Atlantis]

Don't be pessimistic Rich. Farage plans on having a candidate for every seat meaning for the Tories to retain their lead Johnson is going to have to sell his deal to the Brexiteers. Tough ask as it's bollocks.

Don't be optimistic B0ycey. Farage has announced that he won't stand in the election. That probably means he has made a deal with Bojo because the Brexit party is nothing without Farage.

You can think what you like of Boris, but he for sure is a smart operator who'll play the system to his advantage no matter the cost.

I think Remainers have to start getting off their asses if they want to stop Brexit now.

[Beren]

I think Remainers have to start getting off their asses if they want to stop Brexit now.

They should support Labour, simple as that, and call it tactical voting if they like.

[B0ycey]

Don't be optimistic B0ycey. Farage has announced that he won't stand in the election. That probably means he has made a deal with Bojo because the Brexit party is nothing without Farage.

You can think what you like of Boris, but he for sure is a smart operator who'll play the system to his advantage no matter the cost.

I think Remainers have to start getting off their asses if they want to stop Brexit now.

Totally agree that the Remainers need to get off their asses Atlantis, whereas Corbyn seems open to cooperation Swinson seems less interested. Only unity can over come a ten point lead and I wish that would sink in their heads.

Having said that Johnson does need to sell his Brexit deal to the Brexiteers now Farage is openly against it and vermently so. So there is no way they have made a deal unless BoJo has sold his soul to the devil and sent his deal to the trash bin. I expect to see some gains from the Brexit party and loses from the Tories. This only helps remainers as it splits the leave vote.

[Nonsense]

BoJo didn't negotiate a thing, he accepted the deal the EU originally offered and that May had rejected.

https://news.sky.com/story/hammond-reje ... t-10965110

Transition period, backstop in the Irish sea, the works. It's no wonder that he EU said yes, they knew BoJo had to come back with a deal to remove the the threat of the Brexit party and call Labours bluff. He caved in completely and now sells it as something special.

I very much doubt the WA will be further negotiated but the future relationship has a long way to run before we have any idea of where we will end up.

I think you are having a laugh,if you suggest,as you are that BoJo never negotiated his deal,but, that the E.U 'offered' it to him,I think that you might just want to reconsider that point.

The 'original'(MAY's)deal was rejected 3 times in parliament,so, it seems silly saying that they 'offered' it to him.

So,again, with MAY's deal, for the E.U, it was a case of 'take it, or leave it',no re-opening of negotiations,for obvious reasons, that the 'deal' by MAY, was signed by both sides-hence no re-negotiation's.
Then, along comes BoJo, negotiations begin with the E.U, lo-behold,they result in the current 'agreement', awaiting signing & ratification on both sides.

I9 take your point on the following, but,the W.A 'agreement' can be further 'adjusted' by both sides, even though the E.U said that they wouldn't re-open negotiations, the reason is simply that, the current 'agreement' is not signed & sealed with ratification.

That re-opening by BoJo, is what was significant for both sides to the negotiations & credit should be apportioned equally to the E.U & BoJo's negotiators.

I wouldn't go as far as some in saying the 'agreeement' is perfect, it's not, but, it is virtually practical in practic,e with some 'tweak's', but, it's a classic compromise that some exploit for it's imperfections,but MAY's 'deal'(W.A)was full of them, one thing is absolutely certain, CORBYN would never,ever negotiate in the U.K's interest & nobody should ever trust him to run our country.

[Nonsense]

Absolutely well said!

I have great respect for Boris as a masterful political operator, but little but contempt for his fanbois.

Boris had a very privileged upbringing, but even so he's been amazingly successful getting to number 10 and so far staying there. But what has he ever delivered? Did he do anything to stop the de-Britification of London? Has he stopped runway 3? a major concern to his constituents. What social conservative or populist policy has he delivered on or even significantly contributed to delivering on? He delivered London for the Tories and he will probably deliver an overall majority for them at the General Election. But if you are not a Tory party partisan what an earth reason is there for putting your faith in Boris?

You are incorrect on agreeing with BeesKnees's point Rich, because he opened the door to more negotiations,that was an achievement in itself when you consider their resistance to doing so with MAY's W.A.

On the other points you make, how on earth do you think that BoJo could deliver on his own policies,of which he cannot do, because he has no mandate to do it, that's why he can only attempt to do what was remaining in the last Tory manifesto,of which there is a mandate.
However, as a minority government, in a raucous parliament,it's higly unlikely that he could hardly attempt any policy delivery & that's why he sought an election.

[BeesKnee5]

I think you are having a laugh,if you suggest,as you are that BoJo never negotiated his deal,but, that the E.U 'offered' it to him,I think that you might just want to reconsider that point.

The 'original'(MAY's)deal was rejected 3 times in parliament,so, it seems silly saying that they 'offered' it to him.

So,again, with MAY's deal, for the E.U, it was a case of 'take it, or leave it',no re-opening of negotiations,for obvious reasons, that the 'deal' by MAY, was signed by both sides-hence no re-negotiation's.
Then, along comes BoJo, negotiations begin with the E.U, lo-behold,they result in the current 'agreement', awaiting signing & ratification on both sides.

I9 take your point on the following, but,the W.A 'agreement' can be further 'adjusted' by both sides, even though the E.U said that they wouldn't re-open negotiations, the reason is simply that, the current 'agreement' is not signed & sealed with ratification.

That re-opening by BoJo, is what was significant for both sides to the negotiations & credit should be apportioned equally to the E.U & BoJo's negotiators.

I wouldn't go as far as some in saying the 'agreeement' is perfect, it's not, but, it is virtually practical in practic,e with some 'tweak's', but, it's a classic compromise that some exploit for it's imperfections,but MAY's 'deal'(W.A)was full of them, one thing is absolutely certain, CORBYN would never,ever negotiate in the U.K's interest & nobody should ever trust him to run our country.

The original deal offered by the EU was never voted on by parliament. May rejected it and came up with the whole UK back stop agreement instead.

All BoJo has done is taken what was first on the table in 2017 before May and the EU came up with an alternative.

Border in Irish sea
Pay £39bn
Transition period

It's not hard to recognise what happened here. Boris dumped the DUP to accept the deal May couldn't.

[Nonsense]

The original deal offered by the EU was never voted on by parliament. May rejected it and came up with the whole UK back stop agreement instead.

All BoJo has done is taken what was first on the table in 2017 before May and the EU came up with an alternative.

Border in Irish sea
Pay £39bn
Transition period

It's not hard to recognise what happened here. Boris dumped the DUP to accept the deal May couldn't.

The E.U didn't actually do anything,after all, they said all along that it's up to the U.K to tell them what it wants & the E.,U could only accept ot reject U,K proposals.

The Irish question arose for the Good Friday Agreement & also by virtue of the fact that one of it's members has a border with Northern Ireland.

Remember, the E.U only has that member with a border next to Northen Ireland, by telling the South, to "think again", after they rejected the Lisbon Treaty,they duly did so, by holding a second referendum,culminating in acceptance of Lisbon & thus becoming a member of the E.U.

I accept in part what you say about replacing MAY's W.A with a 'border' down the Irish Sea, but, the only reason that BoJo needed to come up with an alternative, was for two main reasons:
1/ MAY's 'deal' (W.A)was rejected in parliament 3 times.
2/ The fact that the E.U's border is on the North-South divide.

The U.K does not want any 'border' either in Ireland,nor around it's coast,it is at the insistance of the E.U that there is a 'border'.

What BoJo is attempting, is to have a 'virtual' border, not a physical border.

I think that is reasonable, that's because technology can provide all the necessary data to validate shipments in\out of the U.K & E.U.

Such accounting methods have long been in existence, it's simply a normal part of book-keeping for any company that exports goods or services on a global basis.
With additional electronic live data, real time positional evidence is available in which to validate that data, such as origin of shipments & destination.

HMRC has enormous resources at it's disposal in which the tracking,validation,accounting & other systems complete the picture of all shipments.
There is,apart from fraudulent shipments, few commodities that can get into the country without notice, perhaps human shipments being one of them.

That's why long ago,I advocated that ex-servicemen should operate as Border Agency Staff at all of our ports,because I would be reassured that they would indeed catch every migrant coming into the country illegally & I would replace the existing incompetent staff with immediate effect.

BoJo didn't 'dump' the DUP, they couldn't accept BoJo's deal,for which my response would be, if you don't like it, vote with the opposition in a 'no confidence' vote & in that election a referendum on Irish unification would be included in the manifesto.

I suspect that the DUP would then drop their opposition & who cares if they then sever their link to the Conservative Party.

[BeesKnee5]

The E.U didn't actually do anything,after all, they said all along that it's up to the U.K to tell them what it wants & the E.,U could only accept ot reject U,K proposals.

The Irish question arose for the Good Friday Agreement & also by virtue of the fact that one of it's members has a border with Northern Ireland.

Remember, the E.U only has that member with a border next to Northen Ireland, by telling the South, to "think again", after they rejected the Lisbon Treaty,they duly did so, by holding a second referendum,culminating in acceptance of Lisbon & thus becoming a member of the E.U.

I accept in part what you say about replacing MAY's W.A with a 'border' down the Irish Sea, but, the only reason that BoJo needed to come up with an alternative, was for two main reasons:
1/ MAY's 'deal' (W.A)was rejected in parliament 3 times.
2/ The fact that the E.U's border is on the North-South divide.

The U.K does not want any 'border' either in Ireland,nor around it's coast,it is at the insistance of the E.U that there is a 'border'.

What BoJo is attempting, is to have a 'virtual' border, not a physical border.

I think that is reasonable, that's because technology can provide all the necessary data to validate shipments in\out of the U.K & E.U.

Such accounting methods have long been in existence, it's simply a normal part of book-keeping for any company that exports goods or services on a global basis.
With additional electronic live data, real time positional evidence is available in which to validate that data, such as origin of shipments & destination.

HMRC has enormous resources at it's disposal in which the tracking,validation,accounting & other systems complete the picture of all shipments.
There is,apart from fraudulent shipments, few commodities that can get into the country without notice, perhaps human shipments being one of them.

That's why long ago,I advocated that ex-servicemen should operate as Border Agency Staff at all of our ports,because I would be reassured that they would indeed catch every migrant coming into the country illegally & I would replace the existing incompetent staff with immediate effect.

BoJo didn't 'dump' the DUP, they couldn't accept BoJo's deal,for which my response would be, if you don't like it, vote with the opposition in a 'no confidence' vote & in that election a referendum on Irish unification would be included in the manifesto.

I suspect that the DUP would then drop their opposition & who cares if they then sever their link to the Conservative Party.

You sound like you are trying to persuade yourself rather than anyone else.

I know all about CHIEF and CDS. I work for a software house providing system solutions to HMRC.
CHIEF is an ancient ICL VME that's barely maintainable. The new CDS is untested and not ready for any kind of volume, it was designed from the bottom up to integrate into the new EU customs interfaces that it will no longer have access to.

They are currently configuring CHIEF to cater for the different scenarios. It's a mess. The idea that they can just magic up high tech solutions overnight is for the birds.

However you sugar it he dumped the DUP. Tories used them for two years to prop up their government and then ditched them when it suited. They have shown that the Conservative and unionist party would be prepared to break the Union.

[Nonsense]

You sound like you are trying to persuade yourself rather than anyone else.

I know all about CHIEF and CDS. I work for a software house providing system solutions to HMRC.
CHIEF is an ancient ICL VME that's barely maintainable. The new CDS is untested and not ready for any kind of volume, it was designed from the bottom up to integrate into the new EU customs interfaces that it will no longer have access to.

They are currently configuring CHIEF to cater for the different scenarios. It's a mess. The idea that they can just magic up high tech solutions overnight is for the birds.

However you sugar it he dumped the DUP. Tories used them for two years to prop up their government and then ditched them when it suited. They have shown that the Conservative and unionist party would be prepared to break the Union.

So, you work for a 'software house' providing systems for hmrc, no wonder it's a 'mess'. ..just joking.

My son is a senior technical services project manager at hmrc, with 40+ years experience that is second to none,I am sure that he is aware of the current status regarding processing documentation systems at his place of work.

My grandson is an accountant,I meet with him weekly, discussing business, he doesn't appear to encounter any significant 'problems' regarding companies that import\export from the U.K, I do not doubt that he would tell me if there were.
Decades ago,before retirement, I was a certified book-keeper to Final Accounts,it was before Sage came into being, one system I worked with was the Kalamazoo 3 in 1 paper based double-entry, being manual, it was possible to cope with any variations,unlike software of today.

If you are running an operating system that is coded differently to another one,particularly a much older one, the integration process is going to be difficult handling the legacy side of things,especially when the software running on the system has to cope globally.


I personally would never operate a system such as is required to cope with the changes,based on Windows, I have used it since 1980,I would rather design software code to run on a particular distro of Linux,but again, the reality is there is no universally integrated,functioning software\operating system available to my limited knowledge of that particular matter,is there?

When I was last involved in business computing, it was IBM that was mainstream,sometimes we have too much to choose from & end up with not everyone being satisfied, much as like elsewhere in life.


It doesn't surprise me though, that IT systems for government,provided by outside businesses are in such a state,as the NHS system was abandoned.

CHIEF is supposed to work within the Customs Declaration System,it's replacement, is supposedly, 'future proof' due to the additional scalability in volumes in the order of x10.
There are a number of applications currently running on hmrc's VME Fujitsu(formerly ICL)Legacy environment, they will soon be redundant.


I know, as you are also aware,that these are not completely or fully operational as yet,but, the objective is to fully integrate them into a state where particular functions that are necessary to operate globally,is currently being worked on between the E.U & the U.K.

I'm sure that any 'gliches' will gradually be ironed out before CHIEF is finally retired.

There may be a glimmer on the horizon with Windows 10 though, supposedly, in January, will be a newly released update pack that includes a Linux Shell Extension,like all of their releases, there will be 'hiccups', but I was considering waiting until then before migrating from W7 64 Bit.

You say that the DUP was 'dumped', I don't agree, however, they are not currently on the same hymn sheet as the Tories over BoJo's 'deal' & I am sure we both agree on that point.

[BeesKnee5]

So, you work for a 'software house' providing systems for hmrc, no wonder it's a 'mess'. ..just joking.

My son is a senior technical services project manager at hmrc, with 40+ years experience that is second to none,I am sure that he is aware of the current status regarding processing documentation systems at his place of work.

My grandson is an accountant,I meet with him weekly, discussing business, he doesn't appear to encounter any significant 'problems' regarding companies that import\export from the U.K, I do not doubt that he would tell me if there were.
Decades ago,before retirement, I was a certified book-keeper to Final Accounts,it was before Sage came into being, one system I worked with was the Kalamazoo 3 in 1 paper based double-entry, being manual, it was possible to cope with any variations,unlike software of today.

If you are running an operating system that is coded differently to another one,particularly a much older one, the integration process is going to be difficult handling the legacy side of things,especially when the software running on the system has to cope globally.


I personally would never operate a system such as is required to cope with the changes,based on Windows, I have used it since 1980,I would rather design software code to run on a particular distro of Linux,but again, the reality is there is no universally integrated,functioning software\operating system available to my limited knowledge of that particular matter,is there?

When I was last involved in business computing, it was IBM that was mainstream,sometimes we have too much to choose from & end up with not everyone being satisfied, much as like elsewhere in life.


It doesn't surprise me though, that IT systems for government,provided by outside businesses are in such a state,as the NHS system was abandoned.

CHIEF is supposed to work within the Customs Declaration System,it's replacement, is supposedly, 'future proof' due to the additional scalability in volumes in the order of x10.
There are a number of applications currently running on hmrc's VME Fujitsu(formerly ICL)Legacy environment, they will soon be redundant.


I know, as you are also aware,that these are not completely or fully operational as yet,but, the objective is to fully integrate them into a state where particular functions that are necessary to operate globally,is currently being worked on between the E.U & the U.K.

I'm sure that any 'gliches' will gradually be ironed out before CHIEF is finally retired.

There may be a glimmer on the horizon with Windows 10 though, supposedly, in January, will be a newly released update pack that includes a Linux Shell Extension,like all of their releases, there will be 'hiccups', but I was considering waiting until then before migrating from W7 64 Bit.

You say that the DUP was 'dumped', I don't agree, however, they are not currently on the same hymn sheet as the Tories over BoJo's 'deal' & I am sure we both agree on that point.

I don't want to go too far off course but most modern cloud based systems using front ends like Angular don't really care what operating system you use. VME ICL is pretty much just run as an emulator these days, most of the hardware disappeared at the time of the millennium bug because it was seen as a good time to switch.

CDS failed to be ready for 31/10/2019 and they have been working on it for years. Most of my work is on the RTE/I (Real time earnings) project and CIS ( Customer Information System). Mostly Unix based back end as far as I'm aware.

[Nonsense]

I don't want to go too far off course but most modern cloud based systems using front ends like Angular don't really care what operating system you use. VME ICL is pretty much just run as an emulator these days, most of the hardware disappeared at the time of the millennium bug because it was seen as a good time to switch.

CDS failed to be ready for 31/10/2019 and they have been working on it for years. Most of my work is on the RTE/I (Real time earnings) project and CIS ( Customer Information System). Mostly Unix based back end as far as I'm aware.

I think that UNIX is a more complete system than Linux on it's own,I used to run a few distro's of Linux, which I do like, but, back then I was an O.E.M, building gaming machines(Linux was poor at running games until Wine became available),it's now a very expensive hobby if High End stuff is what you want, seeing as I rarely do gaming now, I have turned back to micro-electronics,of which there is pretty interesting things going on all the time.

The RTE /1 gets taxes in for the Treasury throughout the year when it's due, it helps the cash flow,but doesn't stop government borrowing.

I think that the government can cope until the end of the transitional period(unless we leave without a deal)with CHIEF running within the CDS,thereafter it should be prepared for whatever comes along,but I suspect that we will,with a 'tweak' accept BoJo's deal should the Tories win the election.

[skinster]

[Beren]

Brexit has never been a great idea, but it may be even worse today than it was three years ago.

Nov. 6, 2019

Brexit Means Something Different in 2019

As Brexit watchers eye the UK’s looming Dec. 12 election, wondering how it will proceed and whether it can break the stalemate, Mark Leonard makes a broader point in a New Statesman essay: that the world has changed quite a bit since Britons initially chose Brexit in 2016.

“When Britain went to the polls to vote on the Europe question in 2016, Barack Obama was US President and there was debate about a so-called G2 world, where China and the US, the two biggest economies, would find ways of managing their differences to the benefit of the world,” Leonard writes. “David Cameron and [Chancellor of the Exchequer] George Osborne hoped to maintain the ‘special relationship’ with the US while also declaring a new golden age with China.” Brexiteers’ claims were far-fetched, but the UK becoming a “Singapore on steroids” seemed plausible, at least, in 2016’s world order.

Fast forward to today, and one finds the US and China furiously decoupling their economies. Historical powers Russia, Turkey, and Iran have all grown more assertive. The open trading economy is reorganizing itself into protectionist blocs—and the EU, which Britain is leaving, is the only one that stands a chance to balance the US and China. As a result, Brexit means something different in 2019, Leonard writes: “Rather than taking back control, in a world of great power blocs Britain may find itself at the mercy of other powers. In the place of European sovereignty we may have DIY servitude.”

Many of the claims of the Leave campaign were obviously false, but there was an internal logic to the idea that Britain could cut free and seek to be “Singapore on steroids”, as the former Tory and Ukip MP Douglas Carswell is credited as saying. The problem is that somewhere between 23 June 2016 and today, the world they wanted to enter died.

[Nonsense]

Brexit has never been a great idea, but it may be even worse today than it was three years ago.

You might say that,but consider that we will end up with something, for which no price is too much to pay for-our freedom.

What thec ountry does with it,is another matter.

There are cost in any decision we make, the people(not politicians)decided to leave the E.U,that is a cost that is worth paying for the long term benefit of the country.
However, by retaining connections with the E.U is not fully embracing what the people decided,it's a difficult thing to consider,but basically, leave, meant leaving the 'political' union of the E.U & retaining that aspect in the future of our relationship with europe is not delivering leave in it's entirety.

There are some six or seven main trading blocs around the globe, as well as benefiting members, there are also costly restrictions that only having real freedom can challenge.
If the U.K did as CORBYN , with others want,by accepting a Customs Union within an agreed deal, we would have restrictions on our freedom to make advantageous deals for this country around the globe ,yet paying money to the E.U, with no say on what happens to it & we would forever be a vassalage state reducued to a form of impotence or penury.

Having that freedom, means that we have to use our brains a bit more, work harder as individuals,just as the Victorians did & not to expect 'entitlements' in life.

I have no doubt,that despite the difficulties, that this country can make & pay it's way in the world.

That's how the country made it's mark on the world, not being insular, but being outward,industrious,inventive,competitive & always looking out for business opportunities wherever they arise.

I don't see Brexit as a 'mistake', I see people that made a decision & a promise on that decision being broken by politicians.

The people made that decision to leave, we must now leave, the people do not want another 'referendum' as a 'final say' on the matter, that decision has already been made in 2016.

CORBYN's prevarications, the votes against any Tory negotiated deals, are dishonest, they are made to please Labour's paymasters, the trade unions,including within the N.H.S,just remember, it was Labour that introduced the private sector into the N.H.S with PFI, once that moment happened, it opened the Pandoras Box to the Tories to go further.

[BeesKnee5]

What a joke.

I already have all the freedom I need.

In fact my preference would be to ditch the houses of parliament and all the shysters and bought peerages along with it.

Once we leave the EU then there will be one less place to blame for the bunch of crooks we elect in our faulty electoral system

[B0ycey]

What a joke.

I already have all the freedom I need.

Amen. Although leaving the EU means less freedom as you don't retain the privileges you have now throughout the EU when out.

Perhaps people need to be reminded that the UK government agreed to all EU law before it becomes enforced on us and it will be copy and pasted as UK law when we leave.

[Atlantis]

Boris Johnson just made the perfect argument for remaining in the EU. Speaking in Northern Ireland, Johnson said his Brexit deal would allow the province to keep free movement and access to the Single Market and described this as a "great deal." However, these benefits will both be lost by the rest of the United Kingdon.

Why does he hate the English and Scottish so much?

[Potemkin]

Boris Johnson just made the perfect argument for remaining in the EU. Speaking in Northern Ireland, Johnson said his Brexit deal would allow the province to keep free movement and access to the Single Market and described this as a "great deal." However, these benefits will both be lost by the rest of the United Kingdon.

Why does he hate the English and Scottish so much?

Basic Rule of Politics #72: Tell different lies to different audiences.