EU-BREXIT - Page 279 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in Europe's nation states, the E.U. & Russia.

Moderator: PoFo Europe Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please. This is an international political discussion forum, so please post in English only.
By SolarCross
#15042163
@Presvias

Redwood:
Consistently voted for higher taxes on plane tickets Show votes
11 votes for, 0 votes against, between 2014–2017

Why don't you support this one? :?:
By Presvias
#15042164
You're singling out one policy he voted on that helps your case.

I stumbled across this:

These are the Climate Science Denier MPs Lobbying for a Hard Brexit
....

Redwood has previously questioned the veracity of climate science, writing on his personal blog that:

“I look out of my window to see my garden frozen solid, covered in frost and snow. It is April 7th, and I have just turned the heating up … Will the government please give us some accurate figures of temperature trends over the last 100 years, given the disputes we read about over the very simple question “Has it been getting warmer or not?”

On the same blog, Redwood has complained about the “BBC peddling climate change alarmism” by not including skeptics’ voices in debates about global warming.

Redwood signed a letter in May 2017 to then-energy secretary Amber Rudd, which argued that setting “radical” climate targets would not reduce Europe’s emissions because others in the EU would just do less.

Redwood also attended a 2010 meeting of climate science deniers in parliament, organised byDUP MP Sammy Wilson.



https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.desmog ... exit%3famp

Harharhar, that article is funny, this gave me a good chuckle:

"The other MPs that voted against the Act are no longer in parliament. One, former St Albans MP Peter Lilley, was mooted for a peerage until a Channel 4 documentary alleging he was willing to sell his Brexit connections to a fake Chinese consortium appeared to scupper his chances."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5446790/p ... it-claims/

A Sunday Times probe found the trio all appeared willing to approach key ministers on behalf of a Chinese company offering cash for Brexit advice.

Pitching for a job, Mr Lilley described how he attended two advisory groups alongside Brexit minister Steve Baker and Trade Secretary Liam Fox.

Ex-Health Secretary Andrew Lansley was accused of using his influence to provide Brexit 'intelligence'
4
Ex-Health Secretary Andrew Lansley was accused of using his influence to provide Brexit 'intelligence'Credit: Getty Images - Getty
Ex Health Secretary Lord Lansley was caught on camera offering to use his connections and knowledge to provide Brexit “intelligence”.

And Andrew Mitchell, also a former minister, who charges £6,000 a day in consultancy fees - also appeared happy to give paid advice to the Chinese firm.

The joint newspaper and Dispatches investigation was set up after sources told of a lobbying bonanza sparked by Brexit as firms rush to cash in with ex ministers becoming “guns for hire”.

After viewing the secret footage, Sir Alistair Graham, the former chairman of the committee on standards in public life described it as “unacceptable” that former ministers were acting for private gain.

He said: “To take advantage of this difficult time and confusion to make extra money doesn’t demonstrate a great deal of concern for the public interest.

“Giving some special help to one company, when that information is not generally available is not acceptable.”

Speaking about Mr Lilley, he said he was “wrong” to propose such a service because he was offering his “access to very important information” to “one company rather than generally


:D And you wonder why I don't like Tories??
By SolarCross
#15042168
Presvias wrote:You're singling out one policy he voted on that helps your case.

It doesn't help my case but I happen to share Redwood's scepticism on "climate change". But I am curious why you included it as evidence of "lowering standards" which we have already established is a euphemism for raising taxes and increasing the scope and powers of bureaucrats.

Do you support airlines getting tax free fuel while the motorist is bled like a stuck pig? Is that "raising standards" for "climate change"?
User avatar
By ingliz
#15042173
Two years wasted.

It's odds on that Johnson has kaffled - 'last-minute compromises are made'.

So the DUP is dumped with a golden parachute.

And it's May's 2018 (Northern Ireland-only backstop) deal.


:lol:
User avatar
By Kirillov
#15042301
ingliz wrote:Two years wasted.

It's odds on that Johnson has kaffled - 'last-minute compromises are made'.

So the DUP is dumped with a golden parachute.

And it's May's 2018 (Northern Ireland-only backstop) deal.


:lol:


It's all very quiet in here. No Nonsense, Kaiserscharmm and SolarCross screaming outrage like they did at Theresa May's deal, even though this deal is basically the same? Is it because their beloved blond fop is responsible for this one? It doesn't surprise me - SolarCross in particular seems like the type who likes it when Old Etonians "butter his crumpets".
User avatar
By Beren
#15042330
The Guardian wrote:A similar arrangement was rejected by Theresa May as a deal that no British prime minister could accept.

But now the British people want to get Brexit done so much that even that is acceptable, although May's deal got acceptable too as soon as she offered her resignation for it. :lol:

Also, Brexit needs to get done so much as well that Rees-Mogg firmly believes such a deal will pass parliament. Are there still people that believe it's the EU that wants to prevent the UK from leaving rather than it's the Brits plotting against each other? :lol:
By SolarCross
#15042357
Kirillov wrote:It's all very quiet in here. No Nonsense, Kaiserscharmm and SolarCross screaming outrage like they did at Theresa May's deal, even though this deal is basically the same? Is it because their beloved blond fop is responsible for this one? It doesn't surprise me - SolarCross in particular seems like the type who likes it when Old Etonians "butter his crumpets".

i've been busy with real life, so what is new?
By Atlantis
#15042426
Johnson's deal may be similar to May's deal; however, his approach is diametrically opposed to her's. This article shows well why that spells trouble for the future. Boris navigates by sight without a long-term plan. That allows him to paper over the fundamental contradictions in his approach, which bodes ill for the future.

Any Johnson Brexit deal sows seeds of future confrontation with the EU

Boris Johnson wanted to be prime minister long before he wanted to take Britain out of the EU. The novelty of Brexit among his ambitions prompts a thought experiment: imagine there was no referendum. By some other craft Johnson has reached Downing Street. Would he propose swapping full EU membership for the latest version of a deal being hammered out in Brussels today?

Of course not. It would be a bizarre surrender of international status and economic leverage in the world’s largest trading bloc. He would see no wisdom in quitting the single market, erecting new borders and retreating from the rooms where big continental decisions are made. Even the fiercest Eurosceptics did not advocate that path before 2016. They thought there must be a way to leave the club without relinquishing members’ privileges. Seeing Brussels as a parasite on sovereignty, they did not understand that EU membership was a component of British power.

That is the cardinal error of Brexit, but its significance is easily lost in the detail. For days there has been an intense focus on customs arrangements. Could something be devised to allow Northern Ireland to trade as if it were still in the EU, while reassuring hardline unionists that they have left? Apparently so.

But it is important to step back and recall why this problem existed in the first place. Johnson envisages a future in which the UK does not shadow EU market rules. The greater the regulatory divergence on either side of a border, the harder that border has to be. Zoom out still further and you see a statement of intent by the UK to gain a competitive edge by undercutting its former EU partners. The original economic conception of Brexit is to make Britain a low-cost lure for investment. Brussels doesn’t like the sound of that. The more aggressively Britain intends to price itself relative to the rest of Europe, the harder the EU will make it for British goods and services to be sold within the single market. (What Johnson isn’t telling British voters is that the competitive edge he promises will be achieved by internal devaluation – shaving down wages, in real terms, and working conditions.)

Johnson’s wrangles in Brussels look like a re-enactment of Theresa May’s negotiations, but pull the lens back and you see a vital difference: May was persuaded of the need for strategic proximity to the rest of Europe and saw economic alignment as a necessary condition to achieve that. Her only intervention in the referendum campaign was a speech arguing that British national interests had to be represented in EU institutions and could be amplified there. She never rejected that view but tried unsuccessfully to find a Brexit model that could accommodate it.

Johnson’s view is different. He does not feel the tension between economic divergence and strategic alliance. He doesn’t see beyond his immediate desire in any endeavour, whether in private self-indulgence or public policy. As one former cabinet minister puts it: “He’s no chess player. He thinks one move at a time. In Johnson’s world, the UK can develop an economic model conceived by people who despise the EU, alongside a foreign policy in which UK-EU relations are unaffected. His rise to power has been fuelled by ideological anti-Europeanism. He is the anointed candidate of Tory hardliners who hoped that Brexit would cause the whole European project to unravel.

Yet he also seems to think that EU leaders do not notice or do not mind. The prime minister has built a career on crass anti-Brussels caricatures and now imagines he can dissipate ill will by inserting jovial references to “our European friends” in his speeches. He is mistaken. Westminster might have lost sight of strategic dilemmas generated by Brexit, but EU leaders have not. Initial hope that the UK might still be accommodated within the broader scope of a European project has given way to anxiety about the emergence of a volatile lone-wolf state on the continent’s doorstep.

It is understood well enough in Brussels that Brexit and Trumpism are ideological siblings
Anti-Brexit arguments dwell on the UK’s welterweight status in trade negotiations compared to a 27-state bloc, but Britain is still a pretty powerful country: a G7 economy with a permanent seat on the UN security council and, by European standards, a big army. EU membership has never stopped Britain pursuing its own foreign and security policy – as Tony Blair’s clashes with Jacques Chirac over the Iraq war demonstrated. But generally, UK power has been plugged into the European project to the benefit of both. What happens when that plug is pulled?

Diplomatic protocol on both sides of the Channel is to insist that trade decoupling will not damage other types of partnership. Privately there is grim recognition that the world doesn’t work like that, not any more, not with Donald Trump in the White House, hurling tariffs across the Atlantic as part of a weird, multi-pronged attack on former western allies.

It is understood well enough in Brussels that Brexit and Trumpism are ideological siblings. They are fuelled by the same nationalist rhetoric, cheered by the same enemies of European solidarity and abetted to varying degrees by the Kremlin. Nor has it escaped attention in Paris and Berlin that Johnson tried to shut down parliament illegally, suggesting a cavalier approach to good governance. There are no reserves of personal trust in the prime minister and he has hitched himself to a doctrine of cut-throat competition that, whether he understands it or not, sets the UK on an economic collision course with Brussels. Even with a deal, the consequences will be messy.

Brexit was conceived and supported by people who want the EU to fail, yet any UK government that is committed to the rule of law and democracy should want the EU to thrive. That is the irreducible dilemma Britain faces. Those have been the options since 2016, obscured by technical jargon, shrouded in dishonest rhetoric, bedevilled with detail. One way emboldens forces of division and nationalism; the other way strengthens the project that was founded to resist those forces. Johnson chose his path and the stupid tragedy of it all is that he doesn’t understand where it leads but is dragging the country there anyway.


I'll never understand the hubris that makes the Brits believe their intentions are not understood on the continent. Is it the inability to understand other people and languages that makes Brits believe others can't understand them either? I have bad news for them. There are no countries so transparent to foreign scrutiny as the UK and the US.
By Presvias
#15042427
What intention?

He is a bendable puppet, didn't you get the memo? He pretends to be a cuddly liberal as mayor, or a nasty brexeater, depends on the weather ie who's pulling his strings.

In this case it's Cummings, who himself is linked with bigger oligarcs, big biz egc and who themselves are strung along like puppets.

That is the reality. He hasn't a clue - he hasn't any plan at all.

Idk why these people want to do this stuff to our lives but hey, welcome to another day in paradise and soon to be singapore on thames, on a miserable October morning. 8) :roll:
User avatar
By Beren
#15042429
Atlantis wrote:Johnson's deal may be similar to May's deal; however, his approach is diametrically opposed to her's. This article shows well why that spells trouble for the future. Boris navigates by sight without a long-term plan. That allows him to paper over the fundamental contradictions in his approach, which bodes ill for the future.

Any Johnson Brexit deal sows seeds of future confrontation with the EU

It may be absolutely deliberate and part of a long-term plan if Johnson navigates to a future confrontation with the EU. Confronting the EU from the outside could be even more profitable than doing the same from within. He could gear up the WW2 psychosis of the Brits then, for example. We've always been at war with Eurasia.
User avatar
By Negotiator
#15042431
...

"Long-term plan" and "Johnson" in the same sentence ? :eek:
User avatar
By Beren
#15042433
Negotiator wrote:...

"Long-term plan" and "Johnson" in the same sentence ? :eek:

Not his own long-term plan perhaps, but I'd rather bet there is a long-term plan.
By Rich
#15042465
Johnson has had along term plan, to get to the top and stay there for as long as possible. So he started by making up lies about the EU, because those lies were popular with his daily telegraph readers. He was anti welfare because that was popular with the readers and Tory party members. London has high rents, so as London Mayor he became the arch defender of the welfare budget, calling Housing benefit caps ethnic cleansing. He promised to lie down in front of the runway 3 bulldozers, because his constituency is close to Heathrow. He's really a Cameronite with a bit of political incorrectness thrown in, He's definitely to the left of Teresa May on immigration.
By Presvias
#15042511
Rich wrote:Johnson has had along term plan, to get to the top and stay there for as long as possible. So he started by making up lies about the EU, because those lies were popular with his daily telegraph readers. He was anti welfare because that was popular with the readers and Tory party members. London has high rents, so as London Mayor he became the arch defender of the welfare budget, calling Housing benefit caps ethnic cleansing. He promised to lie down in front of the runway 3 bulldozers, because his constituency is close to Heathrow. He's really a Cameronite with a bit of political incorrectness thrown in, He's definitely to the left of Teresa May on immigration.


Good analysis as usual, I wouldn't class it as a long term plan per se but a survival/climbing strategy where he chameleonizes in any situation, like his mate dodgy dave. I still think what Beren, and I said is true as well as your post.
By Atlantis
#15042523
Beren wrote:It may be absolutely deliberate and part of a long-term plan if Johnson navigates to a future confrontation with the EU. Confronting the EU from the outside could be even more profitable than doing the same from within. He could gear up the WW2 psychosis of the Brits then, for example. We've always been at war with Eurasia.


The UK is already the most deregulated economy in the EU and is therefore in a position to suck investment away from other EU members. Outside the EU, the UK will no longer be able to do that since the EU will put up barriers to protect its economy from British social and tax dumping. Barnier and most other European leaders are very aware of the fact that Johnson aims to undercut their economies by Singapore-style deregulation. If Brussels bureaucrats are good at something, it is to fine-tune contractual clauses so as to preempt any future abuse by trading partners.

Gearing up WW2 psychosis doesn't do anything for the economy. And when people get tired of it after a while, it won't even help him in the polls.
User avatar
By ingliz
#15042538
Atlantis wrote:Johnson's deal

It is “unlawful for Her Majesty’s government to enter into arrangements under which Northern Ireland forms part of a separate customs territory to Great Britain.

We expect that petition to be lodged tomorrow and to be heard on Friday. We believe the government’s proposed withdrawal agreement is contrary to section 55 of the Taxation (Cross-border Trade) Act 2018. We do not understand how the government might have come to negotiate a withdrawal agreement in terms that breach amendments tabled by its own European Research Group. Unless and until section 55 is repealed by the UK parliament, it is simply not open, as a matter of law, for the United Kingdom to enter into such an agreement."


Jolyon Maugham QC


:lol:
By Rugoz
#15042586
Atlantis wrote:The UK is already the most deregulated economy in the EU and is therefore in a position to suck investment away from other EU members. Outside the EU, the UK will no longer be able to do that since the EU will put up barriers to protect its economy from British social and tax dumping. Barnier and most other European leaders are very aware of the fact that Johnson aims to undercut their economies by Singapore-style deregulation. If Brussels bureaucrats are good at something, it is to fine-tune contractual clauses so as to preempt any future abuse by trading partners.

Gearing up WW2 psychosis doesn't do anything for the economy. And when people get tired of it after a while, it won't even help him in the polls.


Ah yes, everybody must submit the EU bureaucracy, otherwise it undercuts the block's economy. :roll:
The UK is too large for tax dumping to be attractive, maybe you should point your finger at Ireland instead.
User avatar
By Nonsense
#15042697
A provisional agreement has been made between the E.U & the government.

Both sides will need to have to the details scrutinised & agreed by their respective parliaments before ratification of the treaty.

The 'alternative' is no deal, with the U,K leaving on 31 October & it would no longer be certain that the E.U would accept any further extension.

Any points left outstanding by the respective parliaments could be handled during the transition period for when a trade deal would negotiated.
  • 1
  • 277
  • 278
  • 279
  • 280
  • 281
  • 305
What is happening in Iran?

If the media is anything to go by, Iran's recent p[…]

Another school shooting

And here's the definition of "militia":[…]

I was tear gassed once. It sucks. :hmm: It's not[…]

about great ring

I have searched carefully in the Internet about th[…]