Beechey Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 https://www.ft.com/content/78fcb8bc-7579-11e8-a8c4-408cfba4327c Why not just say the words "Tier One"? Why not? Why keep everyone nervous about your defence plans after the catastrophe that has been the previous eight years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donut Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 Wonder if this guy voted for sovereignty? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11r4E_Hi8Dk If he is real, god help us all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, Donut said: The answer to the question is the brexit white paper produced by the government, which includes leave voters, says "parliament has always been sovereign". That is the answer. Unless theyre lying. Why would they lie by talking about taking back control, then admit we had control? Is anyone in this whole brexit thing capable of telling something that isn't a lie? You didn't answer the question. So again, how can a country who can't even do it's own trade deals and have it's highest court overulled by a foreign jurisdiction have it's own sovereighty? Edited 21 June 2018 by MattP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr The Singh Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 1 minute ago, MattP said: You didn't answer the question. So again, how can a country who can't even do it's own trade deals and have it's highest court overulled by a foreign jurisdiction have it's own sovereighty? Can I answer it, Matt P? Is it number 3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 4 minutes ago, MattP said: You didn't answer the question. So again, how can a country who can't even do it's own trade deals and have it's highest court overulled by a foreign jurisdiction have it's own sovereighty? You can’t, basically our prime minister is no more than a mayor of the British isles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strokes Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 14 minutes ago, Beechey said: https://www.ft.com/content/78fcb8bc-7579-11e8-a8c4-408cfba4327c Why not just say the words "Tier One"? Why not? Why keep everyone nervous about your defence plans after the catastrophe that has been the previous eight years? Paywall mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beechey Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Strokes said: Paywall mate. Bugger they must have added it after I posted. To summarise: May has been under fire because she has asked Gavin Williamson to justify why the UK should be a "Tier One" military power. This has shocked the MoD as they expected a good settlement in the defence modernisation paper from the government, especially since there's a £20bn gap in the budget over 10 or so years. May is then asked whether she believes the UK should be "Tier One", she responds by saying "I want the UK to be a leading military power". MPs now roundly saying UK should remain a top tier power and say Conservative voters won't support anything less. Iffy to be dancing on this rope, especially given the state of the Armed Forces right now. Edited 21 June 2018 by Beechey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 2 minutes ago, MattP said: You didn't answer the question. So again, how can a country who can't even do it's own trade deals and have it's highest court overulled by a foreign jurisdiction have it's own sovereighty? We used our sovereign power to opt to pool some of our sovereignty with others in the national interest, including in the fields of trade and law. So the UK agrees trade deals and runs the ECJ jointly with the other 27 EU nations. The EU is not (yet) a foreign jurisdiction. We are part of it (for now). This is clearly not a popular move among those of a nationalist bent who believe that sovereignty should not be shared above the national level, even in an increasingly global world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/15/trump-threatens-use-us-trade-talks-force-nhs-pay-drugs/ Even the possibility of this was obvious to anyone even vaguely familiar with the way this US administration functions. But hey, price of the special relationship...right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beechey Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 (edited) 2 minutes ago, leicsmac said: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/15/trump-threatens-use-us-trade-talks-force-nhs-pay-drugs/ Even the possibility of this was obvious to anyone even vaguely familiar with the way this US administration functions. But hey, price of the special relationship...right? Anyone who believes a special relationship exists between the UK and USA on more than a military/intelligence sharing effort is a bit of a tool. They're our most important ally, and we theirs. But that's basically as far as it goes nowadays. US national interests have almost always trumped the so-called special relationship. Edited 21 June 2018 by Beechey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicsmac Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Beechey said: Anyone who believes a special relationship exists between the UK and USA on more than a military/intelligence sharing effort is a bit of a tool. They're our most important ally, and we theirs. But that's basically as far as it goes nowadays. US national interests have almost always trumped the so-called special relationship. You'd think that, wouldn't you? However, there certainly seem to be plenty of "tools", as you describe them, about who actually believe the US (in general and under the current administration most certainly in particular) will be fair with the UK against maximising their own interests. What the UK can do about it should the US act exactly as described here, however, is perhaps a more loaded question, but given the power the US wields globally against that of the UK I honestly don't know how much can be done. Edited 21 June 2018 by leicsmac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifted*fox Posted 21 June 2018 Share Posted 21 June 2018 32 minutes ago, leicsmac said: What the UK can do about it should the US act exactly as described here, however, is perhaps a more loaded question, but given the power the US wields globally against that of the UK I honestly don't know how much can be done. Maybe we can sign up to some sort of European membership scheme where we can... Oh, forget it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, MattP said: You didn't answer the question. So again, how can a country who can't even do it's own trade deals and have it's highest court overulled by a foreign jurisdiction have it's own sovereighty? We didn't need to do our own trade deals because we got them via the EU. I'm not sure why that's such a bad thing given the EU gets better deals than we'll ever get on our own due to the economic power of the bloc. Our MEPs hold vetos over any EU laws we don't want to see implemented. So all the laws that are implemented have a democratic mandate. Which court has jurisdiction is irreverent. It would only overule if our courts misapplied human rights, for example. That's a good thing. Edited 22 June 2018 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 8 hours ago, Beechey said: Bugger they must have added it after I posted. To summarise: May has been under fire because she has asked Gavin Williamson to justify why the UK should be a "Tier One" military power. This has shocked the MoD as they expected a good settlement in the defence modernisation paper from the government, especially since there's a £20bn gap in the budget over 10 or so years. May is then asked whether she believes the UK should be "Tier One", she responds by saying "I want the UK to be a leading military power". MPs now roundly saying UK should remain a top tier power and say Conservative voters won't support anything less. Iffy to be dancing on this rope, especially given the state of the Armed Forces right now. Basically all the Tory austerity.chickens are coming home to roost at once. They've underfunded.everything for years so either need to break their own economic rules (Hammond has already said there's no money left) or see services decimated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 Project fear. 14,000 direct job losses and a supply chain of 110,000 jobs in the event of no deal. Just from one company. Airbus plans UK job cuts amid fears of hard Brexit impact https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/22/airbus-plans-uk-cuts-amid-fears-of-hard-brexit-impact?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Izzy Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 28 minutes ago, toddybad said: Project fear. 14,000 direct job losses and a supply chain of 110,000 jobs in the event of no deal. Just from one company. Airbus plans UK job cuts amid fears of hard Brexit impact https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/22/airbus-plans-uk-cuts-amid-fears-of-hard-brexit-impact?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard I'm not keen on these type of headlines. Using words like "planning, preparing & set to...." just sets the hares running and doesn't guarantee it's actually 100% going to happen. It still might happen, but at this stage it's just guesswork, speculation, scaremongering and creates panic. I can't really see the benefit in publishing it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innovindil Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 2 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said: I'm not keen on these type of headlines. Using words like "planning, preparing & set to...." just sets the hares running and doesn't guarantee it's actually 100% going to happen. It still might happen, but at this stage it's just guesswork, speculation, scaremongering and creates panic. I can't really see the benefit in publishing it. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-44570931 The BBC version is a much better read tbh. They talk about leaving the UK if we don't get a transition deal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 15 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said: I'm not keen on these type of headlines. Using words like "planning, preparing & set to...." just sets the hares running and doesn't guarantee it's actually 100% going to happen. It still might happen, but at this stage it's just guesswork, speculation, scaremongering and creates panic. I can't really see the benefit in publishing it. I'm not sure it is speculation when it's a quote from the company itself. They're basically telling us directly that they'll be off if there's no deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 3 minutes ago, toddybad said: I'm not sure it is speculation when it's a quote from the company itself. They're basically telling us directly that they'll be off if there's no deal. It's called lobbying. It's easier for their business to be in the single market so they release stories like this to put pressure on the govt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Izzy Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 5 minutes ago, toddybad said: I'm not sure it is speculation when it's a quote from the company itself. They're basically telling us directly that they'll be off if there's no deal. It’s still all just ‘if’s, buts and maybes’ though isn’t it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 22 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said: It’s still all just ‘if’s, buts and maybes’ though isn’t it? I suppose in terms of the deal we do or don't get it is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milo Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 1 hour ago, toddybad said: Project fear. 14,000 direct job losses and a supply chain of 110,000 jobs in the event of no deal. Just from one company. Airbus plans UK job cuts amid fears of hard Brexit impact https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/22/airbus-plans-uk-cuts-amid-fears-of-hard-brexit-impact?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Company owned by German/Spanish/French governments in Brexit threat shocker... ...is a more accurate headline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 1 hour ago, toddybad said: We didn't need to do our own trade deals because we got them via the EU. I'm not sure why that's such a bad thing given the EU gets better deals than we'll ever get on our own due to the economic power of the bloc. Our MEPs hold vetos over any EU laws we don't want to see implemented. So all the laws that are implemented have a democratic mandate. Which court has jurisdiction is irreverent. It would only overule if our courts misapplied human rights, for example. That's a good thing. Toddy I have no problem with people thinking this is a good thing, that's a fair viewpoint. That isn't national sovereignty though when you do those things. Our MEP's do not hold a veto either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alf Bentley Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 23 minutes ago, Webbo said: It's called lobbying. It's easier for their business to be in the single market so they release stories like this to put pressure on the govt. 22 minutes ago, Izzy Muzzett said: It’s still all just ‘if’s, buts and maybes’ though isn’t it? Lots of things in life involve "ifs". IF LCFC sells our best player and recruits duffers, we could get relegated (not applicable, it seems). IF I threatened Wasilewski, I could get my head kicked in. Here: "Airbus said IF the UK left the EU next year without a deal - meaning it left both the single market and customs union immediately and without any agreed transition - it would "lead to severe disruption and interruption of UK production". "This scenario would force Airbus to reconsider its investments in the UK, and its long-term footprint in the country". Webbo's right that its lobbying. They're seeking to pressure the govt to avoid No Deal and Customs barriers, in particular, as they believe these would massively damage their business. Whether that would just involve disruption and lost profits or the company moving production abroad is anyone's guess - though I doubt that they'd make such a public statement, unsettling for their staff, as a complete bluff. Airbus already has plants on the continent, imports a lot of parts and does a lot of trade with China, so if there's no transition deal and increased customs barriers/disruption from March, it certainly makes economic sense for them to shift production to the continent or China. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 22 June 2018 Share Posted 22 June 2018 (edited) 19 minutes ago, MattP said: Toddy I have no problem with people thinking this is a good thing, that's a fair viewpoint. That isn't national sovereignty though when you do those things. Our MEP's do not hold a veto either. It may not sit with the meps but nations hold vetos over EU law making. And I'm not really fussed whether it's sovereinty or not. If sovereignty means we're worse off then it's a strange thing to be chasing. Edited 22 June 2018 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts