MC Prussian Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 1 hour ago, Finnaldo said: The worst the 'Far Left' get in the UK are bad opinions, attempting to deplatform people they don't like at Uni campuses and a couple of bellends throwing soft drinks. Meanwhile the Counter-Terrorism Chief noted four foiled terrorism plots from Far Right extremists in 2017: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43200966 There's also a growing number of Far Right referrals to prevent: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47645863 There's plenty of bellends and apathy in the Far Left, but this myth that they're somehow the biggest threat to the West is clearly bullshit. Yes, far-right extremists should be monitored, exposed and sentenced, provided they have committed a crime or were in the process of doing so. Still, I wonder whether this report mentioned here has been published by now: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/feb/10/home-office-urged-to-release-leftwing-extremist-report Because I'm intrigued to see what it's like on the other side, too. There's certainly a prevalence to discuss and mention right-wing extremism in the media, but little about groups and movements on the other side of the political spectrum. But maybe that's just me. And the biggest threats to the West are the attempts at destabilizing democracies across all countries, plus the subject of disinformation (and suppression of information/censorship by Social Media outlets). You could add religious zealots to that, as well. Right-wing extremists are on the fringe in Western Societies and luckily still small in numbers.
Alf Bentley Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 45 minutes ago, MattP said: I full agree - I'm not arguing for No deal or saying there is a mandate for it. My point it it appears the BBC are deliberately manipulating figures to show "anti Brexit" parties against "pro Brexit parties" when the figures they are actually coming to isn't the latter but "No Deal" parties. Yes I'd like to Raab to win and I fully hope the threat of No Deal leads us to getting one parliament can pass - if not then you know what the law states. I agree that if the BBC categories are pro-Brexit & anti-Brexit, the Tories have to be categorised as pro-Brexit. If the categories were pro- and anti-No Deal, they'd have to add Labour to the "Anti" category. So, 35% No Deal, 55% Anti & 9% Tories, seeking a Brexit Deal but keeping No Deal as a back-up. But what about Raab repeatedly saying we should leave in October, with or without a deal? When would such a deal be negotiated? If Raab wins, he'll only take office mid-July at the earliest, everyone then goes on holiday until September & the current Commission is replaced at the end of October. By Sept/Oct, Barnier might be awaiting confirmation to replace Juncker. I can understand the stance of "we want a deal parliament can pass, but No Deal is better than a bad deal". But Raab is ruling out an extension beyond October, when it's difficult to see how a deal could be re-negotiated before then. His call for re-negotiation is meaningless under those circumstances. He's effectively advocating No Deal as a policy - a policy for which there is no popular or electoral mandate whatsoever. At the last election 55% of votes were cast for parties vehemently opposed to No Deal and only 2% for parties advocating No Deal.......yet he's rushing to No Deal as quickly as he can. I know what the law states: that we're on course for No Deal, but that Parliament can bring down the Govt or legislate for a referendum (with difficulty now) or seek to instruct the Govt to revoke Article 50. I voted Remain but long accepted that a compromise Brexit had to proceed for democratic reasons. That's why I opposed a referendum or revocation. But if we have an anti-democratic PM who seeks to force through an extremist No Deal Brexit without any mandate or reasonable negotiations, that needs to be prevented by any democratic means available.
Alf Bentley Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 Ample evidence presented by @Voll Blau and @MattP...... Expel Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour Party now!.......and Guarantee a Labour Govt at the next election!
Innovindil Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 7 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said: Ample evidence presented by @Voll Blau and @MattP...... Expel Jeremy Corbyn from the Labour Party now!.......and Guarantee a Labour Govt at the next election!
davieG Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48256318 Who pays what etc in case you didn't know. EU budget: Who pays most in and who gets most back? EU budget 2017: Net contributions/receipts Each country pays the same proportion of its national income to the EU budget, so richer countries pay more and poorer ones less. The EU also takes 75% of the customs duties, agricultural duties and sugar levies collected by each member state when goods enter the customs union. The EU spends the money on a wide range of projects, but about 80% of the budget every year goes to two main areas: agriculture and development of poorer areas of the EU. So, poorer countries and those with a lot of farms get more. Poland was the biggest net recipient of the EU budget (getting more back than it contributed in the first place), followed by Greece, Romania, Hungary and Portugal. Luxembourg and Belgium, two of the richest EU countries, are also on the list of EU budget net recipients because they receive a high proportion of the funding for administration as many EU institutions, such as the Commission and the European Parliament, are based there. How much is this per person? If the figures for net contributors and recipients are expressed per person, a different picture emerges. The largest net contributor to the EU budget per capita is the Netherlands, followed by Sweden, Germany, Denmark and the United Kingdom in fifth place, with €112.85 in 2017 Luxembourg tops the list of net recipients per person, because a large number of EU institutions are based in the country of under 600,000 inhabitants. The other biggest recipients are Lithuania, Estonia, Greece, Hungary and Latvia. . How much is that as proportion of each country's GDP? The Netherlands pays the biggest proportion of its gross domestic product (GDP) - a measure of the amount produced in an economy in a year. In 2017, its contribution to the EU budget was 0.47% of its GDP. Germany is second on this list, followed by Sweden and the UK, in fourth place, with 0.32% of GDP contributed in 2017. At the other end of the scale, some countries, such as Lithuania, Bulgaria and Hungary, receive between 2.5% and 3% of their GDP from the EU budget. The economies of Greece, Estonia, Latvia, Romanian and Poland, meanwhile, receive about 2% of their GDP.
EnderbyFox Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 Is that 10 contenders in the Tory leadership contest now? Few more and we could do a sweepstake. Rory Stewart vs Boris in the final two imo.
Buce Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 2 minutes ago, EnderbyFox said: Is that 10 contenders in the Tory leadership contest now? Few more and we could do a sweepstake. Rory Stewart vs Boris in the final two imo. Nope, it's 11.
Buce Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 Bercow: MPs will get chance to block No Deal under new Tory leader John Bercow, the Speaker of the House of Commons, has warned Conservative leadership candidates that they will not be able to force through a no deal Brexit without parliament’s approval. Speaking in New York, he gave a clear sign that the speaker would make sure parliament has an opportunity to stop the UK leaving without a deal if MPs believe it should be halted. “The idea that parliament is going to be evacuated for the centre stage of debate on Brexit is simply unimaginable...The idea the House won’t have its say is for the birds,” he said. He highlighted the fact that while leaving the EU without a deal is the legal default: “There is a difference between a legal default position and what the interplay of different political forces in parliament will facilitate.” Three of the candidates - Boris Johnson, Dominic Raab and Esther McVey - have suggested that they could be willing to try to take the UK out of the EU without a deal on October 31 regardless of parliament’s clear view in the past that this should not happen.
String fellow Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 The expulsion of Alastair Campbell from the Labour party for such a trivial reason shows how ruthless and heartless the hard-left Corbyn regime really is. Alastair Campbell, a loyal servant to the Labour party for many years, is someone with mental health issues, so something like this could easily tip him over the edge.
Milo Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 45 minutes ago, Buce said: Bercow: MPs will get chance to block No Deal under new Tory leader John Bercow, the Speaker of the House of Commons, has warned Conservative leadership candidates that they will not be able to force through a no deal Brexit without parliament’s approval. Speaking in New York, he gave a clear sign that the speaker would make sure parliament has an opportunity to stop the UK leaving without a deal if MPs believe it should be halted. “The idea that parliament is going to be evacuated for the centre stage of debate on Brexit is simply unimaginable...The idea the House won’t have its say is for the birds,” he said. He highlighted the fact that while leaving the EU without a deal is the legal default: “There is a difference between a legal default position and what the interplay of different political forces in parliament will facilitate.” Three of the candidates - Boris Johnson, Dominic Raab and Esther McVey - have suggested that they could be willing to try to take the UK out of the EU without a deal on October 31 regardless of parliament’s clear view in the past that this should not happen. I just read this elsewhere - Good job he's being all impartial again. (My theory that a number of strategic players have been bought off and will block any kind of Brexit at all costs might have something in it, after all)!
Guest Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 7 hours ago, MC Prussian said: In the past five to ten years, the FN/RN has gained more and more percentages of voters in France, be it in presidential campaigns or in Parliament and the EU parliament in particular. How is that not a rise? As far as I can tell, the party struggles with its inherently evil past under Le Pen's father and is trying to distance itself from racism and antisemitism. You could probably tell me more about how successful they are in doing so. En Marche is Macron's vehicle, I mean the party even shares the same initials as his name. In its personality cult, it comes across as Farage's position as part and head of the Brexit Party, just on the left. En Marche isn't exempt from criticism: https://www.marianne.net/monde/absolutisme-des-qi-superieurs-macron-critique-par-son-meilleur-ami-allemand https://www.dw.com/en/is-macrons-en-marche-out-of-step/a-46198077 The change in attitude among young people wasn't aimed at FN/RN voters in particular, I see it more as a disenchantment with SJW culture in general, which is finding its way into politics also. So it does hold some truth with regards to the FN/RN: http://www.purebreak.com/news/elections-europeennes-3-choses-a-retenir-du-vote-des-jeunes-en-france/176494 https://www.diggitmagazine.com/articles/increase-popularity-marine-le-pen-s-front-national Note that this is about voter turnout by young people for a party on the far right. I deliberately said "more conservative" with regards to the shift, so that can be anything to the right of the Socialists or leftist parties on the whole. Like I've said, I have high hopes for the Green Party. Wonder how they'll deliver what they're promising. I checked for you today. Young people from 18 to 35 voted green - they have the environment on their minds. The over 60's stayed with the classic parties. Only the 35-59 age range moved towards Le Pen and her friends. This backs up everything I see in real life too. Furthermore Urban areas don't vote NF, it's the rural areas that do - as one would expect.
Bryn Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48437124 What is the ****ing point in this? This is not a public vote, why is the BBC holding a public debate? This is politics for entertainment.
oxford blue Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 9 minutes ago, Bryn said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48437124 What is the ****ing point in this? This is not a public vote, why is the BBC holding a public debate? This is politics for entertainment. Or politics for information about how the future PM performs in a debate?
Bryn Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 Why is it not standard practice then? It's flagrantly using current political turmoil to attract viewers and that should not be in keeping with the BBC's editorial code.
Guest MattP Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 4 hours ago, Alf Bentley said: I agree that if the BBC categories are pro-Brexit & anti-Brexit, the Tories have to be categorised as pro-Brexit. If the categories were pro- and anti-No Deal, they'd have to add Labour to the "Anti" category. So, 35% No Deal, 55% Anti & 9% Tories, seeking a Brexit Deal but keeping No Deal as a back-up. But what about Raab repeatedly saying we should leave in October, with or without a deal? When would such a deal be negotiated? If Raab wins, he'll only take office mid-July at the earliest, everyone then goes on holiday until September & the current Commission is replaced at the end of October. By Sept/Oct, Barnier might be awaiting confirmation to replace Juncker. I can understand the stance of "we want a deal parliament can pass, but No Deal is better than a bad deal". But Raab is ruling out an extension beyond October, when it's difficult to see how a deal could be re-negotiated before then. His call for re-negotiation is meaningless under those circumstances. He's effectively advocating No Deal as a policy - a policy for which there is no popular or electoral mandate whatsoever. At the last election 55% of votes were cast for parties vehemently opposed to No Deal and only 2% for parties advocating No Deal.......yet he's rushing to No Deal as quickly as he can. I know what the law states: that we're on course for No Deal, but that Parliament can bring down the Govt or legislate for a referendum (with difficulty now) or seek to instruct the Govt to revoke Article 50. I voted Remain but long accepted that a compromise Brexit had to proceed for democratic reasons. That's why I opposed a referendum or revocation. But if we have an anti-democratic PM who seeks to force through an extremist No Deal Brexit without any mandate or reasonable negotiations, that needs to be prevented by any democratic means available. I honestly have no idea if Raab will actually take us out on No Deal - but if we are to change the WA then he'll need to say he will and the EU will need to believe it. One of the great problems with this whole process of conducting a negotiation in public is you can't be honest, if any candidate was to rule out No Deal then attempting a renegotiation is totally pointless. If a Raab goes for No Deal and the EU won't change a thing then at least my side knows for sure that it won't be - then the house and public can form an opinion there. There is no mandate for anything and at some point somebody is going to have to make a decision.
Guest MattP Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 15 minutes ago, Bryn said: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48437124 What is the ****ing point in this? This is not a public vote, why is the BBC holding a public debate? This is politics for entertainment. They did the same with the Labour leadership contests, I found it very entertaining. I don't see why we shouldn't televise these given its the leadership of our two main parties. Andrew Neil Interviews as well with the final two which will be great television.
Alf Bentley Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 24 minutes ago, Milo said: I just read this elsewhere - Good job he's being all impartial again. (My theory that a number of strategic players have been bought off and will block any kind of Brexit at all costs might have something in it, after all)! If all Bercow is saying is that he'll allow Parliament to have its say on No Deal, then he is being impartial - and democratic, isn't he? If Parliament wants to support No Deal, or just to allow it to happen, it can choose to do that. I sincerely hope that it doesn't as it has absolutely no electoral mandate to do so. Once upon a time, Brexit was supposedly all about "our sovereign British parliament taking back control from unelected officials in Brussels". Never hear Brexiteers say that now, do we? Now, it seems to be about "sidelining our democratic parliament so that unelected officials in London can take control of our sovereign British Brexit".
Guest MattP Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 Just now, Alf Bentley said: Once upon a time, Brexit was supposedly all about "our sovereign British parliament taking back control from unelected officials in Brussels". Never hear Brexiteers say that now, do we? Now, it seems to be about "sidelining our democratic parliament so that unelected officials in London can take control of our sovereign British Brexit". It still is. The problem is we didn't vote to "take back control" just so parliament could then vote to give it away again
Alf Bentley Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 23 minutes ago, FIF said: I checked for you today. Young people from 18 to 35 voted green - they have the environment on their minds. The over 60's stayed with the classic parties. Only the 35-59 age range moved towards Le Pen and her friends. This backs up everything I see in real life too. Furthermore Urban areas don't vote NF, it's the rural areas that do - as one would expect. Is that the whole story, FIF? Genuine question, as my knowledge of French politics is out of date. I know that, some years ago, the FN got a lot of support in areas like the Nord and Lorraine, ex-industrial areas that had formerly voted Communist, but turned to the LePens after the mines and steelworks closed down. Very similar story to places like Bolsover, Barnsley & such like switching from Labour to the Brexit Party now.
Alf Bentley Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 9 minutes ago, MattP said: I honestly have no idea if Raab will actually take us out on No Deal - but if we are to change the WA then he'll need to say he will and the EU will need to believe it. One of the great problems with this whole process of conducting a negotiation in public is you can't be honest, if any candidate was to rule out No Deal then attempting a renegotiation is totally pointless. If a Raab goes for No Deal and the EU won't change a thing then at least my side knows for sure that it won't be - then the house and public can form an opinion there. There is no mandate for anything and at some point somebody is going to have to make a decision. Although I don't agree with it, I can see some validity in the idea of threatening No Deal with the aim of getting a better deal in negotiations - and then making a judgment when negotiations conclude. But Raab, Boris & McVey have all excluded any idea of an extension and have said we'll leave in October, Deal or No Deal. For the reasons I've explained, that is not giving negotiations a realistic chance (max. 2 months, during an EU transition period). It's pretty close to an immediate No Deal policy.
Guest Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 42 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said: Is that the whole story, FIF? Genuine question, as my knowledge of French politics is out of date. I know that, some years ago, the FN got a lot of support in areas like the Nord and Lorraine, ex-industrial areas that had formerly voted Communist, but turned to the LePens after the mines and steelworks closed down. Very similar story to places like Bolsover, Barnsley & such like switching from Labour to the Brexit Party now. The large cities in Lorraine like Metz voted for Macron but the rural areas of lorraine voted Le Pen. It was the same in Nord where Lille was macron.
Alf Bentley Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 5 minutes ago, FIF said: The large cities in Lorraine like Metz voted for Macron but the rural areas of lorraine voted Le Pen. It was the same in Nord where Lille was macron. Cheers. Again, a very similar scenario to the UK, whereby big cities in industrial regions, like Manchester, Leeds & Newcastle, have tended to stay more loyal to Labour & more likely to oppose Brexit. Whereas surrounding small towns and rural areas that have lost industry have switched to voting Leave, supporting the Brexit Party (sometimes Tories in 2017) etc. The big cities offer alternative employment and better lives, I suppose, and have attracted some public/private investment. The small towns & deindustralised rural areas have not seen their old industries replaced (or replaced only by shite jobs), causing a lot of bitterness, understandably.
Lionator Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 Looks like the Brexit Party is nailed on for the Peterborough by-election which is quite frankly terrifying given that they have no manifesto or policies. How on earth does being in the European Union or not affect local issues?
Buce Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 3 minutes ago, Lionator said: Looks like the Brexit Party is nailed on for the Peterborough by-election which is quite frankly terrifying given that they have no manifesto or policies. How on earth does being in the European Union or not affect local issues? Never underestimate the power of collective ignorance.
bovril Posted 28 May 2019 Posted 28 May 2019 https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/27/nigel-farage-sets-his-sights-on-party-winning-peterborough-byelection "I am optimistic that I can find men and women of this calibre,” Farage said pointing to the successful MEP candidates.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.