The I cant believe it’s not politics thread.

[Dahnsouff]

4 hours ago, Vacamion said:

 

It's ludicrous that all of this theatre de merde has followed a 52/48 vote on a yes/no proposition about an incredibly complex matter, which made no mention of the future trading arrangements, the single market (which many on the Leave side promised we would still have access to) or what would happen to Northern Ireland, which is unsolveable.

 

It's like an entire country took a 10 yard run up and kicked itself hard in the baws.

 

Then spent 6 years soiling itself.

 

 

I never understood how a yes/no vote was allowed to exist and then stand constitutionally against the colossal implications it represented. 

[Legend_in_blue]

4 hours ago, StanSP said:

Several people! Ultimately, they thought that it would be a disaster, totally not beneficial for the UK and definitely not the right thing to do. 

 

Tell me, where are those 'sunlit uplands' we were promised? 

 

They also said it may be short term pain but long term gain. Tell me, how short is short term? When do we start to see the 'gains' from Brexit? 

Indeed, but unfortunately as was the case with Covid, people were duped by Boris.  He's very good at the art of persuasion.  Farage to some extent however is also partly to blame.

[st albans fox]

5 hours ago, filthyfox said:

Ahhh Brexit.

In 2016 2pint milk from Asda cost £.89, and had been steady for years.

Now... £1.28

 

Thanks Brexit, I feel SO much better off!

At least we can call it two pints forever if we want to ! 
 

 

[weller54]

10 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

At least we can call it two pints forever if we want to ! 
 

 

Yer!!!...litres is for wimps!

[SpacedX]

On the subject of all the ****wittery surrounding Brexit, sunset law/provision is a massive issue which none of the leave protagonists could answer at the time (or now), and I'm guessing not one person that voted to leave the EU properly understood - or even seemed aware of. Why? Because there was simply no plan to address the intricacies of it - just half arsed lip service. I was always inclined towards Euro scepticism and felt that Tony Benn articulated a very strong argument in relation to that  - the same one that Corbyn lacked the bollocks to voice preferring instead to bask in populist adulation and not wishing to jeopardise the prospect of 60,000 six formers chanting "Oooh Jeremy Corbyn" again at the Glastonbury Festival. I honestly feel at the time that this being the case, he had the power not necessarily to avert Brexit, but to have significantly appealed to that particular demographic. Instead, being tacitly anti-European Union, he refused to address the issue appearing to sit on the fence to preserve his perceived cult of personality. I digress. 

 

Personally and practically speaking, I was under no illusions however that to leave the EU would have been utter folly and wrought terrible social and economic ills for the UK. Although to some extent ideologically opposed, understanding the benefits of maintaining our membership and the possibility and potential of future reform, the leave vote was never even on the table from my perspective. Particularly since its proponents failed to articulate or offer any viable alternative simply empty pledges, promises and falsehoods with no basis whatsoever. Also, working in research capability, and simply within that frame of reference, the sheer damage inflicted in terms of the loss of collaboration, funding and jeopardising the ease of this was immediately tangible.  

 

There is a mass of EU legislation (European Parliament and Council of European Union) that we currently benefit from that is soon to cease to be - encompassing by way of example, employment law, food standards, health and safety, environmental....The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill 2022 allows government to end the special status of retained EU Law in the UK statute book on 31st December 2023. Concerning since the Bill will abolish this special status and will enable the Government, via Parliament, to amend more easily, repeal and replace retained EU Law. The Bill will also include a sunset date by which all remaining retained EU Law will either be repealed, or one would hope, where necessary, assimilated into UK domestic law. The sunset may be extended for specified pieces of retained EU Law until 2026. This means that depending upon its agenda, crucial details of say working time regulations may compromised or be allowed to disappear. In 2018, the then Secretary of State Andrea Leadsom declared, "Under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, all existing workers’ rights laws will be transferred into domestic law once we have left the EU, making sure there is no gap or lack of clarity in the minimum set of workers’ rights which, as I have already said, the UK exceeds in many areas." What she neglected to mention was that this was not indefinite. This is particularly terrifying in terms of environmental legislation. DEFRA have the huge task of sifting through the byzantine detail of some 500 existing laws and it is estimated that there are currently three people doing this. This was a God-send to Truss's mercifully short-lived cabinet and tossers such as Rees-Mogg and Lord Frost (who thankfully at the time rejected the two roles offered) and similar cronies, intent on deregulation. These laws don't necessarily need to be replicated or matched or even replaced by UK sovereign law (which is a concern in itself), they can just be allowed to fade away - and that terrifies me.  

Edited 1 November 2022 by Line-X

[Parafox]

30 minutes ago, Line-X said:

On the subject of all the ****wittery surrounding Brexit, sunset law/provision is a massive issue which none of the leave protagonists could answer at the time (or now), and I'm guessing not one person that voted to leave the EU properly understood - or even seemed aware of. Why? Because there was simply no plan to address the intricacies of it - just half arsed lip service. I was always inclined towards Euro scepticism and felt that Tony Benn articulated a very strong argument in relation to that  - the same one that Corbyn lacked the bollocks to voice preferring instead to bask in populist adulation and not wishing to jeopardise the prospect of 60,000 six formers chanting "Oooh Jeremy Corbyn" again at the Glastonbury Festival. I honestly feel at the time that this being the case, he had the power not necessarily to avert Brexit, but to have significantly appealed to that particular demographic. Instead, being tacitly anti-European Union, he refused to address the issue appearing to sit on the fence to preserve his perceived cult of personality. I digress. 

 

Personally and practically speaking, I was under no illusions however that to leave the EU would have been utter folly and wrought terrible social and economic ills for the UK. Although to some extent ideologically opposed, understanding the benefits of maintaining our membership and the possibility and potential of future reform, the leave vote was never even on the table from my perspective. Particularly since its proponents failed to articulate or offer any viable alternative simply empty pledges, promises and falsehoods with no basis whatsoever. Also, working in research capability, and simply within that frame of reference, the sheer damage inflicted in terms of the loss of collaboration, funding and jeopardising the ease of this was immediately tangible.  

 

There is a mass of EU legislation (European Parliament and Council of European Union) that we currently benefit from that is soon to cease to be - encompassing by way of example, employment law, food standards, health and safety, environmental....The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill 2022 allows government to end the special status of retained EU Law in the UK statute book on 31st December 2023. Concerning since the Bill will abolish this special status and will enable the Government, via Parliament, to amend more easily, repeal and replace retained EU Law. The Bill will also include a sunset date by which all remaining retained EU Law will either be repealed, or one would hope, where necessary, assimilated into UK domestic law. The sunset may be extended for specified pieces of retained EU Law until 2026. This means that depending upon its agenda, crucial details of say working time regulations may compromised or be allowed to disappear. In 2018, the then Secretary of State Andrea Leadsom declared, "Under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, all existing workers’ rights laws will be transferred into domestic law once we have left the EU, making sure there is no gap or lack of clarity in the minimum set of workers’ rights which, as I have already said, the UK exceeds in many areas." What she neglected to mention was that this was not indefinite. This is particularly terrifying in terms of environmental legislation. DEFRA have the huge task of sifting through the byzantine detail of some 500 existing laws and it is estimated that there are currently three people doing this. This was a God-send to Truss's mercifully short-lived cabinet and tossers such as Reese-Mogg and Lord Frost (who thankfully at the time rejected the two roles offered) and similar cronies, intent on deregulation. These laws don't necessarily need to be replaced by UK sovereign law they can just be allowed to fade away. 

Reading this intellligent, considered analysis I think:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Legend_in_blue]

 

[Sambiasso]

19 minutes ago, Legend_in_blue said:

 

Problem with films like this is it doesn't show the whole or true picture.

51secs in and you've got people smoking ciggies, wearing £80+ pairs of new Nike trainers queuing for a food bank because they can't afford to eat supposedly. I find the irony that those queuing are never the ones who are volunteering to help run the services. 

However you see people like the former soldier in this video who cannot afford to eat or light his home and wonder why people kick off about housing asylum seekers in hotels with 3 hot meals a day, hot water and heating for a combined £6m a day across the country. I'm all for helping others but help our own first especially those who've served our country helping those who are now staying in our hotels. 

In both cases get these people in the community to help gut and build the new Food Bank+ that needed doing up, if you want food then bloody earn it by doing a few hours graft helping those who are helping you but the film just focused on poverty porn and shifting the focus onto Brexit,

The fishing industry in Grimsby especially wasn't killed off by Brexit or the tories, it was Labour back in 1997 - 2010 which started the beginning of the end so because of that we don't have a generation of fisherman in that area to take up the jobs anyway. I'm all for slagging of the Tories, saying Brexit was a mistake but there is always little to no acknowledgment of how the labour party also damaged this country and left it for the posh prricks to come in and do an even worse job.

They're all as bad as each other, this constant cycle in my life time has been 1 political party f'ck the country and the next one comes in and does the same so the cycle just continues. I've no doubt that Labour will come in next and spend the following 8yrs blaming the Tories then 6+yrs f'cking the country again, rinse and repeat.
 

This is why I don't choose to vote for anything, the only time I ever hear from Alberto Costa is when he's up for election.

 

[Claridge]

The EU won’t last, glad we have got out early. All this whining drivel when Covid and Ukraine have had a massive effect on everything. 

[deep blue]

7 hours ago, grobyfox1990 said:

Lol i kinda knew my initial post would trigger someone not actually reading my initial post and launching into a batsh1t mad diatribe. To spell out my initial post in the simplest of terms that requires no intuition or understanding - i did not vote for leave, i voted remain, so there's no point addressng me lol. If things in Europe unravel i would not admit my vote to remain was wrong, hindsight is 20/20.

 

It's obvious they were sold a lie - starting with a red bus that i imagine has broken down by now? And ranging to issues such as easy trade deals being signed, no checks or barriers into the single market, no barriers to trade, no bonfire of workers rights, services market largely staying intact, ability to transfer professional qualifications cross-border, being 'first in the queue' - and the list goes on and on. Has any of this happened?

 

Kudos to you if you have a brain big enough to have seen through all these lies, but that big brain must then surely understand these are, in fact, lies and brexit voters were lied to. Completely short sighted and disingenious to suggest everyone should've understood the issues they way you did, and now 6 years into a multi-decade project, admit they were wrong.

 

 

It didn't need any brain at all to find out that the cost quoted by the OUT campaign for the amount of our contribution to the EU was totally untrue.

Edited 1 November 2022 by deep blue

[deep blue]

4 hours ago, Dahnsouff said:

I never understood how a yes/no vote was allowed to exist and then stand constitutionally against the colossal implications it represented. 

It was insane.  It's also been forgotten that the vote was technically "advisory".  Cameron was foolish enough to say that he would honour the result but he should have had the balls to change his mind when it was so close.  Politicians change their mind all the time now without blushing; he just didn't have the courage.

[st albans fox]

4 minutes ago, deep blue said:

It was insane.  It's also been forgotten that the vote was technically "advisory".  Cameron was foolish enough to say that he would honour the result but he should have had the balls to change his mind when it was so close.  Politicians change their mind all the time now without blushing; he just didn't have the courage.

Cameron was hamstrung by the euro sceptic  right of his party and the ukip issue. He would never have got away with rowing back on his commitment 

[Daggers]

Brexit. 
 

 

[weller54]

52 minutes ago, Daggers said:

Brexit. 
 

 

Oven ready deal or no oven ready deal?

[weller54]

1 hour ago, Claridge said:

The EU won’t last, glad we have got out early. All this whining drivel when Covid and Ukraine have had a massive effect on everything. 

How you doing Nige?

[dsr-burnley]

1 hour ago, deep blue said:

It was insane.  It's also been forgotten that the vote was technically "advisory".  Cameron was foolish enough to say that he would honour the result but he should have had the balls to change his mind when it was so close.  Politicians change their mind all the time now without blushing; he just didn't have the courage.

Yes, it was technically advisory.  And so in principle if the result had voted to stay by a million or so votes, Boris Johnson or any other PM would have been perfectly entitled to take the UK out of the EU on the same pathetic pretext that the referendum shouldn't have been taken seriously.

 

But I suspect if they did, all the people arguing "it was advisory" or "it was too important a decision to be made by popular vote" would have screamed foul like nobody's business.  Because what they're objecting to isn't the principle that the decision was arrived at in the wrong way, what they're objecting to is that it gave the "wrong" result.

[Nalis]

4 hours ago, Line-X said:

On the subject of all the ****wittery surrounding Brexit, sunset law/provision is a massive issue which none of the leave protagonists could answer at the time (or now), and I'm guessing not one person that voted to leave the EU properly understood - or even seemed aware of. Why? Because there was simply no plan to address the intricacies of it - just half arsed lip service. I was always inclined towards Euro scepticism and felt that Tony Benn articulated a very strong argument in relation to that  - the same one that Corbyn lacked the bollocks to voice preferring instead to bask in populist adulation and not wishing to jeopardise the prospect of 60,000 six formers chanting "Oooh Jeremy Corbyn" again at the Glastonbury Festival. I honestly feel at the time that this being the case, he had the power not necessarily to avert Brexit, but to have significantly appealed to that particular demographic. Instead, being tacitly anti-European Union, he refused to address the issue appearing to sit on the fence to preserve his perceived cult of personality. I digress. 

 

Personally and practically speaking, I was under no illusions however that to leave the EU would have been utter folly and wrought terrible social and economic ills for the UK. Although to some extent ideologically opposed, understanding the benefits of maintaining our membership and the possibility and potential of future reform, the leave vote was never even on the table from my perspective. Particularly since its proponents failed to articulate or offer any viable alternative simply empty pledges, promises and falsehoods with no basis whatsoever. Also, working in research capability, and simply within that frame of reference, the sheer damage inflicted in terms of the loss of collaboration, funding and jeopardising the ease of this was immediately tangible.  

 

There is a mass of EU legislation (European Parliament and Council of European Union) that we currently benefit from that is soon to cease to be - encompassing by way of example, employment law, food standards, health and safety, environmental....The Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Bill 2022 allows government to end the special status of retained EU Law in the UK statute book on 31st December 2023. Concerning since the Bill will abolish this special status and will enable the Government, via Parliament, to amend more easily, repeal and replace retained EU Law. The Bill will also include a sunset date by which all remaining retained EU Law will either be repealed, or one would hope, where necessary, assimilated into UK domestic law. The sunset may be extended for specified pieces of retained EU Law until 2026. This means that depending upon its agenda, crucial details of say working time regulations may compromised or be allowed to disappear. In 2018, the then Secretary of State Andrea Leadsom declared, "Under the terms of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, all existing workers’ rights laws will be transferred into domestic law once we have left the EU, making sure there is no gap or lack of clarity in the minimum set of workers’ rights which, as I have already said, the UK exceeds in many areas." What she neglected to mention was that this was not indefinite. This is particularly terrifying in terms of environmental legislation. DEFRA have the huge task of sifting through the byzantine detail of some 500 existing laws and it is estimated that there are currently three people doing this. This was a God-send to Truss's mercifully short-lived cabinet and tossers such as Rees-Mogg and Lord Frost (who thankfully at the time rejected the two roles offered) and similar cronies, intent on deregulation. These laws don't necessarily need to be replicated or matched or even replaced by UK sovereign law (which is a concern in itself), they can just be allowed to fade away - and that terrifies me.  

Scary thing is EU law was weaponised as 'Brussels red tape' by the Brexit campaigns

[Daggers]

Cruella’s week gets worse:

 

“The Ministry of Justice

Upheld

Social media (paid ad)

02 November 2022

A paid-for Facebook ad for The Ministry of Justice was likely to cause serious offence on the grounds of race, by reinforcing negative stereotypes about black men”

 

https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/the-ministry-of-justice-a22-1164637-ministry-of-justice.html

[ozleicester]

.      Cant prove it

 

Edited 2 November 2022 by ozleicester

[ozleicester]

13 hours ago, urban.spaceman said:

This bit:

Implies that this bit

Isn't true.

 

She once raced down to South Kensington with a camera man after tweeting about an outrageous Muslamic terror attack to cover what turned out to be a car crash.

 

She makes a living off of generated outrage.

 

Stop listening to her.

Never forget   

If you havent seen this... rather waste the 9 minutes suggested earlier... watch this 3 mins 
 

[Dahnsouff]

6 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

Yes, it was technically advisory.  And so in principle if the result had voted to stay by a million or so votes, Boris Johnson or any other PM would have been perfectly entitled to take the UK out of the EU on the same pathetic pretext that the referendum shouldn't have been taken seriously.

 

But I suspect if they did, all the people arguing "it was advisory" or "it was too important a decision to be made by popular vote" would have screamed foul like nobody's business.  Because what they're objecting to isn't the principle that the decision was arrived at in the wrong way, what they're objecting to is that it gave the "wrong" result.

You are probably right, but my issues with the process comes from the whole vague nature of the posed question, the lack of any acknowledgement of the obvious complexities of the actual exit, something that was clear and obvious prior to the simplistic question being posed

[Fazzer 7]

11 hours ago, Sambiasso said:

Problem with films like this is it doesn't show the whole or true picture.

51secs in and you've got people smoking ciggies, wearing £80+ pairs of new Nike trainers queuing for a food bank because they can't afford to eat supposedly. I find the irony that those queuing are never the ones who are volunteering to help run the services. 

However you see people like the former soldier in this video who cannot afford to eat or light his home and wonder why people kick off about housing asylum seekers in hotels with 3 hot meals a day, hot water and heating for a combined £6m a day across the country. I'm all for helping others but help our own first especially those who've served our country helping those who are now staying in our hotels. 

In both cases get these people in the community to help gut and build the new Food Bank+ that needed doing up, if you want food then bloody earn it by doing a few hours graft helping those who are helping you but the film just focused on poverty porn and shifting the focus onto Brexit,

The fishing industry in Grimsby especially wasn't killed off by Brexit or the tories, it was Labour back in 1997 - 2010 which started the beginning of the end so because of that we don't have a generation of fisherman in that area to take up the jobs anyway. I'm all for slagging of the Tories, saying Brexit was a mistake but there is always little to no acknowledgment of how the labour party also damaged this country and left it for the posh prricks to come in and do an even worse job.

They're all as bad as each other, this constant cycle in my life time has been 1 political party f'ck the country and the next one comes in and does the same so the cycle just continues. I've no doubt that Labour will come in next and spend the following 8yrs blaming the Tories then 6+yrs f'cking the country again, rinse and repeat.
 

This is why I don't choose to vote for anything, the only time I ever hear from Alberto Costa is when he's up for election.

 

Yup. I chuckle when the bbc and sky show overweight even obese people in food banks. Why would they do that 🤷‍♂️

[Fazzer 7]

9 hours ago, Claridge said:

The EU won’t last, glad we have got out early. All this whining drivel when Covid and Ukraine have had a massive effect on everything. 

It would never be allowed to fail. 

[Zear0]

9 hours ago, Claridge said:

The EU won’t last, glad we have got out early. All this whining drivel when Covid and Ukraine have had a massive effect on everything. 

Agreed. The outstanding success we're making of it will cause them all to join us in this utopia. 

[StanSP]

19 minutes ago, Fazzer 7 said:

Yup. I chuckle when the bbc and sky show overweight even obese people in food banks. Why would they do that 🤷‍♂️

So they shouldn't ever eat again?