Jump to content
Jools

The Positive Brexit Thread

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, SwindonCanary said:

So how come Boris was praised for his work in the G7

By whom, the Express, Patrick O'Flynn? 🤣🤣🤣

Edited by BigFish

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Rock The Boat said:

This has nothing at all to do with contract law. It's a treaty not a contract. You really shouldn't get involved in discussions outside your rather limited lane.

Oh dear, you really are thick aren't you! Last time you made this utterly stupid comment I linked several articles that pointed out that for legal purposes treaties are treated as legally binding CONTRACTS. I should have realised you are too thick to read anything more challenging than a Peter and Jane Ladybird book. Sadly they don't do one on contract law and treaties so your mind-numbing ignorance will inevitably continue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

So how come Boris was praised for his work in the G7

It doesn't start until the 11th June, what has he done to earn praise?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 he was praised for his work on the virus and championing free and fair trade and renewed calls to end all spending on oil and gas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

 he was praised for his work on the virus and championing free and fair trade and renewed calls to end all spending on oil and gas.

By whom?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

"Treaty, a binding formal agreement, contract, or other written instrument that establishes obligations between two or more subjects."

 

The difference between treaty and contract

 is that treaty is (international law) a binding agreement concluded by subjects of international law, namely states and international organizations while contract is an agreement between two or more parties, to perform a specific job or work order, often temporary or of fixed duration and usually governed by a written agreement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

The difference between treaty and contract

 is that treaty is (international law) a binding agreement concluded by subjects of international law, namely states and international organizations while contract is an agreement between two or more parties, to perform a specific job or work order, often temporary or of fixed duration and usually governed by a written agreement.

Jesus, is that the best definition you can find? (no link or reference of course). It is not only tediously superficial, but also entirely irrelevant to my point that FOR LEGAL PURPOSES TREATIES ARE TREATED AS CONTRACTS. 

I suggest you go back and read the links I posted when you first spouted this BS. Thicko!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 24/12/2020 at 14:56, SwindonCanary said:

Here is the government's statement: "Everything that the British public was promised during the 2016 referendum and in the general election last year is delivered by this deal."

"We have taken back control of our money, borders, laws, trade and our fishing waters

"The deal is fantastic news for families and businesses in every part of the UK.

"We have signed the first free trade agreement based on zero tariffs and zero quotas that has ever been achieved with the EU.

"The deal is the biggest bilateral trade deal signed by either side, covering trade worth £668bn in 2019.

"The deal also guarantees that we are no longer in the lunar pull of the EU, we are not bound by EU rules, there is no role for the European Court of Justice and all of our key red lines about returning sovereignty have been achieved.

"It means that we will have full political and economic independence on 1st January 2021."

"A points-based immigration system will put us in full control of who enters the UK and free movement will end.

"We have delivered this great deal for the entire United Kingdom in record time, and under extremely challenging conditions, which protects the integrity of our internal market and Northern Ireland’s place within it.

"We have got Brexit done and we can now take full advantage of the fantastic opportunities available to us as an independent trading nation, striking trade deals with other partners around the world."

 

13 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

image.png.078989929efcefbf53dcb336e5fe8082.png

🤔

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

image.png.078989929efcefbf53dcb336e5fe8082.png

So we left with a compromise that was not purist.

So what the **** was it? 

Another LIE.

You are lied to virtually everyday Swindon and even someone as "purist" as you cannot be fooled all of the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

 he was praised for his work on the virus and championing free and fair trade and renewed calls to end all spending on oil and gas.

What work on the Virus? It was Hancock according to Cummings. Boris didn't go to the meetings half the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

image.png.078989929efcefbf53dcb336e5fe8082.png

Almost too funny not to think this is meant to be understood as satire. So, let's translate what has been said into straight language:

"We signed the NI protocol, which required that we have to do customs checks on various products. However, we didn't think the EU would actually expect us to do the checks that we agreed to do."

Imagine you complained to a builder that he hasn't done the work you contracted him to do and he replied, "Yes I signed the contract to do X but I didn't think for one minute you would then expect me to do X".

That's what we've got, a government of shysters and cowboys. And the whole world is looking on to see just how untrustworthy this government is in fulfilling its obligations. Looking forward to Frost and Boris' appearance on Rogue Traders.

  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

So we left with a compromise that was not purist.

So what the **** was it? 

Another LIE.

You are lied to virtually everyday Swindon and even someone as "purist" as you cannot be fooled all of the time.

Oh Yes he can .....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meanwhile... taking back control : means we won't let Parliament express its will because we (Boris and cabal) know better.

Vote.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An endless stream of culture war crap from the right wing press this week. What do they want us to ignore? 🤔

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Herman said:

An endless stream of culture war crap from the right wing press this week. What do they want us to ignore? 🤔

a) Rapidly rising virus cases meaning that the unlock due on the 21st won't happen.

b) Johnson & Sunak being spanked into line by Biden ready for the G7.

c) That even Johnson's own backbenchers will no longer back his stupidty and lies in cutting the foreign aid budget, and I think actually more generally than that Johnson's increasingly authoritarian approach of continually avoiding any scrutiny by Parliament - as Surfer pointed out recently it turns out that for Brexiteers even the holy mantra of 'taking back control' turns out to be something completely different to what they were promised and expected - not that any of that should be taken as an expression of sympathy for the idiots who believed their own and other Brexiteer's lies.

But you are right that the RWNJ press are having to work overtime at the moment to deflect and distrsct from the ongoing sh*tsh*w that Johnson's government are delivering 🤣

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This morning Gavin Barwell, who as Theresa May’s chief of staff was fully involved in the Brexit talks until the summer of 2019, said it was just not plausible for Boris Johnson to claim that he did not know what he was signing up to. Barwell told the Today programme:

I  don't think the EU is ever going to think that is credible. The EU negotiating team have obviously worked very closely with the British negotiating team under both governments. They know the quality of the civil servants involved in that work, and they know that British ministers would have been have been advised in detail on the implications of what they were signing up to.

So I don’t think anyone who’s involved in the process is going to find it credible that the government signed up to something and didn’t understand what the consequences of that were.

Asked if he thought that the government was now only pretending that it did not realise how damaging the protocol would be when it signed it in 2019, Barwell said:

It’s difficult to conceive of any other explanation. When I was working with Theresa [May], Boris Johnson was foreign secretary for a period of that time. He perfectly well understood what the previous iteration of the protocol meant in terms of regulatory checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

When the deal was published and the government brought its legislation forward, the explanatory memorandum for the bill, which explained what the bill meant, was very clear  ww what the consequences would be.

And  think he and David Frost are intelligent people. I find it inconceivable that they didn’t understand what they were signing up to. They would have been advised very clearly by the civil service about that.

And I think it’s also important to consider the political context at the time. When Boris took over, he initially tried to prorogue parliament and leave without a deal. He wasn’t able to do that. So he then decided that he wanted to call an election to strengthen his position and it was clearly easier to fight that an election within an “oven-ready” Brexit deal.

So I think the calculation was sign up to whatever is on offer, and then see if we can deal with anything we don’t like down the line. I think the EU have come to the same conclusion as me and that’s why they’re taking the approach that they are now.

Edited by PurpleCanary
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

This morning Gavin Barwell, who as Theresa May’s chief of staff was fully involved in the Brexit talks until the summer of 2019, said it was just not plausible for Boris Johnson to claim that he did not know what he was signing up to. Barwell told the Today programme:

I  don't think the EU is ever going to think that is credible. The EU negotiating team have obviously worked very closely with the British negotiating team under both governments. They know the quality of the civil servants involved in that work, and they know that British ministers would have been have been advised in detail on the implications of what they were signing up to.

So I don’t think anyone who’s involved in the process is going to find it credible that the government signed up to something and didn’t understand what the consequences of that were.

Asked if he thought that the government was now only pretending that it did not realise how damaging the protocol would be when it signed it in 2019, Barwell said:

It’s difficult to conceive of any other explanation. When I was working with Theresa [May], Boris Johnson was foreign secretary for a period of that time. He perfectly well understood what the previous iteration of the protocol meant in terms of regulatory checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

When the deal was published and the government brought its legislation forward, the explanatory memorandum for the bill, which explained what the bill meant, was very clear  ww what the consequences would be.

And  think he and David Frost are intelligent people. I find it inconceivable that they didn’t understand what they were signing up to. They would have been advised very clearly by the civil service about that.

And I think it’s also important to consider the political context at the time. When Boris took over, he initially tried to prorogue parliament and leave without a deal. He wasn’t able to do that. So he then decided that he wanted to call an election to strengthen his position and it was clearly easier to fight that an election within an “oven-ready” Brexit deal.

So I think the calculation was sign up to whatever is on offer, and then see if we can deal with anything we don’t like down the line. I think the EU have come to the same conclusion as me and that’s why they’re taking the approach that they are now.

Arlene Foster said exactly the same, she even advised the outcome but was ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

a) Rapidly rising virus cases meaning that the unlock due on the 21st won't happen.

b) Johnson & Sunak being spanked into line by Biden ready for the G7.

c) That even Johnson's own backbenchers will no longer back his stupidty and lies in cutting the foreign aid budget, and I think actually more generally than that Johnson's increasingly authoritarian approach of continually avoiding any scrutiny by Parliament - as Surfer pointed out recently it turns out that for Brexiteers even the holy mantra of 'taking back control' turns out to be something completely different to what they were promised and expected - not that any of that should be taken as an expression of sympathy for the idiots who believed their own and other Brexiteer's lies.

But you are right that the RWNJ press are having to work overtime at the moment to deflect and distrsct from the ongoing sh*tsh*w that Johnson's government are delivering 🤣

The thing is that the faction currently running the country has a focus on campaigning at all times, rather than competance in government. Very few of the cabinet are actually up to the job, so rather than delivering and standing by their record they are constantly looking for the next three word slogan or culture war battle. The truth is, when push comes to shove, they don't have anything else.

Edited by BigFish
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Creative Midfielder said:

a) Rapidly rising virus cases meaning that the unlock due on the 21st won't happen.

b) Johnson & Sunak being spanked into line by Biden ready for the G7.

c) That even Johnson's own backbenchers will no longer back his stupidty and lies in cutting the foreign aid budget, and I think actually more generally than that Johnson's increasingly authoritarian approach of continually avoiding any scrutiny by Parliament - as Surfer pointed out recently it turns out that for Brexiteers even the holy mantra of 'taking back control' turns out to be something completely different to what they were promised and expected - not that any of that should be taken as an expression of sympathy for the idiots who believed their own and other Brexiteer's lies.

But you are right that the RWNJ press are having to work overtime at the moment to deflect and distrsct from the ongoing sh*tsh*w that Johnson's government are delivering 🤣

Although b and c are correct I think a is the most relevant. I have a feeling, like many, that they are going to delay unlocking so they want us fighting about something else. Don't give the feckers the pleasure. 😀

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, BigFish said:

The thing is that the faction currently running the country has a focus on campaigning at all times, rather than competance in government. Very few of the cabinet are actually up to the job, so rather than delivering and standing by their record they are constantly looking for the next three word slogan or culture war battle. The truth is, when push comes to shove, they don't have anything else.

Think the point about them still being in campaign mode rather than governing mode is spot on and was I point I made myself several times on the virus thread - didn't go down well with the spokespeople for Tory party on there then but it was absolutely true then and remains true a year on which makes you think it is very unlikely to change during this Parliament, not while Johnson clings to power anyway although you never know.........

Obviously the lack of basic competence not just in Johnson's case but throughout the Cabinet is a major problem. But IMO governing in campaign mode has made the problem far worse for several reasons:

  • It's very clear that given a choice between doing the right but unpopular thing or the wrong but more popular thing Johnson will always chose the latter option. He seems completely incapable of taking difficult (and by difficult I mean potentially unpopular) decisions until he is forced into it by events, which is why last year we saw so many wrong decisions, right decisions but way too late, and a huge number of complete u-turns. Johnson's, and by extensions the Government's, judgements were appalling time after time.
  • It is not just the Government that is operating in campaign mode - the right wing press have aided and abetted and frankly the HoC might just as well had the whole of last off because they totally failed to do their job of scrutinising the government and holding them to account. In practice what this meant is that many of the worst mistakes were not one-off events but were repeated several times over because at no stage was the goverment held to account for their incompetence (or corruption) so the shambles simply carried on unabated.
  • Bizzarely the one thing that you would expect that they would get right is the messaging - a pretty important element of handling a national crisis in which you are trying get everyone to behave appropriately whether by following govt advice or legal restrictions. But in practice the messaging through the pandemic has also been extremely poor, frequently lacking in clarity, too many obvious lies, and certainly last year downright shambolic at times. Certainly no co-incidence at all that the Scots took Sturgeon's advice seriously throughout whereas in England we saw generally very good behaviour during the first lockdown but after that an increasing disinclination to take was Johnson was saying very seriously.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...