Brexit discussion thread XI (Please read OP before posting)

Infini

Tell me how wrote: »

https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1178329143420715011

He's actually saying that irrespective of everything that has gone on, it is Mr Bercow who has damaged the house in the eyes of the public.
This is no longer about right or wrong, it is about loyalty or dignity. Incredible neck on him.

Meanwhile on a billboard in the UK....



It's just laughable that anyone will even believe a word he says after all this.

Meanwhile the Dumbáss Unionist Party is still in the world of unicorns...

https://www.rte.ie/news/brexit/2019/0929/1079008-dup-foster-brexit-backstop/

They simply refuse to accept there is no time limit ever. Can hear that bus being backed up on top of them right now...

briany

GM228 wrote: »

Will be interesting to see if she does this, a Monarch has not removed a Government since 1834.

Would be truly amazing to see the Queen herself wade into the fray. Dangerous for the monarchy as well, as the wingnuts and trolls of Brexit would be calling for her head, (semi-)literally.

Roger_007

briany wrote: »

Would be truly amazing to see the Queen herself wade into the fray. Dangerous for the monarchy as well, as the wingnuts and trolls of Brexit would be calling for her head, (semi-)literally.

The monarchy in the U.K. is nothing more than a tourist attraction, and a very successful one at that. Such 'constitutional' functions as the monarch has consist of things where the monarch has to do what he/she does what they are told to do by the government in the person of the PM.
The 'powers' of the monarchy are just pretend powers. If the monarch dared to defy the government on any issue, they would not last five minutes.

darem93

I was browsing through Google and stumbled across this street art from before the referendum back in 2016.



This would have been before the 2016 election when Trump was elected and of course long before Boris got into office. Crazy how accurate it turned out to be...

briany

Roger_007 wrote: »

The monarchy in the U.K. is nothing more than a tourist attraction, and a very successful one at that. Such 'constitutional' functions as the monarch has consist of things where the monarch has to do what he/she does what they are told to do by the government in the person of the PM.
The 'powers' of the monarchy are just pretend powers. If the monarch dared to defy the government on any issue, they would not last five minutes.

I don't disagree that the monarchy is not where the true power lies. However, probably the only thing that every major British party and politician (barring Sinn Fein) could espouse agreement on is that they are loyal to her majesty. The mace on the table in the HoC symbolises royal authority in the chamber, and parliament cannot sit without it. So it is a big part of British political culture that they are (on the surface) subordinate. It would be 'interesting' if nothing else to have this shown up.

An Ciarraioch

EU budget national contributions for 2018 published today - Ireland remains a net contributor, increasing from €172m to €314m.

https://ec.europa.eu/budget/graphs/revenue_expediture.html

LeinsterDub

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

EU budget national contributions for 2018 published today - Ireland remains a net contributor, increasing from €172m to €314m.

https://ec.europa.eu/budget/graphs/revenue_expediture.html

Worth every cent! I'd dread to think what this country would be like without the EU

FrancieBrady

Roger_007 wrote: »

The monarchy in the U.K. is nothing more than a tourist attraction, and a very successful one at that. Such 'constitutional' functions as the monarch has consist of things where the monarch has to do what he/she does what they are told to do by the government in the person of the PM.
The 'powers' of the monarchy are just pretend powers. If the monarch dared to defy the government on any issue, they would not last five minutes.

There would have been no prorogation had parliament gotten rid of the prerogative powers of the monarchy.

You cannot say that the 'monarch' is only a tourist attraction' when this situation pertains. What the monarch does or doesn't decide to do has the ability to create chaos.

lawred2

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

EU budget national contributions for 2018 published today - Ireland remains a net contributor, increasing from €172m to €314m.

https://ec.europa.eu/budget/graphs/revenue_expediture.html

that's some amount of spending in Poland

and why is the UK excluded from budgetary balance?

interesting to see only 10 (11 incl UK) net contributors of which Ireland is one.

An Ciarraioch

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

EU budget national contributions for 2018 published today - Ireland remains a net contributor, increasing from €172m to €314m.

https://ec.europa.eu/budget/graphs/revenue_expediture.html

You can safely expect that to at least treble after Brexit, the EU will have to raise funding to cover the hole the UK leaving will leave in the finances.

Jim2007

Roger_007 wrote: »

The monarchy in the U.K. is nothing more than a tourist attraction, and a very successful one at that. Such 'constitutional' functions as the monarch has consist of things where the monarch has to do what he/she does what they are told to do by the government in the person of the PM.
The 'powers' of the monarchy are just pretend powers. If the monarch dared to defy the government on any issue, they would not last five minutes.

On the contrary, documents released by Whitehall under FOI, shows that senior royals have interfered with at least 39 bills in recent times. And in one instance the Queen completely vetoed the Military Actions Against Iraq Bill in 1999.

An Ciarraioch

lawred2 wrote: »

that's some amount of spending in Poland

and why is the UK excluded from budgetary balance?

interesting to see only 10 (11 incl UK) net contributors of which Ireland is one.

No, UK is the country on the very right, problem is with the irregular labelling!

Jim2007

Deleted User wrote: »

You can safely expect that to at least treble after Brexit, the EU will have to raise funding to cover the hole the UK leaving will leave in the finances.

The proposed budget for 21 - 27 has already been released and is on the basis that the UK will not participate.

lawred2

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

No, UK is the country on the very right, problem is with the irregular labelling!

there are only 27 entries in the budgetary balance chart... I see the UK in the other charts

Jim2007

Jim2007 wrote: »

The proposed budget for 21 - 27 has already been released and is on the basis that the UK will not participate.

I was responding to the 2014 -2020 budget in the link, there will be a massive increase in contributions expected from Ireland.

Nate--IRL--

Deleted User wrote: »

I was responding to the 2014 -2020 budget in the link, there will be a massive increase in contributions expected from Ireland.

How much, and for how long?


Nate

Zubeneschamali

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

How much, and for how long?

About 10%, forever.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/ireland-s-eu-budget-contribution-may-rise-to-over-3bn-1.3486204

Nate--IRL--

Hmm ok that's not apocalyptic so.


Nate

Zubeneschamali

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

Hmm ok that's not apocalyptic so.

The UK pays in more than that, it pays in about 13%, but about 7-8% goes back to them, so the UK pays about 6% of the budget net.

Sam Russell

Roger_007 wrote: »

The monarchy in the U.K. is nothing more than a tourist attraction, and a very successful one at that. Such 'constitutional' functions as the monarch has consist of things where the monarch has to do what he/she does what they are told to do by the government in the person of the PM.
The 'powers' of the monarchy are just pretend powers. If the monarch dared to defy the government on any issue, they would not last five minutes.

I would urge posters to view 'A Very British Coup' with Ray McNally playing the PM. It is quite prophetic given the current situation. It posits the dark forces of the British Establishment taking over the state when the PM refuses to do as bid, despite huge threats, blackmail, and the murder of the chief scientist.

It will not be the Queen taking control, but the top brass of the Armed Forces, just like any coup.

jm08

Deleted User wrote: »

I was responding to the 2014 -2020 budget in the link, there will be a massive increase in contributions expected from Ireland.

The UK's contribution has already dropped from about 12 billion in 2015 to 7 billion in 2018. The EU have already proposed cutting CAP (and is being discussed at the moment). The other thing is that investment in some of the Eastern European countries can be reduced as they won't need so much investment from now on.

On another note, the new EU Commissioners are being questioned by the European Parliament today. Phil Hogan is on at 6.30-9pm.


https://www.politico.eu/article/commissioner-hearings-day-1-live-blog-phil-hogan-maros-sefcovic-mariya-gabriel-european-commission/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=alert&utm_campaign=Commissioner+hearings+Day+1%3A+Live+blog&utm_source=POLITICO.EU&utm_campaign=5138f5dcf8-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2019_09_30_12_26&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_10959edeb5-5138f5dcf8-190393289


Interesting to note that two nominated commissioners (Hungary & Romania) have been rejected at Committee Hearing stage already (one I believe over a conflict of interest).

Zubeneschamali

David Gauke (one of the expelled rebels) published an article today suggesting that Brexit won't happen on October 31st and Johnson will get the blame, which is probably true.

At the bottom, he suggests: If all of the leaders of the Leave campaign had had the courage to set out the trade-offs, faced up to reality and argued for a position based on the real costs and benefits, we could have concluded this process much earlier by leaving with a deal.

I think this is wrong, and it is why we are facing either No Deal or No Brexit. If Leave had championed a Norway deal (as the Telegraph suggested they should before the referendum), everyone would have seen immediately that Brexit is worse than Remain, and they would never Brexit at all.

In fact possible every deal, when spelled out as costs and benefits, is worse than Remain. The only option left is No Deal.

Joe_ Public

Sam Russell wrote: »

I would urge posters to view 'A Very British Coup' with Ray McNally playing the PM. It is quite prophetic given the current situation. It posits the dark forces of the British Establishment taking over the state when the PM refuses to do as bid, despite huge threats, blackmail, and the murder of the chief scientist.

It will not be the Queen taking control, but the top brass of the Armed Forces, just like any coup.

Never saw the series, but did read the book by Chris Mullin and am currently about to start the sequel which he just recently published. Harry's not around these days, of course, but there are plenty to continue the good fight.

CelticRambler

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

At the bottom, he suggests: If all of the leaders of the Leave campaign had had the courage to set out the trade-offs, faced up to reality and argued for a position based on the real costs and benefits, we could have concluded this process much earlier by leaving with a deal.

I think this is wrong, and it is why we are facing either No Deal or No Brexit. If Leave had championed a Norway deal (as the Telegraph suggested they should before the referendum), everyone would have seen immediately that Brexit is worse than Remain, and they would never Brexit at all.

Well, yeahhhhh, but no, it's not wrong. It would almost certainly not have been enough to carry Leave over the line at the time of the referendum, but it might well have been sufficient to get enough "soft Remainers" to agree a "fair price" for respecting the infamous Will Of The People - if it had been done in the honeymoon period afterwards.

On paper, it makes perfect sense in so many ways for me to take that well-paid, permanent, pensionable job I interviewed for two weeks ago; but I'll still reject the formal offer if they make it, because I see a brighter future for myself living on the edge of civilisation ...

But of course getting a consensus out of the many and various interpretations of Leave, one that would balance the econmic cost against the emotional benefit, would have been - and still is - an impossible task.

hometruths

Anybody know of any UK forums with decent reasoned Brexit debate?
Have had a browse but most of the ones I have seen are a bit shouty, on both sides.

Tell me how

schmittel wrote: »

Anybody know of any UK forums with decent reasoned Brexit debate?
Have had a browse but most of the ones I have seen are a bit shouty, on both sides.

Given where their politics and media are at, I'd say that's par for the course at this stage.

GM228

http://www.w4mpjobs.org/JobDetails.aspx?jobid=72853

New 6 month job advertised for the Conservatives and Reformist Group at the European Parliament - and the Tories insist they are leaving the day before the job is to start!

Rjd2

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1178667150468423681

very early days but a BBC journo saying their won't be a no confidence vote this week and the blame been laid on the door of SNP.

I suspect that's the Lib Dems doing some propaganda.

Would be very silly not to have a vote this week with the tories in Manchester.

lawred2

Rjd2 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1178667150468423681

very early days but a BBC journo saying their won't be a no confidence vote this week and the blame been laid on the door of SNP.

I suspect that's the Lib Dems doing some propaganda.

Would be very silly not to have a vote this week with the tories in Manchester.

is it?

while it gives them free reign in Parliament - it's not exactly a winner in the old PR stakes... they have the numbers to defeat the Tories when the Tories are actually present and sitting so why be seen (rightly or wrongly) to be pulling such a 'stunt' to achieve the same result?

I'd like to hear the SNP's reasoning really..

gooch2k9

lawred2 wrote: »

is it?

while it gives them free reign in Parliament - it's not exactly a winner in the old PR stakes... they have the numbers to defeat the Tories when the Tories are actually present and sitting so why be seen (rightly or wrongly) to be pulling such a 'stunt' to achieve the same result?

I'd like to hear the SNP's reasoning really..

Aye, better that they lose in person. Otherwise, Tories will be all over moaning about dirty tricks.

That statement doesn't preclude them bringing forward the Benn bill deadline though.