Brexit

ASLEFshrugged

The Daily Mail, a newspaper owned by a Lord who claims non-dom status (inherited along with his title from his father) in order to avoid paying full UK taxes despite spending most of his time living in Wiltshire.

Excuse me if I ignore everything it has to say about anything at all.

imagelost

Aslef :cheers:
I guess it sells papers,,, I was going buy a news paper but headlines :wahoo: nooooo

Barney

Let's face it - they all have party and personal objectives, most of which is nothing to do with the outcome of the referendum. Labour just want a general election, Conservatives failed to engage Parliament from the outset, wanting to do things their way. In all parties most MP's put the will of the people well down their agenda. Sad times.

imagelost

general election ,,, not sure what it would salvage
No party seems to have clue,,,and worse the un trusted one “Jeremy Corbyn “
The 2 main parties need a leadership contest before elections

imagelost

This is all our MPs during Brexit

Vorselaarhammer

Not Britexit but :doh: but some quality foxiness...

OutcastLondoner

And none of the three were Mexico

ASLEFshrugged

imagelost said:

The 2 main parties need a leadership contest before elections

They won't get them.

Tory party rules are that there can only be one leadership challenge in a 12 month period. They tried in December and failed so unless Theresa resigns they can't have another one for eight months.

Labour is different, if 20% of MPs and MEPs vote for a motion of no confidence in the leader then a challenge can be mounted, currently that means 51 MPs or MEPs.

Unfortunately for the "moderates" the last time they tried to oust Corbyn they got mullered because Corbyn supports all the things the grassroots members want (fully funding of the NHS, building council houses, renationalising railways, water, electricity, etc.) that they are against.

At the last General Election those policies led to the biggest increase in Labour's share of the vote (9.6%, up from 30.4% in 3015 to 40%) since they won in 1945.

Corbyn is pretty much untouchable as Labour leader because unlike Blair he actually listens to the grassroots, unlike Blair he leaves the local parties alone to select their candidates and unlike Blair he promotes socialist policies rather than simply watering down Thatcherite neo-liberablism.

imagelost

:ok:
But times have changed

ASLEFshrugged

imagelost said:

:ok:
But times have changed

Times certainly have changed.

Labour party membership has gone up 190k before Corbyn was elected leader to 540k. Before Miliband changed the rules Labour was very much a party that was ruled from the top, now its very much ruled from the bottom up.

Which is why "centarists" like Chuka Umunna, Kate Hoey and Tom Watson are getting their knickers in a twist because their routes to high paid directorships on the boards of global corporations profiteering from "out sourcing" and privatisation are no longer assured.

imagelost

Cheers aslef

imagelost

A thought
What happens if t may resigns is that not leadership contest?

IronHerb

Yep.

chicagohammer

Vorselaarhammer said:

Not Britexit but :doh: but some quality foxiness...

I must admit that when I saw this I assumed that it was a very clever photo shop, because, well surely because right, however Fox and Friends have had come out and apologize saying that a mistake was made and the banner should never have made it to final print.

do you think!!
:doh:

ASLEFshrugged

imagelost said:

A thought
What happens if t may resigns is that not leadership contest?

It doesn't look as if May knows the word "quit". As someone wrote somewhere she's suffered various falures that would have been enough reason for any previous PM to resign but she's carried on regardless.

It seems her one defining quality is sheer obstinate persistence, like a moth banging against a window to get at the light the other side.

When she first put her deal forward it lost 202-432 (-230)
On the second attempt it lost 242-391 (-149)
The third time it lost 286-344 (-58)

At this rate if she can get it to a fourth vote she could finally win.

Barney

Let's hope so. Then we can move on and deal with the other big issues. I guess we are all fed up with the B word

Yeoldhammer

The best part is where they all believe that after May resigns and they bring in the next 'fool' to take on Brexit should the WA get through, they think they will be able to negotiate decent trade terms with the EU in the 'future relationship' oh how wrong will they be again and we come out with a deal just as complimentary useless as May's.

TheMadcapLaughs

I must be mellowing in my old age. Had totally forgotten about this mob, don`t agree with all that they say, but with all the main parties "unelectable" and the amusingly named "change" being anything but, these chaps, if they get their act together, could provide an alternative:

https://sdp.org.uk/

ASLEFshrugged

Actually that is the third version of the SDP. The second version was formed by David Owen when the rest of the first SDP voted to merge with the Liberals to form the Lib Dems.

The second version collapsed after the 1990 Bootle by election where they got fewer votes than the Monster Raving Looney Party.

grey_til_I_dye

In response to Piers Morgan asserting that

No Deal is actually Brexit.
People voted to leave the EU, not to stay in bits of it.

Comes this epic response. It's on Twitter here:

https://twitter.com/EmporersNewC/status/1113547733300842497

or in slightly more readable form here:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1113547733300842497.html

It 's what at times seems like an inexhaustible set of links to pro-Brexit politicians, during the campaign, being certain that the UK would continue to trade tariff free with the EU, and that the deal we would get would bound to be better than our current one, and that there couldn't actually be a no deal Brexit.

thornburyiron

In simple terms why can’t we trade tariff free. What stops our government saying we won’t apply tariffs on our goods which would make our exports cheaper. Why does the EU have to apply tariffs to make their goods more expensive which is to the detriment of the member countries.

grey_til_I_dye

thorn

I think it's hard enough keeping up with the 'what is' in all this, without adding 'why isn't' to the mix.

As you can see from the clips quoted, all the major Brexit players promised that the UK would have a better deal than the one that was in existence prior to the vote, whilst no longer being members of the EU.

They were all challenged, many times, to put some flesh on what that deal might look like, and none of them did.

Bozzer and Gove served as ministers while the current deal was being put in place.

TheMadcapLaughs

Cheers Aslef. I Thought it all ended when they joined the Liberals. I quite like the look of some of their policies/aims.

I find it a little strange that Yvette Cooper is fighting vehemently to protect our country from the "certainty" of the "chaos" and "damage" that is going to be caused by a no deal Brexit (for how long she doesn`t say,) but was quite happy to vote for the Iraq war. A war that WAS certain to cause chaos and damage, cost the country billions, and cost tens of thousands of lives. Nice lady.

ASLEFshrugged

thornburyiron said:

In simple terms why can’t we trade tariff free. What stops our government saying we won’t apply tariffs on our goods which would make our exports cheaper. Why does the EU have to apply tariffs to make their goods more expensive which is to the detriment of the member countries.

In simple terms tariffs are charged on imports not exports.

After we leave the EU will get to decide what tariffs are charged on UK exports to the EU and we will get to decide what tariffs are charged on imports from the EU coming into the UK.

thornburyiron

Asked I know but my point is we don’t have to apply tariffs if we don’t want to and nor do they. The EU as a body may want to but I’m sure the member states would rather not

MrsGrey

thornburyiron said:

Asked I know but my point is we don’t have to apply tariffs if we don’t want

Well, we are members of the WTO, for a start.

So unless we have agreed a new trade deal with individual trading partners, we have to stick to the rules we have already agreed.

Secondly, when negotiating a trade deal, we could say that we won't set tariffs on imports. Our potential trading partner might be delighted. But they won't necessarily reciprocate. So then we'd be in a position of selling our stuff cheap, and buying their stuff at high (net) prices. Doesn't sound too desirable, to me.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-45112872

MrsGrey

You try telling domestic producers that we are going to let companies and businesses import loads of cheap stuff from somewhere else.

Read this https://www.ft.com/content/d97854c2-2941-11e9-a5ab-ff8ef2b976c7

thornburyiron

Do people deliberately misinterpret stuff. 😀I’m talking only about trading with EU countries going forward.

ASLEFshrugged

thornburyiron said:

Asked I know but my point is we don’t have to apply tariffs if we don’t want to and nor do they. The EU as a body may want to but I’m sure the member states would rather not

We can indeed choose not to charge tariffs or charge lower tariffs which makes imports cheaper.

I mentioned a few weeks ago that Michael Gove plans on reducing the tariffs on various foodstuffs in order to keep consumer prices down but that will have (and is already having) serious implications for UK farming.

One of the reasons why the member states join the EU is to trade as a body, not as separate countries. For a member state to trade with the UK separately from the rest of the EU they'd have to leave the EU themselves.

TheMadcapLaughs

As far as I understand that, far from promoting free trade, the EU acts as a bit of a straight jacket as far as individual member states are concerned then. Surely all states following the same rules is as restrictive as it is "emancipating".

I still also think that all arguments are currently "as thing stand". Surely Brexit should be seen as future opportunity. Why can`t we actively support British farmers. Instead of worrying about the implications of import/export tariffs now, why can`t we look at making/growing/producing things we currently import. The EU and its institutions perpetuate a system geared to big business and big finance. Small local businesses and producers are getting swallowed up by the giants. If we carry on as we are, which we seemed determined to do, there will literally be a handful of multi billionaires controlling/supplying virtually everything we watch, wear and consume. I cannot understand, when you look at what is happening in the World, why there is such clamour to maintain the status quo. Fear I suppose.

As far as Brexit is concerned, anything but a clean break is pointless. We may as well remain, all the current Brexit proposals (as I understand them) leave us in a worse position than remaining. A once in a lifetime vote was promised, in or out, the result shocked the establishment. Ever since, our elected representatives, big business and finance, the bank of england, "A" list celebrities, and most of the mainstream media have done their utmost to block Brexit. They have succeeded. A totally pointless exercise and a huge waste of time and money.

There is one bonus to come out of this. Whether you voted remain or leave, I think most would agree that our politicians have been shown up for the useless twonks that they are.