• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Politics, politics, politics

the dza said:
Hopefully, they will sort something out. IIRC, this is only the "divorce agreement" which then secures a transition period. Then they still have to negotiate the future trade arrangement. This being Theresa May, I expect she will drag everything out as long as possible so she can stay in charge of the Tory Party (and stay PM) until the end of this Parliament.
Click to expand...

The divorce agreement being the spec for how we intend to carry forward, agreed by both sides?

Should, "should", be more of a formality from there on as all are agreed on the framework/expectation.

"Should", obviously, as if its wishy washy vagueness then good luck agreeing anything...
 
SpurMeUp said:
Over 2 years in and less than 4 months until we supposedly leave the EU, we have not even got an exit agreement in place! If it's "happening" it's not looking convincing. *snip*
Click to expand...

If they get a withdrawal agreement though, this then buys the transition period (which is 2 years? I might be wrong) and during that period, things stay pretty much the same (again, I might be wrong, but that's my understanding). So the cliff edge is avoided/put back for another couple of years.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
The divorce agreement being the spec for how we intend to carry forward, agreed by both sides?

Should, "should", be more of a formality from there on as all are agreed on the framework/expectation.

"Should", obviously, as if its wishy washy vagueness then good luck agreeing anything...
Click to expand...

In theory...but wishy washy vagueness is May's M.O. (to be fair, it's also Labour's, as they are all trying to not upset anybody re. Brexit). Being wishy-washy and vague is May's only survival tactic and it seems to me that the only thing this government is concerned with is clinging on for as long as possible, never mind what gets implemented.
 
the dza said:
If they get a withdrawal agreement though, this then buys the transition period (which is 2 years? I might be wrong) and during that period, things stay pretty much the same (again, I might be wrong, but that's my understanding). So the cliff edge is avoided/put back for another couple of years.
Click to expand...

Yes it's a long drawn out hill rather than a cliff edge. Hate to be so scepticle, but at the end of it, does anyone think we'll get any value from it?
 
SpurMeUp said:
Yes it's a long drawn out hill rather than a cliff edge. Hate to be so scepticle, but at the end of it, does anyone think we'll get any value from it?
Click to expand...
What price sovereignty?

For some, that will be the value.
For me, I can see very little value still.
 
monkeybarry said:
What price sovereignty?

For some, that will be the value.
For me, I can see very little value still.
Click to expand...

What the fuk is sovereignty? Wikipedia:


Different approaches
The concepts of sovereignty have been discussed throughout history, and are still actively debated.[2][3] Its definition, concept, and application has changed throughout, especially during the Age of Enlightenment. The current notion of state sovereignty contains four aspects consisting of territory, population, authority and recognition.[4] According to Stephen D. Krasner, the term could also be understood in four different ways:
  • domestic sovereignty – actual control over a state exercised by an authority organized within this state,[5]
  • interdependence sovereignty – actual control of movement across state's borders, assuming the borders exist,[5]
  • international legal sovereignty – formal recognition by other sovereign states,[5]
  • Westphalian sovereignty – lack of other authority over state other than the domestic authority (examples of such other authorities could be a non-domestic church, a non-domestic political organization, or any other external agent).[5]
Often, these four aspects all appear together, but this is not necessarily the case – they are not affected by one another, and there are historical examples of states that were non-sovereign in one aspect while at the same time being sovereign in another of these aspects.[5] According to Immanuel Wallerstein, another fundamental feature of sovereignty is that it is a claim that must be recognised by others if it is to have any meaning:

“ Sovereignty is more than anything else a matter of legitimacy [...that] requires reciprocal recognition. Sovereignty is a hypothetical trade, in which two potentially conflicting sides, respecting de facto realities of power, exchange such recognitions as their least costly strategy.[6]

In most senses the UK is of course sovereign. The EU recognises the UK as sovereign, as do all other nations that have reciprocal agreements with other nations (in this sense the EU actually protects sovereignty with a. reciprical national recognition, and b. from tyranny such as the Nazis who smash through sovereign nations).

You wouldn't say France or Germany are not their own nations would you? The whole "sovereignty" concept has been amplified beyond reason by those in the UK who want to create fear. They want people to fear the 'other' of the EU, and amplify a reasoning that we are non-sovereign, which is not wholly true if you take time to look at it.
 
Last edited:
milo said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1059879094089904129
Click to expand...
i-have-a-cunning-plan.jpg
 
Is he talking about non EU trade coming via Holland / Dover?

Either way I knew about this from the papers pre and post referendum ... Why didn't he?
 
And now, this:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...al-irish-backstop-exit-clause-steve-baker#top

Eurosceptic Tory MPs will still vote down the government’s Brexit deal even if Theresa May negotiates an exit clause from the Irish backstop, the former minister Steve Baker has insisted.

May’s cabinet has been locked in a bitter internal wrangle about whether, and how, the government could extricate itself from the backstop, with some ministers concerned her plans could leave the UK in a permanent limbo.

The prime minister hopes to win the backing of her ministers for a draft withdrawal agreement at a special cabinet meeting likely to take place early next week.

But Baker, a leading figure in the backbench European Research Group (ERG), said Conservative MPs would be closely scrutinising the accompanying political declaration setting out the framework for the UK’s future trading relationship with the EU27.

“In the end, it’s not really about the backstop,” he said. “The tearing frustration is that the UK has been negotiating with itself.”

He said he and his pro-leave colleagues would focus their attention on the declaration. “Conservative MPs expect to get some commitment for the money. The overwhelming attitude of Conservative MPs is that paying £39bn for nothing is totally unacceptable,” he said.

The government hopes it can win over Tory sceptics and some Labour MPs with firm reassurances that the Irish backstop will not be indefinite.

But Baker said few would be convinced. If the deal is voted down, he predicted there would be a moment of “profound political crisis”, during which Eurosceptic Tory MPs would be able to shift the government’s negotiating stance towards a looser future relationship with the EU.

Meanwhile, anti-Brexit MPs believe if the deal is voted down, the crucial days afterwards could be when parliament seizes control of the process and insists on a second referendum or at least a closer future relationship with the EU.
 
To think these MPs are paid to implement this ridiculous decision to leave the EU and they can't even be fcuked to properly understand and digest the details being presented to them.

How long until the day we have a non-buffoon in the White House and a British Government working on something other than Brexit?
 
@nayimfromthehalfwayline when you liked the above, was it becuase you agree there should be a second vote.

"The vote to leave the European Union was influenced by a fantasy set of promises that have been shown as undeliverable, Jo Johnson has said, as he sought to explain his reasons for resigning from the cabinet on Friday.

The former transport minister accused the Brexit campaign – which was led, in part, by his brother Boris – of offering the public “a false prospectus” that bears little resemblance to the reality of the deal that the prime minister is to present to parliament.

He said it would be a democratic travesty not to go back to the people for another vote."
 
It is taking so long to reach an obvious realisation. Wish they'd hurry it up a bit!

As the brighter brother put it, the gulf between what was promised during the Brexit campaign and actual Brexit is so great, we have to have another vote. No two ways about it.
 
Last edited:
Not sure why we need another vote because we are not leaving the EU. Which is exactly what I have been saying on here for a long long time.

We might "leave" the EU, but we still be bound by their rules in all areas of life and we will still pay in, I suspect we might get some extra controls on immigration. Which is what Cameron was meant to get years ago, waste of a few years but it has kept us entertained haha.

Anyway on a far more important point, lets talk money and how we the good members of GG can try and come out ahead. Whats the angle? put some money on the pound expecting it to go up when traitor May signs a deal in the next couple of weeks.

How you guys going to play it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back