Brexit, for once some facts.

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
Ah Ha, as i suspected!!

Dail in uproar about pushing through Ireland's involvement in PESCO (aka, European Defence force) with just 2 hrs of debate on Thurs.
It will treble defence spending & undermine our neutrality.

"Was this a quid pro quo for EU supporting Ireland Brexit stance"? asks @RBoydBarrett

What a disgustingly shabby little deal.
Further to the PESCO concept, it was brought to the irish cabinet on 14th. November, and has been one of Simon Coveney pet projects since his time as minister for defense. . The original concept was as part of the Lisbon treaty. The reason it was discussed and agreed in the Dail is because it is an agenda item in the December EU meeting... And the Dail agrees . No underground or underhand dealing here.
Now I like Richard Boyd Barrett and want our opposition TDs to ask the hard questions. The Dail is the place to ask them.
What others on this forum might have difficulty with is why your stance is 100% in alignment with that of SF .. A turnup for the books!.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

tommie

Esteemed Pedelecer
Mar 13, 2013
1,760
600
Co. Down, N. Ireland, U.K.
.. unity at last Tommie, .. I really appreciate the inclusive " our" in your sentence... For what it is worth FG , has always been in favour of international engagement perhaps even NATO. so their support would always be a given. FF would have been more reluctant, and would want to stick to the tried and trusted UN .
not sure where you get the "our" from, its from your TD down in Dun Laoghaire
point you`re all deliberately missing is this -> "Was this a quid pro quo for EU supporting Ireland Brexit stance"? asks @RBoydBarrett"

again the EU engaged in some shabby horse trading.
 

Kudoscycles

Official Trade Member
Apr 15, 2011
5,566
5,048
www.kudoscycles.com
My understanding of parliamentary procedure, and particularly in the case of the UK, was that misleading, not even lieing to the house was viewed as a big no no . , And ministers would either be sacked or resign, where there a whiff of an untruth.
Is it not the case that this man stated that there were multiple assessment reports covering 50+ sectors in existence, and he was protecting them to protect a negotiating stance? . Now either he was lieing then or lieing now?
If they dont exist, what has his department being doing?, So he should be fired for incompetence.
If they do exist then he should be fired for lieing.
Is Davis in charge of the department that should have prepared these reports?? He seemed to me in the house yesterday and in the committee meeting today almost couldn't care less and fed up with the whole Brexit project....his admission yesterday that regulatory alignment applied to the whole UK was a mistake that they are stuck with,Anna Soubry latched onto it as equivalent to staying in the single market and the customs union,its a bit of a worry that the EU were so keen on it...it seemed to me that the EU still had control??? ....his admission today that no final reports existed was an admission that he was previously lying to the house .
What does he do now????
KudosDave
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

tommie

Esteemed Pedelecer
Mar 13, 2013
1,760
600
Co. Down, N. Ireland, U.K.
Another excellent piece from Brendan O`Neill, at last an Irish citizen with a titter of wit!

Destroying the nation to preserve their power


Now we know just how far the pro-EU technocratic class and its supporters are willing to go to preserve their wounded rule. They’re willing to destroy the nation itself. To Balkanise Britain. To tear asunder a kingdom. To pit region against region. To dilute the demos and turn a people, the British people, into just so many groups and sects with apparently conflicting constitutional and legal needs. To overthrow the very ideal of equality before the law. All to the end of preserving their managerial influence over public life. All to maintain their apparently expert rule over what they view as the dim, difficult electorate. Hell hath no fury like those who think they have a right to rule being told by voters that actually they don’t.

Yesterday’s failure of the first round of Brexit negotiations, and the response to it, confirmed that those of us who believe in democracy and popular sovereignty face a very serious foe. The negotiations fell down on two issues in particular: the question of what will become of the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland post-Brexit, and the issue of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and whether it should maintain jurisdiction over EU citizens in the UK (which would mean having jurisdiction over the UK itself).

For months, the Brexit-battered EU has exploited the Irish border issue to try to strong-arm Britain, or parts of it, to stay in the Single Market. And it has insisted the ECJ must be the court of recourse for EU citizens who remain in Britain once Brexit is done. Both of these cynical, undemocratic moves are transparent stabs at weakening the UK; at undermining the two things which arguably make nationhood possible – territorial integrity and a rule of law that applies to all citizens equally. This oligarchical bullying disguised as negotiations is explicitly designed to preserve some form of EU authority over a nation where a majority of people rejected that authority. It is nakedly anti-democratic.

So it is not surprising that the first round of negotiations didn’t go smoothly. Theresa May’s suggestion that there should be a sunset clause to ECJ influence in Britain, of five years, was a sticking point. And where May foolishly made moves to accommodate the EU’s proposed differential treatment of Northern Ireland – accepting there could be ‘regulatory alignment’ between NI and the EU – her government partners in the Democratic Unionist Party rejected it. They said there could be no ‘regulatory divergence’ that ‘separates Northern Ireland economically or politically from the rest of the UK’. The DUP seems to be the only party in Britain which understands what it means to be a nation.

This spectacle should seriously concern those of us who believe in democracy. It confirms the EU and its backers will try almost anything to soften or kill Brexit. It shows that a weak May is making far too many concessions. And it demonstrates that for all their handwringing over ‘Divided Britain’, elite Remainers are happy to see the nation torn apart; they’re happy to bin both constitutional consistency and legal equality if that will help preserve the authority of their institutions and their class against a massive electoral mandate that firmly rejected them.

Consider the response of elite Remainers to yesterday’s developments. No sooner had it been confirmed that May had accepted some kind of regulatory alignment between NI and the EU than powerful Remainers were demanding their own right to break away and form their own post-democratic fiefdoms, to reduce Britain to a patchwork of Lichtensteins according to whether locals voted Remain or Leave.

London mayor Sadiq Khan got the Twitterati all aflutter when he said there are ‘huge ramifications’ in May’s acceptance that ‘it’s possible for part of the UK to remain within the Single Market and Customs Union after Brexit’ (she didn’t actually say that). Londoners ‘overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU’, he said, so perhaps the capital should have a ‘similar deal’. This is a cry to create a pseudo-republic of Remoaners, a principality of the smug with Sadiq as its cult-of-personality overlord, which would define itself by its opposition to, and hostility to, those other, less educated, less middle-class parts of Britain that voted Leave. It is a deeply undemocratic suggestion, and a poisonously divisive one.

Then came SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon, also spying in May’s ‘regularity alignment’ concession a chance to argue that Scotland should break from the Brexit imbeciles too. ‘If one part of UK can retain regulatory alignment with EU and effectively stay in the Single Market… there is surely no good practical reason why others can’t’, she tweeted. The slavishly Sturgeonite newspaper The National today splashes with: ‘NO EXCUSES: SCOTLAND MUST NOW HAVE ITS OWN DEAL.’

They want to Balkanise Britain. Carve it up into Remainer and Brexit enclaves. Divide a nation so that different zones are subject to different constitutions and principles and laws. This is the end point of the EU class’s elitist pseudo-cosmopolitan hatred for the nation: a situation where popular sovereignty comes to be superseded by a dynamic of fragmentation that’s entirely motored by the arrogant desire of the political class to escape the judgement and opinion of the people.

These sectarian Remainers seem to have no idea of the impact that their green-lighting of post-democracy fragmentation could have across Europe. It will signal to every aggrieved regional leader, every local ruler with a breakaway instinct, to cut the cords with nations and partition themselves against publics they distrust or despise. It would set in motion the fall of nations to the impulses of elitist separatism and the protection of technocratic or regional rule from the grubby concerns of the mass of society. It is beyond ironic, but also entirely logical, that an institution that poses as universal – the EU – should create the conditions for the fissuring of nations and peoples.

Then there’s the ECJ issue. May was slammed by EU negotiators, and elite Remainers, for her suggestion of a time limit to ECJ influence on issues relating to EU citizens in the UK. This tells us how serious the EU and its supporters are about diluting British democracy and law even after Brexit. To eschew universal justice in favour of a two-tier legal system, so that a wealthy German hedge-fund boss in Britain would go to a different court to, say, a newly arrived Indian immigrant, is an outrage against modern legal principles. It would accord people in Britain different legal rights depending on their national origin. It would also deny the British electorate the return of law-making sovereignty that they voted for. But elite Remainers cannot see what an affront this is because they have become singularly, destructively devoted to maintaining the power of their own narrow section of society at the expense of all else.

The question now becomes: if they are willing to rupture nations, green-light regional separatism, undermine the rule of law and trash mass democracy to defend their influence, what aren’t they willing to do? Elite Remainers were very angry when the Daily Mail called them ‘enemies of the people’. I now agree with them, because if anything they’re something worse; they’re enemies of key principles of enlightened thought, from universal justice and public reason, to restraining the power of officialdom and trusting a people to govern itself. Some Brexiteers think the fight for democracy was won on 23 June 2016. We now know that was only the beginning. This will be a long, hard battle.

Brendan O’Neill
 

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
not sure where you get the "our" from, its from your TD down in Dun Laoghaire
point you`re all deliberately missing is this -> "Was this a quid pro quo for EU supporting Ireland Brexit stance"? asks @RBoydBarrett"

again the EU engaged in some shabby horse trading.
So are you saying you misplaced the quotation marks? . And i did answer the other question, This permanent reaction force was agreed in signing the Lisbon. Not Lisburn, agreement. It started to come into fruition, at the November EU meeting. Ireland, particularly the FG side led by Simon Coveney, would have had a long term interest, . The engagement by Irish navy in the Mediterranean in humanitarian rescue missions, would have brought it more into focus. ... The other details I have already posted.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
Another excellent piece from Brendan O`Neill, at last an Irish citizen with a titter of wit!

Destroying the nation to preserve their power


Now we know just how far the pro-EU technocratic class and its supporters are willing to go to preserve their wounded rule. They’re willing to destroy the nation itself. To Balkanise Britain. To tear asunder a kingdom. To pit region against region. To dilute the demos and turn a people, the British people, into just so many groups and sects with apparently conflicting constitutional and legal needs. To overthrow the very ideal of equality before the law. All to the end of preserving their managerial influence over public life. All to maintain their apparently expert rule over what they view as the dim, difficult electorate. Hell hath no fury like those who think they have a right to rule being told by voters that actually they don’t.

Yesterday’s failure of the first round of Brexit negotiations, and the response to it, confirmed that those of us who believe in democracy and popular sovereignty face a very serious foe. The negotiations fell down on two issues in particular: the question of what will become of the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland post-Brexit, and the issue of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and whether it should maintain jurisdiction over EU citizens in the UK (which would mean having jurisdiction over the UK itself).

For months, the Brexit-battered EU has exploited the Irish border issue to try to strong-arm Britain, or parts of it, to stay in the Single Market. And it has insisted the ECJ must be the court of recourse for EU citizens who remain in Britain once Brexit is done. Both of these cynical, undemocratic moves are transparent stabs at weakening the UK; at undermining the two things which arguably make nationhood possible – territorial integrity and a rule of law that applies to all citizens equally. This oligarchical bullying disguised as negotiations is explicitly designed to preserve some form of EU authority over a nation where a majority of people rejected that authority. It is nakedly anti-democratic.

So it is not surprising that the first round of negotiations didn’t go smoothly. Theresa May’s suggestion that there should be a sunset clause to ECJ influence in Britain, of five years, was a sticking point. And where May foolishly made moves to accommodate the EU’s proposed differential treatment of Northern Ireland – accepting there could be ‘regulatory alignment’ between NI and the EU – her government partners in the Democratic Unionist Party rejected it. They said there could be no ‘regulatory divergence’ that ‘separates Northern Ireland economically or politically from the rest of the UK’. The DUP seems to be the only party in Britain which understands what it means to be a nation.

This spectacle should seriously concern those of us who believe in democracy. It confirms the EU and its backers will try almost anything to soften or kill Brexit. It shows that a weak May is making far too many concessions. And it demonstrates that for all their handwringing over ‘Divided Britain’, elite Remainers are happy to see the nation torn apart; they’re happy to bin both constitutional consistency and legal equality if that will help preserve the authority of their institutions and their class against a massive electoral mandate that firmly rejected them.

Consider the response of elite Remainers to yesterday’s developments. No sooner had it been confirmed that May had accepted some kind of regulatory alignment between NI and the EU than powerful Remainers were demanding their own right to break away and form their own post-democratic fiefdoms, to reduce Britain to a patchwork of Lichtensteins according to whether locals voted Remain or Leave.

London mayor Sadiq Khan got the Twitterati all aflutter when he said there are ‘huge ramifications’ in May’s acceptance that ‘it’s possible for part of the UK to remain within the Single Market and Customs Union after Brexit’ (she didn’t actually say that). Londoners ‘overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU’, he said, so perhaps the capital should have a ‘similar deal’. This is a cry to create a pseudo-republic of Remoaners, a principality of the smug with Sadiq as its cult-of-personality overlord, which would define itself by its opposition to, and hostility to, those other, less educated, less middle-class parts of Britain that voted Leave. It is a deeply undemocratic suggestion, and a poisonously divisive one.

Then came SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon, also spying in May’s ‘regularity alignment’ concession a chance to argue that Scotland should break from the Brexit imbeciles too. ‘If one part of UK can retain regulatory alignment with EU and effectively stay in the Single Market… there is surely no good practical reason why others can’t’, she tweeted. The slavishly Sturgeonite newspaper The National today splashes with: ‘NO EXCUSES: SCOTLAND MUST NOW HAVE ITS OWN DEAL.’

They want to Balkanise Britain. Carve it up into Remainer and Brexit enclaves. Divide a nation so that different zones are subject to different constitutions and principles and laws. This is the end point of the EU class’s elitist pseudo-cosmopolitan hatred for the nation: a situation where popular sovereignty comes to be superseded by a dynamic of fragmentation that’s entirely motored by the arrogant desire of the political class to escape the judgement and opinion of the people.

These sectarian Remainers seem to have no idea of the impact that their green-lighting of post-democracy fragmentation could have across Europe. It will signal to every aggrieved regional leader, every local ruler with a breakaway instinct, to cut the cords with nations and partition themselves against publics they distrust or despise. It would set in motion the fall of nations to the impulses of elitist separatism and the protection of technocratic or regional rule from the grubby concerns of the mass of society. It is beyond ironic, but also entirely logical, that an institution that poses as universal – the EU – should create the conditions for the fissuring of nations and peoples.

Then there’s the ECJ issue. May was slammed by EU negotiators, and elite Remainers, for her suggestion of a time limit to ECJ influence on issues relating to EU citizens in the UK. This tells us how serious the EU and its supporters are about diluting British democracy and law even after Brexit. To eschew universal justice in favour of a two-tier legal system, so that a wealthy German hedge-fund boss in Britain would go to a different court to, say, a newly arrived Indian immigrant, is an outrage against modern legal principles. It would accord people in Britain different legal rights depending on their national origin. It would also deny the British electorate the return of law-making sovereignty that they voted for. But elite Remainers cannot see what an affront this is because they have become singularly, destructively devoted to maintaining the power of their own narrow section of society at the expense of all else.

The question now becomes: if they are willing to rupture nations, green-light regional separatism, undermine the rule of law and trash mass democracy to defend their influence, what aren’t they willing to do? Elite Remainers were very angry when the Daily Mail called them ‘enemies of the people’. I now agree with them, because if anything they’re something worse; they’re enemies of key principles of enlightened thought, from universal justice and public reason, to restraining the power of officialdom and trusting a people to govern itself. Some Brexiteers think the fight for democracy was won on 23 June 2016. We now know that was only the beginning. This will be a long, hard battle.

Brendan O’Neill
Is he an Irish citizen?, There are so many untruths listed in this and the previous missive, that nothing he says retains credibility. There are so many places I could start, so I will start and finish with the only truth, we both share... The EU does not want the UK to leave.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: flecc and robdon

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
Is Davis in charge of the department that should have prepared these reports?? He seemed to me in the house yesterday and in the committee meeting today almost couldn't care less and fed up with the whole Brexit project....his admission yesterday that regulatory alignment applied to the whole UK was a mistake that they are stuck with,Anna Soubry latched onto it as equivalent to staying in the single market and the customs union,its a bit of a worry that the EU were so keen on it...it seemed to me that the EU still had control??? ....his admission today that no final reports existed was an admission that he was previously lying to the house .
What does he do now????
KudosDave
Listening to the types of statement today, my timeworn excuse of " the dog ate my homework", and" it fell of the bike carrier into a puddle of water" , seem masterful in their clarity,.. Even as we didn't have a dog, and I walked to school.
That the UK cabinet have neither had cabinet meetings or weekend think in sessions, on what is the biggest social , legal and economic event in 50 years, plumbs the depths of absurdity.
 

oldtom

Esteemed Pedelecer
That the UK cabinet have neither had cabinet meetings or weekend think in sessions, on what is the biggest social , legal and economic event in 50 years, plumbs the depths of absurdity.
Regardless of whatever deal should come to pass, the tory party and their media wing will present it as a great victory and achievement for them over the nasty Europeans. Lying and cheating are in their DNA and they will never change. When the resultant, disastrous consequences finally hit home with the brainwashed fools who see themselves as superior to those who don't vote tory, then we can begin to transform the UK or what remains of it into a socialist democracy.

Tom
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

oldtom

Esteemed Pedelecer
The American warmonger seems to be preparing to make a speech which may ignite a major war, perhaps not immediately, but the middle-east will not be a peaceful place if Jerusalem is recognised as the Israeli capital.

Bonehead Boris waffled through an interview with the headline comment that we have no plans to move our embassy! It really is embarrassing to be represented across the globe by someone as ignorant and lacking in historical and cultural knowledge as him.

I feel ashamed to be a citizen of a country that so blithely declares allegiance with a nation governed by a regime conducting a holocaust against the Palestinian people. It is time the UK declared itself no friend of the USA and Israel and demonstrated support for oppressed people wherever they may live.

Tom
 

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
At least 'spread sheet Phil' will have done his homework....

Q: Has the cabinet discussed the end state, where the UK wants to get to after Brexit?

Hammond says there have been discussions about Brexit, but not a specific one about the end state.

He says the first discussion will come in a cabinet committee.

That can only happen when they know talks will move to phase two. Any discussion before then would be premature, he claims.

  • Hammond confirms cabinet has not had a specific discussion about the final Brexit outcome it wants, the so-called “end state”.
Seems strange that after 18 months the cabinet have not had a discussion about the destination?????
KudosDave
Never was so much owed to so many by so few: they have done more damage to the nation than any external enemy ever did

"
We're bought and sold for Offshore gold-
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!"


"With apologies to Robert Burns
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and oldtom

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Is Davis in charge of the department that should have prepared these reports?? He seemed to me in the house yesterday and in the committee meeting today almost couldn't care less and fed up with the whole Brexit project....his admission yesterday that regulatory alignment applied to the whole UK was a mistake that they are stuck with,Anna Soubry latched onto it as equivalent to staying in the single market and the customs union,its a bit of a worry that the EU were so keen on it...it seemed to me that the EU still had control??? ....his admission today that no final reports existed was an admission that he was previously lying to the house .
What does he do now????
KudosDave
My suggestion is that since he looks like the "Cheshire Cat" he should disappear.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and oldtom

Kudoscycles

Official Trade Member
Apr 15, 2011
5,566
5,048
www.kudoscycles.com
Another excellent piece from Brendan O`Neill, at last an Irish citizen with a titter of wit!

Destroying the nation to preserve their power


Now we know just how far the pro-EU technocratic class and its supporters are willing to go to preserve their wounded rule. They’re willing to destroy the nation itself. To Balkanise Britain. To tear asunder a kingdom. To pit region against region. To dilute the demos and turn a people, the British people, into just so many groups and sects with apparently conflicting constitutional and legal needs. To overthrow the very ideal of equality before the law. All to the end of preserving their managerial influence over public life. All to maintain their apparently expert rule over what they view as the dim, difficult electorate. Hell hath no fury like those who think they have a right to rule being told by voters that actually they don’t.

Yesterday’s failure of the first round of Brexit negotiations, and the response to it, confirmed that those of us who believe in democracy and popular sovereignty face a very serious foe. The negotiations fell down on two issues in particular: the question of what will become of the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland post-Brexit, and the issue of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and whether it should maintain jurisdiction over EU citizens in the UK (which would mean having jurisdiction over the UK itself).

For months, the Brexit-battered EU has exploited the Irish border issue to try to strong-arm Britain, or parts of it, to stay in the Single Market. And it has insisted the ECJ must be the court of recourse for EU citizens who remain in Britain once Brexit is done. Both of these cynical, undemocratic moves are transparent stabs at weakening the UK; at undermining the two things which arguably make nationhood possible – territorial integrity and a rule of law that applies to all citizens equally. This oligarchical bullying disguised as negotiations is explicitly designed to preserve some form of EU authority over a nation where a majority of people rejected that authority. It is nakedly anti-democratic.

So it is not surprising that the first round of negotiations didn’t go smoothly. Theresa May’s suggestion that there should be a sunset clause to ECJ influence in Britain, of five years, was a sticking point. And where May foolishly made moves to accommodate the EU’s proposed differential treatment of Northern Ireland – accepting there could be ‘regulatory alignment’ between NI and the EU – her government partners in the Democratic Unionist Party rejected it. They said there could be no ‘regulatory divergence’ that ‘separates Northern Ireland economically or politically from the rest of the UK’. The DUP seems to be the only party in Britain which understands what it means to be a nation.

This spectacle should seriously concern those of us who believe in democracy. It confirms the EU and its backers will try almost anything to soften or kill Brexit. It shows that a weak May is making far too many concessions. And it demonstrates that for all their handwringing over ‘Divided Britain’, elite Remainers are happy to see the nation torn apart; they’re happy to bin both constitutional consistency and legal equality if that will help preserve the authority of their institutions and their class against a massive electoral mandate that firmly rejected them.

Consider the response of elite Remainers to yesterday’s developments. No sooner had it been confirmed that May had accepted some kind of regulatory alignment between NI and the EU than powerful Remainers were demanding their own right to break away and form their own post-democratic fiefdoms, to reduce Britain to a patchwork of Lichtensteins according to whether locals voted Remain or Leave.

London mayor Sadiq Khan got the Twitterati all aflutter when he said there are ‘huge ramifications’ in May’s acceptance that ‘it’s possible for part of the UK to remain within the Single Market and Customs Union after Brexit’ (she didn’t actually say that). Londoners ‘overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU’, he said, so perhaps the capital should have a ‘similar deal’. This is a cry to create a pseudo-republic of Remoaners, a principality of the smug with Sadiq as its cult-of-personality overlord, which would define itself by its opposition to, and hostility to, those other, less educated, less middle-class parts of Britain that voted Leave. It is a deeply undemocratic suggestion, and a poisonously divisive one.

Then came SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon, also spying in May’s ‘regularity alignment’ concession a chance to argue that Scotland should break from the Brexit imbeciles too. ‘If one part of UK can retain regulatory alignment with EU and effectively stay in the Single Market… there is surely no good practical reason why others can’t’, she tweeted. The slavishly Sturgeonite newspaper The National today splashes with: ‘NO EXCUSES: SCOTLAND MUST NOW HAVE ITS OWN DEAL.’

They want to Balkanise Britain. Carve it up into Remainer and Brexit enclaves. Divide a nation so that different zones are subject to different constitutions and principles and laws. This is the end point of the EU class’s elitist pseudo-cosmopolitan hatred for the nation: a situation where popular sovereignty comes to be superseded by a dynamic of fragmentation that’s entirely motored by the arrogant desire of the political class to escape the judgement and opinion of the people.

These sectarian Remainers seem to have no idea of the impact that their green-lighting of post-democracy fragmentation could have across Europe. It will signal to every aggrieved regional leader, every local ruler with a breakaway instinct, to cut the cords with nations and partition themselves against publics they distrust or despise. It would set in motion the fall of nations to the impulses of elitist separatism and the protection of technocratic or regional rule from the grubby concerns of the mass of society. It is beyond ironic, but also entirely logical, that an institution that poses as universal – the EU – should create the conditions for the fissuring of nations and peoples.

Then there’s the ECJ issue. May was slammed by EU negotiators, and elite Remainers, for her suggestion of a time limit to ECJ influence on issues relating to EU citizens in the UK. This tells us how serious the EU and its supporters are about diluting British democracy and law even after Brexit. To eschew universal justice in favour of a two-tier legal system, so that a wealthy German hedge-fund boss in Britain would go to a different court to, say, a newly arrived Indian immigrant, is an outrage against modern legal principles. It would accord people in Britain different legal rights depending on their national origin. It would also deny the British electorate the return of law-making sovereignty that they voted for. But elite Remainers cannot see what an affront this is because they have become singularly, destructively devoted to maintaining the power of their own narrow section of society at the expense of all else.

The question now becomes: if they are willing to rupture nations, green-light regional separatism, undermine the rule of law and trash mass democracy to defend their influence, what aren’t they willing to do? Elite Remainers were very angry when the Daily Mail called them ‘enemies of the people’. I now agree with them, because if anything they’re something worse; they’re enemies of key principles of enlightened thought, from universal justice and public reason, to restraining the power of officialdom and trusting a people to govern itself. Some Brexiteers think the fight for democracy was won on 23 June 2016. We now know that was only the beginning. This will be a long, hard battle.

Brendan O’Neill
Destroying the nation to preserve their power....that headline would appear to be the effect and end game intended by the 35 Tory hard right wingers (Bone,Rees-Mogg,IDS)
KudosDave
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: robdon and Wicky

oldtom

Esteemed Pedelecer
Any decent person caught deliberately telling lies would be in trouble. Once upon a time MPs caught so doing would apologise to the house and to the country, the wealthy ones would resign and take up positions with major organisations as grateful thanks for all the influence misused on their behalf; in the case of cabinet ministers, it was essential and they generally chose to 'fall upon their sword' if caught, suddenly finding part -time directorships at eye-watering salaries with huge multi-national conglomerates and/or banks.

Has Davis gone yet? If not, why not? May should go too as she is embroiled in all this fiasco up to her neck and has taken personal control of the 'Brexit' discussions from time to time.

'Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practise to deceive!'

It really is sick now!


Tom
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon and Wicky

oldtom

Esteemed Pedelecer
Why do I hate tory scum so much? This is why:

24991269_1641406065880523_4009149455518972151_n.jpg

Every single person who has ever voted for a tory politician killed that woman and there are thousands like her who have died prematurely, many at their own hand solely because of this tory government's implementation of murderous policies.

Tom
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

Danidl

Esteemed Pedelecer
Sep 29, 2016
8,611
12,256
73
Ireland
An unusual turn of Phrase in the Independent Headline
"
Yes, the Brexit Secretary David Davis really does think there's no point planning for Brexit
This was not some great epistemological conundrum. It was a bullshitter and a blagger trying and pyrotechnically failing to cover its arse

He even brought a box with him, to the Brexit Select Committee, that is. Two lever arch files, themselves not large enough to contain much more than a dead cat. In fact, we learned, they contained the totality of his department’s assessments on the impact of Brexit on the UK economy, broken down across dozens of different sectors. In size, if nothing else, it bore every outward resemblance not to a comprehensive analysis of how this seismic decision will affect the country, but to a primary school project on trains.

“Do the impact assessments exist?” he was asked. Davis sucked on a cough sweet and removed and replaced his glasses with such frequency he could still be marketed as a novelty Chinese lucky cat toy in good time for Christmas.

“There is a formal definition of impact assessments,” he began, his words instantly and inescapably caught in the centrifugal force of the plughole of 'no'.

Had he, the Committee Chair Hilary Benn asked him, produced an impact assessment on, say, the automotive sector?

“No.”

“The aerospace industry?”

“No.”

“The financial services sector?”

“I think the answer to all of these is going to be no,” he said.
On previous occasions, David Davis has claimed his department has been analysing the effects of Brexit in “excruciating detail.” That that excruciating detail appeared to be contained in two ring-binders which he did not deny had been produced in the last three weeks, after a House of Commons vote compelled him to publish it.

What his department had been doing was apparently “sectoral analyses” not impact assessments. There was, apparently, no point in actually forecasting the risks of Brexit. David Davis was, he said, “not a fan of economic models because they’re always wrong.”

Brexit would be a “paradigm shift” and yes, at this point, its most fervent cheerleader and now chief negotiator did liken it to the “financial crash of 2008.”

There would be no point in seeking to predict the economic impact of Brexit, because “No one saw the financial crash coming.”

No, they did not. But if you’d told JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs and the rest of them that the financial crash was coming, and not merely that but you were able to tell them the precise date more than two years in advance, it’s fair to imagine they would not have said “Well, there’s not much point in planning for it. We’ll see how it goes.”

It doesn’t matter much, this, in the grand scheme of things. That the nation is hopelessly underprepared for Brexit and that David Davis is utterly clueless is common knowledge to anyone even vaguely intimated with the process.

In one of his final public utterance before deleting his Twitter account, the former Vote Leave director Dominic Cummings memorably described Davis as “thick as mince, vain as narcissus and lazy as a toad.”

On this evidence, that was generous assessment, even if its impact on Davis has been zero."
.........................................................

What I want to know is; Which Enemy Power destroyed the sanity of this country with a 100 Megaton Artificial Stupidity Bomb?

One of the Reader's Comments stands out head and shoulders above the rest:
"
jcgu64
I do think this is grossly insulting to toads. How would you feel, if you were a toad, being compared to David Davis?.

Just So., but then what civility or consideration could one expect from a "leader of the Leave Camp"?
OG, i would like to modify one of your comments in the above.. relating to the financial crash in 2008 and the assumption that it was unforeseen...
It was foreseen, was written about and a number of the big players knew it was going to happen , just not exactly when... Many were planning on one last fllng.. . So hubris played a part.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: robdon and oldtom

oldgroaner

Esteemed Pedelecer
Nov 15, 2015
23,461
32,613
80
Another excellent piece from Brendan O`Neill, at last an Irish citizen with a titter of wit!

Destroying the nation to preserve their power


Now we know just how far the pro-EU technocratic class and its supporters are willing to go to preserve their wounded rule. They’re willing to destroy the nation itself. To Balkanise Britain. To tear asunder a kingdom. To pit region against region. To dilute the demos and turn a people, the British people, into just so many groups and sects with apparently conflicting constitutional and legal needs. To overthrow the very ideal of equality before the law. All to the end of preserving their managerial influence over public life. All to maintain their apparently expert rule over what they view as the dim, difficult electorate. Hell hath no fury like those who think they have a right to rule being told by voters that actually they don’t.

Yesterday’s failure of the first round of Brexit negotiations, and the response to it, confirmed that those of us who believe in democracy and popular sovereignty face a very serious foe. The negotiations fell down on two issues in particular: the question of what will become of the border between the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland post-Brexit, and the issue of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and whether it should maintain jurisdiction over EU citizens in the UK (which would mean having jurisdiction over the UK itself).

For months, the Brexit-battered EU has exploited the Irish border issue to try to strong-arm Britain, or parts of it, to stay in the Single Market. And it has insisted the ECJ must be the court of recourse for EU citizens who remain in Britain once Brexit is done. Both of these cynical, undemocratic moves are transparent stabs at weakening the UK; at undermining the two things which arguably make nationhood possible – territorial integrity and a rule of law that applies to all citizens equally. This oligarchical bullying disguised as negotiations is explicitly designed to preserve some form of EU authority over a nation where a majority of people rejected that authority. It is nakedly anti-democratic.

So it is not surprising that the first round of negotiations didn’t go smoothly. Theresa May’s suggestion that there should be a sunset clause to ECJ influence in Britain, of five years, was a sticking point. And where May foolishly made moves to accommodate the EU’s proposed differential treatment of Northern Ireland – accepting there could be ‘regulatory alignment’ between NI and the EU – her government partners in the Democratic Unionist Party rejected it. They said there could be no ‘regulatory divergence’ that ‘separates Northern Ireland economically or politically from the rest of the UK’. The DUP seems to be the only party in Britain which understands what it means to be a nation.

This spectacle should seriously concern those of us who believe in democracy. It confirms the EU and its backers will try almost anything to soften or kill Brexit. It shows that a weak May is making far too many concessions. And it demonstrates that for all their handwringing over ‘Divided Britain’, elite Remainers are happy to see the nation torn apart; they’re happy to bin both constitutional consistency and legal equality if that will help preserve the authority of their institutions and their class against a massive electoral mandate that firmly rejected them.

Consider the response of elite Remainers to yesterday’s developments. No sooner had it been confirmed that May had accepted some kind of regulatory alignment between NI and the EU than powerful Remainers were demanding their own right to break away and form their own post-democratic fiefdoms, to reduce Britain to a patchwork of Lichtensteins according to whether locals voted Remain or Leave.

London mayor Sadiq Khan got the Twitterati all aflutter when he said there are ‘huge ramifications’ in May’s acceptance that ‘it’s possible for part of the UK to remain within the Single Market and Customs Union after Brexit’ (she didn’t actually say that). Londoners ‘overwhelmingly voted to remain in the EU’, he said, so perhaps the capital should have a ‘similar deal’. This is a cry to create a pseudo-republic of Remoaners, a principality of the smug with Sadiq as its cult-of-personality overlord, which would define itself by its opposition to, and hostility to, those other, less educated, less middle-class parts of Britain that voted Leave. It is a deeply undemocratic suggestion, and a poisonously divisive one.

Then came SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon, also spying in May’s ‘regularity alignment’ concession a chance to argue that Scotland should break from the Brexit imbeciles too. ‘If one part of UK can retain regulatory alignment with EU and effectively stay in the Single Market… there is surely no good practical reason why others can’t’, she tweeted. The slavishly Sturgeonite newspaper The National today splashes with: ‘NO EXCUSES: SCOTLAND MUST NOW HAVE ITS OWN DEAL.’

They want to Balkanise Britain. Carve it up into Remainer and Brexit enclaves. Divide a nation so that different zones are subject to different constitutions and principles and laws. This is the end point of the EU class’s elitist pseudo-cosmopolitan hatred for the nation: a situation where popular sovereignty comes to be superseded by a dynamic of fragmentation that’s entirely motored by the arrogant desire of the political class to escape the judgement and opinion of the people.

These sectarian Remainers seem to have no idea of the impact that their green-lighting of post-democracy fragmentation could have across Europe. It will signal to every aggrieved regional leader, every local ruler with a breakaway instinct, to cut the cords with nations and partition themselves against publics they distrust or despise. It would set in motion the fall of nations to the impulses of elitist separatism and the protection of technocratic or regional rule from the grubby concerns of the mass of society. It is beyond ironic, but also entirely logical, that an institution that poses as universal – the EU – should create the conditions for the fissuring of nations and peoples.

Then there’s the ECJ issue. May was slammed by EU negotiators, and elite Remainers, for her suggestion of a time limit to ECJ influence on issues relating to EU citizens in the UK. This tells us how serious the EU and its supporters are about diluting British democracy and law even after Brexit. To eschew universal justice in favour of a two-tier legal system, so that a wealthy German hedge-fund boss in Britain would go to a different court to, say, a newly arrived Indian immigrant, is an outrage against modern legal principles. It would accord people in Britain different legal rights depending on their national origin. It would also deny the British electorate the return of law-making sovereignty that they voted for. But elite Remainers cannot see what an affront this is because they have become singularly, destructively devoted to maintaining the power of their own narrow section of society at the expense of all else.

The question now becomes: if they are willing to rupture nations, green-light regional separatism, undermine the rule of law and trash mass democracy to defend their influence, what aren’t they willing to do? Elite Remainers were very angry when the Daily Mail called them ‘enemies of the people’. I now agree with them, because if anything they’re something worse; they’re enemies of key principles of enlightened thought, from universal justice and public reason, to restraining the power of officialdom and trusting a people to govern itself. Some Brexiteers think the fight for democracy was won on 23 June 2016. We now know that was only the beginning. This will be a long, hard battle.

Brendan O’Neill
He is even thicker than Boris!

Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
 
  • Agree
Reactions: robdon

anotherkiwi

Esteemed Pedelecer
Jan 26, 2015
7,845
5,786
The European Union
I'm beginning to have a bad feeling about this brexit thing, I'm not so sure it is going to turn out as well as some of you might have expected...:rolleyes:
 

Advertisers