Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sacking the Secretary of State who got Stormont back up and running does seem unfair. Unsurprisingly suspected to be revenge for not believing in Brexit enough:



"I hear Julian Smith sacking is linked to his comments at the height of the Brexit tension last autumn.

He told MPs no deal would be ?very, very bad? for NI"

I posted this in another thread...but this seems to be where it's being discussed....


For context - I didn't vote conservative recently, despite my leaver credentials on this forum. For me the question of government or leave are totally separate.


But, in anycase, after the election I was prepared to give Boris the benefit of the doubt, despite his patchy record with the truth etc. But I must say this forcing out of javid does concern me.


They wanted him to change his advisors, so really they wanted to keep him as a figurehead to show stability, but number 10 would actually make the decisions in the chancellory...


Hmmmm.......

"Can you expand on this please..."


I know many people on the left and on the right (and in the centre) who voted Leave (neither side can see the problem with leaving and The Other Lot getting in)


So I don't think Cat is unique or needs to expand much - to me it just reads that people all had their own reasons for leaving


It's why so many insist "I know what I voted for" - but rarely acknowledge that might be for very different reasons to other leave voters (I think Cat has said they do acknowledge this in the past tbf)

Ha...as soon as I posted that I thought that bit might be the focus....


Sephiroths comments are very fair.


For what it's worth....the short comment to make is that the referendum vote was for the next 50 odd years, and if you were influenced by people like garage, Johnson, rees-mogg etc....then I feel this is conflating the politicians of the moment with a much more structural, longer term decision.


I appreciate the counter argument is that these are the people that will negotiate our exit. And to be fair...that is unfortunate.....

As an aside, I thi nk the juxtaposition highlighted in sephiroths post is worth flagging. It highlights the difference in outlook between many leavers and remainers. The longer term 'concept' was of importance to many leavers (myself included), but the shorter term implementation risks and detail were more important to many remainers


And it's this incongruous way of looking at it that maybe promotes so much division....apples and oranges.....

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I know many people on the left and on the right

> (and in the centre) who voted Leave (neither

> side can see the problem with leaving and The

> Other Lot getting in)


I think it's more that they can put up with the "wrong" party for 5 years if it means they get the Brexit they want, but it's definitely true Leave/Remain isn't drawn along the usual party lines.

"The longer term 'concept' was of importance to many leavers (myself included)"


but again the longer term concept is irreconcilably different amongst many leavers - never mind Remainers. Therefore it will forever be a mirage and never a remote possibility. That's the problem that most remainers see - apples and oranges are different fruit and people will have their own preference. But leave vs remain is Unicorn vs Dog(or cat, according to preference)


It's profoundly irresponsible

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> but again the longer term concept is

> irreconcilably different amongst many leavers -

> never mind Remainers. Therefore it will forever be

> a mirage and never a remote possibility.


You won't find any disagreement from me on that front.

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "Can you expand on this please..."

>

> I know many people on the left and on the right

> (and in the centre) who voted Leave (neither

> side can see the problem with leaving and The

> Other Lot getting in)


But surely that only applies to Labour leave voters. Tory leave voters could vote for their natural side.


I just thought it was interesting that Cat as a leaver didn't vote Tory, the only party on the Leave side that could realistically win and deliver Brexit. It seems to go against the grain of how most people voted, i.e. ignoring political allegiances and voting along the lines of leave or remain instead. I was interested in hearing the backstory to his position...

"But surely that only applies to Labour leave voters. Tory leave voters could vote for their natural side."


well yes, in this election


But that makes non-tory leave voters worse - because clearly brexit NOW will be shaped by (waves hand at whatever this government is) as they were always going to be elected in this election. But just as Corbyn fans (not saying Cat is one) imagined He would win ( I know, I know), they imagined their own version of brexit


But even then - tory leave voters have to accept there will come a time when they won't have power - and then (waves hand at whatever the opposition is now) will be doing a lot of things they won't like


Basically all leavers on all sides could only see the (mostly imaginary) benefits as applicable to them, and dismissed any Actually Very Serious downsides

Sephiroth Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> But that makes non-tory leave voters worse -

> because clearly brexit NOW will be shaped by

> (waves hand at whatever this government is) as

> they were always going to be elected in this

> election. But just as Corbyn fans (not saying Cat

> is one) imagined He would win ( I know, I know),

> they imagined their own version of brexit


Absolutely, I've previously asked the question of Lexiters on here are they comfortable knowing that Brexit is fast becoming what a lot of remainers said it would, namely a conduit for the Tory hard right, increasingly creeping towards a quasi-authoritarian government, and replies back came there none...

EU spending tens of millions of euros a year to promote meat eating


https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/14/eu-spending-tens-of-millions-of-euros-a-year-to-promote-meat-eating


Well done EU. Glad to see you?re spending MY money on something I agree with.

The new SOS for NI says there will be no border down the Irish sea. This border I understood was an implication of the signed WA. Is the UK Gov planning on breaking the agreement and forcing the EU to insist that the ROI enforces a border on the island?

Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The new SOS for NI says there will be no border

> down the Irish sea. This border I understood was

> an implication of the signed WA. Is the UK Gov

> planning on breaking the agreement and forcing the

> EU to insist that the ROI enforces a border on the

> island?


As I have previously pointed out on the Brexit thread.


It has always been the case that EU states have to erect a border against non EU states. Don?t ask me under what EU Law or directive because I?ve never read them nor never will.


An independent Scotland within the EU would need to erect such a border that would make Hadrian?s wall look like a flimsy picket fence.


Anyway, to change tack, I see EU members are crapping themselves again because they?ve got to cough up more money to cover the UK?s contributions.

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
  • Latest Discussions

    • No, because they are a business and their job is to make a profit. It is the local council, on our behalf, who should be giving regard to the environment. Gala, not unreasonably, might take the view that it is the council's role to protect the environment of Southwark, and if they have no objection to this scheme then frankly why shouldn't they (Gala) go ahead? And the council also seems to take the view that they are focused on revenue and not the environment. Otherwise they might listen to the environmental pleas here. The mistake you are making is assuming that either party to this transaction (we are clearly only bystanders) gives a flying fig for the environment when there is money in the offing.
    • It struck me last year that any dialogue with Gala themselves e.g. at the box-ticking "Community Engagement Sessions" is completely pointless, as they are just a business trying to do whatever is necessary to hold their event; the park is just a venue to them, a necessary facility, and they'll say anything to secure it. They don't care about it's welfare or upkeep, over and above making sure there's no complaints big enough to prevent them using it again. I've found that discussing issues with them has just led to them using that info to counteract that issue - effectively helping them strengthen their position. What I find frustrating is that the council, despite being the body that decides on this, and should be representing local residents, takes no active part in any discussions or presentations, so there's no way to engage with them apart from an online consultation which is clearly also a box ticking exercise, bearing in mind for the last two years the overwhelming majority (97% of respondents) objected to the event. Why are Gala running the community meetings? Why do Gala run the issue hotline? If the council really care about the park and the surrounding community, and still allow this type of event, they should be way more hands on with taking responsibility for it's running, not just handing it all over to a profit making company.  Sorry, probably tldr but so sad about the repeated negative impact on our (once beautiful & peaceful) park and just exasperated that there's so little that can be done to halt it. This is just the start, it WILL turn into another Brockwell Park, and Gala & the council just don't care.
    • We used these guys for our underfloor heating, their heating engineer Sam was excellent. Very reassuring and sorted it all out properly.
    • They’re convenient. They’re fun to ride. From ED, getting a Lime to Brixton and then jumping on the tube is probably the fastest way to get into central London. There’s a reason they’re  popular.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...