Page 19 of 19 FirstFirst ... 91516171819
Results 541 to 562 of 562

Thread: UK Politics Thread

  1. #541
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    totally agreed, no issue with him facing every political consequence that befalls him.
    but separate issue entirely from that which is being discussed in the quotes, no?
    People ignoring the constitution and voting for him anyway when he should by rights be out of office already is also a political consequence.

    Our entire constitution is based on custom and obligations, and the PM ignores all of them again and again, and relies on the dual pillars of media support and democratic success to justify all. As long as he successfully attends to these two factors, there is nothing in our system that stops him from doing whatever the hell he likes. And that's a political consequences too.

  2. #542

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    An endless argument that is at least quasi-religious in our inability to decypher fact from faith:
    Does the media lead the public or the public the media?

    Perhaps a sign of my optimism in mankind i tend to the latter view - by which we can understand that in achieving control (by voting to leave), immigration became an issue with lower salience.
    That would still reflect very poorly on everyone involved.

    There is a meta sense in which media are driven by the audience - cf. "age of clicks" - but editors and managements for one play a long-known role in crafting public discourse and consent.

    Notably, the level of "control", however construed, over immigration authorization wouldn't have any predictable association with whether the immigrants under the given meta-regime are prone to damage the economy/compete with locals or enhance the economy. Unless there is evidence that Leavers specifically wished to eliminate Polish and Romanian immigration on the charge that it was so deleterious. So the change in sentiment depends on alternative factors.
    Last edited by Montmorency; 06-18-2022 at 06:28.
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

  3. #543
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    The Tory government's top lawyer explicitly links the Rwanda policy with Brexit. What was that I said about the Tories rooting all their political capital in the idea of Brexit, and periodically picking fights with Europe in order to refresh it? That Brexit is not so much an economic or governmental idea, as a way to maintain themselves in power through the dual pillars of friendly media and Downing Street.

    Said Lady Cavendish, a Tory peer.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cavendish
    The government seems to have only two guiding principles: setting political traps for its opponents, and extending the power of the executive. Its Rwanda immigration scheme falls into the first category: a policy known inside Whitehall to be unworkable, but which is popular and makes critics look wet. More sinister still is the stealthy encroachment upon institutions which are supposed to act as checks on government.
    Polls show 44% for the Rwanda policy and 40% against. Which is good enough for a policy never meant to be implemented, but only used to gain political capital. It was never workable, and it's ruined the UK's international reputation. But it's offered another chance to pick a fight with Europe, and probably gained a few votes. Such is our democracy.

    Member thankful for this post:



  4. #544
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Downing Street pressured The Times to drop story about Johnson's corruption, namely appointing Johnson's then girlfriend to a highly paid role within the Foreign Office. The Times obeyed.

    This is wrong on how many levels?

    Member thankful for this post:



  5. #545
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    The Schools Bill currently going through the Lords is the biggest power grab since the 1870s. Says Tory peer and former education minister, Kenneth Baker.

    I suppose this is another example of a type B policy on the Cavendish scale, extending the power of the executive.

  6. #546
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,639
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Until there is an effective system of independent oversight the ray of light is the two by-elections where hopefully the Tories will suffer crushing defeats. That might be enough to get backbenchers to do what they do best and their self interest might get rid of Boris.

    Prince William has stated that he intends to not continue the "never complain, never explain" mantra, but although he seems to be an ethical and honourable person (as much as someone can deduce anything from material that has been filtered by a small legion of PR professionals) and would IMO be well placed to be in charge of apolitical oversight of the politicians. He however seems to be keener to work with charities. Not itself a bad thing, but there are thousands of people that could do that, whereas there's hardly anyone who could provide a nucleus for oversight to grow around.

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

    Member thankful for this post:



  7. #547
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    Until there is an effective system of independent oversight the ray of light is the two by-elections where hopefully the Tories will suffer crushing defeats. That might be enough to get backbenchers to do what they do best and their self interest might get rid of Boris.

    Prince William has stated that he intends to not continue the "never complain, never explain" mantra, but although he seems to be an ethical and honourable person (as much as someone can deduce anything from material that has been filtered by a small legion of PR professionals) and would IMO be well placed to be in charge of apolitical oversight of the politicians. He however seems to be keener to work with charities. Not itself a bad thing, but there are thousands of people that could do that, whereas there's hardly anyone who could provide a nucleus for oversight to grow around.

    The government has already threatened the heir to the throne with abolition if he doesn't zip up, after he'd commented on a policy that wasn't supposed to be enacted anyway. I don't see William, one step further from the throne, being able to offer the kind of oversight you suggest.

    Braverman has already cited the striking down of the Rwanda policy, something that was never meant to be enacted, as reason for withdrawing from another international body (that we took a principal part in setting up post-war), and that we need to fully implement Brexit by reclaiming sovereignty. The proposal for reclaiming sovereignty doesn't just reclaim power from the international courts, it also reclaims power from domestic courts, by stating that the judiciary should look less to human rights and international treaties and more to government policy.

    Which is the Cavendish description of the Tory government in action: push a type A policy (Rwanda) that's not meant to be implemented, then use that to push a type B policy (shackling of courts and withdrawing from international treaties) which is meant to be implemented. And the move is backed by the support that the magic word "Brexit" automatically invokes. Did the Leave campaign mention anything about drawing down human rights and unilaterally ignoring international treaties? Because that's what Leave's victory is being used to push.

  8. #548
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,900

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Did the Leave campaign mention anything about drawing down human rights and unilaterally ignoring international treaties? Because that's what Leave's victory is being used to push.
    I don't speak for the Leave Campaign, but I can confirm for you that I have a long standing grievance with the ECHR in its continuing judicial activism in interpreting new meaning that the original text neither contained nor intended.

    This judicial activism exacerbated when in the enforcement of its judgements it breaches the well understood legal concepts of subsidiarity and margin for appreciation.

    I don't wish the UK leave the ECHR, but i'm even firmer in my opinion that the current situation of the judiciary being used to overide the will of parliament is unsustainable.

    This is a tricky situation, there are no easy answers, and the last time we tried to tackle this from the inside was when Ken Clarke attempted back in 2012 to get the ECHR to agree principles of governance that would more firmly apply the concepts of subsidiarity and margin for appreciation.

    This has not been a resounding success. The UK is an explicitly political system, and this sits badly with having a judiciary that (correctly) tells the gov't that it is in breach of the judgments handed down by the ECHR:
    "well, we'll just change the law so it can do what we intend it to!"
    "no, i'm afraid that is not possible..."

    There has been some good commentary on what the bill is trying to achieve - and I am broadly happy with the intention:

    https://twitter.com/ProfMarkElliott/...10755015868421

    I have also seen good commentary that the drafting of the bill seems like a dogs breakfast, noting that the HRA was a much more elegant piece of legislation. But the HRA achieved this 'elegance' by basically assenting to the judgements of the ECHR, and the new bill of rights is ugly because it is trying to work around inadeqecies of how ECHR judgments of operationalised in the British legal system.

    We could have an elegant new bill of rights... by scapping the ECHR. I would have no fear of this as the UK political system is perfectly capable of managing rights and responsibilities... but i do appreciate that this creates its own political/publicity problems that the Gov't is keen to avoid.

    There are no doubt rough edges, and the UK law making process is good at knocking them off, but I fully support the core aim of the bill as highlighted in the twitter thread above.
    Last edited by Furunculus; Yesterday at 10:17.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  9. #549
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    The Mail is blaming Labour for the rail strike. Despite the Tories having been in power for the past 12 years. Another year and they'll have been in power for as long as the longest running Labour government ever, and they and the Tory government are still blaming Labour. Just like the Red Wall voted Tory for change, despite the Tories having been in power at that point for 9 years. Is it something about conservatives that prevents them from taking responsibility for what they do, and instead try to pin the blame on everyone but them?

  10. #550
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Jacob Rees Mogg says he won't be producing assessments on the impact of Brexit. Meaning his job, that of Minister of Brexit Benefits, is literally unaccountable. There is nothing to measure his success or failure by.

    Member thankful for this post:



  11. #551
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,639
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Jacob Rees Mogg says he won't be producing assessments on the impact of Brexit. Meaning his job, that of Minister of Brexit Benefits, is literally unaccountable. There is nothing to measure his success or failure by.
    All Ministers are accountable to the PM. That's it - including the PM. He's not the first Minister to be in "charge" of a disaster and nothing to come of it. Even Yes Prime Minister joked about this - how there's the Press department to broadcast every minor success and the Official Secrets Act to suppress every failure.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    The Mail is blaming Labour for the rail strike. Despite the Tories having been in power for the past 12 years. Another year and they'll have been in power for as long as the longest running Labour government ever, and they and the Tory government are still blaming Labour. Just like the Red Wall voted Tory for change, despite the Tories having been in power at that point for 9 years. Is it something about conservatives that prevents them from taking responsibility for what they do, and instead try to pin the blame on everyone but them?
    The Mail blames Labour for the weather. So nothing new there. The incumbent government nearly always tries to blame the last one. And with no oversight there's nothing to stop them, nor any penalty for doing so.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    The government has already threatened the heir to the throne with abolition if he doesn't zip up, after he'd commented on a policy that wasn't supposed to be enacted anyway. I don't see William, one step further from the throne, being able to offer the kind of oversight you suggest.
    I know. The Windsors are first and foremost survivors, rather than leaders. Any risk isn't worth it, with all the reforms just being with the aim of continuing the monarchy rather than anything more widely useful. Boris is currently weaker than the Monarchy and he can threaten abolition but I doubt that would fly with the populace, so if one were to make some sort of move now (again with an intermediary, and probably having asked several important people their view and frankly to be the ones to suggest it) what exactly is Boris to say? No - I'm whiter than white, I need no oversight and I'd never lie...

    I'm open to alternatives but the Judiciary follows the law - so if the Law is changed they have little power to oppose the changes except on narrow legal grounds; the Civil Service reports to the Government rather than is independent and given it is part of the system would unlikely change; Speaker of the House? Perhaps - and whilst we're at it why not make it a directly elected role so the holder has a mandate rather than chosen and there isn't a constituency without representation.

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  12. #552
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    All Ministers are accountable to the PM. That's it - including the PM. He's not the first Minister to be in "charge" of a disaster and nothing to come of it. Even Yes Prime Minister joked about this - how there's the Press department to broadcast every minor success and the Official Secrets Act to suppress every failure.



    The Mail blames Labour for the weather. So nothing new there. The incumbent government nearly always tries to blame the last one. And with no oversight there's nothing to stop them, nor any penalty for doing so.



    I know. The Windsors are first and foremost survivors, rather than leaders. Any risk isn't worth it, with all the reforms just being with the aim of continuing the monarchy rather than anything more widely useful. Boris is currently weaker than the Monarchy and he can threaten abolition but I doubt that would fly with the populace, so if one were to make some sort of move now (again with an intermediary, and probably having asked several important people their view and frankly to be the ones to suggest it) what exactly is Boris to say? No - I'm whiter than white, I need no oversight and I'd never lie...

    I'm open to alternatives but the Judiciary follows the law - so if the Law is changed they have little power to oppose the changes except on narrow legal grounds; the Civil Service reports to the Government rather than is independent and given it is part of the system would unlikely change; Speaker of the House? Perhaps - and whilst we're at it why not make it a directly elected role so the holder has a mandate rather than chosen and there isn't a constituency without representation.

    International law is also the law in the eyes of the judiciary. Which is a check on the government's powers, as it is beholden to agreements it has made with other countries. What the change means is that those agreements no longer matter. Sovereignty, which the full implementation of Brexit requires (so says the government's chief legal adviser), means we are no longer held to international agreements, and that everything is beholden only to what the current government says.

    Unless I am wrong, I do not recall this being raised during the Brexit campaign.

  13. #553
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,639
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    International law is also the law in the eyes of the judiciary. Which is a check on the government's powers, as it is beholden to agreements it has made with other countries. What the change means is that those agreements no longer matter. Sovereignty, which the full implementation of Brexit requires (so says the government's chief legal adviser), means we are no longer held to international agreements, and that everything is beholden only to what the current government says.

    Unless I am wrong, I do not recall this being raised during the Brexit campaign.
    International laws can be abided by or not by individual countries at their own discretion. So they are not really a check since they can be ignored if politicians inform the Judiciary they no longer apply. Like the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea which the USA has chosen to not sign up to.

    The Brexit campaign was about short slogans to win votes. It certainly wasn't a weighty legal discussion. More of bullshit on a bus.

    EU laws can equally be ignored - look at Hungry and Poland for some recent examples, and Germany, France and Spain for some others. Have two or more countries on your side and suddenly the EU can't do anything. Hardly a solution to the problem. And the EU has almost no tools to act on countries in the EU that don't tow the line.

    Last edited by rory_20_uk; 06-23-2022 at 15:36.
    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

    Member thankful for this post:



  14. #554
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    International laws can be abided by or not by individual countries at their own discretion. So they are not really a check since they can be ignored if politicians inform the Judiciary they no longer apply. Like the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea which the USA has chosen to not sign up to.

    The Brexit campaign was about short slogans to win votes. It certainly wasn't a weighty legal discussion. More of bullshit on a bus.

    EU laws can equally be ignored - look at Hungry and Poland for some recent examples, and Germany, France and Spain for some others. Have two or more countries on your side and suddenly the EU can't do anything. Hardly a solution to the problem. And the EU has almost no tools to act on countries in the EU that don't tow the line.

    ~:smokingL:
    If that was the case, what was all the debate about sovereignty? If it had always been within our power, why did we need to withdraw from the EU in order to assert that power? I remember one argument being posited that leaving the EU would mean the UK would be responsible for all its actions, that the UK government can no longer blame the EU for everything. We've left the EU, and the UK government is still blaming the EU for everything, including not being able to enact the Rwanda policy. What was the point of Brexit?

  15. #555
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,639
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    You do know the Court that this went to has nothing to do with the EU, right?

    There is still a contested border across Ireland which was always going to be impossible to solve (unless the EU gave a waiver as it has with other countries overseas territories - but they have to punish leavers).

    Because bieng able to snarl up a process isn't the same as not having to be part of it - Poland and Hungary receive billions in direct aid so they're accepting.

    And no country is a lone actor and few if any leavers thought that the UK would suddenly have no links to other countries.

    The EU is blaming Russia for famines in Africa - by this... "logic", is Africa Russia and te EU all joined together due to having an interconnection?

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

  16. #556
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    You do know the Court that this went to has nothing to do with the EU, right?

    There is still a contested border across Ireland which was always going to be impossible to solve (unless the EU gave a waiver as it has with other countries overseas territories - but they have to punish leavers).

    Because bieng able to snarl up a process isn't the same as not having to be part of it - Poland and Hungary receive billions in direct aid so they're accepting.

    And no country is a lone actor and few if any leavers thought that the UK would suddenly have no links to other countries.

    The EU is blaming Russia for famines in Africa - by this... "logic", is Africa Russia and te EU all joined together due to having an interconnection?

    Of course the court that was involved has nothing to do with the EU. But the attorney general cited Brexit, and said the Rwanda reverse showed that we need to fully implement Brexit to regain our sovereignty. That's the government's chief legal adviser, explicitly citing Brexit in relation to the Rwanda decision. It will probably win votes based on this argument.

  17. #557
    Darkside Medic Senior Member rory_20_uk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Taplow, UK
    Posts
    8,639
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Of course the court that was involved has nothing to do with the EU. But the attorney general cited Brexit, and said the Rwanda reverse showed that we need to fully implement Brexit to regain our sovereignty. That's the government's chief legal adviser, explicitly citing Brexit in relation to the Rwanda decision. It will probably win votes based on this argument.
    So you know and I know along with everyone else here that claims of Brexit is a desperate call for votes. And isn't relevant: no one here is arguing that the Government is doing a good job or even a truthful job. I think it would be newsworthy when they opt for telling it straight.

    An enemy that wishes to die for their country is the best sort to face - you both have the same aim in mind.
    Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.
    "If you can't trust the local kleptocrat whom you installed by force and prop up with billions of annual dollars, who can you trust?" Lemur
    If you're not a liberal when you're 25, you have no heart. If you're not a conservative by the time you're 35, you have no brain.
    The best argument against democracy is a five minute talk with the average voter. Winston Churchill

    Member thankful for this post:



  18. #558
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by rory_20_uk View Post
    So you know and I know along with everyone else here that claims of Brexit is a desperate call for votes. And isn't relevant: no one here is arguing that the Government is doing a good job or even a truthful job. I think it would be newsworthy when they opt for telling it straight.

    Not desperate, effective. They do it because they know it works. Get Brexit done. Protect Brexit from the Remoaners. Don't let them stop it. For all the rubbish the government is doing, for all the wrecking it's doing to the British democratic system, they know that invoking Brexit gets them votes.

  19. #559
    Praefectus Fabrum Senior Member Anime BlackJack Champion, Flash Poker Champion, Word Up Champion, Shape Game Champion, Snake Shooter Champion, Fishwater Challenge Champion, Rocket Racer MX Champion, Jukebox Hero Champion, My House Is Bigger Than Your House Champion, Funky Pong Champion, Cutie Quake Champion, Fling The Cow Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Virus Champion, Solitaire Champion, Worm Race Champion, Rope Walker Champion, Penguin Pass Champion, Skate Park Champion, Watch Out Champion, Lawn Pac Champion, Weapons Of Mass Destruction Champion, Skate Boarder Champion, Lane Bowling Champion, Bugz Champion, Makai Grand Prix 2 Champion, White Van Man Champion, Parachute Panic Champion, BlackJack Champion, Stans Ski Jumping Champion, Smaugs Treasure Champion, Sofa Longjump Champion Seamus Fermanagh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Latibulm mali regis in muris.
    Posts
    11,442

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    UK police refuse to investigate 600k donation to Tory party. Barclays flagged it as suspicious, the New York Times investigated it and found it to have come from a Russian bank account (500 is the limit for a non-UK citizen, and that's 500, not 500k). The UK police says it's ok. And thus the Tories continue to take Russian money, and they'll continue to be elected on Russian money....
    Surely this is just a form of economic sanction...

    "The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken

    Member thankful for this post:



  20. #560
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,900

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    If that was the case, what was all the debate about sovereignty? If it had always been within our power, why did we need to withdraw from the EU in order to assert that power? I remember one argument being posited that leaving the EU would mean the UK would be responsible for all its actions, that the UK government can no longer blame the EU for everything. We've left the EU, and the UK government is still blaming the EU for everything, including not being able to enact the Rwanda policy. What was the point of Brexit?
    you know the answer to this already:
    we follow the rules, so we feel them in a way that other countries do not.
    Last edited by Furunculus; Yesterday at 10:22.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

  21. #561
    Headless Senior Member Pannonian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    7,897

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Furunculus View Post
    you should know the answer to this already:
    we follow the rules, so we feel them in a way that other countries do not.
    Haven't you been supporting our current efforts at unilaterally rewriting our agreement with the EU, that was signed off by the current PM? Do you feel the same way about us ignoring the rules as you seem to about other European countries ignoring those rules?

  22. #562
    BrownWings: AirViceMarshall Senior Member Furunculus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forever adrift
    Posts
    5,900

    Default Re: UK Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Pannonian View Post
    Haven't you been supporting our current efforts at unilaterally rewriting our agreement with the EU, that was signed off by the current PM? Do you feel the same way about us ignoring the rules as you seem to about other European countries ignoring those rules?
    you have to separate the british gov't (as an actor with 50 years history of good compliance within the EU), from me as an individual (looking at the problems caused by the NIP over the last few years).

    they are not the same thing.
    Last edited by Furunculus; Yesterday at 10:18.
    Furunculus Maneuver: Adopt a highly logical position on a controversial subject where you cannot disagree with the merits of the proposal, only disagree with an opinion based on fundamental values. - Beskar

Page 19 of 19 FirstFirst ... 91516171819

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO