British Politics

[Len Cnut]

 

[Dazey]

1 hour ago, DieselDaisy said:

What a load of tripe. They don't exist! The industry is almost completely destroyed because of your beloved EU! There are coastal towns reduced to ghost towns running up the north east - Scotland also. I believe it is similar elsewhere. 

Why do people who defend the EU ignore the fact it destroyed our maritime industry? You defend studenty gap year wankers in the interests of the EU and European migrants but never what this horrid thing actually did to our country? They are technically ''working class'' you know, if you consider yourself ''the left'' they should be included in your appraisal of the EU - a pre-industrial working class? None of you, not you, Atari, Graeme bat an eyelid about the fact the EU destroyed thriving maritime towns. Some 'left'? 

So because you bear a grudge over something that happened 30 odd years ago the solution is to fuck ourselves over even more? The fishing industry is gone. Deal with it. 

[DieselDaisy]

7 minutes ago, Dazey said:

So because you bear a grudge over something that happened 30 odd years ago the solution is to fuck ourselves over even more? The fishing industry is gone. Deal with it. 

Not so much a grudge but knowledge of just how revolting the European Union is as an institute. 

And by the way, Corbyn loathes the EU. He just has to be seen to be flabby on it because of all of the Blairite wankers in his party.

[DieselDaisy]

Jeremy Corbyn on the EU,

- opposed it in 1975 (leaving the EEC)

- opposed it in 1993 (Maastricht)

- opposed it in 2008 (Lisbon)

Speeches,

Greek crisis ''There is no future for a Europe that turns its smaller nations into colonies of debt peonage." ''If Europe becomes a totally brutal organisation that treats every one of its member states in the way that the people of Greece have been treated at the moment, then I think Europe will lose a lot of support from a lot of people''.

"The project has always been to create a huge free-market Europe, with ever-limiting powers for national parliaments and an increasingly powerful common foreign and security policy."

PS

I have just been to Greece and there is no love loss between the people and the EU - again, jobs, employment, welfare, livelhoods blah blah blah - the stuff you idiots cite so much when supporting the EU, yet conveniently ignore when those issues show the EU for the crock of shit it always has been.

Edited December 8, 2017 by DieselDaisy

[SoulMonster]

56 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

No, it was EU quotas which specify when British fisherman can fish, and how much they can fish. It is specific policy which killed our industry.

Did you read the text I pasted above? I think it addresses this directly:

Quote

 

The Environment Secretary Elizabeth Truss, says she “firmly believes UK fishermen are better off inside the EU”. She believes it is “wishful thinking” to suggest that Britain can get a better deal for its fishermen outside of Europe. Britain, she says, has only 13 per cent of the EU’s total sea area, but is allocated 30pc of the total quota and our trawlers fish in Irish, German, French and Dutch waters with catches worth about £100m a year. She has warned that Britain would not have automatic and immediate freedom to control its own waters if it left the EU – and would still have to comply with the bloc’s restrictions without having any say over them. While recognising that the CFP “hasn’t always suited us”, Ms Truss says that UK-led reform has ended the “wasteful practice” of discarding fish and has given regional decision-making back to local fishermen.

Supporters of EU membership also point out that 66 per cent of UK seafood exports go to EU countries and that seven out of the top ten countries that Britain exports to are in the EU. They say industry profits are going up from 271 million euros gross profit in 2013 to 367 million euros gross profit in 2014. Others including environmental law firm ClientEarth say that the reformed CFP offers the best solution to overfishing in Europe, with many stocks already showing signs of improvement. They say that while many small vessels in the UK are suffering from low quotas, the UK has the second largest quota allocation in the EU and leaving the EU could result in a “tragedy” of overfishing and trawlermen’s livelihoods could suffer during years of bureaucratic wrangling.

 

 

[AtariLegend]

EU and Japan finalize deal for trade zone covering 30% of global GDP

To add to the barrage of news from Brussels this morning, the EU and Japan have finalized their free trade deal, which was agreed in principle back in July.

Both sides have now agreed the text of an economic partnership agreement to create the world’s largest open economic zone, which will cover 600m people and encompassing approximately 30 per cent of global GDP, according to the EU.

The deal, which took four years to agree, cuts tariffs, introduces cooperation on standards and regulations, and opens up public procurement markets.

European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker and Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe said that while the deal had “considerable economic value”, it was also of “strategic importance”, demonstrating the regions’ commitment “to keeping the world economy working on the basis of free, open and fair markets with clear and transparent rules”.

“It’s done”, said Mr Juncker, who described the agreement as “a powerful political signal to the world, keeping the flag of free and fair trade high”.

“With the finalization of the negotiations, the path is now clear to complete the internal procedures leading to the signature, ratification and full implementation of the agreement,” Mr Juncker and Mr Abe added in a joint statement.

But despite the months of negotiations on the details of the text since July, which were intended to allow the two sides to iron out any wrinkles, the deal announced on Friday dodges the contentious issue of investor protection, separating it out from the main economic partnership agreement.

Investor protection was highlighted as a sensitive issue back in July, with Brussels rejecting the use of traditional “investor state-dispute settlement” tribunals — criticized by campaign groups as a tool for multinationals to undermine environmental and labour standards– and Tokyo resisting the alternative of investment courts.

Instead, negotiations will continue separately on the issue outside the scope of the main deal, helping smooth the path towards ratification of the trade agreement by the EU’s member states.

 

 

 

Source:https://www.ft.com/content/f0f093fb-89e9-395d-b12a-39a789c321a1

Edited December 8, 2017 by AtariLegend

[DieselDaisy]

5 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Did you read the text I pasted above? I think it addresses this directly:

 

It does and Truss is speaking out of her behind. That has no analogy to the realities of the situation here, and anyhow the industries were killed a longtime ago. Why collaborate with an organisation for marginally more scraps when that organisation in question is the main reason you are eating scraps to begin with? That is almost Stockholm syndrome!!

I do not live in London or a similar cosmopolitan area. My area overwhelmingly voted for leaving the EU. That is my reality, obviously if I lived in London and worked in the city, drinking lattes and so forth I might be more sympathetic to the other argument, but you live within your own experience and the experience here is that the EU killed our fishing industries off and basically colluded with the south in aggrandising the 'north-south divide' economically. 

[Padme]

56 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Not so much a grudge but knowledge of just how revolting the European Union is as an institute. 

And by the way, Corbyn loathes the EU. He just has to be seen to be flabby on it because of all of the Blairite wankers in his party.

Nobody is saying that the EU is a paradise where everything is perfect. Sure there are things that can be changed. Even if many things are completely changed. There will always be something that won't be ideal. Corbyn might not be the EU number one fan. But Brexit wasn't his idea. And he didn't join the Leave campaign. In fact he supported Remain.

48 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Jeremy Corbyn on the EU,

- opposed it in 1975 (leaving the EEC)

- opposed it in 1993 (Maastricht)

- opposed it in 2008 (Lisbon)

Speeches,

Greek crisis ''There is no future for a Europe that turns its smaller nations into colonies of debt peonage." ''If Europe becomes a totally brutal organisation that treats every one of its member states in the way that the people of Greece have been treated at the moment, then I think Europe will lose a lot of support from a lot of people''.

"The project has always been to create a huge free-market Europe, with ever-limiting powers for national parliaments and an increasingly powerful common foreign and security policy."

PS

I have just been to Greece and there is no love loss between the people and the EU - again, jobs, employment, welfare, livelhoods blah blah blah - the stuff you idiots cite so much when supporting the EU, yet conveniently ignore when those issues show the EU for the crock of shit it always has been.

I don't see why you have to call people idiots. Because nobody has called you such thing. As for Greece they are also guilty. It is their fault if they have an incompetent government. They got in the mess they have all by themselves.  There was a world wide crisis in 2008. As usual the most vulnerable people are the ones who have to suffer the most. And that happens all over the world. It will always be like that with or without the EU.

[SoulMonster]

45 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

It does and Truss is speaking out of her behind. That has no analogy to the realities of the situation here, and anyhow the industries were killed a longtime ago. Why collaborate with an organisation for marginally more scraps when that organisation in question is the main reason you are eating scraps to begin with? That is almost Stockholm syndrome!!

I do not live in London or a similar cosmopolitan area. My area overwhelmingly voted for leaving the EU. That is my reality, obviously if I lived in London and worked in the city, drinking lattes and so forth I might be more sympathetic to the other argument, but you live within your own experience and the experience here is that the EU killed our fishing industries off and basically colluded with the south in aggrandising the 'north-south divide' economically. 

Yes, and then there are those people who try to look at what is the best for everybody by taking a broader perspective instead of focusing narrowly on one group isolated. It might be that the EU has been bad for England's fishing industry -- although this seems to be disputed -- but if it has been sufficiently good for other parts of England, so that the net effect is positive, then they will unselfishly have to be in favor. Because what matters to them is the majority, and not small niche groups and individuals.

[DieselDaisy]

41 minutes ago, Padme said:

Nobody is saying that the EU is a paradise where everything is perfect. Sure there are things that can be changed. Even if many things are completely changed. There will always be something that won't be ideal. Corbyn might not be the EU number one fan. But Brexit wasn't his idea. And he didn't join the Leave campaign. In fact he supported Remain.

I don't see why you have to call people idiots. Because nobody has called you such thing. As for Greece they are also guilty. It is their fault if they have an incompetent government. They got in the mess they have all by themselves.  There was a world wide crisis in 2008. As usual the most vulnerable people are the ones who have to suffer the most. And that happens all over the world. It will always be like that with or without the EU.

''Job security, social-welfare, etc etc''.

(Yes, but that doesn't apply to fishermen and Greeks - those latter people, working class people, should be punished).

Hypocrisy of the highest order from the Euro supporters.

Then there are the disgusting prejudices against votes who democratically voted leave - ''white van man'', ''Little Englanders'', ''ignorant'' or ''warped by media'' - much of this is class bigotry of the highest order.

Corbyn was for remain - as was Theresa May - because his party is full of Blairites that he has to keep happy. Corbyn is a far-leftist and a Bennite. The EU basically stands against everything he believes in.

 

[DieselDaisy]

39 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Yes, and then there are those people who try to look at what is the best for everybody by taking a broader perspective instead of focusing narrowly on one group isolated. It might be that the EU has been bad for England's fishing industry -- although this seems to be disputed -- but if it has been sufficiently good for other parts of England, so that the net effect is positive, then they will unselfishly have to be in favor. Because what matters to them is the majority, and not small niche groups and individuals.

What a horrendous post. 

 

[Padme]

49 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

''Job security, social-welfare, etc etc''.

(Yes, but that doesn't apply to fishermen and Greeks - those latter people, working class people, should be punished).

Hypocrisy of the highest order from the Euro supporters.

Then there are the disgusting prejudices against votes who democratically voted leave - ''white van man'', ''Little Englanders'', ''ignorant'' or ''warped by media'' - much of this is class bigotry of the highest order.

Corbyn was for remain - as was Theresa May - because his party is full of Blairites that he has to keep happy. Corbyn is a far-leftist and a Bennite. The EU basically stands against everything he believes in.

 

Well I never said any of those things you pointed out. The bigotry I saw came from far right groups like Britain First. And they support Brexit

 The thing is this is a soft Brexit yet the UK still has to pay the divorce bill. Remain, with all it flaws at least it would've been a lot cheaper.

[DieselDaisy]

10 hours ago, Padme said:

Well I never said any of those things you pointed out. The bigotry I saw came from far right groups like Britain First. And they support Brexit

 The thing is this is a soft Brexit yet the UK still has to pay the divorce bill. Remain, with all it flaws at least it would've been a lot cheaper.

A divorce bill is part of the European Union's post ex facto negotiating position. There was nothing inherent about it until the EU formulated it after the referendum and thus was marginal during the referendum debate. 

[Padme]

7 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

A divorce bill is part of the European Union's post ex facto negotiating position. There was nothing inherent about it until the EU formulated it after the referendum and thus was marginal during the referendum debate. 

I'm afraid it's not that simple. It has to do also with commitments the UK has made before the referendum.

This is the official agreement document. You can read everything. Or you can just scroll down to the last 5 pages. Those are about the divorce deal. Still we have to keep in mind that this document is not the 10 Commandments. So both sides say in the very begining that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. But it doesn't look like there will be radical changes.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf

[DieselDaisy]

16 hours ago, Padme said:

I'm afraid it's not that simple. It has to do also with commitments the UK has made before the referendum.

This is the official agreement document. You can read everything. Or you can just scroll down to the last 5 pages. Those are about the divorce deal. Still we have to keep in mind that this document is not the 10 Commandments. So both sides say in the very begining that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. But it doesn't look like there will be radical changes.

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf

8th December 2017? 

A scenario suis generis, there was/is not the flimsiest notion on how one would mechanically withdraw from the European Union: a methodology is being so constituted currently. It is then little surprise that a ''divorce bill'' did not exist as a tangible entity before the referendum. It is not inherent (it still isn't) that a British government, presumably a 'hard-Brexit'' one, would accept such a bill either. 

[Padme]

7 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

8th December 2017? 

A scenario suis generis, there was/is not the flimsiest notion on how one would mechanically withdraw from the European Union: a methodology is being so constituted currently. It is then little surprise that a ''divorce bill'' did not exist as a tangible entity before the referendum. It is not inherent (it still isn't) that a British government, presumably a 'hard-Brexit'' one, would accept such a bill either. 

I'm not sure I understand. The date in the document simple means the day the agreement was made by both said. Before the referendum there was no Brexit. So you couldn't have a divorce bill. You can't have a marriage and a divorce at the same time. If you mean some kind of "prenupcial agreement".  Was it done before the UK decided to join the EU?  Were the EU and the UK thinking about some possible future divorce could take place? 

[AtariLegend]

Given the comments by Tories today and over the weekend, I think they're trying to get EU to reject the deal. Every Tory Brexiteer/May are sending the message that we don't take the agreement seriously and we're untrustworthy so you shouldn't trust us anyway.

[mishan]

On 12/8/2017 at 5:19 AM, SoulMonster said:

Yes, and then there are those people who try to look at what is the best for everybody by taking a broader perspective instead of focusing narrowly on one group isolated. It might be that the EU has been bad for England's fishing industry -- although this seems to be disputed -- but if it has been sufficiently good for other parts of England, so that the net effect is positive, then they will unselfishly have to be in favor. Because what matters to them is the majority, and not small niche groups and individuals.

People keep saying things to the effect that to make an omelette you have to break some eggs. Seen lots of broken eggs, yet to see an omelette.

And we back to socialism is bad because when the collective is everything, the individual is nothing. Countries are made up of individual people, identity politics be damned.

[SoulMonster]

18 minutes ago, mishan said:

People keep saying things to the effect that to make an omelette you have to break some eggs. Seen lots of broken eggs, yet to see an omelette.

Politics and society is not like cooking, though, you won't see perfect dishes and flawless meals, it is just trying to make it as good as possible for everyone. If you expect perfection, then you will be endlessly disappointed, and that just foments indifference, apathy and even animosity towards the system. Hence Trump. 

Back to that thing about EU. It's a huge thing, it affects many aspects of our societies. Some will suffer, some will benefit. Those that suffer will be opposed, those that benefit will be in favor. That is how it is, and how we expect it to be. It's democracy, typically vote selfishly. But to condemn EU as a whole based on isolated effects on sub-industries, instead of looking at the overall effect, the net effect, it might have on individual countries and Europe in total, is a bit disingenuous. I don't think any political system, alliance or major structural change, will result in everybody being better off. It doesn't work that way. 

[mishan]

47 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Politics and society is not like cooking, though, you won't see perfect dishes and flawless meals, it is just trying to make it as good as possible for everyone. If you expect perfection, then you will be endlessly disappointed, and that just foments indifference, apathy and even animosity towards the system. Hence Trump. 

Back to that thing about EU. It's a huge thing, it affects many aspects of our societies. Some will suffer, some will benefit. Those that suffer will be opposed, those that benefit will be in favor. That is how it is, and how we expect it to be. It's democracy, typically vote selfishly. But to condemn EU as a whole based on isolated effects on sub-industries, instead of looking at the overall effect, the net effect, it might have on individual countries and Europe in total, is a bit disingenuous. I don't think any political system, alliance or major structural change, will result in everybody being better off. It doesn't work that way. 

I know the world isn't perfect. I'm far from utopian. How do you reckon the EU is a democracy? Did you elect those folks in Brussels? Can you vote them out of office?

No? But it's okay that they make the rules for you, even though they've never even been to where you live?

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, mishan said:

I know the world isn't perfect. I'm far from utopian. How do you reckon the EU is a democracy? Did you elect those folks in Brussels? Can you vote them out of office?

No? But it's okay that they make the rules for you, even though they've never even been to where you live?

I certainly did not elect them, my country isn't even part of the EU :). I didn't mean that EU is a democracy as such, more than when it comes to voting on whether to be part (or to exit) the EU, people's vote will mostly be determined by its effect on them personally, and not on the overall effect. And these elections are democratic. That was my point.

But since we inadvertently started talking about the democracy of EU: Lack of democratic eligibility is certainly a problem with the EU, but as far as I understand it, election to the European Parliament is through direct voting, so that is a direct democratic process at least. I also believe that when it comes to other EU institutions, elected national leaders will appoint these, and as such it is at least indirectly a democratic process (you vote on your British politicians who then get to decide who will represent them in the EU, just like we vote on politicians who get to decide other things for us -- we live in representative democracies). 

And as for your last point: If I could choose then you would have local democracies with elected people who make local rules (rules that only affect a small region, by people living in that region), and then, as a new layer onto the onion, you have a national democracy where you vote in national politicians who make rules that needs to be harmonized across many local regions, and lastly, EU, in my ideal world, is just another layer on top of that, with elected politicians (elected directly or indirectly) who create rules on a higher level meant to regulate interactions between countries in Europe. I know it is not like this everywhere where local democracy isn't working well and where EU interferes apparently mindlessly with national governance. So people feel rules are forced upon them, either from London or from Brussels, right. I also think that a lot of complaining come from people who don't understand how things work, aren't aware of local/regional democracies, and generally use politicians and the system are scapegoats for problems arising from their own incompetence or larger structural changes in society. 

[Padme]

1 hour ago, mishan said:

I know the world isn't perfect. I'm far from utopian. How do you reckon the EU is a democracy? Did you elect those folks in Brussels? Can you vote them out of office?

No? But it's okay that they make the rules for you, even though they've never even been to where you live?

 In the U.S. they vote for a President and members of Congress. But nobody votes for the FBI chief. Well in the EU and in the UK you have a similar situation. So you elected people and it is their job to designate a high rank government agencies chief.  The EU is a democracy because there is an European Parliament a and you vote for MEP.

[mishan]

1 hour ago, Padme said:

 In the U.S. they vote for a President and members of Congress. But nobody votes for the FBI chief. Well in the EU and in the UK you have a similar situation. So you elected people and it is their job to designate a high rank government agencies chief.  The EU is a democracy because there is an European Parliament a and you vote for MEP.

The difference is that the FBI director doesn't get to make laws. The EU bureaucracy does get to make laws. And it's a bit far removed to see it as a democratic process.

[Padme]

36 minutes ago, mishan said:

The difference is that the FBI director doesn't get to make laws. The EU bureaucracy does get to make laws. And it's a bit far removed to see it as a democratic process.

If the EU bureaucracy is making a law. It is because the EU Parliament made a law that gives certain powers to people like Juncker. Assuming the UK was against this. The UK complained ages ago, not now. Besides when the UK government announced that a referendum was going to take place in June 2016. Cameron or somebody should've called Juncker. And organized meetings with EU bureaucracy regarding an hypotetical Leave outcome. And how to make it as painless as possible for the UK. The UK government was not prepared at all. The Leave outcome caught the UK government off guard with no strategy or plan of any kind.

[AtariLegend]

4 hours ago, mishan said:

How do you reckon the EU is a democracy? Did you elect those folks in Brussels?

Yes actually. EU Parliament is elected by proportional representation.

The Council is each member's head of government, i.e the UK's is May. The commission which isn't elected is made up of representatives chosen by each member's head of state who is elected.

It's technically more democratic than the House of Lords.

 

Edited December 12, 2017 by AtariLegend