Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Gareth

General Discussions on Brexit

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, G4rth said:

So don't we trade with anyone else but the EU then? What you want already happens. So Royal Assent isn't refused. That is not what I was talking about. That occurs after a parliamentary vote. I was talking about ideas being vetoed then shelved before even getting to parliament. If your happy with the present system then that's great but some of us would like to see a form of government that is " inclusive of all " rather than the " devil take the hindmost " near dictatorship system that we are at present governed by.

 

image-20160401-6801-jbjk8e.thumb.png.05fa95d88bdb19924515847625072713.png

Of course we trade outside the EU, but trade (for example) with the Commonwealth has not substantially recovered. There's a slight increase but not anything significant. 

As for whole ideas being vetoed before getting to Parliament by the Royal family, that's complete nonsense. I think the Republicans would be using that as 'ammunition' to argue for the dissolution of the monarchy if that was the case. The current Queen is so obedient to Parliament's will, she would give Royal Assent to her own dissolution or a breakup of the union. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 8410Commodore said:

 

image-20160401-6801-jbjk8e.thumb.png.05fa95d88bdb19924515847625072713.png

Of course we trade outside the EU, but trade (for example) with the Commonwealth has not substantially recovered. There's a slight increase but not anything significant. 

As for whole ideas being vetoed before getting to Parliament by the Royal family, that's complete nonsense. I think the Republicans would be using that as 'ammunition' to argue for the dissolution of the monarchy if that was the case. The current Queen is so obedient to Parliament's will, she would give Royal Assent to her own dissolution or a breakup of the union. 

Complete nonsense? The ICO doesn't think so although you probably know better.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/aug/31/secret-royal-veto-powers-exposed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, G4rth said:

Complete nonsense? The ICO doesn't think so although you probably know better.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/aug/31/secret-royal-veto-powers-exposed

G4rth the last time the Royal's vetoed anything was in 1708 when Queen Mary vetoed The Scottish Militia Bill... under instruction from Parliament

Before that it was William III who vetoed 6 Bills during his reign from 1650 -1702.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 8410Commodore said:

 

image-20160401-6801-jbjk8e.thumb.png.05fa95d88bdb19924515847625072713.png

Of course we trade outside the EU, but trade (for example) with the Commonwealth has not substantially recovered. There's a slight increase but not anything significant. 

As for whole ideas being vetoed before getting to Parliament by the Royal family, that's complete nonsense. I think the Republicans would be using that as 'ammunition' to argue for the dissolution of the monarchy if that was the case. The current Queen is so obedient to Parliament's will, she would give Royal Assent to her own dissolution or a breakup of the union. 

Forgive my igorance, but doesn't the chart you provide show that the EU and single market membership isnt really a factor in our trade with the commonwealth? There is a steep decline starting long before we joined. If that is where we are hoping to do new trade, I would hope the reasons for that and the size and likelyhood of any new oppertunities are well understood.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jonno said:

G4rth the last time the Royal's vetoed anything was in 1708 when Queen Mary vetoed The Scottish Militia Bill... under instruction from Parliament

Before that it was William III who vetoed 6 Bills during his reign from 1650 -1702.

Jonno, you have not understood. I am not referring to bills past by parliament being refused Royal Assent after the event. I am referring to the, what was secret, ability of certain members of the Royal family to veto bills before they even get to parliament if they think they might have an adverse effect on their businesses. No other business owners have that advantage and it is undemocratic.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, penguin said:

Forgive my ignorance, but doesn't the chart you provide show that the EU and single market membership isn't really a factor in our trade with the commonwealth? There is a steep decline starting long before we joined. If that is where we are hoping to do new trade, I would hope the reasons for that and the size and likelihood of any new opportunities are well understood.

The ignorance is not yours penguin.:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A conversation elsewhere on this forum on the Channel Tunnel - wait for after Brexit and the border controls then, utter chaos now, enjoy it while it lasts as I have a feeling the French will then leave a lot of stuff up to us regarding immigration control.  There will probably me a lot more migrants getting onto the ferries and into the tunnel and we will be trying to police the lot.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, G4rth said:

Jonno, you have not understood. I am not referring to bills past by parliament being refused Royal Assent after the event. I am referring to the, what was secret, ability of certain members of the Royal family to veto bills before they even get to parliament if they think they might have an adverse effect on their businesses. No other business owners have that advantage and it is undemocratic.

Got you, but as you say, it's no longer such a big secret as the ICO received all of the information back in late 2012, 5 years ago. It was our judicial system and our laws which allowed this into the open. Under full EU integration and the seismic change toward the inquisitorial model and the loss of the CPS it would never be the case. Under our laws the Royals must produce accounts, no other European monarchy does... I'm sure we'd be interested in the Orange-Nassau's dealings in South America for instance.

I agree with your comment regarding the graph, the Commonwealth has diminished so obviously trade has.

You mention the end of the Empire, true enough. However doesn't our lack of business being conducted will an old Empire member, India, show the constraints we have. Surely we should be doing business with them on a far larger scale if not for the EU's insistence on telling us who we can and can't play with? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, jonno said:

You mention the end of the Empire, true enough. However doesn't our lack of business being conducted will an old Empire member, India, show the constraints we have. Surely we should be doing business with them on a far larger scale if not for the EU's insistence on telling us who we can and can't play with? 

But being a member of the EU doesn't stop the UK trading with anyone, just as we always have done. What membership does do is make it far easier to trade with our nearest neighbours something, I would have thought, was an advantage to us. We have already seen companies and EU organizations make plans to relocate to the remaining EU countries. The UK won't fall apart but when we leave the EU but no one has yet come up with any convincing argument that we will be better off. Apart from good health for our families and ourselves I would have thought that was probably most peoples second priority.

Edited by G4rth
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nodwad, for the record David Davis has never, ever been sacked from any Government position... Fact...

But hey i'm just a leave voter with my head in the sand.

On the one hand you say that we are trying to bully the EU then on the other say that the other 27 members will gang up on us, so by definition, who is the bully?

We already have a border with France, it's why we show our passports and on occasion have our bags checked.

Ryanair flights between the UK mainland and the R.O.I require a passport too.

Edited by Gareth
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know we have a border with France and we show our passports and get our bags checked - but I am talking about checking for hiding migrants on board and at the Tunnel.  The French apparently are going to hand the entire job of policing what leaves France for us to deal with in the UK.  At present border control works both ways but after Brexit the French will probably only care what comes into their country from the UK, it will be our responsibility to police our own points of entry.  This will mean a lot more police and customs officials - and of course they will require paying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Khaines said:

I know we have a border with France and we show our passports and get our bags checked - but I am talking about checking for hiding migrants on board and at the Tunnel.  The French apparently are going to hand the entire job of policing what leaves France for us to deal with in the UK.  At present border control works both ways but after Brexit the French will probably only care what comes into their country from the UK, it will be our responsibility to police our own points of entry.  This will mean a lot more police and customs officials - and of course they will require paying.

I don't think location of border controls are in themselves the problem. Returning UK staff and French staff working in the UK to their respective countries is probably going to be cheaper. The problem will be the delays in disembarkation at the terminals. Unless there is a dramatic reduction of travel to and from the UK or a dramatic increase in the footprint of port facilities the delays will inevitably cause much longer ferry turn round times so probably fewer sailings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stand corrected on losing his job,I know he failed twice to lead the Tory party and resigned has a mp a few years back.i cannot remember anything about the bully thing.has for border control when we leave the the EU,it is well known what border control think what is going to happen and anybody who travel a lot have a good idea to.the French are going to chase our border controls back Into the UK and open the flood gates for anyone who wants come over.when they step onto our side of the border what happens then?they will be bailed to come back at a later date,I know this sounds stupid but it is happening now because they have not got the staff or places to take them to.no place to go to then what happens chaos will happen.i feel sorry for the residents of area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, neilcvx said:

Always resigned prior to the inevitable sacking plus he's a sexist bigot Fact.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/who-is-david-davis-a-profile-of-britains-new-minister-for-brexit/amp/

 

 He hasn't Neil,

He's resigned only the once in his whole political career due to his concern over the then new Act allowing suspects to be detained indefinitely without charge.

He's heavily involved in Civil Liberties and is a huge fan of the European Court of Human Rights. Yes he's very much a Eurosceptic, he was in on the EU's inception and knows what the endgame is, but he believes in an independent Human Rights Court. 

As for being a bigot? I've never known him to be intolerant of others opinions political or otherwise... He and Alec Salmond get on very well and their political views are poles apart.

Sexist.. No, never seen it. He actually fights for women in the workplace. He's currently subordinate to three female cabinet ministers including the PM and his wife Doreen is a very successful Molecular Biologist in her own right, far more successful in her field than he is in his... If he was a sexist, he'd have been out on his ear years ago. 

There's maybe one or two things he can be accused of, sexism or bigotry aren't on the list.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, G4rth said:

I don't think location of border controls are in themselves the problem. Returning UK staff and French staff working in the UK to their respective countries is probably going to be cheaper. The problem will be the delays in disembarkation at the terminals. Unless there is a dramatic reduction of travel to and from the UK or a dramatic increase in the footprint of port facilities the delays will inevitably cause much longer ferry turn round times so probably fewer sailings.

What did we do prior to 1992?

I can't remember... I've been trying to find the movement figures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, jonno said:

What did we do prior to 1992?

I can't remember... I've been trying to find the movement figures.

I can't remember either. However one only needs to look at the problems that have occurred at Gibraltar with Spain over the years to see what cross border travel problems happen without goodwill on both sides. Has the UK used up it's goodwill with the other 27 EU members? Possibly, especially when it's in their interests to get as many UK companies to set up European bases as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just think if you lived in France with All the people from other countries living in shanty towns and walking the streets all day and night would you feel safe?i dare bet what they are thinking now ,when the UK leaves just open the ferry ports up and the tunnel for everyone and presto problem solved.it is the UK problem now because when they step ashore it is to late then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corbyn is unbelievable.  Watching him on PMQs was very painful watching.  He stood there berating Tory policies and full of what he would do if elected as PM, but failed to see that his Brexit stance has had Labour voters leaving in droves, many Labour supporters are now either not voting or voting Lib Dem.  Basically, he won't get a chance to fulfil what he's on about as he has alienated his own voters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Khaines said:

Corbyn is unbelievable.  Watching him on PMQs was very painful watching.  He stood there berating Tory policies and full of what he would do if elected as PM, but failed to see that his Brexit stance has had Labour voters leaving in droves, many Labour supporters are now either not voting or voting Lib Dem.  Basically, he won't get a chance to fulfil what he's on about as he has alienated his own voters.

Brexit is not the only game in town. There are plenty of other things wrong in the UK. Labour won't get a majority but Corbin's best bet is to concentrate on other things. There is probably more to be gained for him raising other matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he is a dead man walking,I would not vote for him .he could not run a tap never mind the country.i was a labour member for many years and have always voted labour but not with a man like that in charge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am interested in seeing what Osborne does regarding his editorship of the Evening Standard (which I now follow on Facebook).  Will he make mischief for May in revenge for his sacking?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jonno said:

 

Sexist.. No, never seen it. He actually fights for women in the workplace. He's currently subordinate to three female cabinet ministers including the PM and his wife Doreen is a very successful Molecular Biologist in her own right, far more successful in her field than he is in his... If he was a sexist, he'd have been out on his ear years ago. 

There's maybe one or two things he can be accused of, sexism or bigotry aren't on the list.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/12/david-davis-accused-sexism-denying-tried-kiss-diane-abbott-not/amp/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you will find Osborne has already said he is not standing in next election it was in one of the Papers earlier on.looks like they are all bailing out already.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, nodwad said:

I think he is a dead man walking,I would not vote for him .he could not run a tap never mind the country.i was a labour member for many years and have always voted labour but not with a man like that in charge.

Agreed.  What baffles me is that the Labour membership voted for him...overwhelmingly.....twice!  Any idea what the membership was thinking in putting the party into this position?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...