Current Politics in the United Kingdom

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by judy84

The waste of taxpayers' money carries on with worthless MEPs....


An EU court has rejected calls for greater transparency about MEPs’ expenses, as it upheld a decision that politicians are not required to reveal how they spend public money intended for their offices.

Members of the European parliament are paid €8,611.31 (£7,705) a month in gross salary, plus pension. On leaving the parliament they receive a golden parachute, a transition allowance worth up to €206,664, depending on length of service.
The court case was centred on expenses, including the €4,416 monthly “general expenditure allowance” awarded to MEPs to fund their constituency offices, which costs the public purse €40m a year. MEPs are also refunded first-class travel expenses and get a €313 daily allowance for hotel and living costs when working in Brussels and Strasbourg.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...u-court-ruling

Not, of course, that Westminster is scandal-free in this regard. I remember the various expenses scandals and frauds during the Blair administration only too well. However, despite an attempt to enforce secrecy under the flimsy pretext of national security, the courts determined that the MPs expenses had to be made public, and this was how it all got found out, and five MPs even ended up in prison. Clearly the EU wants to make sure this can't happen to MEPs in Brussels and Strasbourg. Its all part of making decision making and governance unaccountable to the mere plebians.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

I simply want friendship and cooperation between sovereign nations, each respecting the self-determination of all the others. I think that is a reasonable thing to want.

Ok, so how do we standardize trade so we know what we're trading and how we do it, co-operate with police and regulators so we know we treat people equally and can catch villains, have a forum for communicating with each other, and know who we turn to if we think someone's doing it wrong?

You just don't like agreeing with other people and being told when you're wrong, that's your problem, isn't it

[palo5]

Originally Posted by judy84

I first turned against the EU about 30 years ago when I read about the corruption, greed and cheating, partic. with the CAP

Oh, so you didn't hear about the billions the private sector gives itself for booze and whores... you know... the sector you subsidize with trillions of tax money that you pay for? Instead you hate farmers who give you a secure supply of food, because producing food is bad and corrupt and that's why you hate the EU?

Hahaha! Your joke just made my morning

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by ********

What matters now is what we do after May loses the vote on her deal.

Can't re-negotiate, EU has already ruled that out and there is zero chance of getting an acceptable deal anyway. It was always a brexiteer cakeist fantasy.

Crashing out would be very bad and there is no majority for that either.

Norway+ might get enough votes. People's vote might get enough votes.

May will obviously have to go. Tory leadership contest at the very least, maybe a GE. It's a right fuck up.

The DUP have already indicated that they will vote down the deal proposed by the EU and Mrs May, but that they will support Mrs May's government if there is a confidence vote afterwards. Mrs May is likely to survive if this is what happens. She will not go to the country unless forced and she will probably not even attempt to reopen the negotiations, unless the EU change their minds and indicate a willingness to resume discussions, which I doubt. The next step will be that 29 March will go by and Britain will leave, be the consequences of this whatever they may.

I prefer this outcome to the alternatives being suggested. "Norway Plus" - Amber Rudd's suggestion of an alternative - is going to mean staying in the EU by any other name, particularly as the "plus" is continuing membership of the customs union as well as the single market. What would be the point of that? Staying in the EU completely would be far more logical.

But what would that mean? Rescinding the Article 50 Notice [even if the ECJ says that Britain can do it] will mean that we are slaves, with no practical hope of ever leaving the EU. Were we to choose this then IMHO we are finished. Finished as a nation and finished as a people.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCADpxXn4Yo

Also, either of these options means removing Theresa May and I don't see that happening unless the DUP withdraws support in a confidence vote - say what you like about the DUP but when they say something, they do tend to follow it through with deeds. I predict that Theresa May will continue to be Prime Minister until some time after Britain leaves the EU and that Britain will leave the EU on 29 March 2019; and without a deal. Presumably there will not be a transition period either, because there is nothing to implement or phase in.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by ********

Norway+ might get enough votes. People's vote might get enough votes

Norway won't let you in, it seems. Your reputation precedes you

"The UK seems to be considering joining our Efta family as a temporary solution - Norway for now - until it gets a better deal. It really surprises me that anyone would think Norwegians would find that appealing. It would be like inviting the rowdy uncle to a Christmas party, spiking the drinks and hoping that things go well. They would not

Norway will, of course, be looking for a long-term partnership with the UK after the divorce from the EU, but we’re not interested in being the rebound girl while you look for better options"

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...y-eu-brexiters

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by palo5

Ok, so how do we standardize trade so we know what we're trading and how we do it, co-operate with police and regulators so we know we treat people equally and can catch villains, have a forum for communicating with each other, and know who we turn to if we think someone's doing it wrong?

You just don't like agreeing with other people and being told when you're wrong, that's your problem, isn't it

Seriously? You think we can't trade or cooperate as independent countries? You think we won't share intelligence?

As for trading standards, there are all sorts of protocols for that, right down to letters of credit and bills of lading, which enforce fair dealing between sellers and buyers when shipping bulk commodities by sea. The EU has nothing to do with that.

I am not sure where you get the idea that I oppose regulation or cooperating with others. But I think all countries should make their own rules in their own home soil and that cooperation should be by mutual consent. Those who violate norms of acceptable behaviour will find that they can't get cooperation anymore. Do I need to give a specific example or shall we take that example as read?

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by palo5

Norway won't let you in, it seems. Your reputation precedes you

"The UK seems to be considering joining our Efta family as a temporary solution - Norway for now - until it gets a better deal. It really surprises me that anyone would think Norwegians would find that appealing. It would be like inviting the rowdy uncle to a Christmas party, spiking the drinks and hoping that things go well. They would not

Norway will, of course, be looking for a long-term partnership with the UK after the divorce from the EU, but we’re not interested in being the rebound girl while you look for better options"

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...y-eu-brexiters

I'm heartbroken.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Seriously? You think we can't trade or cooperate as independent countries? You think we won't share intelligence?

No, you'll seek your own advantage, and try to bend, fudge or veto rules, where you can. See what the Norwegians think in the link above. Concerning intelligence, almost no one would trust you, either to tell what you know or not to pass what we give you to the Americans -- why do you think you're being shut out of the EU security loop at the first opportunity?

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by palo5

No, you'll seek your own advantage, and try to bend, fudge or veto rules, where you can. See what the Norwegians think in the link above. Concerning intelligence, almost no one would trust you, either to tell what you know or not to pass what we give you to the Americans -- why do you think you're being shut out of the EU security loop at the first opportunity?

Tut i tut, Palo. Did you get out of the wrong side of the bed this morning? Is yesterday's vodka catching up with you? Chill, baby.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfJRX-8SXOs

The rules of cooperation are much the same in all levels of human interaction. If you want something, you need to negotiate. If you fail to honour your agreements afterwards, you won't be able to negotiate again on a future occasion. But in a situation where sharing intelligence is mutually valuable, there will be intelligence-sharing. That actually includes the Americans, Britain AND the EU collectively. In extremis, for example when combating Islamo-Fascist terrorism, it might even include Russia, which also has common interest in suppressing the Islamist terrorism threat.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-diB65scQU

[judy84]

Mr Palo: Glad I gave you a laugh in the darkest depths of the Arctic Circle...we British are noted for our sense of humour