Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

Status
Not open for further replies.
pauldj42 said:
It goes to integrity and honesty, he’s lost jobs and hurt people and those closest to him, crack on making excuses for him, that’s your call, just don’t expect anyone else to agree.
I’d feel the same way about anyone else who had behaved like he has.
Click to expand...

I'm all for setting high standards, and especially for those in public office. And I'd hope that every politician would be of the highest standard. Here's a thought; think back and consider all the senior politicians you can remember. How many of them haven't been circumspect with the truth and/or told an outright lie?

Setting the bar as high as you do, and this isn't a criticism, I'd hazard a guess that pretty much every senior politician in the last 20 years wouldn't be on your Xmas card list. I'm with on that by the way but I also accept that in lots of things in life there has to be accommodations made. Simply put, a saint wouldn't survive as a senior politician. That doesn't excuse them but it is at least realistic.
 
harpo_72 said:
Thanks for the quality appraisal, like all your posts it’s total cobblers 🤣 and you cannot play golf either because you just troll this thread with your far right opinions. 👍
Click to expand...
How childish 'you cant play golf either na na na na na' grow up. I guess Im a member of two golf clubs for the views then. I have probably posted more in the golf threads over the years than you, these days i find them a bit repetative and boring, a bit like you actually.
 
SocketRocket said:
How childish 'you cant play golf either na na na na na' grow up. I guess Im a member of two golf clubs for the views then. I have probably posted more in the golf threads over the years than you, these days i find them a bit repetative and boring, a bit like you actually.
Click to expand...
Yes your quite right you posted something in 2011 ... but you have posted a shed load more on non golf items in particular these threads about Brexit and Boris J.
As for your 2 club membership, I am very happy for you I am sure your a stand up member.
You still cannot play golf, though ..hahahaha
 
Hobbit said:
I'm all for setting high standards, and especially for those in public office. And I'd hope that every politician would be of the highest standard. Here's a thought; think back and consider all the senior politicians you can remember. How many of them haven't been circumspect with the truth and/or told an outright lie?

Setting the bar as high as you do, and this isn't a criticism, I'd hazard a guess that pretty much every senior politician in the last 20 years wouldn't be on your Xmas card list. I'm with on that by the way but I also accept that in lots of things in life there has to be accommodations made. Simply put, a saint wouldn't survive as a senior politician. That doesn't excuse them but it is at least realistic.
Click to expand...

While I accept your point that most people in public office are economical with the truth from time to time... what we have now is a government / leadership increasingly adopting tactics of mis-information in order to try and promote their agenda.

How many times did Johnson say he wouldn't ask for an extension?
Clearly he realised he had no option but to comply with the law and it was surely the intention from a long way out to comply by sending the extension request.

But in the meantime, he lied dozens of times to try and 'pretend' that the vote on his deal was a 'this deal v no deal' cliff edge.

We also see the 'No. 10 source' throwing dozens of proposals and points of view into the ether. They can test the water on these with an anonymous source - sadly journalists are all too quick to throw them into the public domain. It is then easy for the government to roll back on these points in public.

e.g. was the day of the Scottish Court decision on prorogation... No 10 source said 'it's not surprising to see Scottish judges adopt this point of view'. Calling the judicial impartiality into question... then a few hours later the PM can state publicly that he has faith in the independence of the courts.
 
The Labour position today...
BBC "Leader Jeremy Corbyn said he was only prepared to agree to an election once the PM had completely ruled out "to my satisfaction" the possibility of a no-deal Brexit . "

May not be a good idea to hold one's breath!

Perhaps if the 'deal was supported by HoC it would do what JC wants.
 
woody69 said:
...he came back with a deal demonstrably worse than May's...
Click to expand...
IYO! To me, it's vastly superior in several important areas, so superior to hers!
woody69 said:
as he rubbed out the red lines he had sworn to protect...
Click to expand...
Certainly agree there, but that's the reality of negotiation imo!
woody69 said:
...threw NI under a bus...
Click to expand...
I've always stated that Ireland/NI/GFA was going to be a major problem! This inelegant kludge does appear to 'solve' it.
woody69 said:
...promised the ERG that they could still have No Deal at the end of 2020.
Click to expand...
I don't believe ERG actually ever WANTED No Deal! But they were 'happy' to have No Deal as a fallback, as it would achiev their real goal of 'complete separation' of UK from EU regulation.
 
Foxholer said:
IYO! To me, it's vastly superior in several important areas, so superior to hers!

Certainly agree there, but that's the reality of negotiation imo!

I've always stated that Ireland/NI/GFA was going to be a major problem! This inelegant kludge does appear to 'solve' it.

I don't believe ERG actually ever WANTED No Deal! But they were 'happy' to have No Deal as a fallback, as it would achiev their real goal of 'complete separation' of UK from EU regulation.
Click to expand...
What are the differences you find vastly superior?
 
Grant85 said:
While I accept your point that most people in public office are economical with the truth from time to time... what we have now is a government / leadership increasingly adopting tactics of mis-information in order to try and promote their agenda.

How many times did Johnson say he wouldn't ask for an extension?
Clearly he realised he had no option but to comply with the law and it was surely the intention from a long way out to comply by sending the extension request.

But in the meantime, he lied dozens of times to try and 'pretend' that the vote on his deal was a 'this deal v no deal' cliff edge.

We also see the 'No. 10 source' throwing dozens of proposals and points of view into the ether. They can test the water on these with an anonymous source - sadly journalists are all too quick to throw them into the public domain. It is then easy for the government to roll back on these points in public.

e.g. was the day of the Scottish Court decision on prorogation... No 10 source said 'it's not surprising to see Scottish judges adopt this point of view'. Calling the judicial impartiality into question... then a few hours later the PM can state publicly that he has faith in the independence of the courts.
Click to expand...

On every point my opinion differs, though not necessarily is different, from yours.

I'd argue that every govt is economical with the truth during periods of high intensity.

On the issue of the extension, he had no choice. Whatever he may have said, as PM he probably recognised there was no way he could break the law.

On the point of deal 'v' no deal; that still isn't resolved. It could even come down to the EU saying enough is enough.

As for leaking then retracting. Is anyone really surprised by this tactic? Every govt does it.

As for calling the judiciary's impartiality into question; hell yes, and rightly so. There's enough evidence, no pun intended, that judges made up their minds based on probabilities not hard facts. By saying Johnson did it for x reason, and not the one stated by either Johnson or his lawyers, was basically formed on opinion not fact. Scotland's own "not proven'" verdict in the case is based on probability, not fact. = "Both in the "solemn" and the "summary" acquittals, not proven is interpreted as indicating that the jury or judge, respectively, is not convinced of the innocence of the accused; in fact, they may be morally convinced that the accused is guilty, but do not find the proofs sufficient for a conviction."
 
Foxholer said:
IYO! To me, it's vastly superior in several important areas, so superior to hers!
Click to expand...
I struggle to see past the fact that it rules out any possibility of the UK negotiating a new customs union with the EU after we leave. It rejects the UK having a close relationship with the Single Market so strips out the safety net on workplace rights, consumer protections and environmental standards. Even by the Government’s own estimates, the basic free trade agreement envisaged by the deal would make every region and nation in the UK poorer.

You can also add that if this deal is passed, then there is a very real risk that we would crash out on no deal terms at the end of December 2020.

Where do you think it is vastly superior out of interest?
 
drdel said:
The Labour position today...
BBC "Leader Jeremy Corbyn said he was only prepared to agree to an election once the PM had completely ruled out "to my satisfaction" the possibility of a no-deal Brexit . "

May not be a good idea to hold one's breath!

Perhaps if the 'deal was supported by HoC it would do what JC wants.
Click to expand...
The point to hammer home if you are Boris is that if Labour win the election JC gets to remove no deal for himself. Surely JC expects to win so why would no deal have to be off the table before the election? If he doesn't trust himself to win then he should not be leader.

Interesting tactic by Boris, he could really ram this home if JC wont back his election push.
 
drdel said:
The Labour position today...
BBC "Leader Jeremy Corbyn said he was only prepared to agree to an election once the PM had completely ruled out "to my satisfaction" the possibility of a no-deal Brexit . "

May not be a good idea to hold one's breath!

Perhaps if the 'deal was supported by HoC it would do what JC wants.
Click to expand...

So JC now wants to ignore one very important element of parliamentary sovereignty i.e. no parliament can pass legislation that a future parliament cannot change.

If a future government wants to go for no deal and a future parliament supports it, the current parliament has no right to and absolutely cannot prevent it.
 
harpo_72 said:
Yes your quite right you posted something in 2011 ... but you have posted a shed load more on non golf items in particular these threads about Brexit and Boris J.
As for your 2 club membership, I am very happy for you I am sure your a stand up member.
You still cannot play golf, though ..hahahaha
Click to expand...
Maybe you would like to put that to a test. If you would like to pop over to Worcester I would be happy to give you a game.

By the way, you seem to have missed these and a great number of others. :rolleyes:

 
Last edited:
ger147 said:
So JC now wants to ignore one very important element of parliamentary sovereignty i.e. no parliament can pass legislation that a future parliament cannot change.

If a future government wants to go for no deal and a future parliament supports it, the current parliament has no right to and absolutely cannot prevent it.
Click to expand...

Corbyn has an MP for 36 years. Of course he's ignoring that very important element. He's playing his usual political games for Labour's own ends. and not that of the electorate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tashyboy
Party holes at golf comps.
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
Pin-seeker
Pin-seeker
Don Barzini
Christmas 2025
14 15 16
Replies
319
Views
8K
kp17
kp17
Lucifer MorningStar
Best clubs of all time (Probably)
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
srixon 1
srixon 1
B
Ping 7 wood head shortage.
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
KenL
KenL
VVega
What age is your Seniors?
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Arthur Wedge
Arthur Wedge
Top