Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

[Deleted member 15344]

Before EU subsidies! You are going back to the 1970s, how can we compare what may happen after Brexit to what happened then?

What exactly is this 'Debt' you mention, is it the National Debt? if it is then its there whether we are in or out the EU. Why do you believe we would not want to support industry with our own money. Using your own logic, why would the government not give grants and subsidies, if you dont trust your government to do this then vote for someone you think will.

Again you don’t really answer the question- it was simple enough

And I believe the government won’t give the same level of financial support to the same level that the EU Grants or subsidies did because i don’t trust them to treat all areas of the UK fairly.

Right now a perfect example is HS2 - going to spend £60bn on a project that prob only helps 10/20% of the country at a guess ? Just think of what the NHS could do with that , or the homeless , or the starving etc etc - that’s are own government spending a significant amount of money to get a small percentage of people into London a bit quicker

And it makes no difference which party is voted for - it’s all the same self motive.

 

[MegaSteve]

Again you don’t really answer the question- it was simple enough

And I believe the government won’t give the same level of financial support to the same level that the EU Grants or subsidies did because i don’t trust them to treat all areas of the UK fairly.

Right now a perfect example is HS2 - going to spend £60bn on a project that prob only helps 10/20% of the country at a guess ? Just think of what the NHS could do with that , or the homeless , or the starving etc etc - that’s are own government spending a significant amount of money to get a small percentage of people into London a bit quicker

And it makes no difference which party is voted for - it’s all the same self motive.

Not in favour of HS2 in anyway whatsoever... But, I'd just like to point out folk will also, in theory, be able to get to Birmingham a few minutes quicker also.. Always, assuming the bloody thing gets completed...

 

[SocketRocket]

Again you don’t really answer the question- it was simple enough

And I believe the government won’t give the same level of financial support to the same level that the EU Grants or subsidies did because i don’t trust them to treat all areas of the UK fairly.

Right now a perfect example is HS2 - going to spend £60bn on a project that prob only helps 10/20% of the country at a guess ? Just think of what the NHS could do with that , or the homeless , or the starving etc etc - that’s are own government spending a significant amount of money to get a small percentage of people into London a bit quicker

And it makes no difference which party is voted for - it’s all the same self motive.

I just tried to answer your question, I'm not concerned whether you trust the Government or what opinions you have on HS2.

Why did you ask a question if you dont want an answer to it, why not just make a statement.

 

[drdel]

Sorry, but what Bercow did was the very definition of impartial. he is the only person currently in the HOC that is able to hold his head high.

Perhaps you can explain why he felt the need to just allow one amendment yet refused an amendment proffered by Peter Bone MP (among others) because "... amendments were not being allowed..." because the Parliamentary process did not permit it?

And, while a car he uses has an anti-Brexit sticker on the screen, it doesn't matter because its owned by his wife - so that's OK then !!!

 

[Deleted member 1418]

Again you don’t really answer the question- it was simple enough

And I believe the government won’t give the same level of financial support to the same level that the EU Grants or subsidies did because i don’t trust them to treat all areas of the UK fairly.

Right now a perfect example is HS2 - going to spend £60bn on a project that prob only helps 10/20% of the country at a guess ? Just think of what the NHS could do with that , or the homeless , or the starving etc etc - that’s are own government spending a significant amount of money to get a small percentage of people into London a bit quicker

And it makes no difference which party is voted for - it’s all the same self motive.

Ah, the exciting world of EU subsidy programmes, brings back some rather unforgettable memories..........for all the wrong reasons!!

Unfortunately I do have some experience of how these work Phil!

But basically the EU doesn't get much say on where it is spent, just mainly how it is spent. It is still up to the Member State on how and where they will prioritise their respective allocations under each funding programme.

Here is where you can find out all about the EU funding programmes. https://europa.eu/youreurope/busine...ng-funding/eu-funding-programmes/index_en.htm.

You can also go on GOV.UK and also the websites for each Devolved Administration as to how the funding programmes are used in the UK.

 

[bluewolf]

Perhaps you can explain why he felt the need to just allow one amendment yet refused an amendment proffered by Peter Bone MP (among others) because "... amendments were not being allowed..." because the Parliamentary process did not permit it?

And, while a car he uses has an anti-Brexit sticker on the screen, it doesn't matter because its owned by his wife - so that's OK then !!!

Look at the facts, not the Brexiteer rhetoric..

The last time Bercow upset the Government was to allow for a push on a referendum to leave the EU. His partiality is to giving Parliament a voice..

Oh, and the fact that it's his wife's car is important. I sometimes drive my wife's car. I'm neither a member of the Nurses Union, nor a Student at Liverpool University... Attempting to smear him in this way is pathetic and unworthy of a serious discussion..

"What do we want? - Parliamentary Sovereignty"

"When do we want it? - .............Er, just when it suits...."

 

[drdel]

Look at the facts, not the Brexiteer rhetoric..

The last time Bercow upset the Government was to allow for a push on a referendum to leave the EU. His partiality is to giving Parliament a voice..

Oh, and the fact that it's his wife's car is important. I sometimes drive my wife's car. I'm neither a member of the Nurses Union, nor a Student at Liverpool University... Attempting to smear him in this way is pathetic and unworthy of a serious discussion..

C'mon you can't really come to that view - I watched the whole debate live yesterday and from his somewhat crimson colour, demeanour, fidgeting and expressions he clearly knew he'd pulled a fast one. I have not relied on the media or 'Brexiteer rhetoric" - can you say the same?

As to the car - he is the speaker of the HoC: his wife and he are not stupid they were obviously aware that placing such a sticker on one of their cars would promote controversy. I doubt you or your wife would choose to display contentious stickers if either of you were in such a position of Public Office. Prominent people normally understand what is wise: Bercow has long proved he is attracted to the limelight and thrives on the attention. He was a Tory member but left and he seems to have adopted the attitude of the high alter of the untouchable merely by stating he's impartial rather than by action.

 

[Hacker Khan]

C'mon you can't really come to that view - I watched the whole debate live yesterday and from his somewhat crimson colour, demeanour, fidgeting and expressions he clearly knew he'd pulled a fast one. I have not relied on the media or 'Brexiteer rhetoric" - can you say the same?

As to the car - he is the speaker of the HoC: his wife and he are not stupid they were obviously aware that placing such a sticker on one of their cars would promote controversy. I doubt you or your wife would choose to display contentious stickers if either of you were in such a position of Public Office. Prominent people normally understand what is wise: Bercow has long proved he is attracted to the limelight and thrives on the attention. He was a Tory member but left and he seems to have adopted the attitude of the high alter of the untouchable merely by stating he's impartial rather than by action.

I am impressed at your advanced body language reading, you should offer yourself up to the news channels as they love a bit of that.

And he's like the BBC, people of both sides will see him as biased depending on if he does something you agree with or not. He did something that has little precedent, but the only real precedent we have is that parliament can do what it wants due to our rather complicated constitution. He has been constant in trying to ensure the executive does not override the legislature. And is he really the cause behind the current state we are in, again I'd suggest we all look at the bigger picture rather then blaming him.

 

[drdel]

I am impressed at your advanced body language reading, you should offer yourself up to the news channels as they love a bit of that.

And he's like the BBC, people of both sides will see him as biased depending on if he does something you agree with or not. He did something that has little precedent, but the only real precedent we have is that parliament can do what it wants due to our rather complicated constitution. He has been constant in trying to ensure the executive does not override the legislature. And is he really the cause behind the current state we are in, again I'd suggest we all look at the bigger picture rather then blaming him.

Thanks for the complement - but its not necessary to be an expert to observe obvious uncomfortable behaviour

Nowhere have I blamed him for anything; my post merely questions his strange decision yesterday and the wisdom of those in public office displaying contentious stickers.

In contrast to his ready acceptance of an amendment yesterday at ~15:00 hrs today he announced there would be no amendments today because HE hadn't decided which to allow

 

[drdel]

I see Jaguar LandRover are (reported as the UK biggest car maker- except they are Indian owned!) to be cutting 4,500 jobs mainly in UK: blaming Brexit and drastically falling sales in China. Funnily they do no mention the 3,000 jib they're creating in Slovakia in the Factory they've planned and been building for over 3 years (And not withstanding that the products are unreliable, primarily diesel and over priced.)

Brexit is a useful scapegoat for all and sundry.

 

[Bunkermagnet]

I see Jaguar LandRover are (reported as the UK biggest car maker- except they are Indian owned!) to be cutting 4,500 jobs mainly in UK: blaming Brexit and drastically falling sales in China. Funnily they do no mention the 3,000 jib they're creating in Slovakia in the Factory they've planned and been building for over 3 years (And not withstanding that the products are unreliable, primarily diesel and over priced.)

Brexit is a useful scapegoat for all and sundry.

I agree it is, however it can't be overlooked that those shouting in the HoC for Brexit/no-deal have been advocates of selling everything successful manufacturing in this country for years for a quick profit. Never mind that we then have no say over the jobs or placement of where those jobs are to be.

 

[bluewolf]

C'mon you can't really come to that view - I watched the whole debate live yesterday and from his somewhat crimson colour, demeanour, fidgeting and expressions he clearly knew he'd pulled a fast one. I have not relied on the media or 'Brexiteer rhetoric" - can you say the same?

As to the car - he is the speaker of the HoC: his wife and he are not stupid they were obviously aware that placing such a sticker on one of their cars would promote controversy. I doubt you or your wife would choose to display contentious stickers if either of you were in such a position of Public Office. Prominent people normally understand what is wise: Bercow has long proved he is attracted to the limelight and thrives on the attention. He was a Tory member but left and he seems to have adopted the attitude of the high alter of the untouchable merely by stating he's impartial rather than by action.

I wouldn't dream of telling my wife what she could or couldn't do. She's a strong independent person and she can have whatever opinion she wants.

Edit... Its not worth it.

 

[Taz]

Does that include his alleged bullying ?

 

[bluewolf]

Does that include his alleged bullying ?

I think the clue is in the question

 

[Old Skier]

Bercow is a good example of what's wrong with British politicians.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Perhaps Bercow is just enjoying a bit of payback from the disgraceful way William Hague and co tried to eject him from his post with a bit of devious dealing on the final hour of the last day of the Cameron government.
I also find it rather sad that some males still think that their wives should do exactly what they tell them to do.

 

[bluewolf]

I see Jaguar LandRover are (reported as the UK biggest car maker- except they are Indian owned!) to be cutting 4,500 jobs mainly in UK: blaming Brexit and drastically falling sales in China. Funnily they do no mention the 3,000 jib they're creating in Slovakia in the Factory they've planned and been building for over 3 years (And not withstanding that the products are unreliable, primarily diesel and over priced.)

Brexit is a useful scapegoat for all and sundry.

Have you got a link to where JLR have blamed Brexit. I read the press releases this morning and I don't remember it being mentioned. It's a genuine request by the way. I've seen several mentions of Brexit by media outlets, but not by JLR today.

 

[bluewolf]

Bercow is a good example of what's wrong with British politicians.

Or, from another viewpoint, just about the only person that is actually fulfilling the role he has. He has obviously made a decision you don't like. That doesn't make it wrong.

 

[drdel]

Or, from another viewpoint, just about the only person that is actually fulfilling the role he has. He has obviously made a decision you don't like. That doesn't make it wrong.

Happy to agree to disagree. IMO under the circumstances in the HoC I think this it was a strange decision to go against the protocols and permit one amendment while denying others. I have no feeling, happy or otherwise.

To those who suggest I wish to dictate to my wife:/ladies you're so wrong. You are extrapolating my comment. I am saying, why would someone in high public office think it prudent to drive any car with a stupid contentious sticker unless you wanted it noticed by the media etc, why else would you obtain/ use such a juvenile thing. Especially when the holder ïof such a position wants to be the picture of impartiality?

 

[bluewolf]

Happy to agree to disagree. IMO under the circumstances in the HoC I this it was a strange decision to go against the protocols and permit one amendment while denying others. I have no feeling, happy or otherwise.

To those who suggest I wish to dictate to my wife:/ladies you're so wrong. You are extrapolating my comment. I am saying, why would someone in high public office think it prudent to drive any car with a stupid contentious sticker unless you wanted it noticed by the media etc. Especially when the hole of such a position wants to be the picture of impartiality?

I'm also happy to agree to disagree. My personal belief is that he recognised the upcoming deadlock and also the efforts of the Executive to stifle debate and run down the clock. He took the opportunity to ensure that MP's had a vote and therefore upheld the power of Parliament over the Executive. I actually respect him for his conviction in this. He knew he'd be pilloried in certain quarters and still he did it. I'd like more politicians to stand by their principles instead of their personal ambitions. We wouldn't be in this mess if this was the case.