blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2024, 01:49:25 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272476 Posts in 66752 Topics by 16945 Members
Latest Member: Zula
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Community Forums
| |-+  The Lounge
| | |-+  The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Poll
Question: How will you vote on December 12th 2019
Conservative - 19 (33.9%)
Labour - 12 (21.4%)
SNP - 2 (3.6%)
Lib Dem - 8 (14.3%)
Brexit - 1 (1.8%)
Green - 6 (10.7%)
Other - 2 (3.6%)
Spoil - 0 (0%)
Not voting - 6 (10.7%)
Total Voters: 55

Pages: 1 ... 1039 1040 1041 1042 [1043] 1044 1045 1046 1047 ... 1533 Go Down Print
Author Topic: The UK Politics and EU Referendum thread - merged  (Read 2180707 times)
TightEnd
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #15630 on: December 11, 2018, 09:57:09 AM »

Brexit: Juncker tells May deal could be clarified, but 'no room whatsoever for renegotiation'

effectively a declaration that they would never use a backstop, but substantively i doubt that is enough to swing many "no" voters in Parliament

The EU protected their own interests, with full transparency and with an appropriate process. We haven't had much transparency, kept shifting the goalposts or trying to and didn't have much process

Not really a great surprise that they have the upper hand really

Logged

My eyes are open wide
By the way,I made it through the day
I watch the world outside
By the way, I'm leaving out today
Tal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 24352


"He's always at it!"


View Profile
« Reply #15631 on: December 11, 2018, 12:12:08 PM »

Article 50 ruling shows the UK remains sovereign

The UK had sovereignty all along...

https://www.ft.com/content/976296c6-fc6c-11e8-ac00-57a2a826423e

Possibly the single biggest frustration of the lot: remainers either say we have always had sovereignty (by which they mean in principle) or that, if we don't, it's ok because we're better off in the club; leavers say we need sovereignty in practice and we can't get that in the club.

Our constitution depends on parliamentary sovereignty and the EU, ECJ and every other relevant body who could benefit by opposing it has supported it.

The point is, parliamentary sovereignty has, for some, become Trident: we are said to spend lots of unpopular money on maintaining it, have no intention of using it and can't do anything with it because it's politically disastrous either way.

"What good is a loaded gun if you are never taken seriously if you threaten to fire it?", leavers ask.

"Fine, but is now the time to point it at anyone?", ask the remainers.

For the last 40-odd years, it's been a simple answer: parliament is sovereign because it can pull out of the EU. I think that's never really been in dispute. The debate is over whether we are sovereign in practice, even if it's not been put in those terms. So I don't really get the FT's point. It's not exactly a Planet of the Apes moment.
Logged

"You must take your opponent into a deep, dark forest, where 2+2=5, and the path leading out is only wide enough for one"
Pokerpops
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1423


View Profile
« Reply #15632 on: December 11, 2018, 12:37:56 PM »

Article 50 ruling shows the UK remains sovereign

The UK had sovereignty all along...

https://www.ft.com/content/976296c6-fc6c-11e8-ac00-57a2a826423e

Possibly the single biggest frustration of the lot: remainers either say we have always had sovereignty (by which they mean in principle) or that, if we don't, it's ok because we're better off in the club; leavers say we need sovereignty in practice and we can't get that in the club.

Our constitution depends on parliamentary sovereignty and the EU, ECJ and every other relevant body who could benefit by opposing it has supported it.

The point is, parliamentary sovereignty has, for some, become Trident: we are said to spend lots of unpopular money on maintaining it, have no intention of using it and can't do anything with it because it's politically disastrous either way.

"What good is a loaded gun if you are never taken seriously if you threaten to fire it?", leavers ask.

"Fine, but is now the time to point it at anyone?", ask the remainers.

For the last 40-odd years, it's been a simple answer: parliament is sovereign because it can pull out of the EU. I think that's never really been in dispute. The debate is over whether we are sovereign in practice, even if it's not been put in those terms. So I don't really get the FT's point. It's not exactly a Planet of the Apes moment.

Can you explain the bolded sentence for me please. I appear to be having a dense day.

Also, the underlined sentence in the last para is clearly factually correct, but somehow it jars with the current position that we find ourselves in.
It’s become a new adventure for Alice with words meaning whatever people want them to mean.
Sovereignty, to me, in the context of our relationship with the EU means that we don’t have to adopt policies and standards that were designed for the benefit of others. eg. to support the activities of rural farmers in Mediterranean climes. Or fishermen in Breton villages. It means that we get to be responsible for choosing our trading partners, political and military allies for ourselves.

Sadly, the bunch of self-serving backstabbing political lightweights that have found their way into power over the past thirty or fourty years have shown very clearly that they aren’t actually capable of having that level of responsibility. If we are leaving then we may as well just get on with it. Schedule an election for March 28th 2019 and ban anyone from campaigning in a constituency other than the one they late a candidate for, or the one they will vote in. No battle buses, minimal national PPBs. Let’s elect a parliament of representatives of the people.

There is a whole new debate to be held about how we finished up with a parliament full of these PPE muppets but fuck it, there’s no time for that now.
Logged

"More than at any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly."
nirvana
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7804



View Profile
« Reply #15633 on: December 11, 2018, 01:28:40 PM »

Article 50 ruling shows the UK remains sovereign

The UK had sovereignty all along...

https://www.ft.com/content/976296c6-fc6c-11e8-ac00-57a2a826423e

Possibly the single biggest frustration of the lot: remainers either say we have always had sovereignty (by which they mean in principle) or that, if we don't, it's ok because we're better off in the club; leavers say we need sovereignty in practice and we can't get that in the club.

Our constitution depends on parliamentary sovereignty and the EU, ECJ and every other relevant body who could benefit by opposing it has supported it.

The point is, parliamentary sovereignty has, for some, become Trident: we are said to spend lots of unpopular money on maintaining it, have no intention of using it and can't do anything with it because it's politically disastrous either way.

"What good is a loaded gun if you are never taken seriously if you threaten to fire it?", leavers ask.

"Fine, but is now the time to point it at anyone?", ask the remainers.

For the last 40-odd years, it's been a simple answer: parliament is sovereign because it can pull out of the EU. I think that's never really been in dispute. The debate is over whether we are sovereign in practice, even if it's not been put in those terms. So I don't really get the FT's point. It's not exactly a Planet of the Apes moment.

Interesting post and it is the nub of it really. Ultimately I voted leave because it didn't seem possible to reframe things with the EU where we took back elements of sovereign decision makjng which might have been accompanied by equitable adjustments that balanced matters. In all this so called mess, Mays deal kind of shows this can be achieved but it would have been considerably better if this could have been accomplished in the period when Cameron was trying to achieve this before any promises around a refedendum
Logged

sola virtus nobilitat
RED-DOG
International Lover World Wide Playboy
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 46911



View Profile WWW
« Reply #15634 on: December 11, 2018, 02:25:24 PM »

Why the fuck do they insist in conducting interviews outside Westminster where we have to listen to car horns blaring and  idiot Joe Public screaming and shouting?
Logged

The older I get, the better I was.
ripple11
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6330



View Profile
« Reply #15635 on: December 11, 2018, 03:06:55 PM »

Why the fuck do they insist in conducting interviews outside Westminster where we have to listen to car horns blaring and  idiot Joe Public screaming and shouting?

It's easy for MP's, Journos etc to nip in and out . I expect a "glass structure/box" will be erected soon, as Boris's water cannons have been decommissioned.
Logged
RED-DOG
International Lover World Wide Playboy
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 46911



View Profile WWW
« Reply #15636 on: December 11, 2018, 03:13:15 PM »

Why the fuck do they insist in conducting interviews outside Westminster where we have to listen to car horns blaring and  idiot Joe Public screaming and shouting?

It's easy for MP's, Journos etc to nip in and out . I expect a "glass structure/box" will be erected soon, as Boris's water cannons have been decommissioned.


They need a sniper. They'd only need to shoot one or two.
Logged

The older I get, the better I was.
ripple11
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6330



View Profile
« Reply #15637 on: December 11, 2018, 04:24:00 PM »

Been here before but rumour is the 48 letters are in........

Maybe good for May, in the sense that if she survives, she can't be challenged for one year.....or is this the beginning of the end?
Logged
ripple11
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6330



View Profile
« Reply #15638 on: December 11, 2018, 04:30:34 PM »


Love him or hate him is it Boris time?

he would surely be odds on win the party member vote.......but can make the final 2 short list?

A running mate of sensible Amber Rudd might do it!!??

13/2
Logged
ripple11
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6330



View Profile
« Reply #15639 on: December 11, 2018, 04:38:40 PM »

Been here before but rumour is the 48 letters are in........

Maybe good for May, in the sense that if she survives, she can't be challenged for one year.....or is this the beginning of the end?


now denied by the 1922 chairman....but cant be long, as EU it seems are giving her nothing on today's Europe tour.
Logged
Tal
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 24352


"He's always at it!"


View Profile
« Reply #15640 on: December 11, 2018, 06:10:57 PM »

Article 50 ruling shows the UK remains sovereign

The UK had sovereignty all along...

https://www.ft.com/content/976296c6-fc6c-11e8-ac00-57a2a826423e

Possibly the single biggest frustration of the lot: remainers either say we have always had sovereignty (by which they mean in principle) or that, if we don't, it's ok because we're better off in the club; leavers say we need sovereignty in practice and we can't get that in the club.

Our constitution depends on parliamentary sovereignty and the EU, ECJ and every other relevant body who could benefit by opposing it has supported it.

The point is, parliamentary sovereignty has, for some, become Trident: we are said to spend lots of unpopular money on maintaining it, have no intention of using it and can't do anything with it because it's politically disastrous either way.

"What good is a loaded gun if you are never taken seriously if you threaten to fire it?", leavers ask.

"Fine, but is now the time to point it at anyone?", ask the remainers.

For the last 40-odd years, it's been a simple answer: parliament is sovereign because it can pull out of the EU. I think that's never really been in dispute. The debate is over whether we are sovereign in practice, even if it's not been put in those terms. So I don't really get the FT's point. It's not exactly a Planet of the Apes moment.

Can you explain the bolded sentence for me please. I appear to be having a dense day.

Also, the underlined sentence in the last para is clearly factually correct, but somehow it jars with the current position that we find ourselves in.
It’s become a new adventure for Alice with words meaning whatever people want them to mean.
Sovereignty, to me, in the context of our relationship with the EU means that we don’t have to adopt policies and standards that were designed for the benefit of others. eg. to support the activities of rural farmers in Mediterranean climes. Or fishermen in Breton villages. It means that we get to be responsible for choosing our trading partners, political and military allies for ourselves.

Sadly, the bunch of self-serving backstabbing political lightweights that have found their way into power over the past thirty or fourty years have shown very clearly that they aren’t actually capable of having that level of responsibility. If we are leaving then we may as well just get on with it. Schedule an election for March 28th 2019 and ban anyone from campaigning in a constituency other than the one they late a candidate for, or the one they will vote in. No battle buses, minimal national PPBs. Let’s elect a parliament of representatives of the people.

There is a whole new debate to be held about how we finished up with a parliament full of these PPE muppets but fuck it, there’s no time for that now.


Bold bit: it's our constitution and it's always existed (unwritten) on the basis that we have ultimate say over what we do. When we joined a common market and then what became the EU, the understanding was that hadn't changed. The ECJ has just said as much and the EU has been negotiating with us on the understanding that No Deal was an option and, if that was what happens, we leave (i.e., we can choose that if we want).

Underlined bit: yes, this is where it's less law and more politics. But that is true of every law, isn't it? You must only use reasonable force when a burglar comes into your house, says the law, but politicians, media and the public can interpret that how they like for their own purposes. The judiciary is powerless to do anything about it until it's asked. The legislature can fiddle with it (often) depending on how public opinion is deemed to move. The executive can have as much fun making noise as it likes, which will either listen to or drive opinion. This can be a good thing or a bad thing. Every now and then, a court is brought in to make the situation clear (if it does its job properly).

« Last Edit: December 11, 2018, 06:14:12 PM by Tal » Logged

"You must take your opponent into a deep, dark forest, where 2+2=5, and the path leading out is only wide enough for one"
Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16570


View Profile
« Reply #15641 on: December 11, 2018, 06:35:06 PM »

Been here before but rumour is the 48 letters are in........

Maybe good for May, in the sense that if she survives, she can't be challenged for one year.....or is this the beginning of the end?


now denied by the 1922 chairman....but cant be long, as EU it seems are giving her nothing on today's Europe tour.

It can't be long before Esther McVey pronounces they are on 46 again.  A couple of days have past since she last claimed it. 
Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
Pokerpops
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1423


View Profile
« Reply #15642 on: December 11, 2018, 07:33:39 PM »

Article 50 ruling shows the UK remains sovereign

The UK had sovereignty all along...

https://www.ft.com/content/976296c6-fc6c-11e8-ac00-57a2a826423e

Possibly the single biggest frustration of the lot: remainers either say we have always had sovereignty (by which they mean in principle) or that, if we don't, it's ok because we're better off in the club; leavers say we need sovereignty in practice and we can't get that in the club.

Our constitution depends on parliamentary sovereignty and the EU, ECJ and every other relevant body who could benefit by opposing it has supported it.

The point is, parliamentary sovereignty has, for some, become Trident: we are said to spend lots of unpopular money on maintaining it, have no intention of using it and can't do anything with it because it's politically disastrous either way.

"What good is a loaded gun if you are never taken seriously if you threaten to fire it?", leavers ask.

"Fine, but is now the time to point it at anyone?", ask the remainers.

For the last 40-odd years, it's been a simple answer: parliament is sovereign because it can pull out of the EU. I think that's never really been in dispute. The debate is over whether we are sovereign in practice, even if it's not been put in those terms. So I don't really get the FT's point. It's not exactly a Planet of the Apes moment.

Can you explain the bolded sentence for me please. I appear to be having a dense day.

Also, the underlined sentence in the last para is clearly factually correct, but somehow it jars with the current position that we find ourselves in.
It’s become a new adventure for Alice with words meaning whatever people want them to mean.
Sovereignty, to me, in the context of our relationship with the EU means that we don’t have to adopt policies and standards that were designed for the benefit of others. eg. to support the activities of rural farmers in Mediterranean climes. Or fishermen in Breton villages. It means that we get to be responsible for choosing our trading partners, political and military allies for ourselves.

Sadly, the bunch of self-serving backstabbing political lightweights that have found their way into power over the past thirty or fourty years have shown very clearly that they aren’t actually capable of having that level of responsibility. If we are leaving then we may as well just get on with it. Schedule an election for March 28th 2019 and ban anyone from campaigning in a constituency other than the one they late a candidate for, or the one they will vote in. No battle buses, minimal national PPBs. Let’s elect a parliament of representatives of the people.

There is a whole new debate to be held about how we finished up with a parliament full of these PPE muppets but fuck it, there’s no time for that now.


Bold bit: it's our constitution and it's always existed (unwritten) on the basis that we have ultimate say over what we do. When we joined a common market and then what became the EU, the understanding was that hadn't changed. The ECJ has just said as much and the EU has been negotiating with us on the understanding that No Deal was an option and, if that was what happens, we leave (i.e., we can choose that if we want).

Underlined bit: yes, this is where it's less law and more politics. But that is true of every law, isn't it? You must only use reasonable force when a burglar comes into your house, says the law, but politicians, media and the public can interpret that how they like for their own purposes. The judiciary is powerless to do anything about it until it's asked. The legislature can fiddle with it (often) depending on how public opinion is deemed to move. The executive can have as much fun making noise as it likes, which will either listen to or drive opinion. This can be a good thing or a bad thing. Every now and then, a court is brought in to make the situation clear (if it does its job properly).



Thanks for that.
Logged

"More than at any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads. One path leads to despair and utter hopelessness. The other, to total extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly."
Sheriff Fatman
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 6133



View Profile
« Reply #15643 on: December 11, 2018, 08:52:03 PM »

Laura Kuenssberg
Laura Kuenssberg
@bbclaurak
·
13m
Hearing that SirGraham Brady has asked to see the PM after #pmqs tmrw, and multiple sources, including senior tories and a cabinet minister, telling us tonight they believe the threshold of 48 letters has been reached - v unlikely to be any confirmation until tomorrow
Logged

"...And If You Flash Him A Smile He'll Take Your Teeth As Deposit..."
"Sheriff Fatman" - Carter the Unstoppable Sex Machine

2006 Blonde Caption Comp Ultimate Champion (to be replaced by actual poker achievements when I have any)

GUKPT Online Main Event Winner 2008 (yay, a poker achievement!)
Doobs
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 16570


View Profile
« Reply #15644 on: December 12, 2018, 08:27:48 AM »

Laura Kuenssberg
Laura Kuenssberg
@bbclaurak
·
13m
Hearing that SirGraham Brady has asked to see the PM after #pmqs tmrw, and multiple sources, including senior tories and a cabinet minister, telling us tonight they believe the threshold of 48 letters has been reached - v unlikely to be any confirmation until tomorrow

I would say it has defended into farce, but that has long been the case.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/dec/12/brexit-chaos-conservative-mps-trigger-vote-of-no-confidence-theresa-may
Logged

Most of the bets placed so far seem more like hopeful punts rather than value spots
Pages: 1 ... 1039 1040 1041 1042 [1043] 1044 1045 1046 1047 ... 1533 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.373 seconds with 22 queries.