Are we sleep-walking out of Europe ?

Timmo1341 posted:

I think most people would call 6-5 a split decision. 8-3 represents a pretty conclusive majority. Lets not have another 'when is a majority not a majority' style debate, pleeeeease!!

Just so,   but please don't make an issue over a point I was not making.    If I was making a point,  it would be that the constitutional law is not clear as 3 judges disagree & if the law was clear, there would not have been the need for the HC & SC to become involved in the first place.  

HC and SC eh? Just like Hifi corner. 

Hungryhalibut posted:

HC and SC eh? Just like Hifi corner. 

  ................  

The Supreme Court's judgement on the sovereignty of parliament will no doubt be welcomed by many but it also said that the devolved assemblies have no legal role or right in the Art 50 decision.  SNP an co will be very grumpy about that.  Apart from lobbying, it's hard to see what the devolved assemblies can do to ensure that their interests are respected by HMG, save for rattling the 'independence referendum' sabre. 

MDS posted:

The Supreme Court's judgement on the sovereignty of parliament will no doubt be welcomed by many but it also said that the devolved assemblies have no legal role or right in the Art 50 decision.  SNP an co will be very grumpy about that.  Apart from lobbying, it's hard to see what the devolved assemblies can do to ensure that their interests are respected by HMG, save for rattling the 'independence referendum' sabre. 

And that the Scottish and NI assemblies will do. Not so sure about the Welsh?

Hmack posted:

MDS posted:

The Supreme Court's judgement on the sovereignty of parliament will no doubt be welcomed by many but it also said that the devolved assemblies have no legal role or right in the Art 50 decision.  SNP an co will be very grumpy about that.  Apart from lobbying, it's hard to see what the devolved assemblies can do to ensure that their interests are respected by HMG, save for rattling the 'independence referendum' sabre. 

And that the Scottish and NI assemblies will do. Not so sure about the Welsh?

I know that some Brexit-supporters have suggested that the UK's exit from the EU may lead to the eventual breakup of the EU itself. Since the UK is a big net contributor to EU coffers our withdrawal will inevitably cause some EU financial stress, but I hope our exit doesn't prove fatal. I suppose that is beyond the UK's control.  However I think it would be an awful tragedy if our exit from the EU also led to the breakup of the UK.   

Copied from a very recent piece of legislation regarding Special Operations in the European Aviation industry. The whole document consumes reams of paper, is often difficult to decipher (there is an "Easy-to-Read" version also available !!!! and it is just as long). But I thought it is typical of EU Regulation and to my mind......cuts both ways ie it's a bureaucratic nightmare of a regulation that is fundamentally sensible and it seeks EU-wide standardisation but................allows flexibility ! Oh, and it leaves the costs involved a bit vague !!

It is not yet possible to determine the level of resource required and therefore the associated costs to be recovered through charging.

The regulations are required to be met by all member states and are standardised by EASA.

However, each member state will decide what they consider to be a high risk activity appropriate to their circumstances, meaning an activity may require an authorisation in one country but not in another.

The three sentences are not cut from different texts, they are consecutive sentences, relating to the single subject of Special Operations.

A Three-Line-Whip from Jeremy..........to vote for A.50

Is this what now passes for "Opposition" ?

Is this in the best interest of the UK, or simply in the best interest of Jeremy Corbyn ?

I presume, and desperately hope, he will at least tender a few proposed amendments to the Bill.

Or do we have to rely on our friends t'other side of Hadrian's Wall to put forward 50+ amendments and bring this extreme right wing government to some sort of sensible responsibility ?

On a somewhat lighter note (is there such a thing these days ?), do we really want to import and drive American export cars or would we prefer Mercs, BMW and Audi to supplement our home-built Nissan, Toyota and Hondas, Jaguars, RangeRovers, Rollers and even Bentleys with the only decent in-car entertainment systems?

Personally I think Labour are between a rock and several hard places ...

• If they don't support triggering Article 50 they will have lost support for going against the people's wishes.
• If Brexit is a disaster they will loose support for not fighting against it.
• If Brexit is a success they will loose support because the Torys will be seen as being the heroes and successfully taking us out from under the control of the EU.

What's this business I hear that the UK will have to PAY to leave the EU ?

Can any of the Brexit Supporters on this forum explain this mystery to me ?

MDS posted:

Hmack posted:

MDS posted:

The Supreme Court's judgement on the sovereignty of parliament will no doubt be welcomed by many but it also said that the devolved assemblies have no legal role or right in the Art 50 decision.  SNP an co will be very grumpy about that.  Apart from lobbying, it's hard to see what the devolved assemblies can do to ensure that their interests are respected by HMG, save for rattling the 'independence referendum' sabre. 

And that the Scottish and NI assemblies will do. Not so sure about the Welsh?

I know that some Brexit-supporters have suggested that the UK's exit from the EU may lead to the eventual breakup of the EU itself. Since the UK is a big net contributor to EU coffers our withdrawal will inevitably cause some EU financial stress, but I hope our exit doesn't prove fatal. I suppose that is beyond the UK's control.  However I think it would be an awful tragedy if our exit from the EU also led to the breakup of the UK.   

Hi Mike - i do think its unlikely the EU will collapse - hopefully it will evolve - but I do believe the federal aim is key to the modern EU and I guess with the UK out of the way it makes it easier for those that want that aim to succeed. My hope for the EU is that it doesn't become isolationist looking in on itself.. we need the EU to be strong and global looking as it will continue to be a significant trading partner for us  and we continue to hold and hopefully develop many new cultural and cooperation ties and alliances going forward.

I do think the NATO element is interesting - there may be those in the EU that want to reduce their reliance on NATO and develop their own EU security mechanism - but almost certainly that view will not be seen as attractive to the eastern EU members such as Estonia and Poland... however it will almost certainly mean for NATO to develop and evolve in the EU the contribution from current wealthy EU members may need to be more brought in line

Don Atkinson posted:

What's this business I hear that the UK will have to PAY to leave the EU ?

Can any of the Brexit Supporters on this forum explain this mystery to me ?

I believe it's about long term commitments... pensions for former U.K. commisoners, former MEPs, etc.

Eloise posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

What's this business I hear that the UK will have to PAY to leave the EU ?

Can any of the Brexit Supporters on this forum explain this mystery to me ?

I believe it's about long term commitments... pensions for former U.K. commisoners, former MEPs, etc.

Right, Thank you Eloise. Makes sense. We either continue to pay money to the EU so that the EU can honour its commitments to these people, or (possibly) we relieve the EU of this responsibility and guarantee to meet these commitments ourselves.

Any idea how much of the £350m pw this represents ?

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

MDS posted:

Hmack posted:

MDS posted:

The Supreme Court's judgement on the sovereignty of parliament will no doubt be welcomed by many but it also said that the devolved assemblies have no legal role or right in the Art 50 decision.  SNP an co will be very grumpy about that.  Apart from lobbying, it's hard to see what the devolved assemblies can do to ensure that their interests are respected by HMG, save for rattling the 'independence referendum' sabre. 

And that the Scottish and NI assemblies will do. Not so sure about the Welsh?

I know that some Brexit-supporters have suggested that the UK's exit from the EU may lead to the eventual breakup of the EU itself. Since the UK is a big net contributor to EU coffers our withdrawal will inevitably cause some EU financial stress, but I hope our exit doesn't prove fatal. I suppose that is beyond the UK's control.  However I think it would be an awful tragedy if our exit from the EU also led to the breakup of the UK.   

Hi Mike - i do think its unlikely the EU will collapse - hopefully it will evolve - but I do believe the federal aim is key to the modern EU and I guess with the UK out of the way it makes it easier for those that want that aim to succeed. My hope for the EU is that it doesn't become isolationist looking in on itself.. we need the EU to be strong and global looking as it will continue to be a significant trading partner for us  and we continue to hold and hopefully develop many new cultural and cooperation ties and alliances going forward.

I do think the NATO element is interesting - there may be those in the EU that want to reduce their reliance on NATO and develop their own EU security mechanism - but almost certainly that view will not be seen as attractive to the eastern EU members such as Estonia and Poland... however it will almost certainly mean for NATO to develop and evolve in the EU the contribution from current wealthy EU members may need to be more brought in line

Yes, I agree with those sentiments, Simon.  Further political integration between the remaining 27 might well be achieved more easily and quickly without the dissenting voice of the UK.  That said I harbour a suspicion that it has suited some member states who have reservations on further integration to have had the outspoken UK being seen as the 'awkward guy'. They may have to speak up for themselves in future.

Re Nato, I also think Trump has a point in being annoyed at those members, some in the EU, who do not contribute their fair share, relying on the USA to carry the greatest burden.    

Indeed, I also share the suspicion that some perhaps smaller states have relied on the UK for its dissent and challenges to proxy their own views whilst at the same time nor being seen to upset the the genereal concencus... I guess such an arrangement if it has been the case is not healthy .. and indeed perhaps distorts perceived commonly held opinion.... so yes they should speak up for them selves rather than be initimidated.

Casualiy browsing the BBC News webpage I noticed the following :-

Britain has agreed a £100m defence deal to help develop fighter jets for the Turkish air force.

The announcement came as UK Prime Minister Theresa May met the Turkish president and prime minister in Ankara.

Mrs May said the defence agreement "underlines once again that Britain is a great, global, trading nation".

I am now convinced that Brexit was right after all. £100m is afantastic  endorsement of Britain's future as a great global trading nation. After all, this represents a full two whole days of contributions to the EU or re-investment in the NHS.

I really don't mid whether you view this post as irony or sarcasm.

As if !! sarcasm & irony,  from you Don, heaven forbid.  Its a typical attention grabbing low hanging fruit political opportunity.  BAe have been associated with this project for quite a while. I was under the impression the deal was signed already but Turkey were the hold up.  A report dated 2015 shows the TFX project started in 2011 with three concept designs by TAI & ....... "Following the selection of BAE, Ankara is expected to choose one of the concepts within the next few weeks and sign an agreement with its development partner by February 2016"

Don Atkinson posted:

Casualiy browsing the BBC News webpage I noticed the following :-

Britain has agreed a £100m defence deal to help develop fighter jets for the Turkish air force.

The announcement came as UK Prime Minister Theresa May met the Turkish president and prime minister in Ankara.

Mrs May said the defence agreement "underlines once again that Britain is a great, global, trading nation".

I am now convinced that Brexit was right after all. £100m is afantastic  endorsement of Britain's future as a great global trading nation. After all, this represents a full two whole days of contributions to the EU or re-investment in the NHS.

I really don't mid whether you view this post as irony or sarcasm.

So Dictator May and her henchmen are making a quick buck doing dodgy weapons trading to countries with serious human rights violations! It's disgraceful, now we are closer to knowing what BREXIT really means...

naim_nymph posted:

So Dictator May and her henchmen are making a quick buck doing dodgy weapons trading to countries with serious human rights violations! It's disgraceful, now we are closer to knowing what BREXIT really means...

Way to go shoehorning Brexit in there!

Unfortunately, the UK has been selling arms to dodgy regimes - most notably the vile Saudis, but also (just off the top of my head) the Shah's Iran, Saddam's Iraq and Suharto's Indonesia - for decades.

This deal with the Islamofascist Erdogan may be egregious in the extreme, but it is merely the continuation of a long and ignoble British tradition of doing a deal whenever there's lots of cash on the table, and nowt to do with Brexit.

Kevin-W posted:

naim_nymph posted:

So Dictator May and her henchmen are making a quick buck doing dodgy weapons trading to countries with serious human rights violations! It's disgraceful, now we are closer to knowing what BREXIT really means...

Way to go shoehorning Brexit in there!

Unfortunately, the UK has been selling arms to dodgy regimes - most notably the vile Saudis, but also (just off the top of my head) the Shah's Iran, Saddam's Iraq and Suharto's Indonesia - for decades.

This deal with the Islamofascist Erdogan may be egregious in the extreme, but it is merely the continuation of a long and ignoble British tradition of doing a deal whenever there's lots of cash on the table, and nowt to do with Brexit.

And if the UK isn't willing to sell to these regimes they will surely obtain them from somewhere else so isn't it better to protect jobs in the UK? 

MDS posted:

Kevin-W posted:

naim_nymph posted:

So Dictator May and her henchmen are making a quick buck doing dodgy weapons trading to countries with serious human rights violations! It's disgraceful, now we are closer to knowing what BREXIT really means...

Way to go shoehorning Brexit in there!

Unfortunately, the UK has been selling arms to dodgy regimes - most notably the vile Saudis, but also (just off the top of my head) the Shah's Iran, Saddam's Iraq and Suharto's Indonesia - for decades.

This deal with the Islamofascist Erdogan may be egregious in the extreme, but it is merely the continuation of a long and ignoble British tradition of doing a deal whenever there's lots of cash on the table, and nowt to do with Brexit.

And if the UK isn't willing to sell to these regimes they will surely obtain them from somewhere else so isn't it better to protect jobs in the UK? 

Exactly.

The UK invented the Industrial Revolution. It could very well lead to the complete elimination of human life on this planet - assuming the "Climate-Change" experts are right. Far more effective than the French Revolution, which by comparison was only a half-hearted affair.

If we are going to wipe the planet clean, why worry about a few aeroplanes to Turkey ? or anywhere else for that matter.

I wasn't aware that Brexit meant leaving the Rat-Race. In fact, quite the opposite - although it's been labled "optimism" and "opportunity"

From the BBC website.................

MPs are launching a parliamentary inquiry into the "growing phenomenon of fake news".

The Culture, Media and Sport Committee said it would investigate concerns about the public being swayed by propaganda and untruths.

The inquiry will examine the sources of fake news, how it is spread and its impact on democracy.

Claims that voters in the US election were influenced by fake news spurred the inquiry, the committee said.

Damian Collins, the committee chairman, said the rise of propaganda and fabrications is "a threat to democracy and undermines confidence in the media in general".

Looks like Trump's influence is having an effect over here.

What will our MPs do to save democracy when they discover that £350m pw was fake news.....................which resulted in 51% of the voting population being swayed by propaganda and untruths. ?

Answer....................nothing !

PS I presume the article, being on the BBC website is actually fake news itself.

Catch 22 anybody ?

Again, from the BBC website....

Nigel Farage has backed Britain introducing “extreme vetting” measures as he defended Donald Trump’s controversial travel ban.

The former Ukip leader suggested the UK Government should adopt similar border policies as he insisted the US President was “entitled” to enforce his widely criticised immigration crackdown.

Hopefully we won't be having a referendum on this as well ?

I really just don't want to be associated with anything this man has to say.

Don Atkinson posted:

Again, from the BBC website....

Nigel Farage has backed Britain introducing “extreme vetting” measures as he defended Donald Trump’s controversial travel ban.

The former Ukip leader suggested the UK Government should adopt similar border policies as he insisted the US President was “entitled” to enforce his widely criticised immigration crackdown.

Hopefully we won't be having a referendum on this as well ?

I really just don't want to be associated with anything this man has to say.

I'm sure Farage realises and uses the language deliberately, but what Trump has done isn't "extreme vetting" it's a blanket ban based on a persons nationality.

Eloise posted:

Don Atkinson posted:

Again, from the BBC website....

Nigel Farage has backed Britain introducing “extreme vetting” measures as he defended Donald Trump’s controversial travel ban.

The former Ukip leader suggested the UK Government should adopt similar border policies as he insisted the US President was “entitled” to enforce his widely criticised immigration crackdown.

Hopefully we won't be having a referendum on this as well ?

I really just don't want to be associated with anything this man has to say.

I'm sure Farage realises and uses the language deliberately, but what Trump has done isn't "extreme vetting" it's a blanket ban based on a persons nationality.

I think Farage, standing in front of "THAT" poster, had in mind a blanket ban on ALL foreigners coming into the UK. Worse still, that's what "The People" of the UK voted for. Not me ! "The People".

I no more agree with what Trump is doing at the moment, than I agree with Farage. But, Trump has identified 7 Nations (that Obama had already identified) who's citizens currently pose an unacceptable security risk to the USA and placed a temporary (c.120 day) ban on them coming to the USA, giving the USA time to organise an effective (extreme) vetting process. As I understand, it is most definitely not a ban on any particular religous group. And also not a punitive ban on nationalities that have inflicted terror within the USA in the past but which the USA considers no longer pose a significant threat to homeland security.

As I say, I don't consider this a good move overall. I think it is justified that people protest. Just as we do about Brexit !.