Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 11:41:53 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Is Theresa May still in charge? Brexit Discussion Thread Four

Started by Fambo Number Mive, January 03, 2019, 08:46:38 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Is Theresa May still in Cheers?

Yeah she plays Norm
8 (21.1%)
Yes as moral support, bellowing "FUCK HIM UP SAM" at opportune moments
8 (21.1%)
Nah mate of course not; died!
6 (15.8%)
No; her backstage attempt to lez up with Diane Keaton went awry
11 (28.9%)
Mary Celeste
5 (13.2%)

Total Members Voted: 38

biggytitbo

Remember that time when everyone was desperate to be associated with Nick Clegg in the hope that his glory would reflect on them? "I agree with Nick" and all that. Now when Nick Clegg gets involved with a campaign, it's like when a firm in Some Mothers Do Av Em employs Frank Spencer, and by the end of the episode it's in rubble.

Shoulders?-Stomach!

Those attack ads check mated Clegg who was saying how we couldn't afford to scrap tuition fees and the cuts had to be made because we couldn't afford all sorts. The screaming tenor was about how poor the nation was. Now demonstrably absolute bollocks but the right will always have the upper hand when it comes to cynicism.

Labour deserve criticism too for failing to support the change which could have prevented their collapse in 2015.

Replies From View

Quote from: Shoulders?-Stomach! on January 05, 2019, 10:33:57 AM
Labour deserve criticism too for failing to support the change which could have prevented their collapse in 2015.

I agree, but don't think Labour associating themselves with anything around that time would have swayed the masses.  They were in necessary self-reconfiguration mode, and hardly anyone was listening to them.

greencalx

Quote from: buttgammon on January 05, 2019, 10:18:58 AM
Britain really can't do referendums well, can it?

Of the three referendums I've participated in, the Scottish Independence one was by far the cleanest (Nick Robinson notwithstanding). I look back on the campaign period as one of (comparative) calm and reasoned debate, and one where the debate was mostly focussed around the questions of currency and EU membership (both of which are now somewhat moot...).

Perhaps this lulled the remain campaign into a false sense of security. They really should have learnt from the AV referendum that emotional arguments trump technical ones. My view on the AV referendum was that AV is indeed not much better than FPTP; but it would have shown a willingness to change, and if you've changed the system once you'd probably be more open to changing it again. The method used to elect the Scottish Parliament seems to work quite well, but apparently it's too complicated for people south of the border, bless 'em.

Paul Calf

Quote from: greencalx on January 05, 2019, 12:22:20 PM
Of the three referendums I've participated in, the Scottish Independence one was by far the cleanest (Nick Robinson notwithstanding). I look back on the campaign period as one of (comparative) calm and reasoned debate, and one where the debate was mostly focussed around the questions of currency and EU membership (both of which are now somewhat moot...).

Prior to encountering some of the ugliness brought out by Indyref, I was 100% in favour of Scottish independence. It took the referendum campaign to surface the poisonous divisive chauvinism concealed in the heart of all nationalism, without exception.

Now, I suppose I'm 70 or 80% in favour. Definitely qualified though.

manticore

Quote from: Paul Calf on January 04, 2019, 05:29:50 PM
Given the reaction to his '7/10' comments in the last one, I can't see how anyone who wanted a Labour government could possibly imagine that a referendum campaign was the right time for any Labour leader to start rehearsing the well-worn talking points about the EU's imperfections.

I don't remember the reaction, and whether it was just professional media remainers who were outraged.

It's not 'rehearsing well-worn talking points', whatever that means, it's being honest with the electorate and letting them know that you're fully aware of the major flaws in the EU and presenting a positive programme for reform from within, while simultaneously warning of the massive dangers that would result from leaving. So people might feel less like they're being talked to by salesmen and women trying sell them damaged goods without giving a damn about how they're failing. But maybe some of you think propaganda is a better approach than honesty.

Maybe Labour should learn a bit from Bernie Sanders' approach to adressing people, because it's something they seem to appreciate. 'These are the problems, and we want to do this and this and this to tackle them'.

I would say that would be something more like a socialist and democratic approach.

manticore

Quote from: king_tubby on January 04, 2019, 06:55:26 PM
"We won't be able to get certain foods like bananas or tomatoes but it's not like we won't be able to eat. And we'll be leaving at a time when British produce is beginning to come into season so it's the best possible time to leave with no deal."

Not my words, the words of an anonymous Tory leaver.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/increasing-number-of-tory-mps-considering-no-deal-brexit-as-a-viable-plan-b_uk_5c2f6bbce4b0407e908ad874?

"And we'll be leaving at a time when British produce is beginning to come into season so it's the best possible time to leave with no deal."

OTOH, from that same article:

QuoteSenior Tory MP Sarah Wollaston, who backs a second referendum, warned no-deal could split the party.

"No deal doesn't have majority support in parliament," she said. "If it became the main government policy objective for Brexit then I and many colleagues would resign the party whip."

Former immigration minister Robert Goodwill, who is loyal to the PM, also dismissed suggestions more MPs were backing no deal, saying the idea was "only from the headbangers".

Referring to May's successful defence of her Tory leadership following a coup attempt last month, he added: "There is a massive majority against no deal in the Commons.

biggytitbo

From the People's Vote website:
QuoteOn October 20th, over 700,000 people marched from Park Lane to Parliament, demanding their future back.

From the GLA:
QuoteHowever, following a request under the Freedom of Information Act, Scotland Yard told The Sunday Telegraph: "The Greater London Authority has included an estimated attendance figure of 250,000 in a debrief document. Please note this is not a Metropolitan Police Service estimate as we have not recorded an estimated attendance figure for the march." The march, on October 20, took place between Park Lane, in central London, and Parliament Square.

Think they must be using Sean Spicer to count their numbers over at the Political establishment People's vote campaign.



BlodwynPig

Biggy, that is an awful post. I think people should retire back to their bungalows for a good hard look at themselves, you and i included

biggytitbo

I dunno, just another example of what a cynical marketing campaign the 'people's vote' is, made up of all the worst forces from the remain side during the referendum campaign.


If we do have second referendum, remain really need to ditch these cunts or they will lose again.

Morning all

Was just coming in to post that, how fucking embarassing for everyone involved

Also this morning - the UK is the fastest growing economy in the G7

The Losers Vote has taken a hell of a beating this week;

- Home Sec just assured everyone that medical supplies will be unaffected by no deal Brexit
- Darling of the Remoaners, and the epitome of a BBC luvvie - Gary Lineker - caught out stirring up fear with a fake NHS poster
- Remoaner march figures exposed as fake
- Everyone agrees there will be no hard border in Ireland
- British expats in France and Italy assured of continued residency post a no-deal Brexit, including expats from those countries who are resident in the UK

The remain case if flapping around like a fish out of water - now we won't be able to buy Easter Eggs or something

No deal Brexit is coming, no-one is listening to you anymore

QuoteLeave the EU without a deal in March 2019.

We are wasting Billions of pounds of taxpayers money trying to negotiate in a short space of time. Leaving the EU in March 2019 will allow the UK good time to negotiate more efficiently. The EU will be more eager to accept a deal on our terms having lost a major partner.
More details
Sign this petition

300,891 signatures

BlodwynPig

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 06, 2019, 10:34:38 AM
I dunno, just another example of what a cynical marketing campaign the 'people's vote' is, made up of all the worst forces from the remain side during the referendum campaign.


If we do have second referendum, remain really need to ditch these cunts or they will lose again.

I agree that these screeching cloying voices are drowning out rationale conversation. It's unavoidable now - 25 years ago, most would be throwing a mocassin slipper or patent leather brogue at their Grundig before finding solace in their tumbler of Scotch.

If we get No Brexit - which i want - i don't want these people to represent the future.

BlodwynPig

..then again, we must stop Paulie and his ILK (yes i said ilk) from dictating the political and cultural landscape of post-apocalyptic Britgone

biggytitbo

I'd not heard of the Gary Lineker thing, but the jug eared crisp salesman is a good example of what happens when you so desperately want to believe something is true with all your heart that it takes on a kind of wider emotional truth entirely divorced from whether its actually a fact or not. Although they are different in many ways, the group the FBPE and celebrity remainers most resemble are actually the MAGA and qanon lot in the US.

katzenjammer

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 06, 2019, 10:27:15 AM
From the People's Vote website:
From the GLA:
Think they must be using Sean Spicer to count their numbers over at the Political establishment People's vote campaign.

What are you going on about?  Every protest ever has the organiser's estimate overblown and the police estimate er.. underblown.  Take the Iraq war protest for example

QuoteAt a demonstration in London in 2003 against the Iraq War, organisers said nearly two million people took part, although police put the figure at 750,000.

Protest numbers: How are they counted?

Fambo Number Mive

Meanwhile, another issue for those who support no deal

QuoteThe Port of Ramsgate "can not be ready" for extra ferry services in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to the councillor for the harbour area.

Seaborne Freight has been given a £13.8m contract to run a freight service between Ramsgate and Ostend in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

However, Conservative councillor Beverly Martin says the harbour can not be ready by Brexit on 29 March.

The government said facilities will be open "as soon as practicable"...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46774054

Dex Sawash


Are the new shipping routes needed due to lack of customs capacity on existing routes?
I've only read 1.2% of brexit posts so if 100 of you would answer I am bound to see it.

Mister Six

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 06, 2019, 10:27:15 AM
From the People's Vote website:
From the GLA:
Think they must be using Sean Spicer to count their numbers over at the Political establishment People's vote campaign.

If this were a cause you supported you'd dismiss the police numbers on the basis that they represent The Man and they would deliberately undercount the figures because of (tenuous reason given by a bloke on a conspiracy blog).

thraxx

Quote from: Dex Sawash on January 06, 2019, 01:15:21 PM
Are the new shipping routes needed due to lack of customs capacity on existing routes?
I've only read 1.2% of brexit posts so if 100 of you would answer I am bound to see it.

This is something thing I don't understand either. On what grounds do we need extra ferry routes after Brexit, and surely all the company will reasonably do is sub contract from other existing ferry operators. Hard to see any extra capacity being actually created. And then what about the extra capacity in the ports needed to support ferry activities, stevedores, customs, transport, infra? Surely, this counts then as extra economic activity, I.e. job creation etc... if this extra capacity is needed then this means that there is more people or stuff to be moved in and out the country, so again extra economic activity. All of this is Ramsgate of all places. Unless of course we are deporting people.

I struggle to any sense or logic in any of this.

biggytitbo

Quote from: Mister Six on January 06, 2019, 02:52:59 PM
If this were a cause you supported you'd dismiss the police numbers on the basis that they represent The Man and they would deliberately undercount the figures because of (tenuous reason given by a bloke on a conspiracy blog).


Yes I'd do whatever you want me to obviously. Fact remains this is an astroturfing campaign from big business, war criminals and the stop Corbyn political establishment cynically bullshitting us.

biggytitbo

Quote from: thraxx on January 06, 2019, 03:02:00 PM
This is something thing I don't understand either. On what grounds do we need extra ferry routes after Brexit, and surely all the company will reasonably do is sub contract from other existing ferry operators. Hard to see any extra capacity being actually created. And then what about the extra capacity in the ports needed to support ferry activities, stevedores, customs, transport, infra? Surely, this counts then as extra economic activity, I.e. job creation etc... if this extra capacity is needed then this means that there is more people or stuff to be moved in and out the country, so again extra economic activity. All of this is Ramsgate of all places. Unless of course we are deporting people.

I struggle to any sense or logic in any of this.


I thought the point was its a contingency measure to route existing traffic away from Dover in the event of the fabled collapse of the usual cross Channel trading routes.

Mister Six

Quote from: thraxx on January 06, 2019, 03:02:00 PM
I struggle to any sense or logic in any of this.

I think the point is that requiring more paperwork and goods checks for ships going into and out of Europe will cause massive backlogs at ports. Opening up more routes allows for the load to be spread and the overall wait time reduced.

biggytitbo

Quote from: Mister Six on January 06, 2019, 03:11:52 PM
I think the point is that requiring more paperwork and goods checks for ships going into and out of Europe will cause massive backlogs at ports.


Nobody is entirely clear on why this will be the case though.

Johnny Yesno

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 06, 2019, 03:24:51 PM

Nobody is entirely clear on why this will be the case though.

Er, because the UK will be a third country.

Mister Six

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 06, 2019, 03:24:51 PM

Nobody is entirely clear on why this will be the case though.

Except for all the articles that have explained this in detail. What are you "not sure" about?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-46739895

QuoteSo why has Dover become so integral to the UK's economic system?

It is by far the biggest destination in the country for roll-on roll-off ferries (known as Ro-Ro, which means cargo is driven on and off rather than lifted by cranes). Dover handled 2.9 million units of Ro-Ro freight last year, most of which were lorries with drivers.

It is also the main access route for trade with the rest of the EU inside the single market. Lorries currently simply drive on and off ferries and are on the motorway within a matter of minutes.

But any lorries arriving from a non-EU country, such as Switzerland, are subject to longer delays.

"If customs don't want to check anything, that would [still] delay the vehicle by about an hour or an hour and a half [while the driver waits for a decision]," Andrew Baxter, the managing director of the freight logistics company Europa Worldwide, told a House of Commons Committee last year.

"If customs wanted to do a documentary check, that could delay it by up to three hours, and if there was an inspection of the goods, that could delay it by up to five hours," he added.

Even though such checks are in the low single digits in percentage terms, it doesn't take much for long queues to develop in the tight confines of the port of Dover.

That's why the government says that, in the event of no-deal, it would minimise checks at Dover to the greatest extent possible and could, in theory, simply wave trucks through. But, as the Cabinet Office acknowledges, it cannot control what the EU will do on the other side of the Channel.

More ports means the load is spread more thinly, reducing potential traffic snarls around Dover and the currently functional ports.

Paul Calf

Quote from: biggytitbo on January 06, 2019, 03:24:51 PM

Nobody is entirely clear on why this will be the case though.

Yes, they are. If you're not, perhaps you should improve your understanding of the consequences of Brexit before you express further opinion.

biggytitbo

Quote from: Johnny Yesno on January 06, 2019, 03:30:43 PM
Er, because the UK will be a third country.


Most non EU trade already comes into the UK without physical customs checks, and there is no reason to believe a no deal exit would entail significant increases in customs checks from EU countries https://briefingsforbrexit.com/no-deal-is-no-nightmare-facts-about-eu-trade-after-brexit/


It's self evident a big backlog at UK ports would cause a big backlog at French ones too, so there is incentive on both sides not to introduce any unnecessary extra checks (and against WTO rules anyway). Even if the scaremongering was remotely true, we could just temporarily waive checks, there are no WTO rules that mandate them, we just have to treat all parties 'equally'.

Paul Calf

Are you suggesting that the UK opens its borders unconditionally to all traffic?

Doesn't that betray TWOTP®?

Mister Six

What about the thing I linked to and quoted up there, Biggy, that says it takes at least an hour for non-EU lorries to enter Dover? And isn't the point of retaking control of British ports that you don't just wave trucks in?

Are you just going to ignore this stuff like usual?

biggytitbo

That document I linked to (which has citations) says less than 3% of imports are checked currently. Why would that change significantly?