Saturday 4th & Sunday 5th February 2017

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:25 pm

It's fear of being painted anti-Brexit, isn't it? The idea we could leave the EU but still be in the main European trading bloc is being taken off the table by an all powerful media.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:26 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... night-live" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Melissa McCarthy steals the show as Sean Spicer on Saturday Night Live

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:33 pm

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radi ... night-live

Melissa McCarthy steals the show as Sean Spicer on Saturday Night Live

Is that a Spice Girl? My Spice Girl T-shit suspiciously disappeared during one of my migrations. I'm still angry about it going missing.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:45 pm

No it isn't.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:45 pm

Willow904 wrote:It's fear of being painted anti-Brexit, isn't it? The idea we could leave the EU but still be in the main European trading bloc is being taken off the table by an all powerful media.

It's an infamous wrong, Brexit.

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:46 pm

Willow904 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:
Temulkar wrote: You are simply not bothering to listen to them, or even trying to, you have your preconceived ideas and you ignore dismiss or deny the evidence to the contrary.

http://labourlist.org/2016/12/corbyn-an ... le-market/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://labourlist.org/2016/11/britain-a ... onference/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
(cJA edit)

Levelling a charge of negligent and/or selective attention against the commentator is wrong.
Willow904's consistent, timely and well-informed content posted here is the evidence making your criticism spurious.
Thank you for the compliment, JA. Not sure I'm that consistent always, but I would suggest that Temulkar is stretching it a bit to suggest that Corbyn's long standing Euroscepticism is somehow a construction of the press or me having pre-conceived ideas. Against that background I'm afraid he has to be more explicit if he is to convince me he will work to keep us as close as possible to Europe. Vague open expressions about "access" that mirror the Tory line is inadequate. Keir Starmer has kept me on board with a definite commitment to the customs union and Ed Miliband has expressed Europhile views frequently enough in the past for me not to doubt his ultimate intentions but Corbyn continually fails to convince me. It is one thing to argue the Lexit route, as RobertSnozers often has. I understand, though don't share, that position, but this idea that a Europhile like myself is somehow being unfair by being doubtful about whether a Eurosceptic can truly represent my views doesn't make much sense to me.

Thanks again Willow for the thoughtful posts.

A further complexity in all this is that being a Europhile, as I certainly am, needn't mean being a cheerleader for the EU as it is constituted in 2017.

My hope, perhaps forlorn, is that all this may lead to a better EU, a more socialist one. I'm not sure I know Corbyn's intentions, but I suspect these are his feelings too.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:48 pm

I have also taken to task others that bother me - both in plenary and one to one. Tem's tone is pretty much alwasy the same and it's very combative. Not necessary - I would like him to continue posting in a different tone.

Mild, if regular irritation I can easily ignore. And do so daily.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:49 pm

But - to be clear - I am speaking only for myself.
And always am.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:50 pm

Moreover i do not support the driving of any user away.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:51 pm

(again I speak only for myself)

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:56 pm

Willow904 wrote:It's fear of being painted anti-Brexit, isn't it? The idea we could leave the EU but still be in the main European trading bloc is being taken off the table by an all powerful media.

Yeah. Even when there's a suggestion immigration could be reformed as part of Soft Brexit, nobody is interested. It shows that it's all about more than immigration. Theresa May was speaking for the Brexit Establishment when she said "it was a vote to change how the country is run".

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:57 pm

I don't really see how the UK will have any influence in Europe now. That seems a very forlorn hope indeed and not very comforting even if it does happen, seeing as we will no longer be in the EU to benefit.

Trump is cheering Brexit, because it marks the start of the disintegration of a strong trading bloc that is big enough to stand up to the US and US corporations - not always, of course, but more than if Europe didn't stand together.

If the EU "wins" and the UK accepts it can't manage on the outside alone and has to accept the four freedoms to remain inside with everyone else, this could help prevent such a disintegration, but ultimately the EU's survival depends on them being pretty tough on us.

For there to be a consensus in the UK behind what will ultimately be something of a compromise on our part, the benefits of belonging to the single market, rather than the negatives, need to be put across to British voters. I don't really see Corbyn as the man for such a job.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 4:57 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:(cJA edit)

Levelling a charge of negligent and/or selective attention against the commentator is wrong.
Willow904's consistent, timely and well-informed content posted here is the evidence making your criticism spurious.
Thank you for the compliment, JA. Not sure I'm that consistent always, but I would suggest that Temulkar is stretching it a bit to suggest that Corbyn's long standing Euroscepticism is somehow a construction of the press or me having pre-conceived ideas. Against that background I'm afraid he has to be more explicit if he is to convince me he will work to keep us as close as possible to Europe. Vague open expressions about "access" that mirror the Tory line is inadequate. Keir Starmer has kept me on board with a definite commitment to the customs union and Ed Miliband has expressed Europhile views frequently enough in the past for me not to doubt his ultimate intentions but Corbyn continually fails to convince me. It is one thing to argue the Lexit route, as RobertSnozers often has. I understand, though don't share, that position, but this idea that a Europhile like myself is somehow being unfair by being doubtful about whether a Eurosceptic can truly represent my views doesn't make much sense to me.
Thanks again Willow for the thoughtful posts.

A further complexity in all this is that being a Europhile, as I certainly am, needn't mean being a cheerleader for the EU as it is constituted in 2017.

My hope, perhaps forlorn, is that all this may lead to a better EU, a more socialist one. I'm not sure I know Corbyn's intentions, but I suspect these are his feelings too.

I don't get what's wrong with the EU really. The Euro zone, sure. But the EU? As I always say, Denmark is in the EU. Prosperous and egalitarian.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 5:00 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
Temulkar wrote:It's almost as if some have an agenda.
Worred fucking sick about my and my family's future.

That's my only "agenda".

I have noticed the Greens and the Libdems being very clear about staying in the single market as the preferred option, but not Labour. I'm told Corbyn and Labour are misrepresented and am given vague sound bites that could be interpreted in a number of ways and am being asked to take on trust that this means a lifetime sceptic of the single market has changed his mind despite his never actually saying this. I can't, I'm afraid. Talk about the advantages of not having to abide by state aid rules and how Labour isn't tied to the principle of freedom of movement of people doesn't give me much confidence.
Well said.

I can't believe that nobody has taken the Clegg point on and run with it. That Merkel would agree to an emergency brake in return for soft Brexit. Sounds like a game changer to me.

I fear that things aren't helped by the fact its Clegg - even if the LibDems have detoxified themselves to a degree, he hasn't.

And on Brexit - even if nothing else - that is a shame, as he plainly knows what he is on about.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 5:03 pm

see above.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 5:08 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:
PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Willow904 wrote: Thank you for the compliment, JA. Not sure I'm that consistent always, but I would suggest that Temulkar is stretching it a bit to suggest that Corbyn's long standing Euroscepticism is somehow a construction of the press or me having pre-conceived ideas. Against that background I'm afraid he has to be more explicit if he is to convince me he will work to keep us as close as possible to Europe. Vague open expressions about "access" that mirror the Tory line is inadequate. Keir Starmer has kept me on board with a definite commitment to the customs union and Ed Miliband has expressed Europhile views frequently enough in the past for me not to doubt his ultimate intentions but Corbyn continually fails to convince me. It is one thing to argue the Lexit route, as RobertSnozers often has. I understand, though don't share, that position, but this idea that a Europhile like myself is somehow being unfair by being doubtful about whether a Eurosceptic can truly represent my views doesn't make much sense to me.
Thanks again Willow for the thoughtful posts.

A further complexity in all this is that being a Europhile, as I certainly am, needn't mean being a cheerleader for the EU as it is constituted in 2017.

My hope, perhaps forlorn, is that all this may lead to a better EU, a more socialist one. I'm not sure I know Corbyn's intentions, but I suspect these are his feelings too.
I don't get what's wrong with the EU really. The Euro zone, sure. But the EU? As I always say, Denmark is in the EU. Prosperous and egalitarian.

When I look at the USA, Russia and China the EU doesn't look so very bad. Any institution can only ever be as good as the people running it. What I like about the EU is that so many people are running it, which prevents extreme ideas from gaining an out of proportion influence.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 5:09 pm

EU - not perfect. Who's disagreeing?

Baby. Bathwater.
Stupid.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 5:09 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Willow904 wrote: Worred fucking sick about my and my family's future.

That's my only "agenda".

I have noticed the Greens and the Libdems being very clear about staying in the single market as the preferred option, but not Labour. I'm told Corbyn and Labour are misrepresented and am given vague sound bites that could be interpreted in a number of ways and am being asked to take on trust that this means a lifetime sceptic of the single market has changed his mind despite his never actually saying this. I can't, I'm afraid. Talk about the advantages of not having to abide by state aid rules and how Labour isn't tied to the principle of freedom of movement of people doesn't give me much confidence.
Well said.

I can't believe that nobody has taken the Clegg point on and run with it. That Merkel would agree to an emergency brake in return for soft Brexit. Sounds like a game changer to me.
I fear that things aren't helped by the fact its Clegg - even if the LibDems have detoxified themselves to a degree, he hasn't.

And on Brexit - even if nothing else - that is a shame, as he plainly knows what he is on about.

Absolutely. Not least because Guy Verhofstadt might be passing on info. Though this more likely would have come from the heads of government team, not the Parliament one.

I'd like Labour to take it on. Maybe they will after Article 50 is done.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 5:22 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
Willow904 wrote:
citizenJA wrote:(cJA edit)

Levelling a charge of negligent and/or selective attention against the commentator is wrong.
Willow904's consistent, timely and well-informed content posted here is the evidence making your criticism spurious.
Thank you for the compliment, JA. Not sure I'm that consistent always, but I would suggest that Temulkar is stretching it a bit to suggest that Corbyn's long standing Euroscepticism is somehow a construction of the press or me having pre-conceived ideas. Against that background I'm afraid he has to be more explicit if he is to convince me he will work to keep us as close as possible to Europe. Vague open expressions about "access" that mirror the Tory line is inadequate. Keir Starmer has kept me on board with a definite commitment to the customs union and Ed Miliband has expressed Europhile views frequently enough in the past for me not to doubt his ultimate intentions but Corbyn continually fails to convince me. It is one thing to argue the Lexit route, as RobertSnozers often has. I understand, though don't share, that position, but this idea that a Europhile like myself is somehow being unfair by being doubtful about whether a Eurosceptic can truly represent my views doesn't make much sense to me.
I don't believe I have often argued the Lexit route. I have expressed misgivings with some of the ways in which the EU operates and wish it to be reformed away from the neoliberal direction - basically exactly the same as Corbyn's position. In case you missed it, my partner's right to stay here is at risk following Brexit, and her career is almost certain to be damaged, if not ended by it. Given the choice I would strongly prefer we remained, from a personal and political viewpoint. But the EU is not perfect and we should not pretend it is - that kind of thing just plays into the hands of those who insist that it is an elitist project.

In the context of a Brexit debate, arguments against the EU appear to me as arguments to leave. More so when from some one like Corbyn who has often supported leaving in the past. It seems strange to me you can't see that. Corbyn can easily correct this impression. It's not hard to argue for a Norway option, it's really not.

AnatolyKasparov · Post by **AnatolyKasparov** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 5:35 pm

tinyclanger2 wrote:EU - not perfect. Who's disagreeing?

Baby. Bathwater.
Stupid.

Corbyn got criticised for saying it, tbh. Well, I'm struggling to understand any other motivation for the whining over his "7 out of 10" comment.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 5:58 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/ ... id-cameron" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Rupert Murdoch accused of enjoying ‘astounding access’ to Downing Street

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 6:14 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:
AnatolyKasparov wrote:Tem makes some good points, as does SH on the other side of the FTN "divide".

In both cases, the manner of delivery sometimes leaves a bit to be desired though.
Indeed. My point is not that I don't want T to post; but that he might moderate the manner in which he does it (and perhaps make it a bit less about how crap we are - just for a change).

SH is a mystery. Like a cat.
Well here's the problem. It's always Tem singled out for crossing a line when he's honest but angry and occasionally commits the seemingly unpardonable sin of using an expletive. SH on the other hand remains superficially polite while obfuscating, twisting facts and other people's words, and using every logical fallacy under the sun, claims expertise he doesn't have in order specifically to mislead people reading this forum who haven't cottoned on to his strategy, and makes little secret of his utter disrespect for anyone who doesn't share his view. Meanwhile the likes of yahyah crow over having driven long time users away, and their behaviour isn't challenged. Frankly I think people have their priorities backwards.

I don't share many of AK's views (or many other posters). I do hope I don't give the impression of not respecting them. If so, I apologise.

I don't think it was entirely fair to lump me in with Tem. I am, at least, "superficially polite."

SpinningHugo · Post by **SpinningHugo** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 6:17 pm

AnatolyKasparov wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:EU - not perfect. Who's disagreeing?

Baby. Bathwater.
Stupid.
Corbyn got criticised for saying it, tbh. Well, I'm struggling to understand any other motivation for the whining over his "7 out of 10" comment.

He was supposed to be campaigning for our membership. It was indicative of the fact that, at very best, he wasn't that bothered whether we left or not. His susbequent behaviour has proven that beyond peradventure.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 6:23 pm

FWIW I don't believe I have seitiroirp ym.

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 6:31 pm

HindleA wrote:FWIW I don't believe I have seitiroirp ym.

My priorities are ok as well - I think, other priorities are available

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 6:37 pm

It was a play on words,literally.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 6:41 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... y-years-on" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Rare 'cave squeaker' frog seen in Zimbabwe for first time in 55 years

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 6:44 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
tinyclanger2 wrote:I have also taken to task others that bother me - both in plenary and one to one. Tem's tone is pretty much alwasy the same and it's very combative. Not necessary - I would like him to continue posting in a different tone.

Mild, if regular irritation I can easily ignore. And do so daily.
It's my permanent state at the moment.

Anger I don't have a problem with. Scorn and arrogance I do.

Well if you read scorn and arrogance in my posts then you are seriously misreading them, and I'm sorry about that.

tinyclanger2 · Post by **tinyclanger2** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 6:49 pm

ah - good. thanks.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 6:56 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... merge-visa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Ministers 'complacent over US travel ban' as more UK claims emerge

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:00 pm

http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2017/02/01/sco ... ins-award/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Scots poem calling Trump a “tangerine gabshite walloper” wins an award

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:02 pm

Willow904 wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:
Willow904 wrote: Thank you for the compliment, JA. Not sure I'm that consistent always, but I would suggest that Temulkar is stretching it a bit to suggest that Corbyn's long standing Euroscepticism is somehow a construction of the press or me having pre-conceived ideas. Against that background I'm afraid he has to be more explicit if he is to convince me he will work to keep us as close as possible to Europe. Vague open expressions about "access" that mirror the Tory line is inadequate. Keir Starmer has kept me on board with a definite commitment to the customs union and Ed Miliband has expressed Europhile views frequently enough in the past for me not to doubt his ultimate intentions but Corbyn continually fails to convince me. It is one thing to argue the Lexit route, as RobertSnozers often has. I understand, though don't share, that position, but this idea that a Europhile like myself is somehow being unfair by being doubtful about whether a Eurosceptic can truly represent my views doesn't make much sense to me.
I don't believe I have often argued the Lexit route. I have expressed misgivings with some of the ways in which the EU operates and wish it to be reformed away from the neoliberal direction - basically exactly the same as Corbyn's position. In case you missed it, my partner's right to stay here is at risk following Brexit, and her career is almost certain to be damaged, if not ended by it. Given the choice I would strongly prefer we remained, from a personal and political viewpoint. But the EU is not perfect and we should not pretend it is - that kind of thing just plays into the hands of those who insist that it is an elitist project.
In the context of a Brexit debate, arguments against the EU appear to me as arguments to leave. More so when from some one like Corbyn who has often supported leaving in the past. It seems strange to me you can't see that. Corbyn can easily correct this impression. It's not hard to argue for a Norway option, it's really not.

This gets to the heart of any of our debates I think. The EU is hugely precious, yet hugely imperfect. The instinct that some of us have is that we need to acknowledge the latter if we are to hold on to the former. Maybe we are wrong Willow and you are correct. But I don't think that is obviously the case. I just want all of us to stay friends and unite against those who actually want the EU to fail.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:06 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... anned-them" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Immigrants want to come to America and not shoot anyone. No wonder Trump has banned them
Rich Hall

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:09 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... t-it-right" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Guardian view on the digital economy bill: a last chance to get it right
Editorial

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:14 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... act-repeal" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

'Shame on you': Republicans face crowds angry over Obamacare repeal

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:28 pm

Hospital operation 'long waiters' rise by 163%

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38853709

The number of people facing "long waits" for hospital treatment in England has more than doubled in the past four years, figures show.

Patients needing routine care such as knee and hip replacements are meant to be seen in 18 weeks under NHS rules.

But the numbers waiting longer than that now top 350,000 - a 163% rise since 2012. There are 3.7 million people in total on the waiting list.

The government promised the NHS would do "better in the future".

Shame that the government didn't say that the government would do "better in the future"...somewhat more honest.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:29 pm

HindleA wrote:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... t-it-right

The Guardian view on the digital economy bill: a last chance to get it right
Editorial

The information at stake is not trivial. It includes sensitive personal details on individuals’ “physical, mental health, emotional, social and economic” wellbeing. There’s also a provision to pass around data relating to a person’s “contribution made to society”. Ominously, vast quantities of personal information will be allowed to flow freely around government departments, councils, schools and police forces.

The implications for the ability to track citizens over their lifetime are mind-boggling. Even more remarkable is that the bill allows for information collected by private firms providing public services to be shared with government bodies.

(cJA emphasis)

What Tory government think valuable I often don't

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:32 pm

Ken Clarke on Brexit: ‘I’ve never seen anything as mad or chaotic as this’
Last week, the veteran parliamentarian was the only Tory to vote against triggering article 50, his passionate pro-Europe speech making him an unlikely hero of the remain left. So how bad does he think Brexit could be? ‘A historic disaster,’ he says

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

frog222 · Post by **frog222** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:40 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... an-cartoon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

EDIT Rowson just up.

Willow904 · Post by **Willow904** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:41 pm

RobertSnozers wrote:
Willow904 wrote: In the context of a Brexit debate, arguments against the EU appear to me as arguments to leave. More so when from some one like Corbyn who has often supported leaving in the past. It seems strange to me you can't see that. Corbyn can easily correct this impression. It's not hard to argue for a Norway option, it's really not.
I don't agree with this at all. The majority of people (as it turned out) had significant misgivings about the EU, and while it's fine to play up the benefits during the debate it would be foolish in the extreme to deny or ignore the shortcomings. The view has to be that it's not perfect, and while it's better than the alternative, we should also lobby to improve it. Given that Corbyn is in absolutely no position to block Brexit, why do you think he would make trouble for himself by arguing for something that's not possible? Jack Straw used to be a member of the communist party, but I don't look at all his actions through the prism of hidden Leninism. I do not think it's right to characterise anyone as a Lexiter who points out that the EU has had a privatisation agenda of the kind that we attack the Tories for, and often prevents us from protecting our public services against commercial interests. Especially as Lexiter seems to have become the insult de jour.

It's impossible to argue for a Norway option. Utterly impossible. It would involve arguing that we have to pay pretty much what we used to, and accept total free movement. It would be completely untenable. There would probably be riots. And that's even if we're offered it, which we won't be.

If you don't like the term Lexit, I won't use it, though I've never knowingly applied it as an insult, just stated it wasn't an option I favour. I want to stay in the single market. I happen to view that as perfectly achievable by those who want to achieve it, why would it not be? Given the only alternative now we are leaving the EU is a "hard Brexit" which would leave us isolated and struggling to achieve decent terms of trade, the only way I see of avoiding economic turmoil and job losses is by remaining in the EEA. Which means talking up the benefits of the single market, not the negatives, else how else can a consensus for this least worst option be won?

I feel sometimes that I'm at serious cross purposes with many posters. Am I correct in thinking that some are thinking along the lines that we will somehow be able to stay in the EU after all? I just don't see that. Once we trigger article 50 we will be leaving, surely. Isn't that the whole point of having to respect the referendum? The only question unsettled is our future relationship. Will it be as part of the single market like Norway or outside it, like the rest of the world? I mean I'm not saying in some unforseen scenario that we might not leave the EU after all, but I can't rely on such slim hopes. Everything I comment is based on the assumption that once article 50 is triggered there will be no opportunity to halt the process and even if this proves false, there is no reason to assume a Tory majority government set on a hard Brexit will choose to halt it even if they could.

So remaining in the single market is all I have to hang on to.

If Corbyn does indeed think like you and believe a Norway option unachievable and not worth fighting for, then my sense that he doesn't really represent my preferred position is pretty spot on, isn't it?

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:45 pm

The front entrance of a grand red-brock building, with the words New Place, Southampton
‘Immoral’ Capita offered £200 bonuses to social workers to slash care packages

http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/im ... -packages/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

frog222 · Post by **frog222** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:57 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:The front entrance of a grand red-brock building, with the words New Place, Southampton
‘Immoral’ Capita offered £200 bonuses to social workers to slash care packages

http://www.disabilitynewsservice.com/im ... -packages/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Capita have had a really good week, remembering that they have also been revealed as employing crooks in the EMS ( Electronic Monitoring Service) .

Very good alibi if your tag shows you at home when you(ve actually been out on the town, or even committing villainy !

Post by **PaulfromYorkshire** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 7:58 pm

Willow904 wrote:
RobertSnozers wrote:
Willow904 wrote: In the context of a Brexit debate, arguments against the EU appear to me as arguments to leave. More so when from some one like Corbyn who has often supported leaving in the past. It seems strange to me you can't see that. Corbyn can easily correct this impression. It's not hard to argue for a Norway option, it's really not.
I don't agree with this at all. The majority of people (as it turned out) had significant misgivings about the EU, and while it's fine to play up the benefits during the debate it would be foolish in the extreme to deny or ignore the shortcomings. The view has to be that it's not perfect, and while it's better than the alternative, we should also lobby to improve it. Given that Corbyn is in absolutely no position to block Brexit, why do you think he would make trouble for himself by arguing for something that's not possible? Jack Straw used to be a member of the communist party, but I don't look at all his actions through the prism of hidden Leninism. I do not think it's right to characterise anyone as a Lexiter who points out that the EU has had a privatisation agenda of the kind that we attack the Tories for, and often prevents us from protecting our public services against commercial interests. Especially as Lexiter seems to have become the insult de jour.

It's impossible to argue for a Norway option. Utterly impossible. It would involve arguing that we have to pay pretty much what we used to, and accept total free movement. It would be completely untenable. There would probably be riots. And that's even if we're offered it, which we won't be.
If you don't like the term Lexit, I won't use it, though I've never knowingly applied it as an insult, just stated it wasn't an option I favour. I want to stay in the single market. I happen to view that as perfectly achievable by those who want to achieve it, why would it not be? Given the only alternative now we are leaving the EU is a "hard Brexit" which would leave us isolated and struggling to achieve decent terms of trade, the only way I see of avoiding economic turmoil and job losses is by remaining in the EEA. Which means talking up the benefits of the single market, not the negatives, else how else can a consensus for this least worst option be won?

I feel sometimes that I'm at serious cross purposes with many posters. Am I correct in thinking that some are thinking along the lines that we will somehow be able to stay in the EU after all? I just don't see that. Once we trigger article 50 we will be leaving, surely. Isn't that the whole point of having to respect the referendum? The only question unsettled is our future relationship. Will it be as part of the single market like Norway or outside it, like the rest of the world? I mean I'm not saying in some unforseen scenario that we might not leave the EU after all, but I can't rely on such slim hopes. Everything I comment is based on the assumption that once article 50 is triggered there will be no opportunity to halt the process and even if this proves false, there is no reason to assume a Tory majority government set on a hard Brexit will choose to halt it even if they could.

So remaining in the single market is all I have to hang on to.

If Corbyn does indeed think like you and believe a Norway option unachievable and not worth fighting for, then my sense that he doesn't really represent my preferred position is pretty spot on, isn't it?

It's my belief that Brexit is largely a political, rather than a legal, process. Imagine there was a general election within the next year or so and a clearly Remain PM was elected with a solid mandate for Remain.

Do you really think the EU would say no sod off you triggered Article 50 and it's too late?

Going through the legal process in the courts and Parliament is important because it ensures due diligence and allows scrutiny. But ultimately, the outcome of this will depend on politics IMHO. The Remain camp needs both to make a strong case for the EU, but also to leave space and time for those who voted Leave to find their way back.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 8:05 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:Ken Clarke on Brexit: ‘I’ve never seen anything as mad or chaotic as this’
Last week, the veteran parliamentarian was the only Tory to vote against triggering article 50, his passionate pro-Europe speech making him an unlikely hero of the remain left. So how bad does he think Brexit could be? ‘A historic disaster,’ he says

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... are_btn_tw" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

“I am trying to minimise giving you opportunities to attack Theresa, because there is no one else at the moment capable of being prime minister, and it’s not her fault.”

(cJA bold)
Yeah, that T May soldiering it out for the good of all, ain't she

He must have been disappointed that he was the only Tory to vote against the bill, given the fact that he insists most of them believe he is right that Brexit is bad for the country. He gives a long, uncommitted mmmmmm.
“Obviously I’d prefer others to join me but frankly it didn’t make any difference to me. I realise it puts me in a rather distinct position, which doesn’t bother me.”

(cJA bold)
You're no one's hero and that's a fact

Clarke announced last year that the current parliament will be his last. He must have some personal sadness that he is ending his career with Britain’s withdrawal?
“I go on. I’m usually quite a bouncy, optimistic fellow, and I’ve seen some fair old crises in my time. And somehow, such is the nature of the human condition, things seem to muddle through.”

(cJA bold)
go f***k yourself

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 8:09 pm

Ken Clarke, you're a witless Tory confirming you don't give a shit about country or people

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 8:10 pm

Somebody got a bottle opening for this here 'old crafty hen'? cJA needs something soothing

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 8:14 pm

https://www.theguardian.com/society/201 ... mily-homes" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Older people to get help to downsize to free up family homes
Housing white paper to incentivise building of sheltered accommodation to encourage older people to sell large houses

AngryAsWell · Post by **AngryAsWell** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 8:19 pm

citizenJA wrote:Ken Clarke, you're a witless Tory confirming you don't give a shit about country or people

Actually Ken Clarke is one of the (few) better Tory's. The reason he voted against A50 is because he recognises how bad it will be for the county.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 8:21 pm

PaulfromYorkshire wrote:
Willow904 wrote:I want to stay in the single market. I happen to view that as perfectly achievable by those who want to achieve it, why would it not be? Given the only alternative now we are leaving the EU is a "hard Brexit" which would leave us isolated and struggling to achieve decent terms of trade, the only way I see of avoiding economic turmoil and job losses is by remaining in the EEA. Which means talking up the benefits of the single market, not the negatives, else how else can a consensus for this least worst option be won?

I feel sometimes that I'm at serious cross purposes with many posters. Am I correct in thinking that some are thinking along the lines that we will somehow be able to stay in the EU after all? I just don't see that. Once we trigger article 50 we will be leaving, surely. Isn't that the whole point of having to respect the referendum? The only question unsettled is our future relationship. Will it be as part of the single market like Norway or outside it, like the rest of the world? I mean I'm not saying in some unforseen scenario that we might not leave the EU after all, but I can't rely on such slim hopes. Everything I comment is based on the assumption that once article 50 is triggered there will be no opportunity to halt the process and even if this proves false, there is no reason to assume a Tory majority government set on a hard Brexit will choose to halt it even if they could.

So remaining in the single market is all I have to hang on to.

If Corbyn does indeed think like you and believe a Norway option unachievable and not worth fighting for, then my sense that he doesn't really represent my preferred position is pretty spot on, isn't it?
It's my belief that Brexit is largely a political, rather than a legal, process. Imagine there was a general election within the next year or so and a clearly Remain PM was elected with a solid mandate for Remain.

Do you really think the EU would say no sod off you triggered Article 50 and it's too late?

Going through the legal process in the courts and Parliament is important because it ensures due diligence and allows scrutiny. But ultimately, the outcome of this will depend on politics IMHO. The Remain camp needs both to make a strong case for the EU, but also to leave space and time for those who voted Leave to find their way back.

(cJA edit)

Is the UK valuable to each and every one of the twenty-seven individual member countries they'll accept unanimously a UK government taking back the Article 50 notification?

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Sun 05 Feb, 2017 8:22 pm

AngryAsWell wrote:
citizenJA wrote:Ken Clarke, you're a witless Tory confirming you don't give a shit about country or people
Actually Ken Clarke is one of the (few) better Tory's. The reason he voted against A50 is because he recognises how bad it will be for the county.

He don't sound too unhappy in the article. Apologies if I've misunderstood.