The Politics Thread

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Someone just remind me how long after we sign the easiest deal in history, do we start to bank our £350m savings? I've lost track a bit.

You could do the May trick of when someone asked her "when do we see the £350M a week being spent on the NHS" she answered "we've committed to spending £390M a week on the NHS".

Of course this is their spending plans and has nothing to do with Brexit or the promise on a bus. But obfuscation is the order of the day.

Some of us said from the beginning that it was nothing, zero, absolutely fxck all to do with economics.
It's about where we stand in relationship to the political powers that control us.
It becomes even more laughable when the entire Leaving process is conducted by Remainers, centrists and non elected officials such as Robbins, Barnier Weyand, Barwell, et fxcking cetera.
You can keep on blabbing on about figures on a bus but you'll be wide of the mark, so wide in fact that you'll have your back to it.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

The next bullshit trick will be for May to call, after all, for a second referendum. I guarantee that it will be a binary choice: Her deal or stay in the EU. This has been her plan all along. The choice before us should be this: (if it has to be binary) No Deal leave or Remain; if it can be a three way choice, then: No Deal Leave, May's 'deal', Remain.
But they won't have the balls to put either of those to the public.

[Prufrock]

I actually agree!

Your bit about it being carried out by unelected officials is a bit mad mind, that's what the civil service is for and shining lights that they all are I think it would be a bit beyond our 650 elected rulers to do it all themselves.

I think the last three years has been a great example as to why representative democracy beats referendums but... The only way of getting out of this I think is by another. The current parliamentary maths is impossible and having put it to the public once I think you'd have to do so again.

In/Out Q1. If out, literal no deal or this.

[BWFC_Insane]

I actually agree!

Your bit about it being carried out by unelected officials is a bit mad mind, that's what the civil service is for and shining lights that they all are I think it would be a bit beyond our 650 elected rulers to do it all themselves.

I think the last three years has been a great example as to why representative democracy beats referendums but... The only way of getting out of this I think is by another. The current parliamentary maths is impossible and having put it to the public once I think you'd have to do so again.

In/Out Q1. If out, literal no deal or this.

If you vote in can you still vote on the second question?

[Prufrock]

Yes.

[Worthy4England]

Someone just remind me how long after we sign the easiest deal in history, do we start to bank our £350m savings? I've lost track a bit.

Ah welcome back missed you mate.

Just passing through mate, double checking that the whole will of the people is being delivered and not just the bits of it they now want! Oh! Hope you're keeping very well Hobes.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Yes.

Indeed. Why not.
But they won't because the entire political class are bricking themselves. They're all pussies.

[Hoboh]

My view on this is That, quite cleverly really, everything about leaving the EU has been pushed to the financial hit/none hit we may/may not take. Long getting lost in all this is the point Spots alluded to, there was much much more than this people took into consideration when voting.
All through the laughingly called negotiations all we have heard is the propaganda from the EU negotiators, Goebels would have been proud of them. Then we witnessed and heard the weak at the knee, wailing, remain camp screaming like they'd been shot as they dropped to the floor. Not once did these creatures who were supposed to be doing a deal point out that there would be very serious consequences the other way if these threats came to fruition, why even yesterday some French bloke had the nerve to say sign or you will be ruined!
You do not enter negotiations on all fours with a jar of Vaseline on your back and May and her leaches must take all the blame for this.
The whole dammed thing is an absolute shambles and when the cuckoo's come home to roost the more than likely squealing remainers will have no one but their self to blame for hindering negotiations.
The main rallying call (lie) for the EU was peace in Europe, just wait for their army to take shape and give the US good cause to pull out of NATO, I'm sure the Russians will be entertained by another bout of wailing.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Someone just remind me how long after we sign the easiest deal in history, do we start to bank our £350m savings? I've lost track a bit.

Viscount Melbourne had you down to a tee: "What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass..."

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Your bit about it being carried out by unelected officials is a bit mad mind, that's what the civil service is for...

Not quite so mad. Selmayr (the Beast of Brussels) is openly congratulating himself to his acolytes on having shafted us. Robbins, it transpires, inserted the line that changed a clause, that caused a Minister to resign - and all behind the minister's back, such that said minister was about to sign up to something that had been deliberately altered to dupe him.
I'm not sure that that is quite what civil servants are for...

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Despite their self satisfied, smug, out of touch ways, I don't know of anybody that Trump, May, Macron or Merkel have had bumped off, Mafia style. This contrasts with Mohammad bin Salman, Kim Jong-un, Putin, and President Xi.
I wonder what distinguishes the two sets? Fear, Power, Uncontrolled subordinates, Voters...? What???

[Lost Leopard Spot]

There is a Vast amount of bullshit and propaganda coming from organisations/businesses/departments arising from a pro-Remain sentiment at the moment.
One single example is a TEXT I received from Eurotunnel informing me that in the event of a no deal Brexit I'd better check well in advance whether I could still take my dog abroad!!!
Sorry, what!!!
The regulations regarding pet travel to Europe from the UK are all one way! It's the UK that has set the parameters and checks required. I can take my dog to France on a private yacht with no checks necessary whatsoever. So what the fxck changes with pet travel whether we Stay In, have a May Day, or Crash Out in March? Simple answer, not one Fxcking thing. Stop being dramatic and playing on fears Eurotunnel, et. al.

[Prufrock]

Absolute bollocks^.

Regulation (EU) No 576/2013.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Absolute bollocks^.

Regulation (EU) No 576/2013.

I return that ^ with a total bollocks back at you. The Regulation you quote is concerned with rabies. The UK and Ireland are declared rabies free countries. That's why there are no checks on animals entering France from the UK, only checks on animals entering the UK from France. I know this because I've transported pets across borders and over to ports many many times. I can state categorically that I can land my border collie in Dieppe tomorrow and I need no passport, no checks, no nothing. I've got her passport and follow the worming regime to GET HER BACK INTO THIS COUNTRY if I don't want a quarantine period and all its costs.
So double bollocks back.

[Prufrock]

Jesus wept.

Article 6 sets out the requirements for moving between member states (currently, UK to France). Article 8 sets out a derogation from those requirements. Us being a rabies-free island is presumably the basis for a derogation that the French don't need to check animals going in from the UK. France being part of mainland Europe also presumably is why there is no such derogation going the other way.

However, it won't have escaped your notice that come April, without a deal the UK will no longer be a member state. Then the relevant regulation will be Art 9. The derogation from that regulation is Art 11 which is in completely different terms. From a quick read it isn't clear that it is even possible to have a derrogation for animals over 16 weeks old but in any case we have no derrogation under that Article.

When "Remoaners" talk about the problems of a literal no deal, no planes medicine etc, it's stuff like this they are talking about.

Tl;dr for basically any of these "no deal" points, currently there are requirements both way, but we have a derrogation that means the French don't need to enforce it at the moment. Once we leave that goes and there are new requirements.

It's not an unobvious point broadly, without Brexit, but it really has hammered home how little hampered people feel about having strong opinions on things they simply don't know enough about.

And although that might seem targeted at one particular side (and I do think one side is worse for it) it really isn't.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Jesus wept.

Article 6 sets out the requirements for moving between member states (currently, UK to France). Article 8 sets out a derogation from those requirements. Us being a rabies-free island is presumably the basis for a derogation that the French don't need to check animals going in from the UK. France being part of mainland Europe also presumably is why there is no such derogation going the other way.

However, it won't have escaped your notice that come April, without a deal the UK will no longer be a member state. Then the relevant regulation will be Art 9. The derogation from that regulation is Art 11 which is in completely different terms. From a quick read it isn't clear that it is even possible to have a derrogation for animals over 16 weeks old but in any case we have no derrogation under that Article.

When "Remoaners" talk about the problems of a literal no deal, no planes medicine etc, it's stuff like this they are talking about.

Tl;dr for basically any of these "no deal" points, currently there are requirements both way, but we have a derrogation that means the French don't need to enforce it at the moment. Once we leave that goes and there are new requirements.

It's not an unobvious point broadly, without Brexit, but it really has hammered home how little hampered people feel about having strong opinions on things they simply don't know enough about.

And although that might seem targeted at one particular side (and I do think one side is worse for it) it really isn't.

Jesus wept back...
F fxck sake. Currently France don't do checks, but the UK does. We therefore need passports to get our pets between UK and France. Are you following this, is it quite fxcking clear? We, the UK, presently demand checks on pets.
If we leave with no deal we will still do checks on pets. No change there then. So why are Eurotunnel making a fxcking fuss about a potential check on a pet. Duh! Duh! Duh duh duh!!!

So you see, you don't need a degree in law or a dictionary to look up derrogation, to realise that I actually know more about this subject than you do, because I simply applied common sense...

[Lost Leopard Spot]

There is a Vast amount of bullshit and propaganda coming from organisations/businesses/departments arising from a pro-Remain sentiment at the moment.
One single example is a TEXT I received from Eurotunnel informing me that in the event of a no deal Brexit I'd better check well in advance whether I could still take my dog abroad!!!
Sorry, what!!!
The regulations regarding pet travel to Europe from the UK are all one way! It's the UK that has set the parameters and checks required. I can take my dog to France on a private yacht with no checks necessary whatsoever. So what the fxck changes with pet travel whether we Stay In, have a May Day, or Crash Out in March? Simple answer, not one Fxcking thing. Stop being dramatic and playing on fears Eurotunnel, et. al.

^ Try reading what I wrote, and not what you think I wrote.

[Prufrock]

Jesus wept.

Article 6 sets out the requirements for moving between member states (currently, UK to France). Article 8 sets out a derogation from those requirements. Us being a rabies-free island is presumably the basis for a derogation that the French don't need to check animals going in from the UK. France being part of mainland Europe also presumably is why there is no such derogation going the other way.

However, it won't have escaped your notice that come April, without a deal the UK will no longer be a member state. Then the relevant regulation will be Art 9. The derogation from that regulation is Art 11 which is in completely different terms. From a quick read it isn't clear that it is even possible to have a derrogation for animals over 16 weeks old but in any case we have no derrogation under that Article.

When "Remoaners" talk about the problems of a literal no deal, no planes medicine etc, it's stuff like this they are talking about.

Tl;dr for basically any of these "no deal" points, currently there are requirements both way, but we have a derrogation that means the French don't need to enforce it at the moment. Once we leave that goes and there are new requirements.

It's not an unobvious point broadly, without Brexit, but it really has hammered home how little hampered people feel about having strong opinions on things they simply don't know enough about.

And although that might seem targeted at one particular side (and I do think one side is worse for it) it really isn't.

Jesus wept back...
F fxck sake. Currently France don't do checks, but the UK does. We therefore need passports to get our pets between UK and France. Are you following this, is it quite fxcking clear? We, the UK, presently demand checks on pets.
If we leave with no deal we will still do checks on pets. No change there then. So why are Eurotunnel making a fxcking fuss about a potential check on a pet. Duh! Duh! Duh duh duh!!!

So you see, you don't need a degree in law or a dictionary to look up derrogation, to realise that I actually know more about this subject than you do, because I simply applied common sense...

...because the checks that the UK carries out on animals coming in from France now (requirements in Art 6) are not the same as those France will have to carry out on animals moving from UK to France post-exit (requirements in Art 9). That an animal + paperwork can now get back into the UK from France does not mean the same animal with the same paperwork will be able to get into France post-Brexit.

Hence the text.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Jesus wept.

Article 6 sets out the requirements for moving between member states (currently, UK to France). Article 8 sets out a derogation from those requirements. Us being a rabies-free island is presumably the basis for a derogation that the French don't need to check animals going in from the UK. France being part of mainland Europe also presumably is why there is no such derogation going the other way.

However, it won't have escaped your notice that come April, without a deal the UK will no longer be a member state. Then the relevant regulation will be Art 9. The derogation from that regulation is Art 11 which is in completely different terms. From a quick read it isn't clear that it is even possible to have a derrogation for animals over 16 weeks old but in any case we have no derrogation under that Article.

When "Remoaners" talk about the problems of a literal no deal, no planes medicine etc, it's stuff like this they are talking about.

Tl;dr for basically any of these "no deal" points, currently there are requirements both way, but we have a derrogation that means the French don't need to enforce it at the moment. Once we leave that goes and there are new requirements.

It's not an unobvious point broadly, without Brexit, but it really has hammered home how little hampered people feel about having strong opinions on things they simply don't know enough about.

And although that might seem targeted at one particular side (and I do think one side is worse for it) it really isn't.

Jesus wept back...
F fxck sake. Currently France don't do checks, but the UK does. We therefore need passports to get our pets between UK and France. Are you following this, is it quite fxcking clear? We, the UK, presently demand checks on pets.
If we leave with no deal we will still do checks on pets. No change there then. So why are Eurotunnel making a fxcking fuss about a potential check on a pet. Duh! Duh! Duh duh duh!!!

So you see, you don't need a degree in law or a dictionary to look up derrogation, to realise that I actually know more about this subject than you do, because I simply applied common sense...

...because the checks that the UK carries out on animals coming in from France now (requirements in Art 6) are not the same as those France will have to carry out on animals moving from UK to France post-exit (requirements in Art 9).

Hence the text.

It appears to me that you are being deliberately obstinate. Art 6, Art 9, Art anyfxckingnumber you want. Currently, right now as members, there is no border anywhere within the EU that has more restrictions on pet travel than that between the rest of the EU and the UK. Currently, right now, the regulations regarding pet travel into the EU from outside are no more onerous than those between other EU countries and the UK.
This is because it was us, the UK that drove the regulation. If anybody is the police state, the non-conformist draconian law maker in all this it was us, the UK.
Any warning about pet checks post Brexit are redundant: We already comply to THE MAXIMUM EXTENT POSSIBLE UNDER EU REGULATIONS with pet checks. Eurotunnel are not informing pet owners of anything new. It's political scaremongering. Which was my original point.
So, Sherlock, what is it that Eurotunnel will do differently in the case of a no deal Brexit? Shoot pets on sight? Not allow them in cars? Demand they can follow commands in three languages?

[BWFC_Insane]

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/pet-travel- ... ter-brexit

This sets out very clearly the practical situation for pet travel if there is no deal.

Basically you will require a rabies vaccination, a blood test from an EU approved testing lab proving set vaccine has worked, a health certificate from your vet no more than 10 days before intended travel.