What is that "mate" of mine Sadiq Khan trying to achieve ?

 

You lost you demented little cretin, get over it and concentrate on your job you terrorist sympathiser.

Edited March 6, 20215 yr by Casino

Just now, Spider said:

Most folk just read the headlines in the Mail and make their minds up there

It's a massive problem that we have newpaper media owners who have the power to decide our elections. I know Blair was criticised for working with Murdoch but honestly, without that support Labour wouldn't have won three elections.

There are also people in parties who have a range of views, it's not just one mass hive mind, and in some ways there are a lot of crossover between say a One Nationer and a Moderate Labourite, but on certain fundamentals there is slight distance.

But that is also difficult for folks to understand if they think it's like supporting a football team.

1 hour ago, Mounts Kipper said:

The public don’t trust Labour to be tough on the EU, Brexit is all but done except the NI issue, to say that Brexit has been disastrous is disingenuous, only outstanding issue is NI and EU using it as a tool to punish UK for leaving and are applying punitive and unnecessarily stringent measures on imports to NI. 

Tory government means nothing will get sorted and we will continue to be in this limbo threatening to break international law and heading towards a trade war. Great🤦

3 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

Tory government means nothing will get sorted and we will continue to be in this limbo threatening to break international law and heading towards a trade war. Great🤦

So be it. If that’s the way the EU want to play it, would be foolish if in the current situation they chose that route. 

19 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

Tory government means nothing will get sorted and we will continue to be in this limbo threatening to break international law and heading towards a trade war. Great🤦

It is what it is

23 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

So be it. If that’s the way the EU want to play it, would be foolish if in the current situation they chose that route. 

We chose this route. You need to reflect honestly about what has happened. We left the EU customs union and single market (our choice). We agreed a great exit deal (our words). We said Northern Ireland would be sorted by technology with no compromise on the GFA (our lie) and we said we would prosper outside the union (no sign that is even vaguely the case). At what point are you going to accept this is our doing and stop blaming the EU? 

43 minutes ago, Not in Crawley said:

It's a massive problem that we have newpaper media owners who have the power to decide our elections. I know Blair was criticised for working with Murdoch but honestly, without that support Labour wouldn't have won three elections.

There are also people in parties who have a range of views, it's not just one mass hive mind, and in some ways there are a lot of crossover between say a One Nationer and a Moderate Labourite, but on certain fundamentals there is slight distance.

But that is also difficult for folks to understand if they think it's like supporting a football team.

All fair points and a lot can happen in the next two years. There’s always the possibility that fans of a particular team, fed up with their own, will follow a neutral team (using your analogy)

We could then be in coalition territory.

 

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

We chose this route. You need to reflect honestly about what has happened. We left the EU customs union and single market (our choice). We agreed a great exit deal (our words). We said Northern Ireland would be sorted by technology with no compromise on the GFA (our lie) and we said we would prosper outside the union (no sign that is even vaguely the case). At what point are you going to accept this is our doing and stop blaming the EU? 

It is the EU who aren’t acting in good faith in terms of movement of goods  from UK to NI (UK) It’s clearly being used as a tool for diversion of trade, that is against the rules of the protocol, whether we trigger article 16 or choose to put bill through parliament to solve the issue is up to our government to decide and I’m supportive of whichever course of action they decide to follow.  

19 minutes ago, BobyBrno said:

All fair points and a lot can happen in the next two years. There’s always the possibility that fans of a particular team, fed up with their own, will follow a neutral team (using your analogy)

We could then be in coalition territory.

 

 

 

 

A coalition might not be a bad thing.

Also first past the post needs looking at.

I think I remember reading that there is only us and Belarus that still have it in Europe. 

Maybe PR would encourage more grown up government and avoid flip flopping one way or another.

12 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

It is the EU who aren’t acting in good faith in terms of movement of goods  from UK to NI (UK) It’s clearly being used as a tool for diversion of trade, that is against the rules of the protocol, whether we trigger article 16 or choose to put bill through parliament to solve the issue is up to our government to decide and I’m supportive of whichever course of action they decide to follow.  

We agreed and signed a deal, that is what the EU are sticking with and have offered some modifications to help make the protocol more acceptable to all parties. 

14 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

It is the EU who aren’t acting in good faith in terms of movement of goods  from UK to NI (UK) It’s clearly being used as a tool for diversion of trade, that is against the rules of the protocol, whether we trigger article 16 or choose to put bill through parliament to solve the issue is up to our government to decide and I’m supportive of whichever course of action they decide to follow.  

They are only acting in bad faith, if bad faith means 'doing what both sides agreed on'.

19 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

It is the EU who aren’t acting in good faith in terms of movement of goods  from UK to NI (UK) It’s clearly being used as a tool for diversion of trade, that is against the rules of the protocol, whether we trigger article 16 or choose to put bill through parliament to solve the issue is up to our government to decide and I’m supportive of whichever course of action they decide to follow.  

The EU are doing what they said they would

We aren’t.

Its really that simple

2 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

We agreed and signed a deal, that is what the EU are sticking with and have offered some modifications to help make the protocol more acceptable to all parties. 

You can parrot the EU line all you like, fact of the matter they are diverting trade & knowingly for the benefit of EU businesses and in a clear contravention of the rules. 

2 minutes ago, ZiggyStardust said:

They are only acting in bad faith, if bad faith means 'doing what both sides agreed on'.

Diversion of trade is against the rules, so they are clearly acting in bad faith. 

24 minutes ago, mickbrown said:

A coalition might not be a bad thing.

Also first past the post needs looking at.

I think I remember reading that there is only us and Belarus that still have it in Europe. 

Maybe PR would encourage more grown up government and avoid flip flopping one way or another.

Yep. The last one was a disaster for the Lib Dems but it doesn’t mean it would be again in the current circumstances. 

1 hour ago, Not in Crawley said:

It's pretty easy to access policies from both parties if you want to know what parties stand for.

It clear people aren't reading them.

Moreover, the Labour policy isn't high tax, but then again, its easier to just spout things that aren't true.

I rejoined the Labour party a few months ago after many years away (stopped after the election of Ed Miliband as leader in annoyance at the Union stitch up) it has allowed me to be part of the 2022 Labour Policy Forum, which is debates, discussion and suggestions that are then taken forward by policy groups. It'll be interesting to see what comes out. Every major party is a broad church and just as One Nation Conservatives can't stand their ERG brethren, I'm not adverse at being called at Red Tory by some of the slightly more left of the party and it good that more people are coming back to challenge some of the more ardent Momentum lot who can't take over the debate if we can take this golden opportunity at getting back in power and turning this old tropes of high tax out of the narrative.

I believe Starmer - whilst not perfect - has done a good job of pulling the Labour party back from the Corybn brink, getting the structures back in place (no mean feat given the fucking shambles it had become) and now turning outwards to speak to the public, people underestimate what needed doing internally.

So, it's all out there, but there is still a job about getting people to.focus on key policies such as more power to regions, fair taxation and better localised services.

But for now l'll see the country struggle through whilst the Tories go through another family dispute.

 

My point is that Labour needs a campaign to go out and convince people who did not vote for them last time to do so next time. 
They have to show why Starmer is worth voting for , and being not as bad as Boris won't do it IMO. 
The fact that I can go out and research the policies is not good enough. What are the 3-4 key areas they want to focus on and the 3-4 key messages in those areas ? The electorate seems to respond to sound bites 'get Brexit done' 'Brexit means Brexit' etc etc what have been the Labour equivalents in last couple of years ?

Reading your note it seems that is starting to happen but the sooner it happens the more impact it has as people will understand what the party stands for. It will be tough as the Press mainly support the Tories.

Edited July 17, 20223 yr by Ani

23 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

You can parrot the EU line all you like, fact of the matter they are diverting trade & knowingly for the benefit of EU businesses and in a clear contravention of the rules. 

Brexit was incompatible with Northern Ireland, that was clear from the outset and was ignored by brexiteers. We agreed a deal and we cannot change that unilaterally as that would be bad faith.

3 hours ago, Mounts Kipper said:

There in lies the problem, the solution is always to give out more money to folk and tax the middle class more, the voting public aren’t fools and won’t vote for that, however I do like Starmers pledge to cost everything and publish it in his manifesto, if his plan looks workable then that’s the key for Labour to get back in power. Sadly Labour can’t be trusted on Brexit so that’s a major vote loser for them. 

The problem with a fully costed manifesto which Labour did produce for last election btw is that it has to be based on assumptions and by definition they get challenged.

Simple Analogy - I could produce a fully costed plan for an away trip to London that has a set of assumptions that makes it seem reasonable. So say 2 beers on way down, 2 before game, match tickets and train tickets so about £100. Let's be honest it would be nearer £200 once taxis , extra beer, food and unaccounted for shit are included.

2 minutes ago, Ani said:

The problem with a fully costed manifesto which Labour did produce for last election btw is that it has to be based on assumptions and by definition they get challenged.

Simple Analogy - I could produce a fully costed plan for an away trip to London that has a set of assumptions that makes it seem reasonable. So say 2 beers on way down, 2 before game, match tickets and train tickets so about £100. Let's be honest it would be nearer £200 once taxis , extra beer, food and unaccounted for shit are included.

You aren’t held to account for breaking your budget!! 🤣

13 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

Brexit was incompatible with Northern Ireland, that was clear from the outset and was ignored by brexiteers. We agreed a deal and we cannot change that unilaterally as that would be bad faith.

We can change it. It’s very clear that the agreement allows change. Not sure why you think we can’t change it. 

Article 16 of the protocol sets out the process for taking unilateral "safeguard" measures if either the EU or UK concludes that the deal is leading to serious practical problems or causing diversion of trade.

 

 

Edited July 17, 20223 yr by Mounts Kipper

2 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Article 16 of the protocol sets out the process for taking unilateral "safeguard" measures if either the EU or UK concludes that the deal is leading to serious practical problems or causing diversion of trade.

 

 

What is our proposed solution ? ( I genuinely do not know) 

5 minutes ago, Ani said:

What is our proposed solution ? ( I genuinely do not know) 

Government have outlined a green Lane, red Lane system, not had a look in detail but, green Lane to NI less checks and paperwork, Red Lane for good to Eire subject to standard customs declaration.  As an example our company supplied care home based in NI and and that’s final destination for the goods however we have to provide all paperwork, commodity codes etc same as if the goods were being imported to Eire. That can’t be the agreed process going forward as it’s utterly crazy to have to supply all info for UK to NI shipments. 

23 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

We can change it. It’s very clear that the agreement allows change. Not sure why you think we can’t change it. 

Article 16 of the protocol sets out the process for taking unilateral "safeguard" measures if either the EU or UK concludes that the deal is leading to serious practical problems or causing diversion of trade.

 

 

Why aren't we invoking Article 16 then?

39 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Government have outlined a green Lane, red Lane system, not had a look in detail but, green Lane to NI less checks and paperwork, Red Lane for good to Eire subject to standard customs declaration.  As an example our company supplied care home based in NI and and that’s final destination for the goods however we have to provide all paperwork, commodity codes etc same as if the goods were being imported to Eire. That can’t be the agreed process going forward as it’s utterly crazy to have to supply all info for UK to NI shipments. 

Does this not imply a border between the NI and Eire. And if so is that compatible with GFA. 

8 minutes ago, Nowack said:

Does this not imply a border between the NI and Eire. And if so is that compatible with GFA. 

There can’t be a hard border, think even BJ government know that and any plan would have to abide by the GFA. 

1 hour ago, Mounts Kipper said:

We can change it. It’s very clear that the agreement allows change. Not sure why you think we can’t change it. 

Article 16 of the protocol sets out the process for taking unilateral "safeguard" measures if either the EU or UK concludes that the deal is leading to serious practical problems or causing diversion of trade.

 

 

We can change it unilaterally but it risks retaliatory action because it is unlawful. I’m not sure why you can’t understand that. We are not holding all the cards.