Westminstenders: Run Forrest Run

[RedToothBrush]

Need i say more?

In the absence of a rebuttal, I think Louise thought they were talking about the European Court of Human Right, not the ECJ. Which is why they've avoided responding. They probably - and I'm not making this up - remember a case about a cat preventing a deportation.

And when they say they don't want the UK to be "beholden to foreign judges" what they really mean is that they want their government to be above and not subject to the law.

Another Brexit bonus: non-EU immigration appears to be at an all-time high.

This is genuinely good news for a country with an ageing population & a shortage of folks who want or are able to do certain jobs, but curiously, right wing groups like Migration Watch appear to be very unhappy about it.

No pleasing some people.

what they really mean is that they want their government to be above and not subject to the law.

Yup - this is what is behind all the bollocks about "activist lawyers" last week.

These people (and I am afraid I now include the formerly reasonable Louise in this group) are not interested in democracy and are actively opposed to the rule of law and press freedom.

I thought the story about the cat preventing a deportation was a fabrication, and that the due process hadn't been gone through for the person who was to be deported. But this is typical - make up stories and they stick.

@Peregrina

I thought the story about the cat preventing a deportation was a fabrication, and that the due process hadn't been gone through for the person who was to be deported. But this is typical - make up stories and they stick.

It was. Never held to account of course. So we can back calculate the demise of the BBC by a few years, really. That was 2008 ? Hardly a new thing.

These people (and I am afraid I now include the formerly reasonable Louise in this group) are not interested in democracy and are actively opposed to the rule of law and press freedom.

Because they like the simple life. As noted up thread by their own admission they "don't do detail". Which is a problem if you need solutions to detailed issues.

Louise has already pissed away their (and your) freedom of movement on the altar of their God Brexit. What else have they got to give away that isn't theirs ? Our childrens lives ?

Meanwhile, some elitist 90s music that some may appreciate

That's 90AD to you and I

I’ve not been on here for a whole day. I don’t know if Louise is just trolling or is incredibly privileged but this from yesterday at 14.03 made me jump -

“ So far as quality is concerned, I basically don't care, many can't afford to. Labelling should take care if it anyway, if quality matters to you, buy British, buy organic, if it doesn't (or can't) have a little more money to spare.”

Firstly Louise doesn’t seem to acknowledge that the principle of labelling is under attack.
Secondly, you don’t care about food quality because some can’t afford it? So you don’t care how bad it gets? You don’t care if someone substitutes powdered bleach for baby milk? Really? Would you really say you have a lot of sympathy for those who can’t afford quality?

We have had food standards in England for a very long time, back before the Act of Union created Britain, because as soon as food started to be traded more widely people began to adulterate it in order to make profit. You must have an astonishing faith in human nature to not understand that without the protection of standards, people will exploit others. Typically those without the power or control over supply and production to stop it get shafted by those with. The job of a state is to maintain that state by protecting its people - all of them - because otherwise they will lose the consent to govern.

We have had food standards in England for a very long time, back before the Act of Union created Britain, because as soon as food started to be traded more widely people began to adulterate it in order to make profit. You must have an astonishing faith in human nature to not understand that without the protection of standards, people will exploit others. Typically those without the power or control over supply and production to stop it get shafted by those with. The job of a state is to maintain that state by protecting its people - all of them - because otherwise they will lose the consent to govern.

You'd think the current fad for baking might have prompted a little interest in it's history and the story of bakers and millers adulterating their flour with alum, chalk and goodness knows what.

I’ve not been on here for a whole day. I don’t know if Louise is just trolling or is incredibly privileged but this from yesterday at 14.03 made me jump -

Yes, I was reading it all day and that stuck out to me as well (along with the erosion of worker's rights). "It won't affect me so I don't need to care". And I often read on here that "at least LC comes on to debate and is a reasonable Tory voter".

reasonable Tory voter

That become an oxymoron in 2016.

That become an oxymoron in 2016.

Or just a moron.

SwedishEdith you've quoted me as saying something I didn't say. "It won't affect me so I don't need to care" are your words, not mine.

Louise
Which factual Brexit headlines have the major news sources not covered?

I thought that one of the justifications given by Brexiteers was that Britain - or even England given that’s how things are going (I will greatly mourn the loss of our coworkers and compatriots btw) - can make its own standards without the EU.

I argued all through that time that people needed to use their eyes and ears. The groups advocating Brexit can openly say that they want to rip up standards at the same time. It’s a contradiction in terms. Blatantly, openly, they’ve been planning exploitation and abuse from the start.

I am just listening to that "Briefing Room" programme, thanks for the link .

I lost faith in the ‘reasonable poster’ some months ago, at the time when we could have requested a transition extension. Said poster was alarmed and said something like ‘what are you going to offer someone like me, who really wants Brexit to conclude in December, as compensation for tolerating an extension?’
(I apologise that I can’t recall the exact words but that was the drift.)

I’d thought that not having the economy crash, not having food/medicine shortages and not having utter chaos at ports would be compensation enough, but no.

And then I realised.

While you’re looking at links Louise... this came up on google as almost the first link.

fstjournal.org/features/history-uk-food-law

I did say pretty much that Hester. On the Briefing Room programme I am just listening to John Peet from the Economist has just been talking about an "implementation period" to follow the conclusion of any deal reached. My emotional reaction to that is not positive, but on reflection it seems sensible enough to me.

And there we get to the heart of everything - emotional feelings trumping logical thought processes. Brexit in a sentence.

Interesting Jason that your summation directly contradicts what I just wrote. Interesting reactions to the "Briefing Room" prog from posters on here.

‘Implementation period’??
I thought we were in it...

@DGRossetti

We have had food standards in England for a very long time, back before the Act of Union created Britain, because as soon as food started to be traded more widely people began to adulterate it in order to make profit. You must have an astonishing faith in human nature to not understand that without the protection of standards, people will exploit others. Typically those without the power or control over supply and production to stop it get shafted by those with. The job of a state is to maintain that state by protecting its people - all of them - because otherwise they will lose the consent to govern.

You'd think the current fad for baking might have prompted a little interest in it's history and the story of bakers and millers adulterating their flour with alum, chalk and goodness knows what.

Lots of bakers in DH's family. And butchers. Oh my god the butchers. I've found a batch of newspaper reports dating back to the late 1800s about how they had been both caught selling adulterated dodgy meat and caught out buying it. Grim stuff.

Horse meat burgers will look luxury at this rate.

@QuestionMarkNow

‘Implementation period’?? I thought we were in it...

We’re in the transition period - the implementation period was being mooted because any kind of trade deal will now happen so late in the day that there needs to be a period whereby UK traders can get their head around what they’ll need to do.

Meanwhile, the EU has prepped and is ready to implement customs checks on 1st Jan if necessary.

So I've listened to the "Briefing Room", which is "the BBC being even handed" according to Frankie

The contributors
David Aaronovich, who wrote the the Guardian in the chair, joined by
Katya Adler Europe Editor - BBC
John Peet from the Economist
Anand Menon - UK in a changing Europe
Maddie Thimont Jack - Institute for Government

All 5 contributors absolutely plainly totally Anti-Brexit, check the writings or public statements of any of them.

Result = 28:43 mins of talk about the prospects of a Deal or not. Essentially all uniform in their opinion that the British negotiators are wrong, that the EU will achieve everything it set out to in negotiations and that that end point is desirable.

Zero positivity, each in turn straining every sinew to argue the desirability of locking in the U.K. to EU standards and regulations, EU state aid rules and EU fishing access.