Brexit mega thread part 8: platinum jubilee edition

[ChiswickFlo]

New thread

I had to link to the PDF - the desire to correct "obligating" to "obliging" was too powerful ....

Mind you, most Brexiteers I've met struggle with English too.(And their history and science aren't too grand either).

Michael Hesseltine
The consequences of Boris Johnson and Brexit are coming home to roost
In a week of economic and political chaos, the British people are realising they have been deceived
twitter.com/BremainInSpain/status/1538074482035900416?t=8-eJZy216GKYdwPGeeG1iA&s=19

www.ft.com/content/d95a0712-6ad0-4a18-858b-dffd8fce7dea

I reject the premise that in leaving the EU we have imperilled the things you cherish. We don't need to be a member of that political organisation to do many of those things, indeed I'd suggest lots of them can be done better if we aren't.

Before Brexit happened I would have been happy with a Norway style deal. Since, the reaction of remainers/rejoiners has mad this a whole lot harder to accept. I don't want free movement back though having begun work to replace it.

So no, I wouldn't be happy with semi-rejoin, if that return of free movement was all it meant. If there were other compensatory benefits, like joining EFTA for example, I'd be up for that and I'd be prepared to accept free movement as an undesirable consequence. I really, really don't like it and I'd much rather what we have now, but I'd accept it if a referendum approved it.

How would I tackle recession you ask? Since a recession is 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth and economic growth is killing the planet we all have to live on, I basically wouldn't tackle it, certainly not for now. The economy getting smaller should be welcomed as a sign we are taking better care of our world. Number 1 lesson from COVID for me = "stop buying shit, now". What needs to happen IMO is an end to incentivisng people to borrow money to buy things they otherwise couldn't afford.

From twitter; "When pushed on Brexit benefits the only answer is always, "We're now free to make our own trade deals". Much as a divorced dad in a bedsit is now free to date Beyonce."

And, obviously, xenophobia...

@LouiseCollins28

While YOU may be able to just buy smaller amounts of stuff, and "not buy shit", there are huge numbers of people not so fortunate. These people are on benefits or living on the breadline, where losing a job, or having handle inflation will be a source of despair. A recession will be the source of so many people living in despair, your breezy "I'll stop buying shit now" is insulting

It sounds like you are willing to fight to the last drop of everyone else's blood

^stop buying shit, now"

Don't worry, you can get it for free from our rivers and waterways.

It's entirely possible to tune people (like some posters here) out of the discussion (such as it is) and lose no vital information.

As with the whole USB charging debacle, no one gives two shits what any Brexiteer thinks.

Does anyone know where all the nectarines have gone?
I love them but cannot find any them anywhere :( (I craved them when pg with ds2)
Constantly oos at both ocado and morrisons and none at my local fruit and veg place either.
Also...he found block butter at <£2 today which I count as a win atm :(

@SerendipityJane - I do the same

Block butter at Lidl is £1.75/500g

I got some for £1.90

....that was on 5 June: I'll check what it is today

Since a recession is 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth and economic growth is killing the planet we all have to live on, I basically wouldn't tackle it, certainly not for now

@LouiseCollins28 you can certainly do better than this!

PSA: I can confirm that Lidl butter is still £1.75 per 500g block of unsalted butter

.

The problem with thinking how great it is that people are not able to buy 'stuff' because of Brexit is that a lot of the stuff many people won't be able to buy are things like food and heat for their homes. It's the callousness of Brexiters in a nutshell.

Yes, we need to change the way we look after our planet. But so far I haven't seen any sign of our government doing anything that will achieve that: allowing neonicotinoids, increased pollution of our rivers and seas and impending lower standards for food safety are all either happening or in the pipeline. So much for Brexit helping to save the planet from our consumerism.

I note the mention of freedom of movement (conveniently ommitting 'of labour' and I suspect that is what it is really all about.

There's no joined up thinking with Brexshitteers. "We must stop climate change", goes well with "let's stop trading with our nearest neighbours and trade with Australia instead". Particularly when the Australia deal is going to cause immeasurable damage to our own farming.

Bunch of deluded idiots...

Anyway, for the lols...

How would I tackle recession you ask? Since a recession is 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth and economic growth is killing the planet we all have to live on, I basically wouldn't tackle it, certainly not for now. The economy getting smaller should be welcomed as a sign we are taking better care of our world

The Green party would say you are crazy.

What about changing growth, rather than curtail it? changes to energy efficiency, moves to more renewables, hydrogen tech.... all can contribute to growth without wrecking the planet.
You seem to want folk at the bottom to pay the price yet again.

Going back in time seems to be a trait for brexitiers.

Since we've had 0 GE votes yet since we actually left it's a bit early to tell tbh. I'm not unhappy though.

I'm not unhappy though.

This is not exactly a ringing endorsement for those easiest deals in history, is it?

I like parties to be honest about what they want. If Labour ultimately wants to rejoin then they should say that. With that said, those proposals are surprisingly sensible, I agree.

From Labour's POV making it clear that Labour won't apply to rejoin during a first term is very clever messaging and could well work for them. It means that people could back them expecting nothing to happen to overturn Brexit, but the comittment doesn't actually say that, it says "apply to rejoin", which doesn't preclude giving all manner of signals to negotiating partners that "rejoin" is what they really want.

2 and 3 are generally sensible too. Seeking more cooperation in specific areas is where one of the electoral "gaps" currently is and its similar with seeking a closer trading relationship overall. Whether those proposals will be electorally successful for Labour I can't tell you. I can tell you I wouldn't be supporting them in the sense of voting for them.

Essentially Labour wants to reestablish an alternative law making power base to rely upon when it doesn't hold the keys to No. 10. That's what the EU is about for them. Much of the sorrow over lost rights and lost opportunities is performative (from them, not for individuals who I'm sure have been genuinely affected). What their MEPs were crying over was their lost power base.

@LouiseCollins28 As far as i can make out, the vast majority of EU "law" was on trade and we had some very wide ranging opt outs.

I'm sure all MEPs miss the Strasbourg gravy train.

I'm at a loss to the Labour power base stuff.... the UK only ever had around 73 MEPs, Labour only had 10 in 2019.

Essentially Labour wants to reestablish an alternative law making power base to rely upon when it doesn't hold the keys to No. 10. That's what the EU is about for them

Labour was and still is genuinely divided on Brexit. As were/are many actual and potential Labour voters.

However, establishing an alternative power base to No 10 to protect employment, consumer, citizen, and environmental rights etc was exactly what the EU was about for me.

All my fears and more coming to fruition now showing I was right to want Brussels as a counterweight to the vested self interest of Tories in power.

www.theguardian.com/technology/2022/jun/17/uk-plan-to-scrap-cookie-consent-boxes-will-make-it-easier-to-spy-on-web-users

The outcome of Aaron Banks defamation suit against reporter Carole Cadwalladr was reported in The Observer today. He sued over a Ted Talk Cadwalladr gave where she suggested Banks had lied about (not) meeting Russian govt officials ahead of the Brexit referendum.

Turns out, thanks to his lawsuit, the judge has ruled that in fact Banks did have multiple meetings both before and immediately after the referendum. More too in that the judge said this was probably not the full extent of his meetings with Russian officials with "reasonable grounds to believe numerous other meetings occurred".

So, seems that yes the Russians/ Putin were trying to / did influence the UK to leave the EU with Brexit a strategic Russian goal to weaken both. Really, none of this is rocket science and at the time all you had to do was to look at who was supporting which position to realise which way to vote.

Interesting too how nothing of this court case is being reported on by any other papers. Johnson and the Tories just wanting any reminders of their links to Russia, Russian money, Russian oligarchs swept under a carpet of Johnson photo ops in Ukraine. 🙄

www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Banks-v-Cadwalladr-130622-Judgment.pdf