BS: Brexit & other UK political topics

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 01:28 PM

Absolutely, Mr Red. I have nothing against change. Some of my best results in life have come though drastic change. But change for changes sake or, even worse, change when you have no idea what you are changing to is a nightmare.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Mr Red
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 10:27 AM

but you wording suggest that you seem to think it is only being practised by the UK side of the negotiations.

Where in the UK might St Petersberg be?

they was deliberately vague but there is no doubt it refers to the politically oriented even if there is no nationality stated or (& I can be the authority on that point) ............ implied.
It has been inferred though. And other than my words, I am not in control of that.

There is no doubt that Europe has something to lose by not securing a deal. But the UK has more to lose. So playing my "life ain't binary" card, I am of the opinion that the brinkmanship is more irresponsible when the loss is the greater.

Change costs money, and this change will cost, and payback is ill-defined. Making deals at the last minute means dependent systems/infrastructure will be formulated in a hurry, and mistakes will be made. Which is why change costs more money. Which is why the UK has more to lose.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 10:11 AM

So,if we can no longer return failed asylum seekers to France from 1 January, we will need to repatriate them to their homes, which is also an option. BBC: Failed asylum seekers
While this is more difficult than just returning them to France, it does stop them immediately re-joining the camps at Calais and trying again.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 06:43 AM

I am happy to have facts quoted and sources credited, Nigel. Let us hope semantics do not enter into the argument when meanings are obvious either. I'm not sure how your quote from the Guardian answers anything though. After the end of this year we will have no right to send anyone entering this country illegally back to their country of EU entry. I think DMcG's point about this ruling being against what some leavers voted for is still valid.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: DMcG
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 06:06 AM

Firstly, of course I have no objection to copying my post as an introduction to this thread.

I find it a bit of a stretch to imagine many people voting to leave because they were dismayed of what was happening to refugees and migrants in France and thought we should be treating them here and better. So that seems to be rather beside the original issue, which was the loss of the right to send such people who get to the UK back to the EU countries. Even last night on Newsnight one of the Conservative MPs for an area in Kent - I forget which - was stressing the importance of the Dublin Agreement.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 05:43 AM

As a partial answer to the usual question of why families are risking crossing the English Channel, this quote:

Though it is hard to grasp at first sight why any family would sleep in a wood rather than apply for asylum in France, the families and the charities who support them say the official accommodation centres are dirty, frightening and inappropriate for vulnerable families.
Armed police try to get families on to buses, tearing up tents. After a certain number of days families must apply to stay in France, and many do not want to do that.
One father told Fallowfield: “If the French would give us even basic support, I would go to the accommodation centre for my children’s sake. But they treat us like animals.”
Like other families here, he sees trying to reach the UK as his only option. “I have destroyed my life for my children to have a better future. I don’t want my kids to grow up where someone can brainwash them and make them kill for a living. Islamic State came to our country and that’s why I have come to this shit place. It’s the hardest job in the world being a parent.”
From The Guardian

So maybe they are still refugees, fleeing an oppressive regime. Do we really want to remain part of a Union with such a regime?

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 05:30 AM

Mr Red:
You're probably right about 'brinkmanship', but you wording suggest that you seem to think it is only being practised by the UK side of the negotiations.

Dave the Gnome:
Interesting to see that the original quote (whatever its unstated origin) mentions refugees and migrants . It seems someone at least accepts that not all those arriving are actually 'refugees'.

Maybe this time around we will see a discussion based more on facts than on suppositions. We can but hope.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Mr Red
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 03:36 AM

Goggle Ads posted "the 10 best Casinos on line" at the top of this thread. Goggle knows everything about us, so what are they telling us this time?

I posit they are whispering Brinkmanship - the kind that doesn't have a contingency plan in case of rare but inevitable far reaching serious interventions.

And that intervention happened like shit does, when you leave things to the last minute.

Did they "beware what you wish for"? we have less than 6 months to find out what they** wished for. The bet is we will get just that. Then we will habituate to the new normal, and we will blame Brexshit and they will blame COVID and everyone will think they are correct.

**we should be obvious but who are they ? Fakebook & St Petersberg come into that equation IMNSHO.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 03:32 AM

I think there is already a thread on the virus, Dick. It is a worldwide issue after all.

Subject: RE: BS: Brexit
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 03:14 AM

why?other disasters, covid 19?
Iwas cycling along yesterday, and stopped to say hello to a walker who used to play trad music, he got on the subject of covid as soon as he could, quote
the trouble began when they restricted congregations of churches t less than 50, it is the house of god, god is all powerful, you are safe inthe house of god unless you are an atheist or communist.
the alternative round here is to talk to sheep, the conversation is equally perplexing

Subject: BS: Brexit
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 Aug 20 - 02:10 AM

As there has been none of the regular infighting, circular arguments or abuse on the UK Labour party thread for weeks now and I have had no objection from the moderation team about starting new political threads I think it is safe to assume the issues have been resolved.

I have copied DMcG's post to kick this one off. Hope that's OK, Dave.

Subject: RE: BS: Important issues re UK Labour Party
From: DMcG - PM
Date: 20 Aug 20 - 01:08 PM

Nothing to do with Labour again: another Brexit consequence.

"EU negotiators have rejected a British request for a migration pact that would allow the government to return asylum seekers to other European countries.

When the Brexit transition period expires on 31 December, the government will lose the right to transfer refugees and migrants to the EU country in which they arrived, a cornerstone of the European asylum system known as the Dublin regulation."

Bit of a shame for those concerned about "all these illegal immigrants", I suspect.

I agree. Brexit is nearly on us and while it is just one of the many failings of the Tory government, it does deserve a thread of its own. I may start another on the other disasters.

---

Nope. This one can run because it has been quieter lately, but several others intended to cause chaos are being thinned out. Mudcat is a music site and the amount of political fighting in the BS threads from the general direction of the UK and environs is too disruptive to much of the membership who come here for music. ---mudelf