Brexit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by ram View Post
    EU to control our armed forces 1st Nov. 2019. when we leave.

    Originally posted by Macromia View Post
    Seriously, there is no way that a claim of that sort could possibly be true and are blatantly false).
    Originally posted by Stevedh View Post
    Do people really fall for this rubbish.
    I resent being called a liar. Misinformed would be a better phase, if i was misinformed, but the proof is in this post.. Deal with it.

    Are you going to write to Lord James of Blackheath ( Speaking About The EU Army Plan In The House Of Lords on 8th Sept 2019 ) that he too is a liar.


    See .. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeI7khz6TKE

    Are you going to write to Andrea Jenkyns who has been Conservative MP for Morley and Outwood since 2015 and is a member of the Select Committee on Exiting the European Union that she too is a liar.
    see https://brexitcentral.com/brexit-bri...ce-structures/

    Suggest you both write to the above, and not me, to call them liars.

    simon.beanmbe only made an apology about his facebook video, changing his words from Letters received , to Details received, and not a retraction of his video.



    Comment


      Lord James speech was actually on 6th September, not the 8th.
      You can't call him a liar, because all he is doing is asking a series of questions.

      Happy to confirm that he's wrong (and was ignored in the debate in which he raised it).

      Andrea Jenkins is also wrong - she usually is.
      However, her point relates to Theresa May's withdrawal agreement, which is a bit of a dead duck,
      When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
      Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

      Comment


        Originally posted by ram View Post
        I resent being called a liar.
        But you haven't been called a liar (not in any post I've seen recently anyway).

        In post #611 I said that claims that have been passed around about the Lisbon Treaty are blatantly false.
        Originally posted by Macromia View Post
        Seriously, there is no way that a claim of that sort could possibly be true (then again, people apparently can't tell that the claims about the Lisbon Treaty that were doing the rounds at one point, and still crop up occasionally, are blatantly false).
        You have misquoted this in your most recent post (#616) by cutting out a section and presenting the beginning and end of a much longer sentence as if it was a direct quote.
        If done intentionally in order to alter the meaning of what I said, that would be dishonest.

        Also, in reference to the claim that you made regarding claims about the EU being lies (in post #609), I made a somewhat tongue in cheek comment stating that your claims were all lies.
        Originally posted by ram View Post
        ( So much for the " EU will make us prosperous - lies, all lies ) -- look it up.
        Originally posted by Macromia View Post
        I looked it up, and your claims are indeed all lies.
        This is saying that the claims that you posted are lies, you are not necessarily intentionally lying, but you are repeating lies.




        Originally posted by ram View Post
        Misinformed would be a better phase, if i was misinformed, but the proof is in this post.. Deal with it.
        You are misinformed, and in post #616 all you have 'proven' is that members of parliament can (either knowingly or unwittingly) also repeat misinformation - something that very few people would have doubted.

        Think about it. If full control of the British Army was handed over to the EU by a government deal, that would be the end of the Conservative party. They are currently relying on support from 'Leave' supporters who (mistakenly) think that Brexit means that the government "takes back control" of the UK - giving away control of all UK defences throw away that support.
        The main reason why the government is desperately trying to force through Brexit on 31st October, is that Conservative party members think that it will be the end of the Conservative party if the UK doesn't leave the UK on that date. In fact, Conservative party members overwhelmingly support leaving the EU on 31st October 2019 even if it results in severe economic damage to the UK, or the break-up of the UK. A majority apparently even want to see Brexit happen if it means the end of the Conservative party:
        https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics...party-destroye



        Although you are mistaken, I do respect the fact that you have at least tried to provide reasons for leaving the EU.
        You have been. lied to - the things that you are saying that you want to avoid were never going to happen in the first place.

        Comment


          More laughable project fear:
          If there is a no-deal Brexit pet owners could also face a four-month wait before travelling.

          Comment


            Wonderful! It really is hilarious - I cannot wait to see what they come up with as we move through October...
            Unshackled by the chains of idle vanity, A modest manatee, that's me

            Comment


              Has anyone done a scare story about supplies of Guinness yet?
              (Posted from the pub).

              Comment


                Originally posted by JK0 View Post
                More laughable project fear:
                Originally posted by islandgirl View Post
                Wonderful! It really is hilarious - I cannot wait to see what they come up with as we move through October...
                Why is it apparently so difficult to understand that 'the media' always exaggerate the potential effects of things like this in order to make it into a story that actually 'grabs' peoples attention?

                In this case, the story linked by JKO is neither "laughable" or "project fear", it highlights a genuine potential problem of leaving the EU on 31st October 2019 without any deal, albeit a minor one that should be relatively easy for officials in the UK and Ireland/ The EU to overcome - IF they actually find the time to address the issue before we leave the EU.

                Someone (possibly even someone in the civil service who is working on ensuring that leaving the EU is as smooth a transition as possible) has realised that this problem exists, and someone in the media has found out and ran with a story that highlights the more extreme potential consequences of inaction.
                It may be that no one in the civil service/ government of the UK or any EU country has even considered this potential problem for blind people who regularly cross the Irish border, and it has only been highlighted because someone who it will affect has looked into what a no deal will mean for them.

                There will be numerous other minor issues, things that might affect very people, that will need changes in legislation, or existing processes, when we leave the EU - and many of these will not have been addressed before we leave (if we leave the EU on 31st October). Many might not even have been considered. No doubt we will hear of many such issues both before, and after 31st October.

                Thinking that simply writing these issues (however small) off as "project fear" is acceptable is what is laughable - it demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of how complex making arrangements to leave the EU without negatively affecting people's lives actually is.
                I expect that you both consider this to be "laughable", or "hilarious", because you think that it should be very easy to alter laws/ procedures to allow people with guide dogs to cross the Irish border wherever, and whenever, they like. Perhaps you don't even think that there should be any restrictions on crossing international borders with guide dogs? The reality is that laws and regulations are in place even for seemingly unimportant things like this - ensuring that goods can move freely across borders when accordance with regulations needs to be checked and tariffs have to be paid is far more complex.



                The more extreme claims made about Brexit can almost always instantly be disregarded, regardless of who makes them (and this applies just as much to claims that the UK will immediately proper and agree favourable trade deals with countries outside of the EU as it does to claims that we will require war time like rationing of food and drugs).
                On the other hand, disregarding any, and all, claims about potential problems as "project fear" really is ridiculous and does nothing more that demonstrate cognitive dissonance and a real lack of any understanding.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Macromia View Post

                  Thinking that simply writing these issues (however small) off as "project fear" is acceptable is what is laughable
                  OMG. You are serious?

                  Comment


                    Yes, JKO, completely serious.

                    The BBC article that you linked highlights an issue that has probably been given very little thought. Legally, pets (which apparently also includes guide dogs) can only enter the EU through approved points of entry if they come from countries that are considered to be "unlisted third countries" under the EU pet passport scheme.

                    Nowhere in the article does it suggest that this is going to have a catastrophic effect on the UK (or the people who live here), or that it will be impossible for arrangements to be made relatively quickly to allow guide dogs to be taken across the Irish border. It has also not been suggested that Brexit can't possibly go ahead because there will be too many 'major issues' like this (THAT would be "project fear")

                    It is, however, a fact that there will be issues like this that will require agreements to be made, or will either (1) severely inconvenience a number of people; or (2) result in them breaking laws until arrangements are put into place (it may well be that both the UK and Irish governments simply choose to ignore the law in this situation, and other similar minor problems, until suitable arrangements are put into place, because it will be almost impossible to police effectively).

                    Leaving the EU, especially leaving the EU without any sort of deal agreed, WILL result in numerous very minor issues that will affect only a fairly small percentage of the British and Irish populations (in addition to the more significant issues regarding trade, tariffs, the right to live and work in the UK/EU, etc. that will affect larger numbers of people).

                    ALL of these issues will need to be considered and have 'fixes' put in to place.
                    Highlighting genuine issues, even those that will affect relatively few people, is not "project fear" - because these issues will need to be addressed.

                    Your attitude seems to be "It won't affect me, so it's all rubbish intended to make people scared of Brexit." That is an extremely selfish attitude.

                    Comment


                      The lady doth protest too much, methinks
                      Unshackled by the chains of idle vanity, A modest manatee, that's me

                      Comment


                        Let's add another couple of inevitable issues.

                        Any processed or manufactured goods sold in the EU have to have an address in the EU on the packaging or documentation.
                        That goes from fruit gums to aircraft (via shampoo, pasties and everything else that isn't a raw ingredient).

                        At the moment, we're in the EU, so a UK address is fine.
                        After October 31st (or whenever) it isn't, so all UK companies need an address within the EU where legal notices can be served and post received).
                        Have a look at your groceries next time you're shopping, see how much packaging will need to be changed (even if the company has managed to set up a European presence).
                        Oh, and UK regulations will require a UK address post brexit (once there's enough time to process the necessary legislation to remove all of the EU references).

                        Then again, if you're selling organic food, you need to register and comply with the EU's organic certification. While the applications will be pretty much rubber stamped, because the UK regulations are the same as the EU's, the process takes at least 9 months (and may take longer of the number of applications are higher than usual).
                        During which time, no UK produce can be labelled as organic within the EU.
                        Which is an issue, even if you think that "organic" is a pointless thing, because items labelled organic command a price premium.

                        Like the pets and service animals issue, you can ignore these issues or call them "project fear", but that doesn't make them go away.
                        These issues need solutions or work rounds, not labels.
                        This isn't politics, real people are going to lose their jobs when UK companies can't sell things in Europe.
                        When I post, I am expressing an opinion - feel free to disagree, I have been wrong before.
                        Please don't act on my suggestions without checking with a grown-up (ideally some kind of expert).

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                          Let's add another couple of inevitable issues.

                          Any processed or manufactured goods sold in the EU have to have an address in the EU on the packaging or documentation.
                          That goes from fruit gums to aircraft (via shampoo, pasties and everything else that isn't a raw ingredient).

                          At the moment, we're in the EU, so a UK address is fine.
                          After October 31st (or whenever) it isn't, so all UK companies need an address within the EU where legal notices can be served and post received).
                          Have a look at your groceries next time you're shopping, see how much packaging will need to be changed (even if the company has managed to set up a European presence).
                          Oh, and UK regulations will require a UK address post brexit (once there's enough time to process the necessary legislation to remove all of the EU references).

                          Then again, if you're selling organic food, you need to register and comply with the EU's organic certification. While the applications will be pretty much rubber stamped, because the UK regulations are the same as the EU's, the process takes at least 9 months (and may take longer of the number of applications are higher than usual).
                          During which time, no UK produce can be labelled as organic within the EU.
                          Which is an issue, even if you think that "organic" is a pointless thing, because items labelled organic command a price premium.

                          Like the pets and service animals issue, you can ignore these issues or call them "project fear", but that doesn't make them go away.
                          These issues need solutions or work rounds, not labels.
                          This isn't politics, real people are going to lose their jobs when UK companies can't sell things in Europe.
                          It's not like anyone's had three year's notice to prepare, is it?

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by jpkeates View Post
                            Like the pets and service animals issue, you can ignore these issues or call them "project fear", but that doesn't make them go away.
                            These issues need solutions or work rounds, not labels.
                            My point exactly.

                            None of these 'issues' are things that can't be addressed, and none would prevent the UK from leaving the EU, but they all need to be identified and there needs to be sufficient time for both the legal issues to be identified, and for businesses to make any required changes.
                            The habit of simply writing everything off as 'project fear', which is displayed by so many leave supporters, makes it more likely that many problems won't be addressed - so this dismissive attitude is only making it slightly more likely that 'Brexit' won't go as well as 'Brexiteers' like to claim it will.

                            Accepting that these issues exist can only help with Brexit.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by JK0 View Post

                              It's not like anyone's had three year's notice to prepare, is it?
                              Yet potential problems are still being identified.

                              I would hope that companies have addressed packaging issues (at least to the point where they can quickly get new packaging and have it available to use as soon as necessary after Brexit).

                              Some issues, including travel for pets/service animals cannot be 'prepared for' by the individuals who will be affected because it requires agreements between the UK government and the EU/Irish government.

                              Comment


                                Brexit will result in an increase in dogging says Kent Online
                                Is that seen as an advantage or disadvantage in Kent?
                                Unshackled by the chains of idle vanity, A modest manatee, that's me

                                Comment

                                Latest Activity

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X