Brexit negotiations

[Clinton]

Obviously you don't understand the concept of community and helping our neighbours. By improving prosperity across the continent we are pushing back the chances of future wars and conflicts.

I completely agree with you about that and which is why I voted Remain (I never bought the economic arguments in favour of Remain, I always thought they were nonsense).

But that "community" ship you talk about ...has sailed. I don't know if you noticed but the UK had a Referendum and we decided to leave. Our UKBF discussions now are in that context. And yes, economically speaking, we are in a position to do better deals than the ones we've obtained via the EU's negotiators. We are a smaller market than the block's so that's a negative in any independent negotiation, but that's more than compensated for by the fact that we don't have to protect various EU-based minority interest groups.

That figure has been going steadily down.

I don't know how the topic turned to benefits but it may have been in response to an Ignored Member (cobby) posting something. But why do you object to the figure going down? Are you in favour of a situation where it's a lot more lucrative to be on benefits than to take on employment? Benefit reductions have caused some cases of extreme hardship, suicide, all sorts. But the system was broken before and someone's trying to fix it. In the process of fixing there will be casualties. And some of those stories can be heart wrenching. But how do you make an omelette without breaking eggs?

 

[Newchodge]

Being racist and hating foreigners are not the same thing.

Care to explain the difference?

 

[Mr D]

Care to explain the difference?

How about the English language explain the difference to you. Perhaps you have been a foreigner anywhere or experienced racism within your own country?


https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/foreigner

foreigner
noun [ C ] uk /ˈfɒr.ə.nər/ us /ˈfɔːr.ə.nɚ/
person who comes from another country

Examples

• It will soon be impossible for foreigners to enter the country.
• I can't speak a word of French so everyone can tell I'm a foreigner as soon as I arrive in France.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/racism


racism
noun [ U ] uk /ˈreɪ.sɪ.zəm/ us /ˈreɪ.sɪ.zəm/ also UK old-fashioned racialism disapproving
belief that people's qualities are influenced by their race and that the members of other races are not as good as the members of your own, or the resulting unfair treatment of members of other races:

The authorities are taking steps to combat/fight/tackle racism in schools.
The report made it plain that institutional racism (= racism in all parts of an organization) is deep-rooted in this country.

 

[Cobby]

I completely agree with you about that and which is why I voted Remain (I never bought the economic arguments in favour of Remain, I always thought they were nonsense).

With your religious zeal for Brexit and disregard for expert evidence and industry consensus, nobody believes that you voted Remain, so it's foolish to believe it adds any weight to your arguments.

Are you in favour of a situation where it's a lot more lucrative to be on benefits than to take on employment? Benefit reductions have caused some cases of extreme hardship, suicide, all sorts. But the system was broken before and someone's trying to fix it. In the process of fixing there will be casualties. And some of those stories can be heart wrenching. But how do you make an omelette without breaking eggs?

Wow.
Broken eggs.

That's what you think of people who suffer and also die, from a completely preventable situation of hardship? Broken eggs? Christ.

The alternative you seek is fixing the system via a route that doesn't harm people. But that will cost more money, and clearly the state budget and funding of a welfare system you will never need, is of more value to you than human lives.

This is the arrogance of privilege - "People unaffected by austerity consider austerity acceptable."

 

[Newchodge]

Let me explain the question, please explain how hating foreigners is not racism.

 

[KM-Tiger]

please explain how hating foreigners is not racism.

Err, perhaps because foreigners can be of any race? And non foreigners can also be of any race.

 

[Mr D]

Let me explain the question, please explain how hating foreigners is not racism.

You are confusing the two.

Are there any people you have ever come across who are not foreign but subject to racism?
How about people who are foreign but not subject to racism because of their looks? For example Cliff Richard - subject to racism because he is foreign?

 

[Clinton]

Xenophobia is, obviously, different to racism! Just like negotiating a contract is different to signing a contract (or did you forget about that one?)

And the funny thing is that people like you are the biggest racists around but you call other people racist simply because they don't want to be part of the EU.

An example: you support preferential immigration treatment for Europeans (who are predominantly caucasian). That's discriminating against people from India, China, Africa . That is racist.

 

[Newchodge]

Hating foreigners. They are hated because they are foreign. Not because of anything else but because they are foreign. How is that not racism. It is not the only form of racism, but it is racism. Racism is not only about skin colour or appearance.

 

[KM-Tiger]

How is that not racism.

Because there is a difference between race and nationality.

 

[Newchodge]

Because there is a difference between race and nationality.

Equality Act https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/9

Race includes colour, nationality, ethnic or national origins.

Are you seriously suggesting that the phrase 'the French are all thick' would not be racist?

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Theresa May postpones meaningful vote on final Brexit deal
https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ostpones-meaningful-vote-on-final-brexit-deal

As expected the arch Brexiteer delays the vote again. She and her government have been extremely opaque and have taken every tactic available to bypass the sovereignty of parliament, including now running down the clock.

Once March 12th rolls around we can expect more last minute shenanigans with our archaic political procedures so she can try and achieve her goals without involving parliament.

Still haven't heard a a peep from Brexiters who claim to care about sovereignty though...

An extension of Article 50 takes a step closer. I think May is becoming more accepting of this possibility too:

May said: “My team will be back in Brussels on Tuesday. As a result of that, we won’t bring a meaningful vote to parliament this week, but we will ensure that that happens by 12 March. But it’s still within our grasp to leave the EU by the 29 March and that is what we are planning to do.”

Confident language.

If any extension does happen, this will be entirely on May's shoulders due to the gamble she's taken. When all is said and done, the end result is likely to be the same, except it could have been sorted months previously without any Brexit delays.

She's also grossly underestimated how much these games annoy even seemingly loyal MPs. The fact is she's trying to prevent them doing their job. She's circumventing the role of parliament. Even for MPs who back her deal, it won't sit easy with them, particularly when it involves flirting with danger so recklessly.

 

[Cobby]

An extension of Article 50 takes a step closer. I think May is becoming more accepting of this possibility too:



Confident language.

If any extension does happen, this will be entirely on May's shoulders due to the gamble she's taken. When all is said and done, the end result is likely to be the same, except it could have been sorted months previously without any Brexit delays.

She's also grossly underestimated how much these games annoy even seemingly loyal MPs. The fact is she's trying to prevent them doing their job. She's circumventing the role of parliament. Even for MPs who back her deal, it won't sit easy with them, particularly when it involves flirting with danger so recklessly.

Reading the output of the European journos and commentariat, May's unnecessary theatrics and "Pretending to Negotiate" is hardening resolve among some MSs to accede to an extension request.

I don't get a strong feeling they'll refuse as it's not in their interest, and at the very least gives them more time to prepare for the cliff edge of No Deal, but the more May continues the pantomime the greater risk she puts us at.

 

[Scott-Copywriter]

Reading the output of the European journos and commentariat, May's unnecessary theatrics and "Pretending to Negotiate" is hardening resolve among some MSs to accede to an extension request.

I don't get a strong feeling they'll refuse as it's not in their interest, and at the very least gives them more time to prepare for the cliff edge of No Deal, but the more May continues the pantomime the greater risk she puts us at.

Speaking of which:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...could-be-delayed-until-2021-eu-sources-reveal

This seems radical, but when you think about it, it actually makes a lot of sense.

We're obsessed with trying to push through a rushed deal, but it provides a two-year implementation period that's effectively the same as staying in the EU anyway.

It may be more prudent to simply stay in the EU for a couple of more years and use that time to negotiate a deal that wouldn't need the implementation period (or possibly even a backstop).

If we can stop obsessing over domestic optics, we should grab this offer (if it arises) with both hands. It could be the only way forward that has any realistic chance of working.

 

[MBE2017]

You're correct. It has simply become a lot clearer recently just how far to the right the Conservatives have been.

It's also worth bearing in mind the time-frame when discussing just how much money is involved in a thing; the Conservatives keep crowing about how they have given more money to the NHS than ever before, and when you simply look at a number that appears to be correct. The problem is, it's not true; as a percentage of GDP the funding they provide is much lower, but £3billion today isn't £3billion back in 1980. It's a sleight of hand and pretty dishonest.

I think I am correct as you do, but your argument is totally opposed to what I said. The conservatives are not and have not moved any further to the right, they are not hard right wingers as yourself and the press try to portray them, they are just right of centre, roughly where they have always been.

They are far from perfect, I particularly dislike the reduction in the disabled benefits, the constant reassessments by non qualified staff of the most vulnerable groups in our society, but having said that I would still vote for them ahead of the Momentum Party, sorry, Labour Party under Corbyn.

 

[Clinton]

Equality Act https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/9

Er, that's nothing to do with the price of fish.

The Equality Act spells out what the government sees as race discrimination in the context of employment.

But you can't apply that to the man on the street and say he is racist because he doesn't like the French. Keep it in context please!

 

[Mr D]

I think I am correct as you do, but your argument is totally opposed to what I said. The conservatives are not and have not moved any further to the right, they are not hard right wingers as yourself and the press try to portray them, they are just right of centre, roughly where they have always been.

They are far from perfect, I particularly dislike the reduction in the disabled benefits, the constant reassessments by non qualified staff of the most vulnerable groups in our society, but having said that I would still vote for them ahead of the Momentum Party, sorry, Labour Party under Corbyn.

The constant reassessments by non qualified staff of the disabled?
Employment Support Allowance (replacing incapacity benefit)?

Green paper 1998, ESA introduced 2008.

A Labour project that was continued by the coalition and Conservative governments.

Saying that, Incapacity benefit without the assessments left people on the scrapheap and if they wanted to get back into work they had to fight to do so. Very little support for those on incapacity benefit who didn't want to be on it.

 

[Mr D]

Hating foreigners. They are hated because they are foreign. Not because of anything else but because they are foreign. How is that not racism. It is not the only form of racism, but it is racism. Racism is not only about skin colour or appearance.

You are linking the two problems.

The reality of racism in the UK is that it also applies to British people living in Britain. People who are not foreign.
And some foreigners it does not apply to because they don't look or sound foreign.

 

[Newchodge]

You are linking the two problems.

The reality of racism in the UK is that it also applies to British people living in Britain. People who are not foreign.
And some foreigners it does not apply to because they don't look or sound foreign.

I have not for one second disputed that. You said that hating foreigners was not racist. It is.

 

[Mr D]

I have not for one second disputed that. You said that hating foreigners was not racist. It is.

I am guessing you have not personally experienced racism?

Just repeating that it is the same thing does not make it so.

 

[Newchodge]

I am guessing you have not personally experienced racism?

Just repeating that it is the same thing does not make it so.

You have no idea

 

[Newchodge]

Er, that's nothing to do with the price of fish.

The Equality Act spells out what the government sees as race discrimination in the context of employment.

But you can't apply that to the man on the street and say he is racist because he doesn't like the French. Keep it in context please!

If you think the Equalities Act is only about employment you are even more ignorant than I thought you to be

 

[Jeff FV]

It may be more prudent to simply stay in the EU for a couple of more years and use that time to negotiate a deal that wouldn't need the implementation period (or possibly even a backstop).

.

^^^^

This.

I think that there is (an understandable) misunderstanding with regards to “the deal”. If we leave on 29th of March on May’s deal it does not mean that everything is a done deal. We still then have two years to negotiate the detail of the deal.

I suspect that a lot of support in the public for May’s deal ( if there is any) is simply because people are fed up with Brexit dominating the news and monopolising politics and they think it’ll all be done if we leave and we can get on with our lives.

A 21 month extension to Article 50 would make sense as we would then leave with everything sorted, rather than leaving and then spending the next two years agreeing the detail (sense of deja vu, anyone?!)

However, I must confess, I suspect that by the end of the 21 month extension we’d agree to stay in.

 

[Newchodge]

It seems to me that the logical thing to do is to revoke Article 50 and set up a cross-party, intelligent (if that is possible) group to consider what would be necessary to leave the EU, Erasmus, Gallileo, etc etc, and reach a reasoned conclusion about what is needed,then decide if it is worthwhile. possibly via a referendum, in which the information given out is independently adjudicated as being accurate.

 

[Mr D]

You have no idea

I'm sorry if the experience of others differs from yours.
Feel free to enlighten the British people regarding racism.

 

[Mr D]

It seems to me that the logical thing to do is to revoke Article 50 and set up a cross-party, intelligent (if that is possible) group to consider what would be necessary to leave the EU, Erasmus, Gallileo, etc etc, and reach a reasoned conclusion about what is needed,then decide if it is worthwhile. possibly via a referendum, in which the information given out is independently adjudicated as being accurate.

Who selects the adjudicators? How do they assure themselves the information they release is accurate at the time?
Are there people you would accept as independent adjudicators?

People may well trust their media provider more than some unknown body.

 

[Clinton]

If you think the Equalities Act is only about employment you are even more ignorant than I thought you to be

OK, it does stretch to "users of private and public services" but I suggest you refer to a dictionary some time, that'll tell you what the English, and global, meaning of racism is (rather than a UK legal definition for certain specific situations)!

It seems to me that the logical thing to do is to revoke Article 50 ...

Ha, ha. Amazing how logic works for Remainers. Jeff and Scott are also getting very excited at the prospect of a delay followed by an eventual Remain. I suggest none of you get your hopes up too high.

 

[Newchodge]

OK, it does stretch to "users of private and public services" but I suggest you refer to a dictionary some time, that'll tell you what the English, and global, meaning of racism is (rather than a UK legal definition for certain specific situations)!

Pathetic

 

[Newchodge]

Pathetic

Let me elaborate. If I were to say that your comment is as pathetic as I would expect from anyone of Indian heritage (which you state you are) Would you consider that I was appallingly racist? I believe I would be, but apparently, you don't.

 

[Clinton]

Duh, if you said "as I would expect from anyone who is foreign" that wouldn't be racist and I wouldn't consider it racist as you didn't mention a race.

What's difficult to understand? The dictionary definition, and global understanding of the term race, is different to how it's spelt out in the Equalities Act. Don't get too carried away by your work - where, no doubt, the definition of race is guided by the Equalities Act - and take a look at the wider world out there!

 

[Newchodge]

Duh, if you said "as I would expect from anyone who is foreign" that wouldn't be racist and I wouldn't consider it racist as you didn't mention a race.

But you earlier stated that a nationality is not a race. So Indian, being a nationality, cannot be used in a racist connotation? Are you for real?

 

[Newchodge]

But just to make you feel better I checked online for a dictionary definition of race (you have not suggested a particular dictionary that you would accept while you don't accept the law). I found this " a group of people who share the same language, history, characteristics, etc.: Sounds like nationality to me.

 

[Clinton]

Racism

Cambridge dictionary: "unfair treatment of members of other races"
Oxford dictionary: "Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race"
Merriam-Webster's : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
Urban Dictionary: A term that used to mean prejudice towards one or more races.
Wikipedia: Racism is the belief in the superiority of one race over another, which often results in discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity.

You might notice that the clue in racism is in the spelling of the word

You seem to be very confused between ethnicity with nationality!

 

[Newchodge]

Racism

Cambridge dictionary: "unfair treatment of members of other races"
Oxford dictionary: "Prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race"
Merriam-Webster's : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
Urban Dictionary: A term that used to mean prejudice towards one or more races.
Wikipedia: Racism is the belief in the superiority of one race over another, which often results in discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity.

You might notice that the clue in racism is in the spelling of the word

You seem to be very confused between ethnicity with nationality!

Could you provide the dictionary definition of race?

 

[Clinton]

Sure, but you could check it yourself.

You said: "Race includes colour, nationality, ethnic or national origins."

Neither the Oxford nor Cambridge definitions of race include anything about nationality or national origins.

People of any given race may mainly be found in one particular country, but there's a difference between race and nationality. In some cases a word, like Indian, can be used to mean either someone of a particular ethnic background or someone who holds an Indian passport. You can be Indian and Caucasian (in which case your nationality is different to your race).

And that's the end of today's English lesson from this Indian.

 

[Cobby]

I think I am correct as you do, but your argument is totally opposed to what I said. The conservatives are not and have not moved any further to the right, they are not hard right wingers as yourself and the press try to portray them, they are just right of centre, roughly where they have always been.

Things you consider "Just Right of Centre:"
Anti-equal rights
Anti-human rights
Windrush!
Inherently elitist and racist
Unwavering support for Viktor Orban
Allied in EP with Sweden Democrats (nazi fringe)
Policy currently dictated by disaster-capitalist wing of their party
Coalition with far right ultra-nationalist political group (DUP)
Opaque governance
Against parliamentary sovereignty
Potential interference in justice system where democracy is concerned to maintain power


Just right of centre. Very cool and normal.

Meanwhile, "preventing privatisation of public services like the NHS" is far-left. Okay.

 

[Cobby]

I have not for one second disputed that. You said that hating foreigners was not racist. It is.

Racism isn't technically xenophobia, but in a real life, meaningful context, it's a white-person's concern to maintain the difference.

Racists are bigots and with rare exception also hate foreigners. Their self esteem is usually very low and built around "me good, others bad" where 'other' is a variable boundary that can be moved as needed.

Racists also usually understand the social deficit that comes with the label 'racist' or 'bigot' so they absolutely love arguing about the technical definition of words like 'race', 'racist' and 'bigot', because that allows them to deflect others highlighting their bigotry and, in their eyes, avoid being labelled for what they are.

It's not an argument worth having them. The moment they cut'n'paste the google definition and say "acutally..." they've already made it clear where they stand and reason will not sway them.

 

[Mr D]

Meanwhile, "preventing privatisation of public services like the NHS" is far-left. Okay.

Have you used public services of the NHS?
Have you used the private services that tie in with the NHS? For most people that's GP surgeries and hospices - both services that are done privately.
For some of us we have had tests done privately rather than by the NHS. Perhaps you have not had that experience yet?

 

[Cobby]

It seems to me that the logical thing to do is to revoke Article 50 and set up a cross-party, intelligent (if that is possible) group to consider what would be necessary to leave the EU, Erasmus, Gallileo, etc etc, and reach a reasoned conclusion about what is needed,then decide if it is worthwhile. possibly via a referendum, in which the information given out is independently adjudicated as being accurate.

I read a great article last year talking about how Brexit could be achieved and it was akin to this but on a longer scale; taking a decade to research, adjust, recruit, re-align and prepare...before triggering Article 50, and to do it all in partnership with the EU, thereby maintaining mutual respect and our diplomatic power on the world stage.

What we've had is the polar opposite of that and despite an endless stream of evidence saying the same thing - Brexit cannot be achieved like this - Brexiters will not stop pounding the table and demanding unicorns. Meanwhile we have become a laughing stock to the rest of the world.

 

[Cobby]

Have you used public services of the NHS?
Have you used the private services that tie in with the NHS? For most people that's GP surgeries and hospices - both services that are done privately.
For some of us we have had tests done privately rather than by the NHS. Perhaps you have not had that experience yet?

That neither addresses the point nor contributes to the discussion at hand. Stay on topic kiddo.