desensitized43

https://news.sky.com/story/government-shelves-key-brexit-bill-amid-speculation-over-theresa-mays-future-11726821

Quote

Government shelves key Brexit bill amid speculation over Theresa May's future

The government has delayed publication of key Brexit legislation as the prime minister listens to MPs' "concerns" about the bill.Theresa May had told MPs the Withdrawal Agreement Bill (WAB) would be published on Friday, but the government now plans to publish the legislation in the week commencing 3 June.

In news that will surprise nobody...

25 minutes ago, Amsterdam_Neil_D said:

Remain are reduced to this,  even after all these years they still have not convinced enough people.  It should have been easy given the facts.

I doubt any tactical voting will make much difference in the big scheme of things unfortunately.

I am convinced now more than ever this isn't just about the EU.  Something else is going on, it must be. 

None of it makes sense at the moment, the EU election will tell us more I suppose.

Utter shambles.

You're right. It isn't all about the EU. In the last 10 years we've had a massive recession and austerity that's meant services have been cut to the bone. Combined with a real lack of quality leadership or backbone from politicians where they've blamed all their inadequecies on johnny foreigner and a mythical EU bogeyman that's probably done more for the working classes than the Tories, Lib-Tories and the Labour government before them.

7 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Yes, a rather subdued occasion helped along by Corbyn being pretty crap as per.

Absolutely. A proper opposition would have immediately pounced on a weak prime minister with half her party and cabinet missing but it seems only the SNP want to talk about it. He's pathetic.

Very strange viewing in the commons. Half the tory party not bothered to show up including the chief whip and half the front bench...

14 minutes ago, bickster said:

May says MPs will get the chance to vote on a second referendum IF they vote for the Withdrawal Bill

it's just trolling now

Laughably weak leadership.

"These are my principles and if you don't like them I have others..."

9 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I thought he was in favour of shaking things up. 

Did I hear him having a go at his security? 

"Complete failure...Should have spotted that a mile away"

40 minutes ago, Mozzavfc said:

Lib dems

The wife will probably vote Greens 

I do have a major worry that we're going to see more people by numbers vote for "remain" parties but still end up with Farage's Fascists.

Just now, Demitri_C said:

So who is everyone voting for in European elections? 

Lib Dem (holding my nose slightly as I do so)

6 minutes ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

This is a vote to elect members to the European Parliament. Which only becomes relevant should we end up staying. They could end up shaping the next Commission, we should be voting for left leaning parties regardless of domestic policy. It is way too important for a 'protest vote'. 

I would definitely suggest the Greens are a better alternative.

I would probably vote for them too if I felt they'd got a chance...

That probably displays a massive problem with our electoral system. We've got far too many left-leaning parties splitting the left vote and not enough right-leaning ones. Ironically that's why we're in this mess...the tories knew that if their right-leaning vote was split they'd lose.

Just now, dont_do_it_doug. said:

Who's we though? The Lib Dems? Are these really the people we want reforming the EU for us should we (hopefully IMO) end up remaining?

Probably not tbh. I voted Lib Dem once to abolish tuition fees and they actively voted for the opposite. I don't like them and under normal circumstances I wouldn't vote for them, but I want to stay in. You're looking too far ahead IMO.

8 hours ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

To what end? Why would we want a bunch of neoliberal puppets carrying our interests into the European Parliament, which is only relevant if we end up remaining. At which point, they become the noose.

The EU needs reform. This aint it. 

We can only reform it if we keep our seat at the table. That's the priority for now, reform is a matter for another day.

2 hours ago, bickster said:

Oh and Rees-Mogg should be seriously worried for his seat

Saw that result. It would be spectacularly funny if he loses at the next GE.

51 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said:

EU Commission - EU Parliament relationship.

Even the most ardent remainer would admit it's not a perfect organisation by any means. I guess where we would differ is that I believe it's possible to correct those problems and leavers clearly think it's irredeemable. i certainly can understand that point of view even though it seems like giving up to me. I'd rather work with our friends (the ones we have left) and try and put it right.

6 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said:

I think that if in the UK someone proposed a system where only an unelected second house (the Lord’s) had the power to introduce new legislation and MP’s merely rubber stamped it, we would think it was farcical!

Are you saying that's analogous to the current EU-UK relationship?

5 minutes ago, WhatAboutTheFinish said:

Do people trot out this line if they were in discussions with people opposed to, for example, a constitutional monarchy?

Do you feel the way legislation is made, regardless of the areas it covers, should be a matter of public interest and debate or should it just be blindly accepted? 

I'm just curious how people get to the positions that they do...nothing more than that.

The way legislation is made is always subject to debate. It's called parliament (UK and EU). No legislation is just blindly accepted as it has to go through a process. I'm interested why people think our parliamentarians are more capable than those sat in Brussels or Strasbourg. I think if the last 3 years (and more tbh) has taught us anything it's that our parliament can't be trusted with more powers to make legislation.

2 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

100% agreed -  however, I didn't even express my view on Brexit here yet the assumption is I have been lied to, simply because I outlined an argument from the leave side. That is not healthy for the debate. 

I simply feel there is increasing hostility to anyone that wants to leave and people who want to remain are claiming much of the moral high ground. 

No one is calling me stupid, yet an argument that I backed and documented with 3 different sources has been ''ridiculed'' as bullshit.

I guess that's my point

 

I think people on all sides are just fed up of the whole thing tbh. When you've got a roughly 50-50 split of opinion on a binary issue led by shady figures on both sides of the argument with questionable vested interests and more than a hint that one side was breaking all kinds of rules is it any reason there's bad feeling?

2 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

That't true.

But then again I think my hypothesis that some people who want to leave are ridiculed regardless of their reasoning is true, primarily considering I have been accused of 'being lied to' just a few posts back  And I didn't even make an argument for leaving!

You have your taxi drivers who are xenophobic, but you also have the people who will call anyone who doesn't want to hold hands with Mrs Merkel a racist or a right wing facist. 

I just feel that there isn't any room in the public debate to present a leave argument without being called a backwards UKIP supporting right wing idiot, and that is not healthy. 

Why do you perceive that you're being ridiculed? If I'd been lied to and someone told me that I'd been lied to I wouldn't automatically think that was an attempt to ridicule me. No one is calling you stupid. Even the most intelligent among us can be deceived.

21 minutes ago, Mic09 said:

Again, I am not arguing either way here - my post was asking about the problem of some people taking the moral high ground when discussing their views on Brexit.

Having said that, there are reasons why some people feel the self governance is something that is missing while being within the EU structures. I simply feel that if we ridicule those people (and I feel this is often the case) then we are just as ignorant as the previously discussed 'racist bigots'. 

I wouldn't call them racists. Xenophobic maybe. Certainly in a lot of cases there is a degree of ignorance. I had a discussion with a taxi driver the other day who was adamant (and I mean strongly adamant) that the French want to leave the EU...They've just elected a massive europhile ffs...what can you say to someone who thinks that?

4 minutes ago, peterms said:

It is often the case that people using the "sovereignty" argument can't quote specific pieces of legislation or directives or judgements that they disagree with, and we especially see this with vox pop arguments.  That does not contradict the point above.

Very true. That's why I don't like the whole "sovereignty" argument and people saying they don't like primacy of certain EU legislation. From what I've experienced those arguments are cover for a little-englander attitude of a dislike of all things foreign (how dare they make our laws etc).

Who's to say any legislation made in westminster by Brits is in any way superior to those made in Brussels by Brits and 27 other nationalities...Bad legislation is bad legislation regardless where it's made and what language the person making it speaks. As has been pointed out by others, the Brexiters made a big deal of saying we'd just leave and sign a free trade deal. In that scenario there's an alignment of standards that happens in the product areas covered by the agreement (that's what the essence of the deal is).

1 hour ago, Mic09 said:

The independence argument is a strong one, considering that much European legislation takes precedence over UK law

Can you name examples of EU legislation that's been brought in that you don't like? Or is it just the concept of legislation being made elsewhere?

27 minutes ago, NurembergVillan said:

Can't recall if I've posted this before or not.  Absolutely runs rings round the lad...

 

I have no doubt that people like this guy genuinely don't believe themselves to be racist. Problem is when you talk to them about which immigrants they actually want to let in under their fantasy system they'll always list commonwealth countries like "Australia, Canada, NZ"...When you mention that most of the commonwealth countries are populated by people of a non-white complexion all of a sudden they're not so keen...

18 minutes ago, Raver50032 said:

Because Kennedy was so desperate to have a positive, female lead and role model for little girls (one of her first interviews when Disney took over and they were plotting TFA), they created Rey... a perfect specimen, can do no wrong, multi-tasker, intellectually savvy, uber-capable engineer, pilot... mind reader... the list goes on. Nothing was really earned in TFA or TLJ. Not in anything we've seen, and that's where, as others have said, her journey is too quick, un-earned, and ultimately, unless corrected in 9, will be a fruitless legacy for females in this story. It doesn't suit Disney's agenda at this stage to have a flawed female lead. They need an easy win for her to put perceived wrongs of the past to bed. Quick and easy (path to the dark side of losing fans maybe). This isn't just a 'male Villa Fan' attitude either... If you watch Collider Jedi Council on YouTube, or other Star Wars fan channels that include female input, there's a lot of angst about Rey and how she and her journey have been handled. I'm the father of a wonderful daughter and I enjoy watching Star Wars with her - I want good role models for her that are well written, well acted... and actually show some trials and tribulations... not quick, easy wins to tick a box.

Completely and 100% agree with this.

What studios have to understand is that it can be rewarding to have a character triumph in spite of and because of their flaws. As you say, it's too easy to write your hero as completely perfect at everything...that's why everyone likes Batman more than Superman.

55 minutes ago, Raver50032 said:

I liked Poe...

But I didn't like what they did with him in TLJ by suddenly making him appear to be all contemporary toxic male who was perceived to have an issue with female authority. That was never how Poe's character was set up in TFA. It gave nonsense purple haired Ms Gender Studies Holdo a vehicle with which to make a societal point where it didn't need to be. Holdo then went on to steal the scene that should have been Ackbar's final moment of glory... instead he went out of the front window with barely any whimper or mention. Having not heard of Holdo before TLJ, I was actually convinced that she was a traitor. Her attitude was the one that stank. Absolutely horrid portrayal of a character that apparently featured in a comic on the build up to TLJ to introduce her as a really good friend and confidante of Leia. For me, she wasn't even needed in TLJ, and yet Disney went with the gender agenda. It all worked out in the end I guess.  

I like the potential of Finn, but he was badly handled in TLJ - kind of though he was still wavering as to what side to be on. He'd made his choice in TFA, and didn't need to have that questioned in TLJ, or at least not in that way. The weakest part of the Ep9 trailer was Finn's trousers... that blue really doesn't go with the beige jacket. Other than that, I'm looking forward to seeing what both Poe and Finn are going to do.

The premise of the Leia Poppins moment was okay... it was the way it was shot that was poor. The foreshadowing of the 'Holdo Manoeuvre' as Leia flew through the hologram of Snoke's ship notwithstanding.

Well that got very PC! Tbh I've tried to avoid that topic in my summary of how I feel because I didn't want to poke a hornets nest. There's vert few ways you can talk about this without appearing very mysogenistic or just generally have issues with women in certain roles... Not that I'm saying you are/do... But since you've gone down that road... 

There was nothing inherently wrong with them casting more female leads in star wars and putting them in herioc or authoritarian roles. The problem that they have, as Chindie pointed out, is that they're being written in a horribly one dimensional way... No flaws, no intricacies to their character. That would be a problem for any character male or female.

They're also not being helped by the general dissatisfaction with the series as a whole. When people are generally pissed off with what they see as Disneys mismanagement they're going to look for scapegoats.

That being said, I'm not sure why you're implying Holdo is some PC plant. Is that because she has purple hair you think she's trans or lesbian? I didn't get that at all. I just got she had purple hair. 

15 hours ago, Chindie said:

Even accepting that they couldn't just redo Luke's journey, and they made the new trilogy more like the ensemble Empire/RotJ increasingly were from the start giving less space to develop a character, the character is really weak. I think there's a good argument the only good character they've got in this new trilogy is Kylo. They **** Finn in the TLJ, Poe isn't a character so much as an archetype... They did make Luke interesting in a different way in  in TLJ but also in a way nobody was ever going to get fly on board with.

...Disney really have cocked this up.

I hear what you say about not having problems with Rey being capable without training and I do agree to a large extent. It's fine to make her be capable, she would have had to be given her upbringing. I just can't buy the short amount of time from her discovering the force existed to being able to manipulate minds and move large objects. As I say, Luke got to progress in a more controlled way up to doing that stuff. It just feels rushed to me and forced.

I completely agree about Finn. He was by far the most interesting character in TFA and he was completely sidelined in TLJ and saddled with another terribly written character in Rose. I hate Poe for exactly the reason you say. He's a cartoon portrayal of "hot-shot pilot". Just awful.

22 hours ago, Chindie said:

The Last Jedi is a weird movie that seems to bear a grudge against everything that came before it. It takes all the mysteries TFA laid throughout its runtime and throws them away with abandon. It's plot is stupid and as a way of driving the film forward is absolutely absurd. It has a whole subplot whose entire purpose appears to be to make a (in fairness, well intentioned) point about the rich and powerful being evil, and that morality is grey, but has no bearing on anything else. It culminates in what should be one of the most impactful moments the series could do, and it does it in a completely low key tossed aside manner which has curiously low levels of emotion or catharsis. It has dreadful humour, and some of the worst scenes I can recall in any blockbuster of recent years (notably Leia's non-death. Whoever thought that was a good idea needs to be locked away from scriptwriting for the sake of the cinema industry)On the other hand, it has some nice action, looks beautiful, has ideas that are new to the series and takes things in ways that subvert expectation. Unfortunately most of those subverted actions are disappointing. It ultimately leaves a new blank sheet, but it's an unsatisfying one as it rejects every question and set up that were TFAs highlights.

I could kind of see what they were trying to do with TLJ in laser narrowing the focus to only a few locations (it's basically pretty much a chase movie). Problem is, it's not what anyone wants from Star Wars. People want to see sprawling locations across the galaxy, not be stuck on a single ship the whole time. It made the sin of making the previous movies seem nonsensical with changes to how people perceive what the "force" can do/not do. The scene with Leia in space was **** ridiculous.

22 hours ago, Chindie said:

Rey is Luke, but Luke is iconic because he's the audience's eyes in this new world who becomes an archetype, whereas Rey is a new character in a world we know who is playing a role we know. Even if she's written stunningly (and she isn't, she's the blandest bland that ever blanded), she'll disappoint

I've got big problems with Rey. Her characters progression feels very "unearned" to me. Beating a trained Jedi/Sith in single combat the first time she held a sabre. Force powers that she's not been able to use previously are suddenly fully developed and controllable with no training. Luke's progression was different in that we got to see him fail...a lot. We'd see a gradual increasing of his power and time jumps between each movie that imply he's been trying to master the art before successfully facing off against Vader/The Emperor. With no scenes indicating refinement of her abilities and with no time jump at all between TFA and TLJ it looks forced.