LondonLax

Full Members
  • Content Count

    7,995
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,941 Excellent

About LondonLax

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. LondonLax

    Australian Football

    We've had a couple of key injuries so I've not been expecting much this tournament but the emergence of Mabil and Ikonomidis has been nice to see.
  2. LondonLax

    Vegetarianism/Veganism

    Not even doner kabab shavings?
  3. LondonLax

    Vegetarianism/Veganism

    I love it how Waitrose consider halloumi an ‘essential’.
  4. LondonLax

    Vegetarianism/Veganism

    And if you’ve bought it already you might as will finish it, wasting food would only make things worse
  5. https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/revealed-commons-plot-to-seize-control-from-theresa-may-ahead-of-brexit-vote-6zp62hh57 From The Times (behind a paywall).
  6. LondonLax

    Dean Smith

    Football fans often spout things like ‘I don’t mind a few losses if it is clear the manger is trying to implement a system or plan’. Inevitably when we do suffer a few losses we find out that is just talk and fans only want instant success.
  7. LondonLax

    Loan watch 2018/19

    DeLaet scored the winner for Melbourne City yesterday.
  8. LondonLax

    All New Funny Pics Thread - Clean Edition

    On the flip side (or the B-side?) Spotify and YouTube are a godsend for decluttering your house/apartment.
  9. Their commenters and below the line readership has not changed but their editorial line definitely has. As ml1dch says they have changed from backing Mogg/Johnson to backing May.
  10. Both of those points are valid. The thing is though in a theoretical scenario where the ‘will of the people’ has shifted to remain following two years of discussions on the reality of brexit it would be perverse to follow through against the electorate’s wishes, particularity if it is an option that causes significant harm. However the only way remain could become a legitimate option in that scenario is if it came about by the same mechanism that resulted in brexit in the first place.
  11. Any second vote would need to have remain on the ballot in case the electorate has changed its mind following all this additional information it has recieved since the first vote. The reason your ‘best of three’ argument is too simplistic is because it is not about two fixed teams fighting for victory. It’s about understanding what the population actually want.
  12. To be honest that is probably a fair enough stance to take. If you are going to vote against your own party to call a general election and hand power to an opposition party you are probably in the wrong party in the first place. There is actually a proposal doing the rounds among Brexiteers where they advocate for May herself to call an election and set the date for the 4th of April. Then when Parliament shuts down to prepare for the election the UK will pass the March deadline and drop out of the EU by default. It could be quite a messy election that followed if they pulled a stunt like that.
  13. Indeed, the policy is heartless. Essentially using a handful of people to make an example of for others. However the first controversial point I mentioned (no asylum in Aus if you arrive by boat) has bipartisan support from both major parties, you would need to vote Greens to see a policy shift on that. The second point (not giving the legacy refugees in those camps a decent way out) is Conservative party policy. I believe the Labor Party would allow NZ to take them and clear the camps. It is likely that Labor will win the next election so it will be interesting to see if there is some progress.
  14. That first line is not correct. Refugees used to drown when boats were able to travel freely to Australia. The current policy is to intervene when a boat heads off from Indonesia and escort it back rather than let it travel in the dangerous waters of the Timor Sea. That’s not a bad policy, the boats refugees are put on when they engage the services of a people smuggler are not sea worthy for the kind of distances involved in getting to Australia. The 1st controversial part is the current policy that says any refugee using a people smuggler to get them to Australia by boat will never be allowed to have their asylum processed in Australia and further, will never be allowed to settle in Australia. Even if they dodge border patrol and survive the crossing they will be sent off to a Pacific Island camp for processing and offered a choice of returning home or to a third country (usually the country on offer is somewhere like Papua New Guinea) The idea being that this acts as a deterrent from using people smugglers in the first place. The 2nd (even more) controversial part is the legacy case load of refugees who are still on these island camps who do not want to return home or go to the third country, often because they have family ties to Australia. They are essentially in a limbo with no prospect of leaving a camp which is little more than an open air prison. Families will have children in these camps and their are kids who are 3 or 4 years old who know no other life. Australia negotiated a refugee swap with Obama to take many of these legacy refugees but Trump threw a spanner in the works and has taken far fewer than planned. New Zealand has also said it will take most and potentially resolve the issue but the current Aus government believes that would act as a back door to Australia and encourage people to try to make the crossing again (Australia and NZ have free movement of people between the two countries).
  15. Surely the murder of an MP over this issue fundamentally changes the dynamic for other MPs dealing with this abuse compared with abuse you reference in the past.