The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[LondonLax]

21 minutes ago, snowychap said:

It was discussed but it was also written off as rubbish by those same people who are now announcing it.

This is really the message from the last few years (not just from Brexit):

 

I agree with the sentiment in that tweet but when I said ‘discussed on here’ I was meaning that the realities of each eventuality were discussed on here by the regular posters on this thread (i.e. we were never fooled by the double speak) and further to that I am not surprised this is the route the UK is taking with Brexit over the other options we all discussed on here. 

The fact that politicians were promising the world and trying to be all things to all people was a separate but also valid point. It seems to be a problem in politics all over the western world at the moment, indeed the SNP are taking a similar approach to their claims about Scottish Independence. 

[snowychap]

34 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

when I said ‘discussed on here’ I was meaning that the realities of each eventuality were discussed on here by the regular posters on this thread (i.e. we were never fooled by the double speak)

I'm not sure that I agree.

See also citizens' rights/EU settlement scheme, &c.

Edit:

34 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

The fact that politicians were promising the world and trying to be all things to all people was a separate but also valid point.

And on this, I don't just think it is a case of promising the world (as that's largely just saying what people want to hear) and then disappointing.

This is different.

It's people saying things that a lot of people know and point out to be at least questionable if not thoroughly untrue and those saying these things doubling down on them when challenged (and even people saying at the time that they can't be so brazenly lying because they'll be found out and made to suffer for doing it -- so why would they lie about x, y & z?). Then when the reality bites, people just waving the cock and bull away as something expected and normal and stuff no one was every really fooled by all along.

The point Cohen was making was not that the misleading had and is happening but that there is no penalty from the public/electorate for doing/having done it.

Edited February 11, 2020 by snowychap

[HanoiVillan]

15 minutes ago, snowychap said:

misleading . . . there is no penalty from the public/electorate for doing/having done it.

This is the key point, really. There's no higher jury awarding prizes for honesty, so unless and until the 'victims' of dishonesty (in this case, companies that have to pay lots more for red tape and bureaucracy and have their supply chains disrupted) actually start acting like they genuinely feel angry about it, then all we can do is assume that in the end, they're okay with it. 

[LondonLax]

14 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

This is the key point, really. There's no higher jury awarding prizes for honesty, so unless and until the 'victims' of dishonesty (in this case, companies that have to pay lots more for red tape and bureaucracy and have their supply chains disrupted) actually start acting like they genuinely feel angry about it, then all we can do is assume that in the end, they're okay with it. 

You can add the electorate to that list also. As the saying goes, the people get the government they deserve. 

[snowychap]

Thread:

Including:

 

[blandy]

On 11/02/2020 at 11:11, snowychap said:

The point Cohen was making was not that the misleading had and is happening but that there is no penalty from the public/electorate for doing/having done it.

Yeah, I agree with both sets of comments - LL's and the twitter ones (and yours).

I wonder whether to an extent at least there will be electorate "retribution". I suspect there may well be. Though whether it actually affects the most guilty, or just their parties then incumbent MPs, I'd be less confident about.

This might be naive, but I think generally if a party or leader does a whole ton of bad, the electorate generally boot them out and/or their name is tarnished forever [Blair]. Hasn't stopped him making a mint, mind. But in terms of how he'll be remembered, he's stuffed.

In a way the shame of it is in both cases [Brexit and Iraq] the main opposition was either egging them on, or at best ambivalent about the grave errors unfolding before them at the time. I think that's perhaps the greater problem - pathetic opposition leaving the Gov't of the day to make all kinds of damaging "mistakes".

The tories couldn't profit electorially from Blair's sins, because they encouraged them. Ditto with Labour if, OK, when, Brexit turns into a fustercluck - they did next to now't to oppose it as a party.

[bickster]

Life is like a box of chocolates...

[Xann]

On 11/02/2020 at 11:29, HanoiVillan said:

This is the key point, really. There's no higher jury awarding prizes for honesty, so unless and until the 'victims' of dishonesty (in this case, companies that have to pay lots more for red tape and bureaucracy and have their supply chains disrupted) actually start acting like they genuinely feel angry about it, then all we can do is assume that in the end, they're okay with it. 

We should be taking a leaf out the French book and freaking right out.

[HanoiVillan]

Seemingly without irony

 

[NurembergVillan]

47 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

Seemingly without irony

 

Gullible's Travels

[snowychap]

Thread:

Including:

 

[snowychap]

UK could face ECJ if it fails to implement Irish protocol Link:

Quote

The UK can be brought to the European Court of Justice if it fails to carry out checks and controls on goods going from Great Britain to Northern Ireland, EU sources have confirmed.

Amid emerging differences over how the Irish Protocol will operate, sources say Article 12 of the Protocol gives the EU the power to take infringement proceedings against the UK through the ECJ.

...

RTÉ News understands that if the UK does not put in place a checking regime or if it fails to carry out the correct checks and controls then the EU can take infringement action, potentially leading to the European Court of Justice.

Article 12 (4) of the Protocol states: "In particular, the Court of Justice of the European Union shall have the jurisdiction provided for in the Treaties" in respect of how checks and controls are applied.

 

[LondonLax]

8 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

Seemingly without irony

 

Nothing has yet changed with regard to immigration queues (and won’t until January 2021). I’m not exactly sure what he is saying here? Is he saying he thinks UK passport holders should have been moved out of the EU queue by now? Or is it a general rant about the efficiency of Schiphol? Or some other take??

Edit: Apparently Schiphol were training new staff that day

https://twitter.com/Schiphol/status/1228324595071160320?s=20

 

Edited February 14, 2020 by LondonLax

[tonyh29]

8 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

Seemingly without irony

 

regular Schipol travellers will know there is a special queue for people like him

 

Edited February 14, 2020 by tonyh29

[Chindie]

2 hours ago, snowychap said:

UK could face ECJ if it fails to implement Irish protocol Link:

 

Yeah, but what is the ECJ going to do when the SAS and a squadron of Spitfires and para-bulldogs attack and incapacitate it under British hobnail boots, eh?

[snowychap]

Thread:

 

[snowychap]

The sound of silence

Quote

We’re in a strange kind of limbo period in which the UK has left the EU, and the Transition Period has started, and yet the crucial talks about future terms have not yet begun and won’t do so until March. That gives the impression that nothing much is happening with Brexit for, as Luke McGee of CNN observes, the government is “eerily quiet on the single most important issue facing the United Kingdom in 2020”.  And what little is being said has largely been drowned out by the cabinet reshuffle, HS2 and other stories.
 

... if the government is successful in persuading people that Brexit was something ‘that happened’, rather than something that is happening, and which both in principle and in form the Prime Minister and other leading ministers made happen.

This is why it is important – especially in the media - to keep challenging the linguistic contortions, and to keep comparing the promises with the outcomes. For although it may seem that both rationality and honesty have now disappeared from our politics that is not inevitable, and will only become so if we all drop the attempt to keep them present.

 

[snowychap]

 

[LondonLax]

On 14/02/2020 at 23:48, snowychap said:

Thread:

 

That is as we discussed on here quite a few times. It will be option B.

The UK Government will not put a border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. If the EU wants to protect their market they will be forced into a Hobson’s choice. 

[ml1dch]

19 minutes ago, LondonLax said:

That is as we discussed on here quite a few times. It will be option B.

The UK Government will not put a border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. If the EU wants to protect their market they will be forced into a Hobson’s choice. 

That's not what (2) above is. They absolutely will put a border there. They will just lie and say that they haven't.

It's not as if any of the people who voted for them will know any different.