OutByEaster? Posted November 28, 2019 Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2019 I think I see the problem differently to you - for me the issue isn't about a commitment to the rules on the Privy council it's that the rules of the Privy council are entirely wrong on trade - trade above all things should be a transparent process - the British public should have the ability to scrutinise trade deals, the British media should, British MP's should, I should - for me Corbyn's actions on this are correct because the rules are wrong. The commitment to the British public wins over the commitment to AIG or whoever drew up the rule with the Privy council. The actions of someone letting the public see information on negotiations carried out by Mr Corbyn in trade negotiations on Russian energy for example would be for me the correct way to do things - good for them. I don't blame Corbyn here - stupid rules should be overcome by people of integrity. Where those rules apply to things that are hidden for the benefit of the British people then they should be hidden from sight - but stuff like this? Good on him - he's put the interests of the British people ahead of those who paid to write the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choffer Posted November 28, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2019 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic09 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: trade above all things should be a transparent process - the British public should have the ability to scrutinise trade deals, the Britih media should, British MP's should, I should - for me Corbyn's actions on this are correct because the rules are wrong. What if, while negotiating with country A) UK also negotiates with country B)? Is it in UK's best interest to have the details of such negotiations open to public, if these details can be used against us by country B )? Might it not put it in a worse negotiating position? Leaving alone the fact that the public only understands the merits of such negotiations based on the media description of those events, and that can be a very skewed picture. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 I'm all for trade deals being conducted in secret. I can understand that. What I'm against is trade deals being conducted in secret whilst the compulsive liar Johnson is seeking election as the Prime Minister and telling the electorate there categorically is no deal being done on the NHS. Liar. Liar. Liar. In that Order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 5 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: I think I see the problem differently to you - for me the issue isn't about a commitment to either the rules on the Privy council it's that the rules of the Privy council are entirely wrong on trade - trade above all things should be a transparent process - the British public should have the ability to scrutinise trade deals, the Britih media should, British MP's should, I should - for me Corbyn's actions on this are correct because the rules are wrong. The actions of someone letting the public see information on negotiations carried out by Mr Corbyn in trade negotiations on Russian energy for example would be for me the correct way to do things - good for them. I don't blame Corbyn here - stupid rules should be overcome by people of integrity. Where those rules apply to things that are hidden for the benefit of the British people then they should be hidden from sight - but stuff like this? Good on him - he's put the interests of the British people ahead of those who paid to write the rules. Going back to TTIP, what was happening was that secret discussions were taking place, including about proposals to give corporations the power to win damages against governments for pursuing policies which led to them making lower profits. Agreeing to such a proposal is a very fundamental betrayal of the interests of the country, in the service of multinational corporations. It is only by knowing about such things before they happen that we stand any chance at all of preventing them. The fine detail of negotiations may properly be kept confidential. Things like whether our government is proposing to open up the NHS to the US, cannot and must not be confidential, and we should reject any claim to the contrary. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 28, 2019 Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2019 11 minutes ago, peterms said: Going back to TTIP, what was happening was that secret discussions were taking place, including about proposals to give corporations the power to win damages against governments for pursuing policies which led to them making lower profits. Agreeing to such a proposal is a very fundamental betrayal of the interests of the country, in the service of multinational corporations. It is only by knowing about such things before they happen that we stand any chance at all of preventing them. The fine detail of negotiations may properly be kept confidential. Things like whether our government is proposing to open up the NHS to the US, cannot and must not be confidential, and we should reject any claim to the contrary. That's a fine point well made. The first two paras, I agree with every word. The last one, starts off the same. Perfect. Where I slightly struggle is that (and I am genuinely posting in this thread not to persuade or oppose or whatever, just to try and be analytical, rather than partisan) while I sort of share the suspicion that the tories, at least in part, would like to do more privatisation of the NHS for bell-end reasons, I don't think that they are actually pro selling it off whoilesale, as Labour claims. So the line "our government is proposing to open up the NHS to the US" is not one that I've seen any evidence for. It's just (maybe correct, maybe not) guesswork. My intuition says this bunch of robbers are quite bad enough to do that, but then we're just talking "my intuition is that..." Maybe with this report leak thing, there's something from revealing that the US would like to sell drugs at higher prices, etc., but there's no "gotcha" in knowing the US want to do that. We knew that already. Going back to TTIP, what was appalling about that wasn't that negotiations were in private/secret, it was that the politicians were not allowed access, that lobbyists and big corp. were and charities an other interested parties were excluded. It wasn't talks about potential talks (in a post Brexit type scenario), it was the actual negotiation. On its own it was enough to make me think "leave the EU, this is appalling". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted November 28, 2019 Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2019 5 minutes ago, blandy said: On its own it was enough to make me think "leave the EU, this is appalling". And in the end, it's the EU and the way it's structured (badly) that managed to put a stop to TTiP (and you can argue, as a result, caused Brexit). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 28, 2019 Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2019 6 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said: in the end, it's the EU and the way it's structured (badly) that managed to put a stop to TTiP Yeah, the redemption was that because of the complaints of MEPs and the exposure that got and then the petitions etc. and because of stroppy (God bless 'em) Belgian district politicians and others, they put a stop to it. Not sure I get the point about how that caused or contributed to Brexit, but that'll be me being dim. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 44 minutes ago, blandy said: while I sort of share the suspicion that the tories, at least in part, would like to do more privatisation of the NHS for bell-end reasons, I don't think that they are actually pro selling it off whoilesale, as Labour claims. So the line "our government is proposing to open up the NHS to the US" is not one that I've seen any evidence for. It's not politically possible to sell it off wholesale, which is why they have adopted the approach of creeping privatisation, requiring elements to be tendered and awarding contracts to private firms, while keeping the main NHS underfunded, overstretched and demotivated, in order to reduce the public support it has and weaken opposition to further privatisation. This for example shows the pace it's happening at. Quote NHS spending on care provided by private companies has jumped by £700m to £3.1bn with non-NHS firms winning almost 70 per cent of tendered contracts in England last year. Private care providers were awarded 267 out of a total of 386 contracts made available in 2016-17, including the seven highest value opportunities, worth £2.4bn. Leading Tories are on record as wanting to privatise it - for example, both Letwin and Hunt have written pamphlets arguing for that. It's not yet possible for that to be formal tory policy. When they are plainly working towards that incrementally, I hardly think that the claim that they want to open it up further to private firms needs any more substantiation. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markavfc40 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 I think this sums up what the Tories are doing and will, if given the chance, really accelerate over the next 5 years. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 28, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2019 2 minutes ago, snowychap said: Have all the journalists been hiding under a rock for two weeks? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snowychap Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 3 minutes ago, bickster said: Have all the journalists been hiding under a rock for two weeks? Two weeks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 28, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2019 15 minutes ago, snowychap said: Two weeks? Well yeah I know, I was talking about the current specifics not the whole years of bullshit 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted November 28, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2019 13 minutes ago, snowychap said: Conveniently forgetting to add that they prefer such articles to be on their own website. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted November 28, 2019 VT Supporter Share Posted November 28, 2019 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 28, 2019 Author Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2019 5 minutes ago, Chindie said: So Momentum turned up? I wouldnt call that news tbh 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 I’d guess this must already be in here somewhere, but Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted November 28, 2019 Share Posted November 28, 2019 15 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: I’d guess this must already be in here somewhere, but I can't decide which of them disgusts me the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts