Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Hiberno-Britannic Politics] This guy, who I named "Brexit", did something stupid

24567101

Posts

  • altidaltid Registered User regular
    Perdurabo wrote: »
    Mc zany wrote: »
    Very flexible document that manifesto. It also says no hard brexit.

    No it doesn't. It states aims relating to the single market should we remain in the EU. By that rationale you believe post Brexit we should be part of the Common Agricultural Policy (as the manifesto seeks to reform this, again as part of the EU).

    The tory manifesto said that they were in favour of the single market and that they would "safeguard british interests in the Single Market". By contrast it merely states that they would respect the outcome of the referendum. This would at least imply that they held membership of the single market as a higher priority than stopping all EU immigration or a hard brexit.

  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    JoeUser wrote: »
    Karl wrote: »
    Honestly, if the SNP are serious about another Indyref, they need to be patient and let Brexit happen. Once the shit storm is in full effect, they can use it as leverage to leave.

    Can the SNP survive losing another Indyref?

    Sturgeon is saying autumn 2018 as a logical choice. That still seems too soon.

    Sounds like she's banking on the negotiations being terrible

    Not exactly a longshot bet

    FencingsaxshrykeRchanen
  • pezgenpezgen Registered User regular
    JoeUser wrote: »
    Is there an estimated date when Article 50 gets triggered? Does it have to wait for reconciliation of the Lords amendments?

    The government still seems to be saying it'll happen in March, but we're quickly running out of March for it to happen in.

  • Dis'Dis' Registered User regular
    Karl wrote: »
    Honestly, if the SNP are serious about another Indyref, they need to be patient and let Brexit happen. Once the shit storm is in full effect, they can use it as leverage to leave.

    Can the SNP survive losing another Indyref?

    I think the ideal for the SNP is to see what shape the Brexit deal takes, then push for a second referendum if its shit before the UK actually exits. Fire it while the deal seems bad rather than the 'new normal', and negotiate with the EU as someone exiting rather than as an outsider.

    Imo SNP could survive in Scotland even if they lose a 2nd referendum, they do have a lot of goodwill as a party who fights for Scotland even among people who are strongly pro-union.

  • BogartBogart Newsflash, fuckwads: I'm a good person. Registered User regular
    JoeUser wrote: »
    Karl wrote: »
    Honestly, if the SNP are serious about another Indyref, they need to be patient and let Brexit happen. Once the shit storm is in full effect, they can use it as leverage to leave.

    Can the SNP survive losing another Indyref?

    Sturgeon is saying autumn 2018 as a logical choice. That still seems too soon.

    They want to get it in before Britain fully leaves the EU. A year and a half into negotiations they're expecting to be a long, painful process of reality walking up to cheerful Brexiteers and smacking them smartly about the face sounds reasonable. The worse the deal looks, the better independence (and continued membership) will look.

    On the other hand, I dunno what an independent Scotland can do other than leave along with the rest of the EU and then rejoin at a later date even if the referendum goes the SNP's way.

  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    Bogart wrote: »
    JoeUser wrote: »
    Karl wrote: »
    Honestly, if the SNP are serious about another Indyref, they need to be patient and let Brexit happen. Once the shit storm is in full effect, they can use it as leverage to leave.

    Can the SNP survive losing another Indyref?

    Sturgeon is saying autumn 2018 as a logical choice. That still seems too soon.

    They want to get it in before Britain fully leaves the EU. A year and a half into negotiations they're expecting to be a long, painful process of reality walking up to cheerful Brexiteers and smacking them smartly about the face sounds reasonable. The worse the deal looks, the better independence (and continued membership) will look.

    On the other hand, I dunno what an independent Scotland can do other than leave along with the rest of the EU and then rejoin at a later date even if the referendum goes the SNP's way.

    That is the damper: I don't see any way for Scottish EU-membership to be continuous and uninterrupted, even if they leave one day before the agreement happens.

    On the other hand, the sooner they leave, the sooner they can apply for admittance.

  • JoeUserJoeUser Registered User regular
    pezgen wrote: »
    JoeUser wrote: »
    Is there an estimated date when Article 50 gets triggered? Does it have to wait for reconciliation of the Lords amendments?

    The government still seems to be saying it'll happen in March, but we're quickly running out of March for it to happen in.

    Yeah, looking at it, the bill has to go back to the Commons, and they have to address the Lords amendments.

    Then back to the Lords!

    PSN: JoeUser80 Steam
  • JoeUserJoeUser Registered User regular
    Why is Nigel Farage talking to Julian Assange?


    Nigel Farage Just Visited The Ecuadorian Embassy In London

    Asked by BuzzFeed News if he'd been visiting Julian Assange, the former UKIP leader said he couldn't remember what he'd been doing in the building.

    PSN: JoeUser80 Steam
  • PerduraboPerdurabo Registered User regular
    altid wrote: »
    Perdurabo wrote: »
    Mc zany wrote: »
    Very flexible document that manifesto. It also says no hard brexit.

    No it doesn't. It states aims relating to the single market should we remain in the EU. By that rationale you believe post Brexit we should be part of the Common Agricultural Policy (as the manifesto seeks to reform this, again as part of the EU).

    The tory manifesto said that they were in favour of the single market and that they would "safeguard british interests in the Single Market". By contrast it merely states that they would respect the outcome of the referendum. This would at least imply that they held membership of the single market as a higher priority than stopping all EU immigration or a hard brexit.

    Oh come on, that's absurd. They also say they were in favour of reforming CAP, blocking an EU army, reforming the workings of the EU, no more EU bailouts and lowering EU spending. We can argue about whether we should leave the single market of course, but not on the basis of a manifesto commitment that doesn't exist.

    Bah.
  • pezgenpezgen Registered User regular
    Asked specifically if he had gone to the Knightsbridge building to meet with Assange, Farage said: “I never discuss where I go or who I see.”

    That is very short sentence that happens to contain an overwhelming weight of blatant untruths.

    JoeUserRMS OceanicPerduraboSolarBurnageVegemyteFencingsaxDesktop HippieJazzShadowenLabelAntinumericlonelyahavashrykeElldrenSkeith
  • BethrynBethryn Registered User regular
    You know, if we time the Trump visit to Scotland just perfectly before indyref2, that could very well swing it in independence' favour if he comes out with another gaffe on Scots and Brexit.

  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    Bethryn wrote: »
    You know, if we time the Trump visit to Scotland just perfectly before indyref2, that could very well swing it in independence' favour when he comes out with another gaffe on Scots and Brexit.

    It will be like Bizarro Obama

  • altidaltid Registered User regular
    Perdurabo wrote: »
    altid wrote: »
    Perdurabo wrote: »
    Mc zany wrote: »
    Very flexible document that manifesto. It also says no hard brexit.

    No it doesn't. It states aims relating to the single market should we remain in the EU. By that rationale you believe post Brexit we should be part of the Common Agricultural Policy (as the manifesto seeks to reform this, again as part of the EU).

    The tory manifesto said that they were in favour of the single market and that they would "safeguard british interests in the Single Market". By contrast it merely states that they would respect the outcome of the referendum. This would at least imply that they held membership of the single market as a higher priority than stopping all EU immigration or a hard brexit.

    Oh come on, that's absurd. They also say they were in favour of reforming CAP, blocking an EU army, reforming the workings of the EU, no more EU bailouts and lowering EU spending. We can argue about whether we should leave the single market of course, but not on the basis of a manifesto commitment that doesn't exist.

    The point is that a commitment to hard brexit did not exist. I despise the assumption that a leave vote absolutely requires a hard brexit. Their manifesto does not say anything of substance regarding a leave vote and is otherwise in favour of the EU. While that may not be conclusive enough to determine government policy, their current drive for hard brexit is not backed by this manifesto. If nothing else there should have been an actual debate over which direction the UK should head after the leave vote given the oceans of uncertainty involved, and yes the option of not leaving should always be there.

  • Mc zanyMc zany Registered User regular
    The manifesto says that "we want to preserve the integrity of the single market." and "We want to expand the single market, breaking down the trade barriers to trade and ensuring that new sectors are opened up to British firms" (page 73)

    So even if they did not say they would stay in the single market, their push for a hard brexit makes keeping those two promises extremely difficult. The point I was making was that there is all sorts of kerfuffle over the increase in NI but not a peep about this. Hence the manifesto being flexible.

    RMS Oceanicaltidpezgen
  • SolarSolar Registered User regular
    It's almost like everyone knows it's economic stupidity to leave but the Referendum seemingly mandates a hard Brexit which will be great, guys!

    altidBurnagepezgenlonelyahavashrykeCommander ZoomElldren
  • pezgenpezgen Registered User regular
    The thing is, I don't think the current government even see themselves in a position of having to honour any of those manifesto promises - they were made by the previous government. If they want to take an entirely new tack then there's a moral argument they should secure a mandate from the public by holding an election - but there's no legal or parliamentary reason for them to do so.

    RMS Oceanic
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    pezgen wrote: »
    The thing is, I don't think the current government even see themselves in a position of having to honour any of those manifesto promises - they were made by the previous government. If they want to take an entirely new tack then there's a moral argument they should secure a mandate from the public by holding an election - but there's no legal or parliamentary reason for them to do so.

    Alternatively, "make whatever argument that gets you the most while giving away the least".

    Desktop Hippiepezgen
  • Mc zanyMc zany Registered User regular
    pezgen wrote: »
    The thing is, I don't think the current government even see themselves in a position of having to honour any of those manifesto promises - they were made by the previous government.

    No they were not. The government we have now is the same one as in 2015. Just the leader has changed. If things worked otherwise every party will just have a leadership contest when they get into power to free themselves of any obligations.

    Gnome-Interruptus
  • PerduraboPerdurabo Registered User regular
    But the manifesto commitment is talking about a scenario where we're in the EU, as is obvious if you read past the comments on the single market. I agree, there should have been more detail from the vote leave camp as to what that looks like, that the government has no guidance from the referendum as to what exactly Brexit looks like, outside of leaving the European Union. But even then, the official leave campaign's stated aims were "to make our own trade deals", "take back control of our borders", to stop "EU control of our trade and economy" - etc etc. Now a lot of these claims are vague, but it seems clear to me that given the official leave group had these aims in the manifesto, how do you reconcile that with staying in the single market?

    I know the Independent pushed this view, that this was some sort of zinger, but it just feels like a waste of time. So the snip of the government commitment to the single market was sent around twitter without any context and people thought it would mean things would change.

    Bah.
  • JoeUserJoeUser Registered User regular
    Besides the manifesto stuff with national insurance, the budget also has tax credit and benefit cuts that could hurt a lot of people.

    From the Institute for Fiscal Studies:
    Tax credit changes in April will not affect current claimants immediately but will mean big losses in the longer term.

    The removal of benefit from third and subsequent children will mean that in the long run 600,000 three child families will be an average of £2,500 a year worse off than they would have been, while 300,000 families with four or more children will be £7,000 a year worse off on average.

    This and the reduction in the “family element” of tax credits will save around £5bn a year in the long run, dwarfing all of yesterday’s announcements combined.

    PSN: JoeUser80 Steam
  • Alistair HuttonAlistair Hutton Dr EdinburghRegistered User regular
    JoeUser wrote: »
    Karl wrote: »
    Honestly, if the SNP are serious about another Indyref, they need to be patient and let Brexit happen. Once the shit storm is in full effect, they can use it as leverage to leave.

    Can the SNP survive losing another Indyref?

    Sturgeon is saying autumn 2018 as a logical choice. That still seems too soon.

    I have a thoughtful and infrequently updated blog about games http://whatithinkaboutwhenithinkaboutgames.wordpress.com/

    I made a game, it has penguins in it. It's pay what you like on Gumroad.

    Currently Ebaying Nothing at all but I might do in the future.
    RMS OceanicaltidJoeUserWerewolf2000adJazzShadowenElldren
  • PerduraboPerdurabo Registered User regular
    Solar wrote: »
    It's almost like everyone knows it's economic stupidity to leave but the Referendum seemingly mandates a hard Brexit which will be great, guys!

    Which speaks to the stupidity of holding a referendum. But that horse has bolted.

    Bah.
    Desktop HippieRMS OceanicJoeUsershrykeCommander Zoom
  • RMS OceanicRMS Oceanic Registered User regular
    I still remember that Sky News bit which was "Nobody had a plan. The only person with a plan was Nicola Sturgeon."

    And the amazing thing is that while this is probably true, it's not like she keikaku'd the most genius plan ever and is a twelfth level intellect. She took the obvious inferences from the demographics of the vote and ran with it. As a plan, it's beautifully simple.

    FencingsaxShadowenAntinumericshrykeCommander ZoomGnome-InterruptusElldren
  • Desktop HippieDesktop Hippie This is NOT normalRegistered User regular
    I still remember that Sky News bit which was "Nobody had a plan. The only person with a plan was Nicola Sturgeon."

    And the amazing thing is that while this is probably true, it's not like she keikaku'd the most genius plan ever and is a twelfth level intellect. She took the obvious inferences from the demographics of the vote and ran with it. As a plan, it's beautifully simple.

    Even the Irish Government had a plan. They see more than a little bewildered that they actually had to use it, but they'd set things up so they had agreed what to deal with if the UK lost its sanity. I still find it hard to credit that nobody in England had a plan. It was a perfect storm of "Nah, we can't lose" from the British Government and the dog catching the car from Leave.

    RMS OceanicSnicketysnickCommander ZoomElldren
  • altidaltid Registered User regular
    Mc zany wrote: »
    pezgen wrote: »
    The thing is, I don't think the current government even see themselves in a position of having to honour any of those manifesto promises - they were made by the previous government.

    No they were not. The government we have now is the same one as in 2015. Just the leader has changed. If things worked otherwise every party will just have a leadership contest when they get into power to free themselves of any obligations.

    And the Chancellor;
    Foreign Secretary;
    Home Secretary;
    Justice Secretary;
    Education Secretary etc.

    While many of the people were in the cabinet already, several of the major positions were filled by people who previously only had relatively minor portfolios. Ultimately only four cabinet members remained in the same position (Defense, Health, Welsh and Scottish secretaries). Then there's the issue of positions like the brexit secretary that didn't exist before. The manner and timing of the change does bring questions about the UK's system, especially as this government does not seem to consider themselves bound by the election manifesto.

    I still think Blair best described this government:
    This is a Government for Brexit, of Brexit and dominated by Brexit. It is a mono-purpose political entity.

    FencingsaxElldren
  • PerduraboPerdurabo Registered User regular
    I still remember that Sky News bit which was "Nobody had a plan. The only person with a plan was Nicola Sturgeon."

    And the amazing thing is that while this is probably true, it's not like she keikaku'd the most genius plan ever and is a twelfth level intellect. She took the obvious inferences from the demographics of the vote and ran with it. As a plan, it's beautifully simple.

    I'm not convinced it's that great a plan, apart from giving themselves a reason to demand another referendum (if that was their only aim, not to win, then fair enough).

    The pretense that the EU is the thing that should cause this ignores the not insignificant number of Scots who wanted to be out of the EU (Jim Sellars is a prime example of this view). Of course a large number of these people will be Unionists, but I'd imagine there would a not inconsequential number of independence = independence people.
    The economic case for independence isn't there
    There's no appetite for a referendum before Brexit is finalised
    The rUK being out of the customs union would make trade with RUK that much harder if Scotland reapplies

    It suits the SNP for this to be biggest issue for perpetuity, especially as they have no real opposition in Scotland these days. If they had any sort of fear of a 2nd referendum loss having any impact on their electability they wouldn't be pursuing it. It's a free shot, at this point. Until there's a viable left wing alternative in Scotland, they can continue going into elections promising referendums.


    Bah.
  • PerduraboPerdurabo Registered User regular
    I learn today that the British government has:

    HOLMES 2 (Home Office Large Major Enquiry System) is an information technology system that is predominantly used by UK police forces for the investigation of major incidents such as serial murders and high value frauds.

    &

    IND intelligence units within INDIS, Enforcement & Removals, Border Control, Managed Migration and Asylum Support, Caseworking and Appeals Directorates now use a new intelligence IT system, Mycroft

    Bah.
    Dark Raven XsurrealitycheckpezgenJazzGnome-InterruptusForar
  • autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    Odd?
    Nigel Farage Just Visited The Ecuadorian Embassy In London

    Asked by BuzzFeed News if he'd been visiting Julian Assange, the former UKIP leader said he couldn't remember what he'd been doing in the building.

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/marieleconte/wait-what?utm_term=.iaopGXvXA#.reQw1ayak


    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
  • pezgenpezgen Registered User regular
    Mc zany wrote: »
    pezgen wrote: »
    The thing is, I don't think the current government even see themselves in a position of having to honour any of those manifesto promises - they were made by the previous government.

    No they were not. The government we have now is the same one as in 2015. Just the leader has changed. If things worked otherwise every party will just have a leadership contest when they get into power to free themselves of any obligations.

    I agree. But I don't think they see it that way. The current cabinet is Brexit-heavy, in contrast to the last cabinet, which was very pro-remain. It's not unlikely that they differ on a lot of other policies too. In their eyes they won, so they get to change things. I think they should be kept to their party's pledges, but they don't seem to see it that way.

  • Desktop HippieDesktop Hippie This is NOT normalRegistered User regular
    Odd?
    Nigel Farage Just Visited The Ecuadorian Embassy In London

    Asked by BuzzFeed News if he'd been visiting Julian Assange, the former UKIP leader said he couldn't remember what he'd been doing in the building.

    https://www.buzzfeed.com/marieleconte/wait-what?utm_term=.iaopGXvXA#.reQw1ayak


    It's entirely possible that Trump is using him as an errand boy.

  • altidaltid Registered User regular
    This is a touch off-topic, but can anyone shed some more light on the current Polish government? After today's events they appear possibly less sane than the british one.

    They tried to have their former prime minister Doland Tusk removed from his current position as European council president. They were beaten by a unanimous vote - which includes the UK voting in favour of Tusk. This appears to have gone down poorly with the Polish government:
    “We know now that it [the EU] is a union under Berlin’s diktat,” the Polish foreign minister, Witold Waszczykowski, told Polish media, echoing persistent claims by PiS that the EU is controlled by Berlin.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/09/donald-tusk-re-elected-as-european-council-president-despite-polish-opposition

    Reading into it, it seems the current Polish government have a particular hatred of Tusk dating back to their time in opposition. They're also unhappy that he has taken the EU's side in opposing some of the rather dubious changes they're making to Poland's courts. As a reminder, these are the people Cameron chose to ally with in Europe.

  • Slacker1913Slacker1913 Registered User regular
    Isn't that the same old Polish fart who said women should earn less because they are naturally inferior to men?

    My wife is trying to finish her dissertation on controversial scientific findings, please contribute by filling out a 4 minute survey:
    Qualtrics survey on video game effects
  • GatorGator An alligator in Scotland Registered User regular
    Poland's situation is ole the usa's if trump was competent

    It's devolving fast into illiberalism

  • AlphaRomeroAlphaRomero Registered User regular
    So what are our thoughts on the national insurance wage increase now they've postponed it. I don't know enough about it for a detailed thought but it seems fair? Why shouldn't self employed pay as much as everyone else?

  • SanderJKSanderJK Crocodylus Pontifex Sinterklasicus Madrid, 3000 ADRegistered User regular
    The Polish government is their Catholic Conservative party, who dig deeply in Putin/Orban/Erdogans playbook. They stuffed the High Court, they changed public broadcasting so that they are stooges of the government etcet.
    One of their flagpoles is that the previous government was Evil, in many different ways (They caused/silenced the crash of the Government airplane crash, they are stooges of various world powers)

    Steam: SanderJK Origin: SanderJK
    CptKemzikElldren
  • pezgenpezgen Registered User regular
    So what are our thoughts on the national insurance wage increase now they've postponed it. I don't know enough about it for a detailed thought but it seems fair? Why shouldn't self employed pay as much as everyone else?

    It does seem fair on paper, especially when "self-employed" is taken to mean business owners or tradesmen or whatever. One of the big problems with it (for me at least) is that "self-employed" can now cover people on zero-hour contracts. So as well as all the other inherent issues with zero-hours contracts, the government would now be taxing these very low paid people even more.

    The Tory MPs opposing it, though, are mostly opposing it because it's a tax rise, and Tories don't raise taxes.

    Gnome-Interruptus
  • klemmingklemming Registered User regular
    Doesn't every budget follow the same script? I'm pretty sure news organisations have the next week of stories written in advance, they just need to fill in the blanks.
    Raise in spending = good, cuts in spending = bad, increase in tax to pay for the other stuff = terrible, any change to what was announced, even if it's just to correct a typo = humiliating U-turn by a failing government.

    Nobody remembers the singer. The song remains.
  • PerduraboPerdurabo Registered User regular
    I was under the impression working a zero hour contract meant that your NICS is still dealt with as PAYE? So this wouldn't apply to them? I might be wrong on this.

    The fact that this affect a large number of Journalists are affected by this, hence the outrage, is telling. Where was this outrage when benefits were being slashed? Equally, this is a progressive tax:

    1210.jpg?w=780&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=0de7e59e3b97eb41dc1fd9d95933306c

    But overall the changes during this parliament are regressive:

    1196.jpg?w=780&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=c3799de832730fe5e401ee6fd5d7a9fa

    Yet the outrage is here? I'm sorry I don't have sympathy for this outrage. I'm perhaps biased as the self employed people I know and work with do so because of the tax benefits.

    Bah.
  • Mc zanyMc zany Registered User regular
    People on zero hour contracts are not self employed. They still work for an employer. Technically contractors are zero hour but that is another barrel of fish.

    I don't get the outrage myself. Self employed workers got a discount on ni for years. Now they will be taxed at the same rate as employees.

    SolarPerdurabo
  • Bad-BeatBad-Beat Registered User regular
    Two reasons for it:

    1. People are being asked to pay more tax. Regardless of the fairness, asking people to pay more tax never goes down well.
    2. Conservatives said they wouldn't. It's not lying but it isn't great optics when you go against something explicitly stated in a manifesto. (By this logic the whole country should be screaming about coming out of the Single Market but hey-ho.. )

    May's Government looked at the revenue increase this would generate and decided it would be worth the criticism. Sounds like they might have mis-judged it.

This discussion has been closed.