RayC

Steady on. We didn't leave the EU just to replace it with a different set of faceless bureaucrats from Beijing, Bombay, Brasilia or Babayeva telling us what to do! (Confession time: Yes, I know Bombay is now called Mumbai. I also admit that I had to search for "Cities in Russia beginning with B").

Agreed but it is isolationist and insular to seek to withdraw from international partnerships, conventions and agreements, especially when you seemingly have no idea what or how to replace their functions. Are you inferring that Indians are incapable of being racist? Her fellow Tory, Baroness Warsi, who I doubt is herself a member of the ".. Guardian-reading, tofu-eating wokerati" seems to disagree. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/baroness-sayeeda-warsi-tory-peer-comments-suella-braverman-racist-b1073500.html Imo Braverman is a simply a nasty piece of work.

I find the prospect that the insular, isolationist, borderline racist homophobe Braverman might end up as leader of one of the two major UK-wide political parties truly horrific. I live in hope that having got their fingers burnt when they elected Truss, surely even Tory MPs and members wouldn't be stupid enough to appoint another mad woman to be party leader. (Before I'm accused of sexism, I fully accept that there are also plenty of madmen in the ERG)..

The aims of the 'levelling up' initiative might be a bit nebulous, but I doubt that they include rampant localised inflation. However, I do agree that the priority should have been on improving local transport links in the north, rather than shaving 20 mins off of a London - B'ham trip. Moreover, the spiralling costs cause a doubt over the Business Case for the HS2 project.

Thanks for the clarification; I'd forgotten about that incident. It seemed like a sensible decision to ensure that the EU agreed with May's proposal to the UK cabinet, although I'll admit that her flying to Berlin, rather than Brussels, does suggest that Germany were driving things at that moment.

As you infer, introducing a system of elected Commissioners would be far from straightforward, but I don't understand why you say that it would de facto generate a federal state? The nomination of Commissioners by member states is usually made according to party lines, so the problem you outline currently exists.

Indeed but the strategic direction of the EU is set by the European Council (Heads of Government of the member states). Again, agreed. It is very unlikely that a decision covering 27 member states will be optimal. Hopefully, it will be the best compromise decision. Agreed. Imo there is a strong argument for Commissioners, especially the President, to be directly elected. However, let's not pretend that UK national politics is any more democratic and doesn't itself throw up some poor results. You only need look at the membership of any UK cabinet this century. Imo V.d. Leyen was a strange choice. A judgement on her performance will be delivered next year when she is up for re-election. That Germany wields enormous influence within the EU shouldn't be a surprise. So too does France, as did the UK when it was a member. I don't understand the Theresa May reference? Most Commission Presidents and Commissioners emerge during the nomination period. Most candidates aren't widely known outside of their home country. Imo that's not a particular problem currently, but I accept that if they were to be elected directly by the public then something would need to be done to change the situation. However, surely the main thing is that the President and Commissioners are competent and on top of their respective briefs. I'm sure that you would agree that the same criteria should be applied to UK cabinet ministers.

So you consider the allegations outlined in this article to be "questionable to ridiculous"? How do you reach that conclusion? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-66838794 It seems that you cannot differentiate between consensual sex and rape.

Imo unless you want the UK to shut itself off from the rest of the world like North Korea, 'taking back control' and the purity of national sovereignty is a myth. All political and trade deals have a cost; it just depends what price a nation is willing to pay. The idea that EU member states are ruled by "faceless men in Brussels" is nonsense. https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/law/how-eu-policy-decided_en#:~:text=EU decision-making process,representing the EU's overall interests

London - Delhi and Istanbul - Bangkok are both 9+ hour flights.

Boris Johnson, July '22?

Yes, the migrant issue is difficult and yes, 27 individual EU member states have different ideas of how it should be managed. Why should that be a surprise? How would Germany leaving the EU solve its' current economic problems? https://www.euronews.com/2023/05/26/why-has-germany-gone-into-recession#:~:text=The country's trading partners imported,to the DIHK economic institute. How has leaving the EU benefitted the UK economically?

I posted this in another thread but it is also relevant here ------- The suggestion that nothing is being done to prevent illegal migration is nonsense. Whether the measures are effective and the money is being as well-spent as it might be are different questions. https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/irregular-migration-and-return_en https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/07/04/money-spent-by-eu-on-migration-policy-becoming-complex-to-track-expert

"Hoist the drawbridge!"

The suggestion that nothing is being done to prevent illegal migration is nonsense. Whether the measures are effective and the money is being as well-spent as it might be are different questions. https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/migration-and-asylum/irregular-migration-and-return_en https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2023/07/04/money-spent-by-eu-on-migration-policy-becoming-complex-to-track-expert

A bit stupid spending all this time, money and effort trying to prevent illegal migration if that is the case.

Presumably you felt the same way when the allegations about Saville, Glitter, Epstein, Weinstein, etc came out? If the UK/ US authorities had adopted your view, two of those named above would be free and, in all probability, committing more crimes today. I agree and pre-internet that was pretty much the case, however, difficult to see how it might be achieved nowadays. No doubt some have. Harvey Proctor springs to mind recently. A lot? There are already avenues open to the CPS and individuals in the UK to bring cases against individuals making false accusations. Traditionally in the UK, the CPS are reluctant to prosecute alleged rape cases because it is difficult to secure a conviction. Therefore, if a not guilty is reached, it is likely that there was a case to be answered. Imo no reason to go further. Imo there is more false information to be found on the wider internet than there is in newspapers such as 'The Times'.

She'll be changing her name to TINA next.

Trans, Didn't think that I would ever respond to one of your posts in this way but, spot on. Wrt to other posters' concerns about those falsely accused, yes it is an issue. Imo it should be pretty simple - through legal channels - to financially compensate such individuals for loss of earnings, etc. Compensating them for the effects on their mental well-being, family, etc is a whole lot more difficult (impossible?). No easy answers but, as Trans infers, I guess that the question that we all have to answer for ourselves is along the lines of: "Is it better for some to be falsely accused if it means that the likes of Saville are stopped in their tracks and punished?"

Which is why I used the word 'allegations'. So you don't think that a celebrity accused of being a rapist is newsworthy? The fact that these allegedly assaults happened 5+ years ago is irrelevant, unless you believe that the allegations should not be investigated. Brand doesn't have to prove that he is innocent. The accusers have to be prove that he is guilty. Presumably, Channel 4 and The Times believe that there is substance to these allegations, otherwise they are leaving themselves open to libel claims. It's noticeable that Brand hasn't threatened libel action. I'm sure that his mate, Elon Musk could underwrite any writ if he was that confident. Rather than immediately shout 'Woke' and 'Misogyny' at the earliest opportunity, maybe you should look at the evidence firstly.

You and your rational argument and conclusion. Whatever next ....????????

Bottom line is that the bloke was a <deleted> before these allegations were made and he remains a <deleted> today. Of course, that's only an opinion but there's plenty of evidence to support my view.

I was under the impression that a major criticism of Remainers was that we can't know what the future will bring. Now we're being asked for predictions????

I assume that is a joke?

That's fair enough and imo unsurprisingly. I would probably go further and add that for those Brits who live in the UK, work for companies with little overseas exposure and visit the continent occasionally, the only things that they are likely to notice about Brexit is a delay to immigration and customs procedures at the ports plus, perhaps, an increase in the cost of some EU produce. However, for those Brits who lived/ live and/or do business in EU countries, it's a different story. Most things for these groups are a lot more difficult post-Brexit and for what benefit?