RayC

Why would they need to do that? Van Grieken's party wants an independent Flemish state which would not include Brussels. However, your idea might have some merit. Since the pandemic there is an abundance of unused office space throughout Europe. In the interests of cost savings, maybe the unelected cabal of Brussels bureaucrats could share their accommodation with the unelected cabal of UK bureaucrats?

Just to be clear. I do not believe that immigrants to the UK of any nationality are any lazier or more work-shy than the indigenous UK population. I was clumsily trying to make the point that the UK is dependent on immigration to bolster its' workforce, and that leaving the EU has had no effect on this dependency. All that has happened is that we have replaced nationals from the EU states with nationals from further afield. Immigrants have always been and unfortunately it appears, will continue to be a convenient peg on which to hang society's problems.

If Brexit was about the future why do Brexiters find it so difficult to explain what this bright new future looks like and, more importantly, how it will be achieved? I'll answer my own questions: It's because they have no idea what it is. Even if they did, I suspect that they wouldn't have the faintest idea how it might be achieved. It's pointless providing (yet again) a counter-argument to the usual EU federalist, anti-democratic claptrap as, rather like any discussion on sovereignty, any facts (supported by evidence) will not be acknowledged as such. Suffice to say, the EU has changed and evolved over time. Why wouldn't it? It happens to all organisations. Has all change been for the best? Almost certainly not. Can the EU be improved? Almost certainly, yes. But what organisation/ system is perfect? The UK constitution or government(s)? I think not. So can we assume that in your opinion, Brexit has been a success to date? If so, we clearly use differing criteria in measuring success. Did you actually read the link which you posted? The most positive comment that I could find was: "Richard Carter, analyst at Quilter Cheviot, said bright spots in the data “give some hope that a recession can still be avoided by the UK”." Hardly a reason to put up the bunting. That the UK has "outperformed" France and Germany in terms of GDP growth - a dubious claim given that, amongst other things, the EU has not issued revised figures - proves nothing in itself. You would have to show either that the UK's relative "outperformance" was due to it having left the EU and/or that France and Germany's relative "underperformance" were due to them being part of the EU: It is almost impossible to test the latter premise, but the effect of Brexit on the UK economy has been modelled and reported upon by the likes of the OBR, FT and 'Britain in a Changing Europe'. The unanimous conclusion of these organisations was that leaving the EU had negatively impacted the UK. Which is factually incorrect. I just listened to a podcast by Politico which stated that support for 'Nexit' among Dutch voters was currently 13%.

How are other EU countries prevented from stopping illegal immigrants? What's the difference between Finland and other EU member states in this context?

As I have pointed out continuously, imo the EU/UK sovereignty issue was basically a red herring. All this chaos to eliminate the 3% of EU legislation which we voted against up to 2016 from the UK stature book. (Anyone seeking a link should go to the Fullfacts website. I've lost count of the number of times I've posted the link). Brexiters keep insisting that it's not Brexit that is the problem but the way that it has been implemented. However, I've yet to see anyo posters here describe in any detail what different path could have - and presumably still should be - taken. "The next two decades will see the decline of the EU ...". If by that you mean that, relative to the rest of the world, the member states of the EU will decline economically then I agree. What you conveniently forget to mention that so will the UK. However, due to its' size the EU as a collective, will still be a significant player on the world stage both economically and politically. Sadly, as an isolated medium-sized economy like the UK will not.

Perhaps those of the opinion that the UK has no need of immigrants could explain why - having left the EU and now being fully in control of immigration - the UK government has simply decided to replace the work-shy, lazy EU nationals - who used to take all our jobs and scround off the British state (err ...🤔) - with lazy, scrounging Indians, Nigerians, Pakistanis and Ukrainians?

If we leave the ECHR we will join Belarus, Russia and Kosovo (if counted as an independent state) as the only European countries outside of the convention. Says it all.

As you say, MSM is far from perfect - and all outlets have their bias - but I would generally still set greater store by what I read there compared with social media. (Imo to infer that the DT is objective is pushing it).

I stopped over in Istanbul en route to BKK and had a similar problem with Turkish Airlines. I was questioned at check-in re my return date which is in March. Fortunately, they accepted my explanation about extending visa. If airlines allow a passenger to travel when they shouldn't, and the passenger is subsequently refused entry at the destination, the airline has to foot the bill, hence the caution. Tbh I'm surprised that these incidents don't happen more often.

Sweet, naive child. Of course Brexiters will find a way to blame the EU for this fiasco🙄

Really? How so? Could you please provide some examples of senior police officers interfering at a strategic level politically to undermine Braverman? Imo our former Home Secretary was the one acting inappropriately by continually trying to interfere in police operations. Police forces in the UK are meant to be operationally independent.

Careful. He'll have you on 'Ignore' before you know it. Mind you, all the best people are part of that club😉

The Chief 'Flat Earther' shows his loyalty to the party and government. Given that ERG MPs appear to disagree so vehemently with government policies, why don't they do the honourable thing and resign the Whip? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12749629/Rees-Mogg-Tory-civil-war-BACKS-sacked-Home-Secretary-Suella-Braverman-Rishi-Sunak-no-Plan-B-betraying-migration-resignation-Rwanda.html

So much better to rely on 'Pravda' and 'Russia Today' for an impartial view of events.

For someone who (unsuccessfully) likes to think of themself as impartial and insists that they just want an end to all the pain and suffering, you spend a disproportionate amount of time reporting and celebrating what you view as setbacks to the Ukrainian cause and, as far as I can see, absolutely none reporting Russian problems.

So having had your various historical falsehoods laid bare - e.g. lies about promises made at the Yalta conference; ignoring the Soviet invasions of Hungary and Czechoslovakia, etc. - and your misrepresentation of the current situation on the battlefield, you now decide to play amateur psychologist in an attempt to deflect attention from the truth. Sad and pathetic.

Well said.

I agree with Stevenl, she'll wait, but be careful what you wish for: Even the slimmest possibility of this loon being elected PM should be avoided if possible.

If that ever happens, The Sun could certainly dust off the headline about 'Last one out of the country turn off the lights'. What has happened to the UK over the past decade? How on earth is it possible that someone so clearly unsuitable for high political office can be seriously considered as a future party leader? We can only hope that Conservative MPs and members take a good, hard look at themselves and come to the conclusion that, under no circumstances, can they elect this incapable, divisive loon to be their leader.

The cracks start to reappear. She is Deputy Chair of the Flat Earth Brigade, so no surprise at her lack of loyalty and support for a party leader who, despite being a Brexiter himself, at least doesn't automatically view anyone non-British as an enemy. With any luck she and her fellow loons will be out at the next election. All just my opinion of course.

Perhaps you would but many of the Christian churches and millions of their followers wouldn't. The Russian Orthodox Church is actively supporting Putin in Russia and you don't have to go that far back in history to witness the Catholic and Anglican Churches turning a blind eye to killings. I'm not trying to act as an apologist for Islam; I'm not religious and have little time for organised religion which imo throughout history has done more harm than good. However, imo it is wrong to castigate ordinary Muslims in this instance. Perhaps but, unfortunately, I doubt that the zealots who follow Hamas will change.

Not sure that there will be an all-out assault, unless she thinks that she has a chance of ousting Sunak before the next election. Imo more likely she bides her time until after the next election and snips away from the fringes i.e odd (in both settings of the word) articles and appearances here and there undermining Sunak. Time will tell.

Hmm🤔 ....... Not so sure this is good news. Gives this mad bigot even more opportunity to galvanise support and organise. Hopefully, the saner members of the Tory party will resist and prevail. The label 'Nasty Party' will be very apt if she ever becomes leader.

I'm pretty sure that individuals attended these marches for any number of reasons: 1) Some support a peaceful, political solution to the 'Palestinian problem' 2) Some support Hamas and 3) some are pacifists who disown violence in any form. There are, no doubt, other categories. It's quite conceivable that those in groups 1) and 3) would be equally comfortable taking part in a march against Hamas. In any event, your answer still doesn't address the question why a Muslim - rather than any other individual - should be expected to organise such a march.

The report found that GMP and other child protection agencies in Greater Manchester failed. Quite rightly, they were castigated. I cannot remember if any individuals were reprimanded but imo some heads should have rolled. Nevertheless, there is nothing in the report that states that the actions of GMP were politically motivated as you suggest. onservative.com/articles/news/uk-police-ignored-grooming-gangs/ No, it's nothing like that. I don't deny that individual police officers have engaged in political acts e.g. taking the knee, showing support for Palestine, etc However, if you then conclude from this that police authorities are institutionally politically bias then you are committing a logical fallacy: I've seen a white elephant but I don't believe all elephants are white.