RayC

Your implication that the UK was somehow discriminated against in terms of number of employees is incorrect. The UK (and other member states) were entitled to numbers in proportion to their respective populations. The UK was unable to supply its' quota (presumably because UK workers did not find the T&C attractive). Given that most of the EU institutions are located in Brussels, why should it be a surprise that local staff make up a significant number of workforce if there are vacancies?

Can you explain why a country dweller's vote is worth less than a city dweller's vote under a PR based voting system?

"Bingo!". 4 corners.

As a Remainer, I accepted the Brexit result a long time ago. What I now want is for you Brexiters to take accountability and responsibility for your decision and deliver the promised (undefined) benefits based on an international agreement which was signed less than 3 years ago Unfortunately, what we get instead is constant whining and complaining from Brexiters about how unfair it is that the EU choose to implement the terms of that agreement. No system of electoral democracy is perfect. It's a tired, and flawed, old argument that the UK system of government - where less than 43% of votes cast delivers a government with a cast-iron parliamentary majority - is somehow superior and more democratic than the system of PR used at an EU level

????????It's comes as no surprise that you think one of the major policy issues is irrelevant to a discussion above the suitability of the PM candidates.

Of course you're ".. not interested". As usual, you can't support your position with a reasoned argument.

Take your pick. Neither seem apparent.

So the benefits of Brexit will miraculously start to become apparent wef 2024? Excellent. Something to look forward to.... unless of course they don't and you've been sold a pup. Really? Not what most Johnson apologists on this board would have us believe. Anyway, 2.5 years (at most) to finish a process that has not(?) been rumbling on since 2016. Cutting things a bit tight.

I wouldn't have thought that unilaterally breaking an international agreement was the best way to win friends and influence the wider international community.

Which supports the view that the "vociferous left-wing media" aren't as influential as the Johnson apologists would have us believe.

So you didn't approve of Sunak's furlough scheme? You would have preferred that workers were made redundant during the pandemic, and that businesses went bust? China and the US have grown more rapidly than the UK during this period. Russia has not, and has been even more economically mismanaged than the UK. Brexit was in 2016. The Tories had already been in power for 6 years. Six years of unnecessary austerity politics instigated by 'Boy' George, followed by an unnecessary event (Brexit) caused by 'Call me Dave' gambling his own and the country's political future; weak leadership by May, who was undermined by her own party; 3 years being led by an opportunist chancer, and now the prospect of being led by a political chameleon. 12 years in power. How long before these promised benefits arrive?

Don't you think that the ongoing fall-out from Brexit is still relevant to today's political discussion?

If the "vociferous left wing media" is as influential as you suggest, why hasn't it translated into election victories for Labour? Re Johnson in particular: Johnson supplied an awful lot of tinder to light the fire.

You never tire of hitting the Ctrl+V buttons do you, even when the content is completely irrelevant to the topic under discussion.

I have no experience of the US health care system, but to suggest that European systems lag behind because they are "socialized" is over-simplistic. I have (relatively) recent experience of the Belgian and UK systems. Both systems might be described as "socialized". The Belgian health care system is excellent, the UK's is not. Again, over-simplistic. The waiting lists in Europe vary according to the individual country, and within the individual nations, according to the procedure.

I doubt that Theresa May would agree with you.

Just another example of defection and an unwillingness to take responsibility and accountability for your preferred party's actions. Anyway, on the subject of embarrassments: https://www.bigissue.com/news/politics/the-most-embarrassing-things-tory-mps-have-said-to-defend-boris-johnson/ And let's not forget good old Nadine https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/nadine-dorries-worst-gaffes-shes-27412006.amp

There's a reason for that https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cityam.com/boost-for-global-britain-as-uk-exports-to-eu-defy-brexit-challenges-and-hit-highest-level-ever/%3famp=1

To the extent that any one entity controls the EU, I'd suggest that it was the Council. The amount of influence an individual nation has within the EU is difficult to quantify and depends on a number of factors (policy area, national importance, etc), but there is clearly a relationship with the size of the individual nation's economy. France and Germany are clearly more influential within the EU than Cyprus and Malta. However, it's not a perfect indicator. For example, I'd argue that the Netherlands is more influential - especially since the UK left - than the size of its' economy might suggest.

I really don't understand what point(s) you are trying to make? The UK government/ population should keep abreast of events that are happening in the world? I imagine that (almost) all posters - irrespective of their political views - could agree with that. That all major policy decisions should be made by referendum? IMO more debatable.

You agree that it's too big an ask of you to present a coherent argument? Fair play to you. That's a big admission ????

Of course we can't predict the future with certainty, but how can a rational decision be reached on whether a policy is desirable unless an estimate of its' effects are taken into account? Did you think Brexit was a good idea because you stuck your finger in the air and found that the wind was blowing from the East/ West/ North/ South (delete as appropriate) and that was proof enough? Germany is a federal republic comprising of states with a fair amount of autonomy, so I suppose you could informally label this nation, The United States of Germany? However, I doubt that it what you meant? By stating that the UK will not be subsumed into a 'Greater' Germany, I assume that you are suggesting that nations such as France, Italy, etc will? Any evidence to support this hypothesis? No, thought not.

I think one point may be that the waiting room is full and therefore it is necessary for people to queue outside. If so, this might lead to a secondary conclusion that it will take some considerable time for those people at the back of the queue to be attended to by a doctor/ nurse. Of course I have no way of proving the above and accept that one among many possible other explanations is that the waiting room is completely empty, that those queueing are sun-worshippers and that this is the best sun spot in Northampton. Personally, I find this explanation less likely. Hope this helps.

So how long will we have to wait for these perceived economic benefits? 10 years? 20? 30? Or maybe, these benefits simply do not exist. In the meantime, even a UK government body (OBR) estimates that Brexit has - and will continue to have - negative effects (on productivity). If you do decide to reply, it would be good if it contained a coherent counter argument.

Tory supporters only defence against the charge that the NHS has deteriorated progressively under their watch is to mock Diane Abbott. Says it all.