Extreme Brexit could be worse than financial crisis for UK: BoE

[Grouse]

22 minutes ago, billd766 said:

What you seem not to understand is that most aspiring MPs are selected by the relevant party and few of them actually live in the constituency. They are presented to the local party and have rarely been challenged. 

 

IMHO at the next GE that will change as the voters and the local parties will not necessarily accept a candidate just because the party says so.

 

They have seen the totale debacle caused by the MPs representing themselves, their principle and their consciences and they are not happy about it. MPs, despite what you think and say are elected to represent their constituencies and NOT themselves.

 

Yes I am a former military man and I PROUDLY served my Queen and my country for 25 years. How about you? Were you another cadet bone spurs?

 

Yes I can think things through rationally which Is why I voted Brexit and a good reason why I get fed up with people like you who carp and niggle all the time and insult people when you don't have an answer.

 

Democracy is accepting that you have lost and not whining about it as you do on a daily basis.

 

BTW please show me where the constitution of the UK is laid down.

 

  4 hours ago, Grouse said:

He's treating bullies with the contempt they deserve. Good.

 

Any others who are threatened should act in the same way.

 

Who exactly are Conservative Associations? Golfers? Free Masons? Are they the arbiters of democracy now? Our constitution has been standing for a very long time; I don't want it changed by a bunch of anally retentive gammons thank you.

 

There you go once again, insulting people who you believe are not of your "superior class".

 

Nobody cares what you want, nor do people like being called a bunch of anally retentive gammons by some over educated person like you.

OK

 

I agree that MPs are often foisted upon constituents. That must stop. I also hope to see more independent candidates.

 

You still are having difficulty understanding that MPs must  vote in accordance with what they themselves consider to be in the best interests of ALL of their constituents and the country as a whole. Read that again because I am stating the truth. MPs should not vote in their own interest.

 

I'm happy you appreciated your time in the forces. I hope they are giving you a good pension.

 

I never had any desire to be in the forces. There was no conscription in my time so excuses were unnecessary. I thank the EU for minimising the chance of war. There were cadets at university with me. All salaried from the Army, Nsvy or RAF. So that was nice for them.

 

The British constitution is not written, but that does not mean there isn't one. It has been established by precedent over centuries and will be changed over time.

 

His local Conservative Association WAS bullying him because he was against a no deal Brexit. He was correct to resign rather than be dictated to by unelected bigotted buffoons.

 

Is it possible to be overeducated? I doubt it. Anyway, I don't have a PhD.

 

I don't care for class designations. Never have.

Edited March 17, 2019 by Grouse

[sanemax]

What does it currently spend it on?

According to the BBC, in 2014, the first year of the current budget, the EU spent a total of €138.44bn (£122.1bn). Of that, almost 80% went to two key areas: agriculture and fisheries, and development projects in poor areas.

 

€43bn (£37.9bn) is currently spent on direct payments to farmers. Anyone in the EU who has land used for agriculture can receive a payment, under a scheme “aimed at ensuring the economic viability of the EU’s eight million farmers [that accounts] for almost half of their income”, says the BBC. 

 

 

The huge spending on farming is increasingly coming under fire. Traditionally, cash payments were linked to production, says Politico, “leading to embarrassing overproduction. Now, we’re stuck in a system where banks, and even the Queen of England, receive gigantic amounts of taxpayer money simply because they happen to own agricultural land — regardless of what they produce, or if they produce anything at all.”

[billd766]

19 minutes ago, billd766 said:

What you seem not to understand is that most aspiring MPs are selected by the relevant party and few of them actually live in the constituency. They are presented to the local party and have rarely been challenged. 

 

IMHO at the next GE that will change as the voters and the local parties will not necessarily accept a candidate just because the party says so.

 

They have seen the totale debacle caused by the MPs representing themselves, their principle and their consciences and they are not happy about it. MPs, despite what you think and say are elected to represent their constituencies and NOT themselves.

 

Yes I am a former military man and I PROUDLY served my Queen and my country for 25 years. How about you? Were you another cadet bone spurs?

 

Yes I can think things through rationally which Is why I voted Brexit and a good reason why I get fed up with people like you who carp and niggle all the time and insult people when you don't have an answer.

 

Democracy is accepting that you have lost and not whining about it as you do on a daily basis.

 

BTW please show me where the constitution of the UK is laid down.

 

  4 hours ago, Grouse said:

He's treating bullies with the contempt they deserve. Good.

 

Any others who are threatened should act in the same way.

 

Who exactly are Conservative Associations? Golfers? Free Masons? Are they the arbiters of democracy now? Our constitution has been standing for a very long time; I don't want it changed by a bunch of anally retentive gammons thank you.

 

There you go once again, insulting people who you believe are not of your "superior class".

 

Nobody cares what you want, nor do people like being called a bunch of anally retentive gammons by some over educated person like you.

BTW Grouse it is quite easy for people to respond to comments that they don't agree with without being rude, arrogant and insulting.

 

Try it for a month or so and you will feel the better for it.

[candide]

11 minutes ago, sanemax said:

https://www.theweek.co.uk/91393/how-does-the-eu-spend-its-money

Firstly, you changed the source in your quote about my post, which is against forum rule (among others),

Secondly, you don't seem to really take into a account what is exactly written in your source. I quote from your source: "According to the BBC, in 2014, the first year of the current budget, the EU spent a total of €138.44bn (£122.1bn). Of that, almost 80% went to two key areas: agriculture and fisheries, and development projects in poor areas. 

In your OP you forgot to mention "development projects in poor areas", which gets nearly as much budget as the CAP. ????

So it's not 80% for agriculture and fisheries, as you mentioned in your OP.

Edited March 17, 2019 by candide

[aright]

48 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I am a big fan of Burke. We may be having an agreement here. Are you sure you understand his quote? 

I think I do and don't feel it supports your case that the views of the majority of constituents are subservient to an elected official. Your argument assumes MP's are more intelligent than the electorate they serve...…..I know mine and I certainly don't regard him as intelligent as myself or most of my friends. To carry the argument to the extreme...….If 80% of constituents vote for Plan A do you think it's in an MP's remit to then vote for Plan B? 

 

[damascase]

15 minutes ago, billd766 said:

Actually it was an attempt to lighten the day with humour.

 

Sorry that you didn't understand it.

Well, I’m surprised you can’t see the humour in my reaction. Are you sure you are British?

Edited March 17, 2019 by damascase

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Does he? That's good! I know he wants a softer Brexit and wants ratification by the electorate. Sounds like a reasonable type whatever you think of his Brexit views.

I could never have predicted you would say something like that!

[evadgib]

10 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 I already have, several times!

 

At the risk of incurring @evadgib's faux wrath by 'trawling back' to provide evidence; the two latest being

But you are correct; asking Brexiteers here to express their own opinion is flogging a dead horse; Only two have made any attempt to do so and both of those clammed up when I attempted to discuss their views further.

??

The 'trawling back' to which I referred was that you would take a fine toothcombe to my posts in order to trumpet 'evidence' that you believe exists but i know doesn't.

I was hoping to save you the trouble but instead you've done it to your own.

You are highly entertaining 49, please keep 'em coming ????

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

The man spoke well on Andrew Marr. Made the local Conservative Association Chairman look a total pillock 

 

This man wants a single market. He's been made a member of the national CON party. He's talking with the CON whips AND Corbyn. He backs May's deal. He's a one nation Tory.

 

We should support people like him.

Hail Great Winkers!

[nauseus]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

I am a big fan of Burke. We may be having an agreement here. Are you sure you understand his quote? 

Steady now.

[sanemax]

5 minutes ago, candide said:

Firstly, you changed the source in your quote about my post, which is against forum rule (among others),

 

Technical error rather than deliberate , I tried to insert my link into my reply , but it kept going into your quote box . I tried deleting my link from your quote , ah anyway , I just pressed post because my C&P is misbehaving .

  Apologies, technical error 

[Grouse]

20 minutes ago, aright said:

I think I do and don't feel it supports your case that the views of the majority of constituents are subservient to an elected official. Your argument assumes MP's are more intelligent than the electorate they serve...…..I know mine and I certainly don't regard him as intelligent as myself or most of my friends. To carry the argument to the extreme...….If 80% of constituents vote for Plan A do you think it's in an MP's remit to then vote for Plan B? 

 

Read this!

 

https://thehistoryofparliament.wordpress.com/2017/02/07/edmund-burke-and-the-brexit-debates/

 

"

To deliver an opinion, is the right of all men; that of Constituents is a weighty and respectable opinion, which a Representative ought always to rejoice to hear; and which he ought always most seriously to consider. But authoritative instructions; Mandates issued, which the Member is bound blindly and implicitly to obey, to vote, and to argue for, though contrary to the clearest conviction of his judgement and conscience; these are things utterly unknown to the laws of this land, and which arise from a fundamental Mistake of the whole order and tenour of our Constitution.

Parliament is not a Congress of Ambassadors from different and hostile interests; which interests each must maintain, as an Agent and Advocate, against other Agents and Advocates; but Parliament is a deliberative Assembly of one Nation, with one Interest, that of the whole; where, not local Purposes, not local Prejudices ought to guide, but the general Good, resulting from the general Reason of the whole. You chuse a Member indeed; but when you have chosen him, he is not Member of Bristol, but he is a Member of Parliament. If the local Constituent should have an Interest, or should form an hasty Opinion, evidently opposite to the real good of the rest of the Community, the Member for that place ought to be as far, as any other, from any endeavour to give it Effect"

Edited March 17, 2019 by Grouse

[evadgib]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

The man spoke well on Andrew Marr. Made the local Conservative Association Chairman look a total pillock 

 

This man wants a single market. He's been made a member of the national CON party. He's talking with the CON whips AND Corbyn. He backs May's deal. He's a one nation Tory.

 

We should support people like him.

I haven't seen it yet. Will take a look later.

[nauseus]

33 minutes ago, candide said:

Interesting remark but facts are innacurate. The CAP represents 37.7% of the EU budget and fisheries should not be much.

http://bruegel.org/2018/02/eu-budget-common-agricultural-policy-and-regional-policy-en-route-to-reform/

 

Here you go. Rather vague as expected.

 

This is for 2015 from:  https://europa.eu/european-union/topics/budget_en

What is the money spent on?

The lion's share of the EU budget supports growth and jobs.  

Another significant share goes on agriculture and rural development.

Top expenditure areas (2015)

46% – in the EU, subdivided into:

• 34% – helping underdeveloped EU regions and disadvantaged sections of society
• 12% – making European firms more competitive.

41% – producing safe and secure food supplies, innovative farming and efficient and sustainable use of land and forests.

How does the EU budget break down by budget heading? (2015 figures)

Within the EU

Some programmes & budgets in 2015:

• Horizon 2020 – research & innovation programme (€10 bn)
• Youth Employment Initiative (€1.4 bn)
• COSME – programme for small businesses (€0.3 bn)
• Connecting Europe Facility – transport, energy & digital networks (€3.4 bn)
• Erasmus+ – education, training, youth & sport (€1.6 bn)
• Life – environment programme (€0.4 bn)

 

 

[nauseus]

43 minutes ago, candide said:

Interesting remark but facts are innacurate. The CAP represents 37.7% of the EU budget and fisheries should not be much.

http://bruegel.org/2018/02/eu-budget-common-agricultural-policy-and-regional-policy-en-route-to-reform/

 

My other post has the farming etc at 41%. Total for 2015 was 145 Bn.

 

The biggest 46% is a huge grey area really. Will include "projects" of various descriptions.  

[Grouse]

As many of you will know, I rate The Economist very highly. I could not get the latest hard copy edition. I will say no more than that.

[aright]

38 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Read this!

 

https://thehistoryofparliament.wordpress.com/2017/02/07/edmund-burke-and-the-brexit-debates/

 

"

To deliver an opinion, is the right of all men; that of Constituents is a weighty and respectable opinion, which a Representative ought always to rejoice to hear; and which he ought always most seriously to consider. But authoritative instructions; Mandates issued, which the Member is bound blindly and implicitly to obey, to vote, and to argue for, though contrary to the clearest conviction of his judgement and conscience; these are things utterly unknown to the laws of this land, and which arise from a fundamental Mistake of the whole order and tenour of our Constitution.

Parliament is not a Congress of Ambassadors from different and hostile interests; which interests each must maintain, as an Agent and Advocate, against other Agents and Advocates; but Parliament is a deliberative Assembly of one Nation, with one Interest, that of the whole; where, not local Purposes, not local Prejudices ought to guide, but the general Good, resulting from the general Reason of the whole. You chuse a Member indeed; but when you have chosen him, he is not Member of Bristol, but he is a Member of Parliament. If the local Constituent should have an Interest, or should form an hasty Opinion, evidently opposite to the real good of the rest of the Community, the Member for that place ought to be as far, as any other, from any endeavour to give it Effect"

You make a fair point, especially the last sentence although it seems to be at odds with my quote.

I still think in a modern context you need to answer 3 questions.

 

If 80% of constituents vote for Plan A do you think it's in an MP's remit to then vote for Plan B?

 

Prior to a vote electors don't know the IQ of a candidate Isn't it inconsistent to disparage the majority view of constituents but panegyrize (thanks for the opportunity to use that word) the majority view of parliamentarians?

 

Are you happy for the Cabal in Brussels to do your thinking for you? 

 

[owl sees all]

This debate is just like the people trying to get onto the Titanic. Remoaners are saying that the ship is destined for great things. Brexiteers are saying "don't get on, there are not enough lifeboats."

 

And, as we now know the Titanic didn't do so well. Just like the ship; the EU is doomed. Our country saved by astute voters; as will be evident at the EU elections.

Edited March 17, 2019 by owl sees all

[Grouse]

12 minutes ago, aright said:

You make a fair point, especially the last sentence although it seems to be at odds with my quote.

I still think in a modern context you need to answer 3 questions.

 

If 80% of constituents vote for Plan A do you think it's in an MP's remit to then vote for Plan B?

 

Prior to a vote electors don't know the IQ of a candidate Isn't it inconsistent to disparage the majority view of constituents but panegyrize (thanks for the opportunity to use that word) the majority view of parliamentarians?

 

Are you happy for the Cabal in Brussels to do your thinking for you? 

 

Great points!

 

Burke's point still stands. We all need to take far more care who we select as candidates for MP and MEP.

 

The classic points are "bring back hanging" and "free beer on Saturdays". How would the voting go?

 

No, I don't want Brussels to think for us. Subsidiarity is the correct way. The current shambles has embarrassed me. The country has dropped its trousers and exposed its arcane underwear and weakened under carriage.

 

I have never panegyrised anyone to the best of my knowledge. My most excellent education has its limits!

[nauseus]

17 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

This debate is just like the people trying to get onto the Titanic. Remoaners are saying that the ship is destined for great things. Brexiteers are saying "don't get on, there are not enough lifeboats."

 

And, as we now know the Titanic didn't do so well. Just like the ship; the EU is doomed. Our country saved by astute voters; as will be evident at the EU elections.

We are already passengers, unfortunately. Leavers are aware of the lack of safety equipment and hazards ahead. The Captain is in the bar and his Ch Mate talks about cake (and eating it) when he's not insulting the cabin crew.

[damascase]

38 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

This debate is just like the people trying to get onto the Titanic. Remoaners are saying that the ship is destined for great things. Brexiteers are saying "don't get on, there are not enough lifeboats."

 

And, as we now know the Titanic didn't do so well. Just like the ship; the EU is doomed. Our country saved by astute voters; as will be evident at the EU elections.

Great stuff you are smoking - or do you really believe this? If I had to bring the Titanic into the discussion, I would have pictured a ship full of Brexiteers heading for the unavoidable iceberg.

[sanemax]

1 minute ago, damascase said:

Great stuff you are smoking - or do you really believe this? If I had to bring the Titanic into the discussion, I would have pictured a ship full of Brexiteers heading for the unavoidable iceberg.

No, the Brexiters are already on the iceberg , they've sent a signal to the Titanic Captain, warning him on the iceberg ahead , the Captain stopped the Titanic, sent the life rafts to rescue the stranded people on the ice berg , and we will all sail off happily and look back and watch the iceberg melt due to global warming 

[candide]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

My other post has the farming etc at 41%. Total for 2015 was 145 Bn.

 

The biggest 46% is a huge grey area really. Will include "projects" of various descriptions.  

Same order of magnitude, no problem. The figures I found were on a longer period of time. It confirms it's not in the 80% level.

[owl sees all]

7 minutes ago, damascase said:

Great stuff you are smoking - or do you really believe this? If I had to bring the Titanic into the discussion, I would have pictured a ship full of Brexiteers heading for the unavoidable iceberg.

Brexit is the best thing to have happened in UK politics since WW2. It has woken people up to the truth about the political class. 

 

Some really good things are going to come because of this. Out of EU. BBC forced to run without licence fee. Proportional representation. Revamping of our once great fishing industry. And of course the biggie; dissolving of H of L.

[brewsterbudgen]

Brexit is the best thing to have happened in UK politics since WW2. It has woken people up to the truth about the political class. 
 
Some really good things are going to come because of this. Out of EU. BBC forced to run without licence fee. Proportional representation. Revamping of our once great fishing industry. And of course the biggie; dissolving of H of L.

I'm a Remainer, and still hold out hope that Brexit can be stopped, but if proportional representation was to be an end result, it could be worth it. At least it would be the end of the Tories.

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

[evadgib]

47 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Brexit is the best thing to have happened in UK politics since WW2. It has woken people up to the truth about the political class. 

 

Some really good things are going to come because of this. Out of EU. BBC forced to run without licence fee. Proportional representation. Revamping of our once great fishing industry. And of course the biggie; dissolving of H of L.

I guess here is as good a place as any to post this:

 

[Thairealist]

9 hours ago, billd766 said:

Absolutely correct.

 

He seems to have forgotten who elected him and why he was elected.

 

I have felt for a long while that both the Labour and Tory parties only need the constituents simply to get elected. Once they are in they may talk to the hoi polloi every so often but otherwise they are all of the "I am your mp and i know more than you" party.

 

At the next election the Parties may descend on the constituencies and tell them WE have decided who will represent you at the next election. They may well be in for a big surprise and be told "This person is our choice and we want him/her to represent us", and if you don't like it you know what you can do.

I have just finished watching the program, and he comes over as a complete two faced hypocrite. Full of his own self importance.

[Thairealist]

9 hours ago, nauseus said:

Miserable weather. At least the forecast is better.

 

 The lady at the very end,spoke for the people of the UK be they leavers or remainers.

 

 

Edited March 17, 2019 by Thairealist

[aright]

The European Union will tell the U.K. that if it wants the option of delaying Brexit for more than three months it must hold European Parliament elections, or risk a perilous new cliff-edge in July.

A draft document discussed by ambassadors Friday opens the door to a long extension of membership beyond the March 29 exit day. But if Britain wants to extend beyond June, it has to take part in the election, which could be politically toxic. Otherwise, it will be ejected from the club.

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-15/may-s-brexit-delay-threat-conceals-eu-s-dilemma-over-extension

[Thairealist]

8 hours ago, Grouse said:

It is astonishing to me that a person of your years and experience does not know how our representative democracy works, or at least is supposed to work. You, having the privilege of a vote, have the ability to select someone who you trust to take decisions in the best interests of ALL of all their constituents AND the country as a whole. I am getting very bored of explaining this to people who will not listen. Do you just take orders? Or can you think this through rationally? I believe that you are a former military man? What were you defending? The crown? The people? British democracy? What? If you want a different constitution then vote to change it!

 

 

I’m just surprised that we have people like you, with such a closed mind and biased views.