Brexit bribe? UK PM May unveils $2.1 billion fund for Brexit-backing towns

[Dumbastheycome]

23 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If Brexit is going to deliver business and trade for the UK, then why the need for government handouts?

Erm. Unrelated you need understand ! ( please )

[Dumbastheycome]

1 hour ago, Prissana Pescud said:

And Ms May has a mandate for this cash splurge?

 She could build a new Hadrians wall across Scotland and Irish borders for that much.

Which they  might  just welcome !  ????

[Dumbastheycome]

51 minutes ago, Loiner said:

Yes, they lied in 1975 and it’s still going on: “Take our bribe and you will be better off in the EU this time. Honest.”


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Which is the bigger  lie?

This river, that river?

Or stranded on the  Isles?

Edited March 5, 2019 by Dumbastheycome

[7by7]

3 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

English money? I presume you mean UK money, unless this bribe comes from a ringfenced English pot? Is there such a thing?

Sent from my SM-G935F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

Westminster is responsible for such spending for England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Holyrood is responsible for the same type of spending for Scotland.

 

So maybe 'English money' was inaccurate, but it certainly isn't Scottish money.

[7by7]

In their 2017 manifesto Labour promised billions of pounds of extra public spending, money to be spent in many of the same areas as this announcement.

 

How many of those accusing this of being a Tory bribe considered Labour's promise to be a bribe also?

 

Very few, I suspect.

[7by7]

3 hours ago, dunroaming said:

May's deal is still dire for the UK but will, in the end, Britain capitulate?  When I say "Britain", I mean of course the MP's that suppose to represent the views of the people.  

So does this you are now in favour of the people being given the final say?

 

After all in a democracy people are, or should be, allowed to change their mind.

[dunroaming]

3 hours ago, Loiner said:

Yes, they lied in 1975 and it’s still going on: “Take our bribe and you will be better off in the EU this time. Honest.”


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

In 1975 people knew what they were voting for because it had all been negotiated before the vote.  In 2016 all people had to go on was a load of made up promises wrapped up as facts.  Not surprising then that everyone is angry now!

[dunroaming]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

So does this you are now in favour of the people being given the final say?

 

After all in a democracy people are, or should be, allowed to change their mind.

Totally agree and the vote should never have been given to the people in the first place!  But even now the leavers are threatening rioting in the streets if it goes to a second vote.  Clearly they know their goose will be cooked if we go down that route.

 

My wish would be that Brexit is scrapped, closely followed by the government stepping down and calling a general election.  The people should be given the chance to get rid of the liars and cheats once and for all! 

[Loiner]

In 1975 people knew what they were voting for because it had all been negotiated before the vote.  In 2016 all people had to go on was a load of made up promises wrapped up as facts.  Not surprising then that everyone is angry now!

Not at all true for either year. In 1975 the vote was for the Common Market, which turned out to be an early deception for the EU. In 2016 was voted to Leave forty years of the con. The deception this time was the promise that we would actually Leave.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[dunroaming]

35 minutes ago, Loiner said:

Not at all true for either year. In 1975 the vote was for the Common Market, which turned out to be an early deception for the EU. In 2016 was voted to Leave forty years of the con. The deception this time was the promise that we would actually Leave.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Whatever you want to believe pal.  The denial is never going to die, I know that.

 

The Common Market became the EU and the UK were instrumental in it's development over the whole 40 year period.  But by all means keep denying that if it helps your cause.

 

But you right that we were promised that we would not only leave but that "the EU would be desperate to do deals with us".  "It would be the easiest deal of all time!"  Like I said, made up promises wrapped up as facts!

Edited March 5, 2019 by dunroaming

[CG1 Blue]

9 minutes ago, dunroaming said:

Whatever you want to believe pal.  The denial is never going to die, I know that.

 

The Common Market became the EU and the UK were instrumental in it's development over the whole 40 year period.  But by all means keep denying that if it helps your cause.

 

But you right that we were promised that we would not only leave but that "the EU would be desperate to do deals with us".  "It would be the easiest deal of all time!"  Like I said, made up promises wrapped up as facts!

It's funny how one quote from one man (Liam Fox) gets taken out of context and is used by every remainer in almost every debate. 

From memory he was simply saying that in theory a trade deal with the EU and it's partners SHOULD be the easiest deal in history, given that the template is already there. 

Actually I couldn't resist digging it up.  Note he made the comment in July 2017, so AFTER the referendum, so it wasn't part of the Leave campaign. 

 

"Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Thursday, the international trade secretary said: “The free trade agreement that we will have to do with the European Union should be one of the easiest in human history.

“We are already beginning with zero tariffs, and we are already beginning at the point of maximal regulatory equivalence, as it is called. In other words, our rules and our laws are exactly the same.”

However, he went on to concede that securing a deal would probably not be easy in practice. “The only reason that we wouldn’t come to a free and open agreement is because politics gets in the way of economics,” Fox said.

 

 

 

 

 

[Loiner]

4 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

It's funny how one quote from one man (Liam Fox) gets taken out of context and is used by every remainer in almost every debate. 

From memory he was simply saying that in theory a trade deal with the EU and it's partners SHOULD be the easiest deal in history, given that the template is already there. 

 

I've asked Remainers "Who Said that and when?" on previous occasions. Unsurprisingly, there's never an answer. It just doesn't fit the Remainer narrative.

If the negotiations were being done by committed Leavers, and not May/Merkel behind closed doors, they probably would be the easiest deal in history. "Here you go M. Barnier - this is what we're doing. Take it or leave it."  

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, Loiner said:

I've asked Remainers "Who Said that and when?" on previous occasions. Unsurprisingly, there's never an answer. It just doesn't fit the Remainer narrative.

If the negotiations were being done by committed Leavers, and not May/Merkel behind closed doors, they probably would be the easiest deal in history. "Here you go M. Barnier - this is what we're doing. Take it or leave it."  

David Davis ( a Brexiteer) ran the negotiations until he failed.

 

Brexiteers in the Tory party had their chance to challenge TM for the PM’s job - they chose not to do so

 

Brexiteers (Rees-Mogg, Davis, Fox, Johnson et al) promised to present alternative ‘Plan-B’ for Brexit, they failed to do so.

 

There is a common thread running right the way through Brexit and those who support Brexit.

 

’The world isn’t as I want it to be and that is someone else’s fault’.

 

This line of thought is so pervasive it even shows up when Brexiteers don’t get the Brexit they hoped for.

 

It’s always someone else’s fault!

 

 

[7by7]

1 hour ago, dunroaming said:

The people should be given the chance to get rid of the liars and cheats once and for all! 

As that describes most politicians from all parties; with whom would we replace them?

 

Guy Fawkes; the only person to enter the Houses of Parliament with honest intentions!

[dunroaming]

33 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

It's funny how one quote from one man (Liam Fox) gets taken out of context and is used by every remainer in almost every debate. 

From memory he was simply saying that in theory a trade deal with the EU and it's partners SHOULD be the easiest deal in history, given that the template is already there. 

Actually I couldn't resist digging it up.  Note he made the comment in July 2017, so AFTER the referendum, so it wasn't part of the Leave campaign. 

 

"Speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Thursday, the international trade secretary said: “The free trade agreement that we will have to do with the European Union should be one of the easiest in human history.

“We are already beginning with zero tariffs, and we are already beginning at the point of maximal regulatory equivalence, as it is called. In other words, our rules and our laws are exactly the same.”

However, he went on to concede that securing a deal would probably not be easy in practice. “The only reason that we wouldn’t come to a free and open agreement is because politics gets in the way of economics,” Fox said.

 

 

 

 

 

Easy enough to go back and listen to many of the speeches made along the "bus".  Much easier to just be in denial though.

[dunroaming]

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

David Davis ( a Brexiteer) ran the negotiations until he failed.

 

Brexiteers in the Tory party had their chance to challenge TM for the PM’s job - they chose not to do so

 

Brexiteers (Rees-Mogg, Davis, Fox, Johnson et al) promised to present alternative ‘Plan-B’ for Brexit, they failed to do so.

 

There is a common thread running right the way through Brexit and those who support Brexit.

 

’The world isn’t as I want it to be and that is someone else’s fault’.

 

This line of thought is so pervasive it even shows up when Brexiteers don’t get the Brexit they hoped for.

 

It’s always someone else’s fault!

 

 

All spot on.  The only thing I would add is that May surrounded herself with Brexiteers putting people like Fox and Johnson in high profile posts right from the very start. Not only that but after Davis failed miserably at getting a deal she appointed another hard line Brexiteer Raab to replace him.  He failed just as miserably as Davis.  It's what happens when you promise the undeliverable, you can't deliver it.

[dunroaming]

18 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

As that describes most politicians from all parties; with whom would we replace them?

 

Guy Fawkes; the only person to enter the Houses of Parliament with honest intentions!

Good question and you are right but these people have screwed the country with their lies and failings and should be held responsible for that.  In any job, anywhere in the world, they would all be sacked on the spot.

[7by7]

44 minutes ago, Loiner said:

I've asked Remainers "Who Said that and when?" on previous occasions. Unsurprisingly, there's never an answer. It just doesn't fit the Remainer narrative.

It's a difficult question to answer as apart from overblown hyperbole and downright lies, like the NHS bus, the Leave campaign said virtually nothing about what they planned for a post Brexit Britain.

 

The reason for this silence is simple; they didn't have a plan. Perhaps they expected to lose?

 

Since then it's almost impossible to answer as all they say is that they don't want May's deal. What they don't say is what their alternative is. The closest they come is no deal; which any sane person knows would be disastrous for us. Unless we want to join Mauritania in being one of the only two countries to trade on WTO terms alone!

 

Brexit papers: What no deal could mean

 

Brexit: What is the 'no deal' WTO option? 

 

(You will doubtless dismiss those as being from a 'biased' source; but I can find no overtly pro Brexit source which actually explains what the real consequences of a no deal Brexit would mean. They all seem to think the world will come begging to do deals with us!!)

 

44 minutes ago, Loiner said:

If the negotiations were being done by committed Leavers, and not May/Merkel behind closed doors, they probably would be the easiest deal in history. "Here you go M. Barnier - this is what we're doing. Take it or leave it."  

There is one reason and one reason only why May is PM and so in charge of negotiations on behalf of the UK; no committed leaver wanted the job. They all bottled it and withdrew from the leadership contest.

 

What about UKIP?" you may say. Well, the British people said what they thought of them in the 2017 election! Lost their only seat and suffered a 10% drop in their share of the vote!

 

The EU are of course under no obligation to concede anything. We want to leave the club, they only need to concede whatever suits them. Something the average Brexiteer seems incapable of understanding!

Edited March 5, 2019 by 7by7
Typo

[CG1 Blue]

1 hour ago, dunroaming said:

All spot on.  The only thing I would add is that May surrounded herself with Brexiteers putting people like Fox and Johnson in high profile posts right from the very start. Not only that but after Davis failed miserably at getting a deal she appointed another hard line Brexiteer Raab to replace him.  He failed just as miserably as Davis.  It's what happens when you promise the undeliverable, you can't deliver it.

Please don't bend the truth.

 

Davis didn't fail. He was undermined by May (Remainer), and Olly Robbins (Remainer). They ignored his efforts, tore up his plan, so he resigned. 

In July 2018 Raab was relegated to deputy negotiator as soon as he took the post, and May took the lead. Once Raab realised there was no shifting the May / Robbins deal direction, he too resigned (Nov 2018). 

It was impossible to deliver something when the PM and her head civil servant were hell bent on delivering something different. 

[CG1 Blue]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

There is one reason and one reason only why May is PM and so in charge of negotiations on behalf of the UK; no committed leaver wanted the job. They all bottled it and withdrew from the leadership contest.

You fail to acknowledge that the vast majority of Tory MPs were/are remainers. The leave contenders had zero chance of becoming PM, so stepped aside. 

 

Trust me, if there were equal numbers of remainers and leavers among Tory MPs, Boris, Mogg or one of the other leavers would challenge May. But they know the parliamentary arithmetic means it would be a waste of time. 

[Loiner]

 
It’s always someone else’s fault!
 
 

Yes, the Remainers fault.
Remainers control the CON party, so even after trying a Leaver could not become PM, and we ended up with Theresa the appeaser. She forced out Davis and Raab to get her deal with Merkel into position. The combined CON and LAB Remainer forces in parliament have steered the country towards BRINO. Hence our current shambles.
Yes, it’s all Remainers fault.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Loiner]

Easy enough to go back and listen to many of the speeches made along the "bus".  Much easier to just be in denial though.

So go back and find it then. Your favourite quote was long after the referendum, so not something that was voted for. The idea of a deal that should have been the easiest, was hijacked by Remainers and in their hands became the hardest .


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, Loiner said:

Yes, the Remainers fault.
Remainers control the CON party, so even after trying a Leaver could not become PM, and we ended up with Theresa the appeaser. She forced out Davis and Raab to get her deal with Merkel into position. The combined CON and LAB Remainer forces in parliament have steered the country towards BRINO. Hence our current shambles.
Yes, it’s all Remainers fault.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Priceless.

[RuamRudy]

21 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

And how much money does Westmnister (the UK government) give to Scotland to help fund this?

 

Scotland is much funded by UK tax payers, largely outside of Scotland. That's why the majority of Scots voted against trying to leave the UK.

Why are Westminster and so many non-Scots opposed to it if we are such a financial burden upon you all? Here's a clue - we are not. Scotland is a cash cow that Westminster has been milking for decades but giving very little back. That time is coming to an end. 

[RuamRudy]

13 hours ago, 7by7 said:

Westminster is responsible for such spending for England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Holyrood is responsible for the same type of spending for Scotland.

 

So maybe 'English money' was inaccurate, but it certainly isn't Scottish money.

But where does Holyrood get its cash from? It has tax raising powers, that is true, but the majority of taxes raised in Scotland or generated from Scottish activities still disappear into the black hole that is Westminster. We receive back a portion of that payment and then a charge is applied to Scotland for unclear spending by Westminster on our behalf - spending that is so impenetrable it would make the EU blush, and definitely not on things that benefit Scotland - HS2, Trident, London Sewer Upgrades etc. 

[7by7]

13 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

You fail to acknowledge that the vast majority of Tory MPs were/are remainers. The leave contenders had zero chance of becoming PM, so stepped aside. 

 

Trust me, if there were equal numbers of remainers and leavers among Tory MPs, Boris, Mogg or one of the other leavers would challenge May. But they know the parliamentary arithmetic means it would be a waste of time. 

 

Ah, the usual pathetic excuse.

 

May was not very popular as Home Secretary, there is a good chance that had a more popular challenger, such as Johnson, stood against her that they would have won; regardless of their stance on Brexit.

 

But he, and Gove, knew that delivering a Brexit which pleased everyone, even every Brexiteer, was going to be nigh on impossible; so they both bottled it and left the task to May. 

 

That way May gets the blame, and they can stand back with a metaphorical smirk on their faces saying "Told you so." 

 

 

[7by7]

6 hours ago, Loiner said:

<Snip>

Remainers control the CON party, so even after trying a Leaver could not become PM, and we ended up with Theresa the appeaser.

Even after trying?

 

No Leaver tried, they all bottled it and withdrew from the contest!

 

People make the pathetic excuse that they knew they wouldn't win; but the fact is they didn't even try.

 

England knew they wouldn't win the World Cup last summer; so using your, CG1 Blue and virtually every other Brexiteer's excuse, they shouldn't have bothered turning up!

[7by7]

4 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

But where does Holyrood get its cash from? It has tax raising powers, that is true, but the majority of taxes raised in Scotland or generated from Scottish activities still disappear into the black hole that is Westminster. We receive back a portion of that payment and then a charge is applied to Scotland for unclear spending by Westminster on our behalf - spending that is so impenetrable it would make the EU blush, and definitely not on things that benefit Scotland - HS2, Trident, London Sewer Upgrades etc. 

Public spending per head in Scotland is higher than all other parts of the UK other than Northern Ireland.

 

The Scottish government recognises that public spending in Scotland exceeds revenue, even when taking North Sea revenue into account.

Source: Scotland: Tax and spending.

 

OK, those figures are only up to 2015/16; if you can provide more up to date figures I'd be grateful.

 

As you know, I am an ardent unionist; but I am also a democrat. Scotland voted to remain in the UK before there was any mention of a Brexit referendum. Just as I believe we should have a second Brexit referendum now that the full consequences of Brexit are more widely known, I also believe that as Scotland voted to Remain, then if (let's be honest, more likely when) the UK does leave the EU the Scottish people should be given the opportunity to decide whether to come with us on that long and difficult road, or leave the UK and apply for EU membership as an independent nation.

 

Ditto for Northern Ireland; they, too, voted Remain. Therefore the people of that province should also be given the chance to decide whether to unite with the Republic and remain in the EU or leave the EU and remain in the UK. But the issue there is a lot more complex than in Scotland. Which way would Remainers who are also Unionists and Brexiteers who are also Republicans vote? History has shown that nothing there is ever simple and straightforward!

 

 

[Loiner]

Even after trying?
 
No Leaver tried, they all bottled it and withdrew from the contest!

Leadsom was there to the end finally withdrew.
Gove was eliminated after two rounds.
Fox was eliminated after one round.
Boris was stabbed in the back early by Gove.
What would you expect when the party is Remain?


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Mavideol]

On 3/4/2019 at 7:03 PM, Chomper Higgot said:

If Brexit is going to deliver business and trade for the UK, then why the need for government handouts?

exactly, why waste money, she's full of contradictions but maybe it's another way to run the clock