Jump to content

Brexit - Post Match Reaction


Saints Web Definitely Not Official Second Referendum  

185 members have voted

  1. 1. Saints Web Definitely Not Official Second Referendum

    • Leave Before - Leave Now
      43
    • Leave Before - Remain Now
      8
    • Leave Before - Not Bothered Now
      2
    • Remain Before - Remain Now
      101
    • Remain Before - Leave Now
      7
    • Remain Before - Not Bothered Now
      1
    • Not Bothered Before - Leave Now
      3
    • Not Bothered Before - Remain Now
      5
    • I've never been bothered - Why am I on this Thread?
      3
    • No second Ref - 2016 was Definitive and Binding
      12


Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

It is a mark of the situation that we have now arrived at, that in a few hours we will be out of the Implementation Period of the WA, and all that the resident remoaners here can do, is call Farage names in an act of childish, frustrated, foot-stamping defiance. Still, if it makes you lot feel better, then go ahead, but I don't see that Farage is going to be much bothered by insults from a football forum. His place in history for beginning and then leading the campaign for our exit from the EU has earned him his place in history, and Boris will also be remembered down the years as the PM that brought about a successful FTA following our departure, against the predictions of many who said that such a deal was impossible.

It has been a truly awful year due to the Chinese virus, but at least there is much to be optimistic about for our future now that we are liberated from the EU's tentacles.

So people who call Farage by names are "childish", but you are not when you refer to them as "remoaners" ?

 

And the deal has more holes than a Swiss cheese, and creates countless committees and overseers to adjudicate it's implementation and continued operation. Never mind it needing 5 years to implement, it will take 5 years for anybody to understand what it actually says.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, buctootim said:

Lol. Very clear you haven’t read it. There are going to be years of negotiations where the EU has the whip hand because Johnson in his infinite wisdom didn’t want a resolution process based on concrete terms overseen by judiciary but instead thought we’d be better off sanctioning each other. The fun part will be watching your temple veins explode with anger

Where it counts there is no jurisdiction of the ECJ over us any longer, replaced by independent arbitration. If it became a matter of sanctions being placed on each other, that would generally favour us, given their massive trade surplus with us. And you do realise that there is a clause that says that we can leave the EU on WTO terms on one year's notice? I expect that we will just wait and see how the EU behaves on these things, and when we are thriving economically we can hit them with the threat that the situation was beginning very much to favour a position that we would be better off on WTO, so cheerio EU. 

Nothing wrong with my temple veins, Timmy. How will yours be as the EU crumbles as other member states follow us out?

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wes Tender said:

Where it counts there is no jurisdiction of the ECJ over us any longer, replaced by independent arbitration. If it became a matter of sanctions being placed on each other, that would generally favour us, given their massive trade surplus with us. And you do realise that there is a clause that says that we can leave the EU on WTO terms on one year's notice? I expect that we will just wait and see how the EU behaves on these things, and when we are thriving economically we can hit them with the threat that the situation was beginning very much to favour a position that we would be better off on WTO, so cheerio EU. 

Nothing wrong with my temple veins, Timmy. How will yours be as the EU crumbles as other member states follow us out?

I wonder if you will prove to be any better at prophesy when compared to the anti-Nostradamus.

 

 

Edited by badgerx16
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tamesaint said:

Talking of shagging.

I wonder if Mark Francois will now reappear in the HofC.

He was there yesterday, quoting Mel Gibson's William Wallace. ( Ironic as Wallace was fighting for Scottish independence ).

Edited by badgerx16
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Wes Tender said:

Where it counts there is no jurisdiction of the ECJ over us any longer, replaced by independent arbitration. If it became a matter of sanctions being placed on each other, that would generally favour us, given their massive trade surplus with us. And you do realise that there is a clause that says that we can leave the EU on WTO terms on one year's notice? I expect that we will just wait and see how the EU behaves on these things, and when we are thriving economically we can hit them with the threat that the situation was beginning very much to favour a position that we would be better off on WTO, so cheerio EU. 

Nothing wrong with my temple veins, Timmy. How will yours be as the EU crumbles as other member states follow us out?

The point is that the process and the outcome is now a political one rather than an independent judicial one as before. Johnson has ditched the ECJ not because it would not have been fair and robust, but because of how it would look politically.

The ECJ has been replaced with a system which will allow the EU to bully the UK if they choose. The UK and EU will decide who sits on the arbitration panel - they will be partial political appointments. When it is deadlocked, as it inevitably it will be often, each party can sanction each other. Yes Im sure you will post up lots of emojis and hyperventilate about how incredulous you are that anyone would think the ECJ would be impartial. But all judges in developed countries do is interpret what is written. A well drafted clear and specific deal would have very predictable judicial results and that in itself would prevent a lot if disputes being escalated. One side would win and one would lose and the weaker party would still have equal access to justice. We could even have continued to send British judges to sit in the court for matters related to UK / EU relations. 

Regarding the ability to terminate - if you were a shred brighter you'd realise that is another weakened position for the UK not a benefit. Before no-one could kick the UK out of the club, we could behave pretty much how we liked. Now the EU can unilaterally withdraw the deal. The UK was never going to walk away to WTO terms - evidenced by accepting even this attenuated shrunken deal.  Again the EU, in the case of a dispute could just threaten to tip the table up and withdraw themselves. The UK would have to give ground on the specific issue or risk losing the whole thing, just as it did in large areas this time. It will be death by cheese paring.   

Edited by buctootim
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

BoJo's dad says he is applying to become a French citizen.

Haha. I like all of Johnson's family more than him. 

I need to get my second passport to reclaim my rights too. My kids have a choice of three   

Edited by buctootim
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, buctootim said:

The point is that the process and the outcome is now a political one rather than an independent judicial one as before. Johnson has ditched the ECJ not because it would not have been fair and robust, but because of how it would look politically.

The ECJ has been replaced with a system which will allow the EU to bully the UK if they choose. The UK and EU will decide who sits on the panel - they will be partial political appointments. When it is deadlocked, as it inevitably it will be often, each party can sanction each other. Yes Im sure you will post up lots of smileys and hyperventilate about how incredulous you are that anyone would think the ECJ would be impartial. But all judges in developed countries do is interpret the law and if it were drafted well then the result and the verdict would be clear - one side would win and one would lose and the weaker party would still get access to justice. 

Regarding the ability to terminate if you were a shred brighter you'd realise that is another weakened position for the UK. The UK needs a deal more than the EU and everybody knows it. The UK was never going to walk away to WTO terms because accepting even this attenuated shrunken deal which doesnt even deal with financial services is better than WTO.  So again the EU, in the case of a dispute could just threaten to tip the table up and withdraw from the deal themselves and the UK would have to cave, just as it did in large areas this time.   

My God, but you're really naive if you believe for one second that the ECJ would be fair and not robust in representing the EU's interests primarily, and that Boris' decision was political rather than being based on the ECJ's lack of impartiality. Yes, the decision was political from the point of view that he had pledged that we would take back control of our laws, but then it would be farcical if an independent sovereign nation was under the legal jurisdiction of another country's laws, wouldn't it? And of course under that situation the ruling nation would hardly be impartial. Do you think otherwise?

The EU got away with bullying the hapless May and the incompetent Robbins, but soon realised that they couldn't bully Boris and Robbins. When they walked away from the table, it was the EU that panicked and recognised that we were prepared to go WTO, and we are the first country to secure a no tariff, no quota deal with the EU. They really punished us for leaving, didn't they? Many EU members think that they gave us too much, and there are rumblings from others thinking that they might prefer to be out on those terms too.

You are still so cock-sure of your opinion that the EU holds all the cards, that they will bully us, that we wouldn't dare walk away to WTO,  but then again, you insisted a few years back that we would go for the Norway option, so what do you know? The EU wouldn't dare tip us over to WTO. But that might still come to pass if one or more of the member states vetoes the deal. in the next few weeks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

My God, but you're really naive if you believe for one second that the ECJ would be fair and not robust in representing the EU's interests primarily, and that Boris' decision was political rather than being based on the ECJ's lack of impartiality. Yes, the decision was political from the point of view that he had pledged that we would take back control of our laws, but then it would be farcical if an independent sovereign nation was under the legal jurisdiction of another country's laws, wouldn't it? And of course under that situation the ruling nation would hardly be impartial. Do you think otherwise?

The EU got away with bullying the hapless May and the incompetent Robbins, but soon realised that they couldn't bully Boris and Robbins. When they walked away from the table, it was the EU that panicked and recognised that we were prepared to go WTO, and we are the first country to secure a no tariff, no quota deal with the EU. They really punished us for leaving, didn't they? Many EU members think that they gave us too much, and there are rumblings from others thinking that they might prefer to be out on those terms too.

You are still so cock-sure of your opinion that the EU holds all the cards, that they will bully us, that we wouldn't dare walk away to WTO,  but then again, you insisted a few years back that we would go for the Norway option, so what do you know? The EU wouldn't dare tip us over to WTO. But that might still come to pass if one or more of the member states vetoes the deal. in the next few weeks.

Doh. Of course they offered no tariff no quota on goods - that's where they have a big surplus and to do anything else would shoot themselves in the foot. What should have happened is the Johnson traded access for their goods against access for our banks, insurance companies etc which is where our surplus is. But he couldnt and didn't even though he recognised it was important.  Now it will be negotiated as stand alone where our leverage will be even less.  

Frost also thought we would go for the Norway option as did Johnson, so I guess I was in better company than you.  

 

Edited by buctootim
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

 Many EU members think that they gave us too much,

"France is watching to see how the new Brexit deal will affect trading with the UK, with the deal so far hailed as “positive” for the French economy, and the UK seen as “losing out” by the economy minister."

https://www.connexionfrance.com/French-news/Brexit-deal-Positive-for-France-as-UK-loses-say-experts-and-ministers

 

"Christopher Chantrey, vice-chairman of the British Community Committee of France, has said the trade deal agreed by the UK and the EU today (December 24) is a “relief” but that he was “not going to be opening champagne just because there is a deal.......

  It is a relief that we haven’t gone to a no-deal situation at the end of 2020 but the bottom line for us is it’s still not good,” he said."

https://www.connexionfrance.com/French-news/Brexit-deal-a-relief-but-we-ve-still-lost-out-overall

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remainer action plan:

  1. Claim Brexit will ruin the country.
  2. Vote against it in the referendum
  3. Lose
  4. Claim Brexiteers were
    1. Mislead
    2. Dumb
    3. Racist
  5. Fight for a second referendum
  6. Vote against Boris in GE
  7. Lose
  8. Claim he'll never get a deal
  9. No deal is what he really wants and will ruin the country
  10. Lose & whine  
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Guided Missile said:

Remainer action plan:

  1. Claim Brexit will ruin the country.
  2. Vote against it in the referendum
  3. Lose
  4. Claim Brexiteers were
    1. Mislead
    2. Dumb
    3. Racist
  5. Fight for a second referendum
  6. Vote against Boris in GE
  7. Lose
  8. Claim he'll never get a deal
  9. No deal is what he really wants and will ruin the country
  10. Lose & whine  

1. Flog a poison

2. See it banned by the EU 

3. Start campaign against the EU 

4. Lose and whine 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Guided Missile said:

Remainer action plan:

  1. Claim Brexit will ruin the country. ( It might yet, let us wait and see )
  2. Vote against it in the referendum   ( Was the right choice )
  3. Lose ( Shit happens )
  4. Claim Brexiteers were
    1. Mislead   ( In some sense we all were )
    2. Dumb     ( Well, you're one )
    3. Racist    ( Some are )
  5. Fight for a second referendum ( Exactly as Farage said he would if the result had gone the other way )
  6. Vote against Boris in GE   ( Was never going to vote for him )
  7. Lose  ( Shit happens )
  8. Claim he'll never get a deal   ( He played poker with the EU and thankfully common sense kicked in on both sides at the last minute )
  9. No deal is what he really wants and will ruin the country  ( It would have done, but I don't think Boris had any idea of what he wanted other than to 'Get Brexit Done'. Slogans are easy, leadership is hard ) )
  10. Lose & whine  ( The only way to lose this last point would hve been a no-deal. The only problem is that if the excrement hit's the aircon, we can't avoid it any more than you can )

Nobody is whining, we are all in the same boat. ( Other than Boris' dad it seems ). This will probably not be as bad as some had predicted, but will certainly not produce the Utopia some planned for.

Now can we stop the peurile "Remoaner" "Brexit Jihadi" bullshit and realise that this is a new year with new opportunities, and things are going to be different. Some might turn out for the better, some will turn out for the worse, and there is still a lot that has to be negotiated.

Edited by badgerx16
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

BoJo's dad says he is applying to become a French citizen.

Boris himself has quite a choice as he has French, German, Turkish, Russian and American ancestry and was born in the USA. Personally, I think he'll choose the USA to settle in but obviously not yet, although he just might follow his father to France for retirement in a warmer climate but he could do that in California too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Media reports no delays for trucks at Dover. Quite unlike the chaos of last month when we were in the single market. Time for the media to cheer up about the majority democratic decision of a great independent nation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Media reports no delays for trucks at Dover. Quite unlike the chaos of last month when we were in the single market. Time for the media to cheer up about the majority democratic decision of a great independent nation.

I had 08:15 in the sweepstake so you were just a tiny bit late with this.

Edited by CB Fry
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Media reports no delays for trucks at Dover. Quite unlike the chaos of last month when we were in the single market. Time for the media to cheer up about the majority democratic decision of a great independent nation.

How much traffic is normal on New Year's Day as compared to what there will be next week ? And are you seriously saying that the SM was the reason for the jams ?

Edited by badgerx16
Link to post
Share on other sites

A glass was raised at 11pm last night to toast the heroes who delivered us this historic moment. 
 

To Nigel, who got us a referendum. There’s no chance the ERG would have done so, they’d still be arguing about section 2, subsection B1 of X treaty.

To Boris & Gove, who probably pushed the result over the line.

To Gina Miller who ensured a meaningful vote. 

To The Spartans who refused to vote for BRINO. Particularly, the radiant Priti & Theresa V the only 2 current cabinet members that never once voted for Mays turd.

To Bercow, Soubry,  Grieve and others that also refused to vote for BRINO but also behaved in such a way to turn the people off the rotten Parliament, and made them want to drain the swamp. 
 

To Sugar tits Swinsson & Krankie who were so deluded they believed an election would stop Brexit. When the remainer parliament & remainer speaker had Boris locked up, they gave him the key to escape. 
 

To Sir Kier Starmer, whose disastrous Brexit policy probably gave Boris an extra 50 seats, ensuring a buffer against the remain element left in the party. 
 

The great thing about Brexit was the ones that wanted it least, the ones that tried to stop it, not only ended up defeated in humiliating fashion, but their actions  also ensured it was something all but 2 of the ERG could vote for. 

Hereos all, I salute you......

  • Like 2
  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

A glass was raised at 11pm last night to toast the heroes who delivered us this historic moment. 
 

To Nigel, who got us a referendum. There’s no chance the ERG would have done so, they’d still be arguing about section 2, subsection B1 of X treaty.

To Boris & Gove, who probably pushed the result over the line.

To Gina Miller who ensured a meaningful vote. 

To The Spartans who refused to vote for BRINO. Particularly, the radiant Priti & Theresa V the only 2 current cabinet members that never once voted for Mays turd.

To Bercow, Soubry,  Grieve and others that also refused to vote for BRINO but also behaved in such a way to turn the people off the rotten Parliament, and made them want to drain the swamp. 
 

To Sugar tits Swinsson & Krankie who were so deluded they believed an election would stop Brexit. When the remainer parliament & remainer speaker had Boris locked up, they gave him the key to escape. 
 

To Sir Kier Starmer, whose disastrous Brexit policy probably gave Boris an extra 50 seats, ensuring a buffer against the remain element left in the party. 
 

The great thing about Brexit was the ones that wanted it least, the ones that tried to stop it, not only ended up defeated in humiliating fashion, but their actions  also ensured it was something all but 2 of the ERG could vote for. 

Hereos all, I salute you......

Dishonourable mentions too to Surrender Bill Benn and Yvette Cooper, and the imposter temporary PM Oliver Letwin, who were the main culprits who effectively took over the government of the country with the aid of the rogue Speaker Bercow. Also to all of those turncoats who either joined another current party, or who formed their own new party without the common decency to stand for re-election at the time, but who were all given the boot subsequently by the electorate a few months afterwards anyway. I can't recall the name of that party, as they kept on changing it.

Cheers to those washed-up has-beens, ex-PMs Major, Blair and Brown and to the former big beasts who are now political dinosaurs, like Heseltine and Clark for sticking their oar in.

And let's not forget the part played in our departure played by those on the EU side, notably Tusk, Verhofstadt, Juncker and Macron, who did their best to insult, belittle and sneer at us at every opportunity, to the extent that even many who voted remain saw that it wasn't a good idea to have people like these running the EU and able to exert such an influence over this nation's future.

Like you, I express my eternal gratitude to the part they played in this successful outcome to our independence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Now I know for sure that this is a comedy thread!

Good work guys - Happy 2021 to everyone of all sides, may your arguments retain comedy value and continue to lure in the unwary to get irate for little gain.

😊

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wes Tender said:Also to all of those turncoats who either joined another current party, or who formed their own new party without the common decency to stand for re-election at the time, but who were all given the boot subsequently by the electorate a few months afterwards anyway. I can't recall the name of that party, as they kept on changing it.

Who are ya?

 

B7F89C3A-AD35-4B8B-B854-63B396EBD193.jpeg

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not on Twatter, but followed a You Tube link to one from Andrew Neil, asking whether there was a cure available yet for Brexit Derangement Syndrome suffered by several Rejoiners like Mad Andy Adonis, AC Grayling, Heseltine, Campbell and other sufferers. That thread of his in turn led me to a very good article that he had written:-

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9105037/Yes-Britain-spring-ANDREW-NEIL-gives-uplifting-vision-post-Brexit-boom.html

Naturally the narrow minded on here will immediately condemn it purely because of the source, rather than because of the author. I think that his prognosis for our future prosperity post-Brexit is very well argued

I also await the launch of his GB News Channel around March. It is very timely when polls currently show that half of the population don't trust the BBC to deliver unbiased news broadcasts. Neither do Sky, (apart from Sky Australia, which is generally very good), so I suspect that GB News will very quickly pick up a large following from those deserting the BBC, ITV and SKY news.

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

I also await the launch of his GB News Channel around March. It is very timely when polls currently show that half of the population don't trust the BBC to deliver unbiased news broadcasts. Neither do Sky, (apart from Sky Australia, which is generally very good), so I suspect that GB News will very quickly pick up a large following from those deserting the BBC, ITV and SKY news.

Our version of Fox News or Newsmax ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Our version of Fox News or Newsmax ?

That claim was strongly refuted by Andrew. He's built his reputation on giving both barrels to both main parties so I doubt that will change any time soon. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Wes Tender said:

I'm not on Twatter, but followed a You Tube link to one from Andrew Neil, asking whether there was a cure available yet for Brexit Derangement Syndrome suffered by several Rejoiners like Mad Andy Adonis, AC Grayling, Heseltine, Campbell and other sufferers. That thread of his in turn led me to a very good article that he had written:-

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9105037/Yes-Britain-spring-ANDREW-NEIL-gives-uplifting-vision-post-Brexit-boom.html

Naturally the narrow minded on here will immediately condemn it purely because of the source, rather than because of the author. I think that his prognosis for our future prosperity post-Brexit is very well argued

 

It is an interesting and positive view, but my response is not 'narrow minded' nor dismissive of the source; the issue of long range teleworking meaning that droves of people will move far afield from the metropolitan population areas, particularly London and environs, will have a detrimental rather than beneficial effect on the areas moved to. This is because the Teleworkers will retain their salary levels, which will be higher than the local economy is capable of supporting, which inevitably drives house price inflation and makes it harder for the local population to get onto the 'ladder'.  ( An expanded version of the ripple effect that already exists along commuting corridors ).

Edited by badgerx16
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

That claim was strongly refuted by Andrew. He's built his reputation on giving both barrels to both main parties so I doubt that will change any time soon. 

I suppose it depends on where the funding comes from.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

It is an interesting and positive view, but my response is not 'narrow minded' nor dismissive of the source; the issue of long range teleworking meaning that droves of people will move far afield from the metropolitan population areas, particularly London and environs, will have a detrimental rather than beneficial effect on the areas moved to. This is because the Teleworkers will retain their salary levels, which will be higher than the local economy is capable of supporting, which inevitably drives house price inflation and makes it harder for the local population to get onto the 'ladder'.  ( An expanded version of the ripple effect that already exists along commuting corridors ).

I didn't have you in mind among the ranks of the narrow-minded, Badger.

I disagree with your opinion that the dispersal of office based professionals away from London and other metropolitan areas into other regions around the country will have a detrimental effect on those regions. You say that those city based professionals will retain their salary levels, but if they are London weighted, why should they retain that weighting if they aren't paying high commuting costs, high rental, housing or entertainment costs? And logically, even if your assumption was correct that higher house prices in the regions would result, then it must also logically follow that London and other metropolitan city property prices would conversely fall. Property prices as with most commercial products, are dependent on supply and demand. Market forces will mean higher prices in those areas over time, but the locals will be able to better afford them because those higher paid professionals will bring a large economic boost to those areas via their income expenditure locally. Houses bought by wealthier purchasers invite activity in the building, plumbing and decoration trades. Local shops, car dealers, Estate Agents, restaurants etc, will all increase their trade, so there will be additional local employment opportunities. Where property prices are cheap enough for most of the local population to get on the ladder, it is often because the areas are run down, with poor, low paid job opportunities, often with high unemployment,

It will be up to the government to level up the regions, bringing good employment opportunities to these poorer areas, which they can do by investment in infrastructure projects like Free Ports for example.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wes Tender said:

I'm not on Twatter, but followed a You Tube link to one from Andrew Neil, asking whether there was a cure available yet for Brexit Derangement Syndrome suffered by several Rejoiners like Mad Andy Adonis, AC Grayling, Heseltine, Campbell and other sufferers. That thread of his in turn led me to a very good article that he had written:-

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9105037/Yes-Britain-spring-ANDREW-NEIL-gives-uplifting-vision-post-Brexit-boom.html

Naturally the narrow minded on here will immediately condemn it purely because of the source, rather than because of the author. I think that his prognosis for our future prosperity post-Brexit is very well argued

I also await the launch of his GB News Channel around March. It is very timely when polls currently show that half of the population don't trust the BBC to deliver unbiased news broadcasts. Neither do Sky, (apart from Sky Australia, which is generally very good), so I suspect that GB News will very quickly pick up a large following from those deserting the BBC, ITV and SKY news.

Moaning about news being biased and posting a link from the Daily Mail. Brilliant! :lol:

Edited by aintforever
Link to post
Share on other sites

Wes, I assume you don't live in an economically depressed rural area. If you are talking about 200 to 300 miles from London, you reach Yorkshire and Lancashire, the rural areas of which are very attractive, but local economics are fragile, and house prices in rural areas are already getting to the point of being beyond reach of young people born here. It also falacious to think that people moving in with spare money will spend it locally, sufficient to boost local businesses. Village shops, garages, etc, run on precarious finances and very narrow margins, and certainly will not provide the products and services somebody living in an urban environment might be used to. There aren't car dealers in every village, estate agents are almost entirely online, and major purchases will be sourced from larger urban centres.

 I suppose thay might boost the need for delivery drivers with local knowledge for all their online purchases.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, aintforever said:

Moaning about news being biased and posting a link from the Daily Mail. Brilliant! :lol:

It comes as no surprise to me that you would feel the need to condemn the source of the article disregarding the person who wrote it. When it comes to bias, you also don't appear to recognise the difference between a newspaper writing an opinion piece, and a broadcaster giving the news. Brilliant🙄

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

That claim was strongly refuted by Andrew. He's built his reputation on giving both barrels to both main parties so I doubt that will change any time soon. 

His reputation was damaged during the last election when he did give both barrels to Corbyn, Swinson and even Sturgeon - but failed to secure any time with his old chum and colleague Boris Johnson.

That episode was a long way from balanced, and his rebuking of the PM following that failure was nowhere near as damaging as the soundbites from his attacks on the other three.

That was the week he lost his reputation for giving everyone the same treatment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, badgerx16 said:

Wes, I assume you don't live in an economically depressed rural area. If you are talking about 200 to 300 miles from London, you reach Yorkshire and Lancashire, the rural areas of which are very attractive, but local economics are fragile, and house prices in rural areas are already getting to the point of being beyond reach of young people born here. It also falacious to think that people moving in with spare money will spend it locally, sufficient to boost local businesses. Village shops, garages, etc, run on precarious finances and very narrow margins, and certainly will not provide the products and services somebody living in an urban environment might be used to. There aren't car dealers in every village, estate agents are almost entirely online, and major purchases will be sourced from larger urban centres.

 I suppose thay might boost the need for delivery drivers with local knowledge for all their online purchases.

I have family living in areas of the country which are more economically depressed than this area. Of course, as well as poorer areas of Yorkshire and Lancashire, there are some pretty wealthy ones too. I expect that these professionals will not be moving to Bradford, or Blackburn and the like, so I doubt that the house prices will be affected much in the likes of them. As I say, it is up to government investment in these regions to pull them up.

I think that it is quaint thinking that Londoners and others living and working in the big cities will necessarily aim for picturesque little villages with a corner shop and a little garage, more likely a town with some of the facilities they are used to. But then you have ignored the categories of local businesses that would benefit, such as builders, plumbers, decorators and other tradesmen. And I see that you don't argue that they should receive lower pay without their London allowance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, rallyboy said:

His reputation was damaged during the last election when he did give both barrels to Corbyn, Swinson and even Sturgeon - but failed to secure any time with his old chum and colleague Boris Johnson.

That episode was a long way from balanced, and his rebuking of the PM following that failure was nowhere near as damaging as the soundbites from his attacks on the other three.

That was the week he lost his reputation for giving everyone the same treatment.

Are you suggesting he didn't attempt to secure that interview and had no response when Johnson refused? It's not like he's gone easy on Boris before, why would he start then? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Are you suggesting he didn't attempt to secure that interview and had no response when Johnson refused? It's not like he's gone easy on Boris before, why would he start then? 

I agree. It was not possible for Neil to give all of them the same treatment, because in order to do that, either all of them would have had to have been interviewed, or all of them would have had to avoid it. I recall Neil being pretty damning in his condemnation of Boris for not attending, so much so that there was criticism of his statement by the Tories and the right wing press.  I would have thought the fact that Boris made some pretty poor excuses as to why he wished to avoid being interviewed by him, would have enhanced Neil's reputation as a formidable interviewer quite considerably.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})