The Conservative Party

Vic said:
Good grief. A supermarket (or anyone else with stock) knows how much goes missing without being paid for. When your product is a train carrying a thousand people, and it's possible to board without a valid ticket, any estimate of fare evasion is just that, an estimate, and one random* MP spending an hour or two running after people he thinks haven't paid does not a statistic make.

* random as in found to have acted unlawfully to benefit a developer he sat next to at a Tory fundraising dinner and who then gave a donation to the Tory Party (after Jenrick rushed through his planning decision).

www.bbc.com

Westferry planning row: Jenrick texted property developer, documents show

Labour say documents show "discrepancies" in housing secretary's account of controversial scheme.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com

Has anyone stuck a camera in Richard Desmond's face and asked him whether he offered a donation if he got what he wanted in his dealings with the "Marxists" at the council.
Click to expand...

Yes Vic.
When your product is a train carrying a thousand people, and it's possible to board without a valid ticket, any estimate of fare evasion is just that, an estimate,
Click to expand...
You make my point , thank you.
 
Ifwecouldjust....... said:
People are thinking this because of nutters like Jenrick posting ''about the problem'' its like asking the population about the number of ''boat people'' ....... many will say it's far a much larger number than the circa 30.000 it actually is.
Click to expand...
No, there isn't that much dispute about the actual numbers , Jenrick's observation is 1 in 25 or 4%, TFL say was 3.8% ,
no far away. The dispute is wether it is increasing or decreasing.
 
Hertzblue said:
Oh come on Bob,
" They think they saw" really , like aliens then maybe fare evaders don't really exist ! that is gaslighting on a grand scale.
I am embarrassing myself ? - FFs get a look in that mirror !
Click to expand...

An opinion poll is just that. An opinion. In this case the opinion is based on what people see or believe they have seen. It is not a reliable measure of the actual level of fare evasion.

Let people whose job it is to combat this issue get on with it. It doesn’t need arsehole politicians indulging in publicity stunts to feed your emotional needs.
 
Vic said:
We only got out of the EU through being told a lot of lies. Where was Starmer being dishonest in what he said to Francois?
Click to expand...
All you need do is read paragraphs 27 to 30 of the Common Understanding document published by the EC on 19 May following the UK-EU summit.

It outlines that there will be dynamic alignment of SPS regulations, that any limited UK exceptions from this process cannot breach EU law in terms of UK exports to the EU and disadvantaging EU exports to the UK, and that the UK has no formal or active role in shaping EU law.

So when Starmer describes claims of dynamic alignment and the UK being a rule taker as nonsense, as he did to Francois, then he’s very obviously being dishonest.
 
From Conservative Post

"There are moments in history when the usual tools of government, the polished press releases, the committee meetings, the endless consultations, simply don’t cut it."

So we need a new tool...

1748691130823.png
 
Brewster's millions said:
All you need do is read paragraphs 27 to 30 of the Common Understanding document published by the EC on 19 May following the UK-EU summit.

It outlines that there will be dynamic alignment of SPS regulations, that any limited UK exceptions from this process cannot breach EU law in terms of UK exports to the EU and disadvantaging EU exports to the UK, and that the UK has no formal or active role in shaping EU law.

So when Starmer describes claims of dynamic alignment and the UK being a rule taker as nonsense, as he did to Francois, then he’s very obviously being dishonest.
Click to expand...
Re "the UK has no formal or active role in shaping EU law" either you're being dishonest or you haven't really read #30:
30. To ensure that it can put forward its view, the United Kingdom should be involved at an early stage and contribute appropriately for a country that is not a member of the European Union to the decision-shaping process of European Union legal acts in the fields covered by the obligation to dynamically align. The European Commission should consult the Government of the United Kingdom at an early stage of policy-making. These rights would not extend to participation in the work of the Council or its preparatory bodies.

I presumed when Starmer said Francois was talking nonsense that he simply meant as usual. He said we are aligned (as we have to be if we want to trade with the EU).

If you're critical of the deal (which most businesses welcome) you should tell us how increased divergence would benefit our exports to the EU.
 
Brewster's millions said:
All you need do is read paragraphs 27 to 30 of the Common Understanding document published by the EC on 19 May following the UK-EU summit.

It outlines that there will be dynamic alignment of SPS regulations, that any limited UK exceptions from this process cannot breach EU law in terms of UK exports to the EU and disadvantaging EU exports to the UK, and that the UK has no formal or active role in shaping EU law.
So when Starmer describes claims of dynamic alignment and the UK being a rule taker as nonsense, as he did to Francois, then he’s very obviously being dishonest.
Click to expand...
But that’s what we voted for.
 
Vic said:
Re "the UK has no formal or active role in shaping EU law" either you're being dishonest or you haven't really read #30:
30. To ensure that it can put forward its view, the United Kingdom should be involved at an early stage and contribute appropriately for a country that is not a member of the European Union to the decision-shaping process of European Union legal acts in the fields covered by the obligation to dynamically align. The European Commission should consult the Government of the United Kingdom at an early stage of policy-making. These rights would not extend to participation in the work of the Council or its preparatory bodies.

I presumed when Starmer said Francois was talking nonsense that he simply meant as usual. He said we are aligned (as we have to be if we want to trade with the EU).

If you're critical of the deal (which most businesses welcome) you should tell us how increased divergence would benefit our exports to the EU.
Click to expand...
Paragraph 30 is pure lip service, and just put there to fool people (those who want to be fooled, that is) into thinking that the UK isn’t a rule taker. The UK can offer its view, that’s it, and contributing ‘appropriately for a country that is not a member’ of the EU is a polite way of telling the UK who decides the rules. So I would suggest you read paragraph 30 again.

I’m not particularly critical of the deal, I’m simply answering your question in relation to Starmer’s misrepresentation and dishonesty of the dynamic alignment issue. Which, apart from his terrible political judgement, is the consistent theme of his tenure so far.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
But that’s what we voted for.
Click to expand...
I’m not suggesting it isn’t. If the UK wanted to maintain a single market type agreement with the EU in certain sectors of the economy, then the UK was always going to be a rule taker, and find itself in a clearly worse situation than when it was in the EU.

I’m simply highlighting Starmer’s dishonesty around the issue of dynamic alignment, which the usual stooge types on here don’t like to admit.
 
Brewster's millions said:
I’m not suggesting it isn’t. If the UK wanted to maintain a single market type agreement with the EU in certain sectors of the economy, then the UK was always going to be a rule taker, and find itself in a clearly worse situation than when it was in the EU.

I’m simply highlighting Starmer’s dishonesty around the issue of dynamic alignment, which the usual stooge types on here don’t like to admit.
Click to expand...
They’re all lying cunts tbf.
 
Brewster's millions said:
I’m not suggesting it isn’t. If the UK wanted to maintain a single market type agreement with the EU in certain sectors of the economy, then the UK was always going to be a rule taker, and find itself in a clearly worse situation than when it was in the EU.

I’m simply highlighting Starmer’s dishonesty around the issue of dynamic alignment, which the usual stooge types on here don’t like to admit.
Click to expand...

More than happy to state the UK is, and always will be, a rule taker and not a rule maker. Stated years ago that we would end up within the EU economic and judicial orbit on trade - especially, given part of the UK is still in the EU Single Market.

It’s what we voted for - ie to remove ourselves from the political process of the EU which includes rule and decision making. Brexiteers just forgot to mention that we would still be subject to the rules.

So,we got what we voted for, and there should be no complaints. And yes, Starmer is going to use the fig leaf of ‘being consulted’ so as not to embarrass the morons who voted for Brexit.

Jolly decent of him to spare their blushes. It’s an act of kindness :)
 
BobKowalski said:
More than happy to state the UK is, and always will be, a rule taker and not a rule maker. Stated years ago that we would end up within the EU economic and judicial orbit on trade - especially, given part of the UK is still in the EU Single Market.

It’s what we voted for - ie to remove ourselves from the political process of the EU which includes rule and decision making. Brexiteers just forgot to mention that we would still be subject to the rules.

So,we got what we voted for, and there should be no complaints. And yes, Starmer is going to use the fig leaf of ‘being consulted’ so as not to embarrass the morons who voted for Brexit.

Jolly decent of him to spare their blushes. It’s an act of kindness :)
Click to expand...
It’s fucking mental that some people are complaining about this when it’s exactly what they voted for in the first place. What the fuck did they expect? It’s beyond moronic.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It’s fucking mental that some people are complaining about this when it’s exactly what they voted for in the first place. What the fuck did they expect? It’s beyond moronic.
Click to expand...
Some people - naively to be as polite as I can be - thought we could have our cake and eat it, because we're English/British. The reality is that was never happening. It's like giving up your season ticket at City while expecting to keep all the privileges of being a season ticket holder.

Brexit came at a cost. In my view, it just wasn't worth it. But the Brexit fanatics will never admit it. They are convinced there was a magic Brexit denied by a shadowy elite group.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
It’s fucking mental that some people are complaining about this when it’s exactly what they voted for in the first place. What the fuck did they expect? It’s beyond moronic.
Click to expand...

No they didn't. Don't you remember, "They need us MORE than we need them".

We were going to leave, then set the rules for trade with the EU. The fact that the EU is a trading bloc many times the size of the UK meant nothing.
 
bluenova said:
No they didn't. Don't you remember, "They need us MORE than we need them".

We were going to leave, then set the rules for trade with the EU. The fact that the EU is a trading bloc many times the size of the UK meant nothing.
Click to expand...
Yeah but we had an empire covering half the global land mass. That must mean something.
 
BobKowalski said:
More than happy to state the UK is, and always will be, a rule taker and not a rule maker. Stated years ago that we would end up within the EU economic and judicial orbit on trade - especially, given part of the UK is still in the EU Single Market.

It’s what we voted for - ie to remove ourselves from the political process of the EU which includes rule and decision making. Brexiteers just forgot to mention that we would still be subject to the rules.

So,we got what we voted for, and there should be no complaints. And yes, Starmer is going to use the fig leaf of ‘being consulted’ so as not to embarrass the morons who voted for Brexit.

Jolly decent of him to spare their blushes. It’s an act of kindness :)
Click to expand...
We can make rules if we want.
Anyone who wants to export to us would have to follow those rules for those products.
The problem is that we’re a small fish in a big pond and our unique rules would add additional cost if they don’t align with rules from the bigger fish.
That’s what the Brexiteers are in denial about.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top