The Labour Government

[mosssideblue]

OK I don't dispute any of that.

But my point still stands , the Government now has an opportunity to start to change things if they want to but seemingly are just following the same course as the previous one.

Can you elaborate as to why Labour are simply doing the same as the Tories

 

[bluenova]

Nobody, other than Starmer, cares about those resolutions or judgments, they're advisory for a reason and that's why most countries ignore them which is what we should have done here.

Instead British taxpayers are having to borrow billions to pay off a sum when their quality of life is being decimated at home with tax rises, bill rises, and spending cuts. Absolute madness.

You say nobody other than Starmer, but it was the Tories that responded to the pressure by starting negotiations.

 

[KDB Fan]

Atoning for the ethnic cleansing by the UK/US in late 60s / early 70s for a US military base, and now paying rent to keep the military base.

John Pilger, Diego Garcia—How the Brits deported a nation

Yep atoning for the ethnic cleansing by handing sovereignty to a different nation thousands of miles away who've systematically mistreated Chagossians over the past few decades and who've recently passed a law threatening them with 10 years in prison if they claim any independence over the island.

Even Starmer, with his shameful record on freedom of expression, wouldn't dream of coming up with a law that punitive.

 

[bluenova]

That was 55 years ago. No reason to pay much if anything at all, why should we pay for our ancestors crimes.

If we as a country go down this route we will be bankrupt in a couple of years given the ammount of people the British Empire offended, dispossessed and killed. Slavery compensation will be back on the agenda soon.

I dont care what the last lot was going to do, Starmer need to grow a pair and put the UK and it's citizens first.

It's hardly paying for ancestors when it was 55 years ago. The UK ended slavery nearly 200 years ago, whereas many of these are people who are still alive.

 

[KDB Fan]

You say nobody other than Starmer, but it was the Tories that responded to the pressure by starting negotiations.

The Tories didn't sign any deal but if they had have done on the terms that Labour are reportedly about to, I'd describe it equally as a massive stitch-up of the British people. Which is what this is.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

It's hardly paying for ancestors when it was 55 years ago. The UK ended slavery nearly 200 years ago, whereas many of these are people who are still alive.

They don't need money from us using the island 100 years ago then do they. 19billion is utterly ridiculous, especially when we haven't been using it, the yanks have. Starmer needs to grow a pair like Badenoch. ;-)

 

[bluenova]

The Tories didn't sign any deal but if they had have done on the terms that Labour are reportedly about to, I'd describe it equally as a massive stitch-up of the British people. Which is what this is.

Because you know everything that's involved in the deal, and why both Governments were very keen to do something about it?

Ultimately we know virtually nothing about how likely it was the we'd lose access to the islands, what the benefit of keeping the lease is, what security issues are involved, what arrangement we have with the US etc., etc.

If you're someone senior in the MoD, on the Privy Council, a Cabinet minister, or a senior FCDO official, then I'll accept you have enough knowledge of what the actual deal is, and what the stakes involved are.

If you're not, then you know as much as I do - and that's not enough to actual know whether it's a stitch up or a great deal.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

The Tories didn't sign any deal but if they had have done on the terms that Labour are reportedly about to, I'd describe it equally as a massive stitch-up of the British people. Which is what this is.

Starmer needs to understand he can choose to.not go along with any negotiations.


This is the trouble with all politicians, they absolutely excel at wasting taxpayers money!

 

[bluenova]

They don't need money from us using the island 100 years ago then do they. 19billion is utterly ridiculous, especially when we haven't been using it, the yanks have. Starmer needs to grow a pair like Badenoch. ;-)

You have no idea if it's £19b (number 10 have said it's nowhere near), and even then, you have no idea how much of that is any kind of resettlement money.

Why 100 years anyway? It was our country that forced people off the islands during the late 60s/early 70s. Even I was alive at that point.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Because you know everything that's involved in the deal, and why both Governments were very keen to do something about it?

Ultimately we know virtually nothing about how likely it was the we'd lose access to the islands, what the benefit of keeping the lease is, what security issues are involved, what arrangement we have with the US etc., etc.

If you're someone senior in the MoD, on the Privy Council, a Cabinet minister, or a senior FCDO official, then I'll accept you have enough knowledge of what the actual deal is, and what the stakes involved are.

If you're not, then you know as much as I do - and that's not enough to actual know whether it's a stitch up or a great deal.

We have 42 amin staff there , and don't have an aircraft that can land there apart from a refueling tanker. There isnt a RN base , So it's not rocket science that it's not militarily important to the UK.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

You have no idea if it's £19b (number 10 have said it's nowhere near), and even then, you have no idea how much of that is any kind of resettlement money.

Why 100 years anyway? It was our country that forced people off the islands during the late 60s/early 70s. Even I was alive at that point.

Why don't they disclose how much it is then? The reason being it's close to 19billion. If it wasn't they would say for sure.

They should disclose anyway as its our money they are wasting not theirs. I loathe how governments behave secretly like this with our money.

100 years because no-one is alive from then chances are. That was your excuse for giving them taxpayers money, some that were moved on are still alive.

Ok That's fine work out how many are still alive then give them a couple of million each. They will all be happy I can guarantee that.

Oh no I hear you bleat the UK must be bent over and rogered silly to the tune of Billions lol.

 

[bluenova]

We have 42 amin staff there , and don't have an aircraft that can land there apart from a refueling tanker. There isnt a RN base , So it's not rocket science that it's not militarily important to the UK.

But we don't know what the importance is to the UK of having the US there. Starmer also made it clear today at PMQs that there were national security reasons that weren't in the public domain. Now he might be making that up, but he directly challenged Badenoch to look into it, which suggests there is more than we know.

There have been suggestions that it's used for extrajudicial detainments, or special ops. I simply don't know, and neither does anyone on this board.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

Can you elaborate as to why Labour are simply doing the same as the Tories

Simply because I asked Vic why Labour didn't just increase central funding for LAs and his reason was there wasn't any money. The same reason the Torries gave if I remember rightly.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

But we don't know what the importance is to the UK of having the US there. Starmer also made it clear today at PMQs that there were national security reasons that weren't in the public domain. Now he might be making that up, but he directly challenged Badenoch to look into it, which suggests there is more than we know.

There have been suggestions that it's used for extrajudicial detainments, or special ops. I simply don't know, and neither does anyone on this board.

I don't believe him or you.

Regardless of that, do you think the Government should disclose what this payment amount is? If not why not?

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

I don't believe him or you.

Regardless of that, do you think the Government should disclose what this payment amount is? If not why not?

According to Politics Live, it is because the negotiations haven’t finished yet.

 

[bluenova]

I don't believe him or you.

I haven't said anything that you need to believe.

Let's see what Badenoch comes back with. If Starmer was just making it up, and we just have Ethel the tea lady on the island, and she quite likes the sea air, then surely she'll come back and say it's unimportant.

 

[Churchlawtonblue]

According to Politics Live, it is because the negotiations haven’t finished yet.

So should they disclose it when they are finished.

To be honest getting any politicians or civil servants to negotiate is just stupid, these people have such a poor sense of value when it comes to public money. The waste is atrocious.

.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

So should they disclose it when they are finished.

To be honest getting any politicians or civil servants to negotiate is just stupid, these people have such a poor sense of value when it comes to public money. The waste is atrocious.

.

That’s what they concluded and said would happen.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

According to Politics Live, it is because the negotiations haven’t finished yet.

As far as I know, nothing has been signed off finally as it got put on hold pending the US election ( the announcement was made in October).

I thought both governments had agreed to the delay.

 

[MillionMilesAway]

I haven't said anything that you need to believe.

Let's see what Badenoch comes back with. If Starmer was just making it up, and we just have Ethel the tea lady on the island, and she quite likes the sea air, then surely she'll come back and say it's unimportant.

I'm not sure what she can come back with.
If she asks for the briefing, it'll be unthinkable for her to then give the details publically.