Paphos Life

Hudswell wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2017 8:50 pm The GE has not been called to divert attention, what a silly comment, Mrs May needs a strong mandate to ensure the best outcome of the Brexit negotions, with the current make up of Parliament she is not getting that...she had no choice, it is not what she wanted but again petty party politics forced her hand.

You may well think it is a silly comment but just remind me how many Conservatives are currently under criminal investigation for issues surrounding election expenses? Was Mrs May able to get the Govt.'s bills relating to Brexit (with a good margin) through both houses? Was she able to trigger Article 50? The answer is yes so why is that not a strong enough mandate - what did she want to do that she couldn't?

The only other thing criminal in all of this is weak and totally ineffective opposition who regardless of their political hue are absolutely necessary in a democracy.

BTW I have always voted Conservative although sometimes I have wanted to vote none of the above.

Cheers

Steve

Juncker is not bothered about 'Hard Brexit'. Why should he care about the projected loss of £25bn to the German manufacturing industry or the £10bn loss to Spain's fruit and vegetable producers of a hard Brexit? He's also not really fussed whether or not we get a trade deal. How will such matters actually affect the European Commission which he heads up or the European Parliament? Of course, they will not. Jean-Claude can rely on the backing of most of the EU states who rely on Brussels handouts. Poland, for example, received a staggering €57.3bn more from the EU than they paid in over a 5 year period. Does anyone expect Poland to stand up for Britain against their benefactor? Only 10 of the 28 EU counties are net contributors to the EU budget, and of these, Germany, Britain and France provide ⅔ of the entire net EU budget. The loss to the EU boils down to money.

All Juncker cares about is securing even more money from the cash cow called the UK. He has already admitted that the EU budget is unsustainable without major revision after Brexit. As the unaccountable, unelected President of an undemocratic institution, his only thought is for milking as much money from us as possible.

An example of this attitude is his firm refusal to discuss the future of EU citizen's in the UK and the UK citizen's in the EU until the very first item on his agenda is sorted out - the money we should pay to Brussels. He clearly doesn't give a tinkers cuss about EU citizen's rights as long as he can extract the maximum amount of money from contributing countries.

smudger wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2017 10:29 pm Steve you are splitting so many hairs I can hardly believe its you posting! Shame on you!

"So it's not bullying, aggressive or threatening to state these position?????"

Steve, what planet are you on?? Every word that comes out from the EU is aggressive, threatening, or bullying!!! They are v clearly not in a position to negotiate, or make compromises. It's the EU or no way. How diplomatic or democratic is that?

Sorry I thought we were having a discussion - I am just responding to the points that you have made and the repeated claims. You are of course entitled to your opinion, as am I, but I will refrain from making personal comments if I don't agree with yours.

smudger wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2017 10:29 pm And, given the non exixtence of any audited, signed off Accounts since it's inception, I see no substantiation of these figures without these Authorised Accounts.

That's not entirely correct either:
https://fullfact.org/europe/did-auditor ... eu-budget/

Cheers

Steve

Royal wrote: ↑Wed May 03, 2017 10:34 pm An example of this attitude is his firm refusal to discuss the future of EU citizen's in the UK and the UK citizen's in the EU until the very first item on his agenda is sorted out - the money we should pay to Brussels. He clearly doesn't give a tinkers cuss about EU citizen's rights as long as he can extract the maximum amount of money from contributing countries.

As with most of the misinformation coming out of the right wing press this is not strictly true. It's true that prior to article 50 being activated the EU refused to negotiate but subsequently submitted their draft negotiating position ; to date there has been no response as May wants to wait until after the GE before discussing it. She stated that all EU Citizens will be treated the same as all other immigrants entering or living in the UK to which David Davis had to issue a denial that this was the not the Governments position. If that is Mays position where does that leave the British who live in EU countries.
Unlike the Times and the 100 billion figure I haven't made this up and the information is there if you care to look for it.
I'm really surprised by how many have been completely taken in by what is just blatant electioneering.

Jim
.

Jim,

For the facts on this matter and the real truth just read the EU issued guidelines (you know, the ones that this thread is all about!). The guidelines state that there will be a phased approach to the negotiations.

Phase 1 aims are to:

• provide as much clarity and legal certainty as possible to citizens, businesses, stakeholders and international partners on the immediate effects of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the Union;

• settle the disentanglement of the United Kingdom from the Union and from all the rights and obligations the United Kingdom derives from commitments undertaken as Member State.

The European Council will monitor progress closely and determine when sufficient progress has been achieved to allow negotiations to proceed to the next phase.

Phase 1 therefore appears to seek to secure the future of EU Nationals in the UK but it is also dependent on agreeing the amount the UK owes the EU (all about the money). Phase 2 will not even begin until this has been sorted out, and let's not forget that within the guidelines it states "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed". So tell me - is that the attitude of a caring EU looking after it's citizen's in the UK?

The General Election has got nothing to do with the delay - it's all in the phased approach set out by Brussels. The guidelines have shamelessly linked the future of EU citizen's in The UK and the future of UK citizen's in Europe to a financial settlement which is what I asserted.

Even the left wing liberal press picked up on that gem

Royal
As I said the information is there if you want to search for it; I didnt lie awake in bed making it up. Both sides are setting out their negotiating positions, nothing new in that either. As Steve said there was no need for a GE, apart from a few MP's she had the rest of Parliament behind her; just a power grab.
I doubt if you will read the article I was quoting but it has been repeated in the Guardian this morning showing the different negotiating positions regarding EU Citizens and they are not very friendly by May. If the EU decide to take similar actions it could mean many unplanned returns to the UK by many Expats.
Jim

Jim B wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2017 10:24 am ...there was no need for a GE, apart from a few MP's she had the rest of Parliament behind her; just a power grab.

Oh Jim,

You do make me smile sometimes!

Again you don't have to take my word for it Royal, just look at how many voted to trigger article 50; it was actually 494 in favour and 122 against.

You do make me smile

Jim

So many people complained that May didn't have a mandate from the voters so she calls a general election to hopefully gain one. Cue same people moaning that she is calling an election when it isn't necessary. That wasn't aimed at anyone in particular on here

I don't believe the June election is about getting a mandate together at all.... It's all about clinging on to keeping the Tories in power. If she had waited until the next election to come around many of them will have been up before the beak on their accounts fiddling running the risk there will be nobody left to vote for or considerably out of favour with the masses making their marks on paper...

It's all been perfectly timed - in my opinion.

Strong and Stable my arse

Remember how the Leave Campaign told us how it would all be so easy to walk away from the EU prior to the referendum? Obviously it's not!

Jim,

The SNP are committed to thwart Brexit as much as they can, at every step of the way, having already moaned about not being allowed Indyref 2 and also having proposed stalling amendments to triggering Article 50 in a vain attempt to prevent it from taking place.

The split Labour Party are committed to a blow by blow account of the negotiations along the way and have said that they will not vote for the eventual deal (which is being undermined by their requirements to know at all stages what is going on) if it doesn't fit in line with what they expect.

The Lib Dems have ignored their constituents wishes and are calling for a second referendum as apparently we didn't vote for 'Hard Brexit' but we instead voted for 'Soft Brexit'. Good luck with that one on 8 Jun Tim - your heartland of SOUTH west England voted 'Out'.

Some Conservatives want Theresa May to walk away from the negotiating table and others want a more conciliatory approach.

Many in the country (mainly Remoaners) have accused Theresa May of being a turncoat Remainer who is seeking her own self aggrandisement without a mandate.

The Government's hands are currently tied to maintaining the election promises of David Cameron's 2015 Manifesto even though Brexit has fundamentally changed the economic position of the country.

The EU is trying at every turn to undermine the position of our Prime Minister and her Government in order to change the course of Brexit. She is being ridiculed, misquoted, private talks being leaked etc etc etc.

If we leave the EU in 2019 and have the originally planned General Election in 2020 there would be chaos.

An estimated 73% of all MPs currently favour remain despite the democratic will of the majority who voted in the Referendum 56% of Conservative MPs.

I would say that we need a General Election sooner rather than later. Theresa May will certainly have my vote.

PhotoLady wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2017 11:24 am Strong and Stable my arse

Yes, it may be, but let's not talk about our physical problems in the politics thread...

Hudswell

You should really try and diversify where you get your information from and then you may have a more balanced view of what is going on. No one is trying to shaft anyone apart from May who is putting her party before country. This election is purely down to the possible charging of up to 40 Tory MPs with fraud and losing their majority . I personally would not support a party who is selling off the NHS to private contractors (look up Plasma Supplies) and of course the Tory supporters will be in denial but it's true


Jim.

Jim B wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2017 5:12 pm
You should really try and diversify where you get your information from and then you may have a more balanced view of what is going on.

Jim,

So let me get what you are actually saying, right. You, Lloyd, PhotoLady et al, only get your information from 'balanced' sources and your views, when actually regurgitating these sources (judging from the amount of links and cut & pastes from the totally left wing liberal media journalist opinions you all seem to reproduce) are all 100% correct, balanced and represent a true reflection of what is going on, whereas everyone else (mainly the rather stupid Brexiteers who are uneducated and the great unwashed) are only reading/listening to unbalanced untruths and are being misled? Wow! Such arrogance still amazes me! Believe it or not, I do actually read those links and try to give a balanced opinion rather than just regurgitating what I read as truth.

Jim B wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2017 5:12 pm
No one is trying to shaft anyone apart from May who is putting her party before country. This election is purely down to the possible charging of up to 40 Tory MPs with fraud and losing their majority.

Quite incorrect again, Jim. She is the ONLY Party Leader who has put the democratic will of the people above her own personal beliefs as to what is right for the country. We will see on 8 Jun 17 who is correct. If you are - then the people will see right through the facade (as you claim to). If you are not right, then she will be returned with a huge majority of 100+ and an unassailable mandate to move forward.

Jim B wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2017 5:12 pm I personally would not support a party who is selling off the NHS to private contractors (look up Plasma Supplies) and of course the Tory supporters will be in denial but it's true

Of course, you are entitled to your view as are we all. We could, of course, just raise taxes, throw more money at the NHS because that indicates (somehow) that we are more committed to it than the other major Party, rather than seek to reform it and get value for hard earned taxpayers money during a time of austerity...

Royal
You really believe all that don't you; did you look at Plasma supplies were they sold it from the NHS for 200 million and sold it for 800 million a few months on? That's really getting good value and that is just one of many cases; no wonder the NHS is on its knees.
You've sèen the quote about fooling some of the people well May appears to be doing a very good job of it; credit where credits due.
And considering I have to tap this all out on my mobile I can't recall the last time I posted a link.

Jim

Jim,

Wasn't Plasma Supplies privatised in 2013 - some 4 years ago - and under a coalition government? What is the link to Theresa May in 2017? Were not the Lib Dems not 'complicit' in the sale if you feel that it was so unfair? Is it the fact that it has been sold on for greater profit that bothers you so much?

Royal

I'm trying to point out that you and others are supporting a party that is asset stripping the NHS; if you believe that's the right way to go well that's up to you. I see Lincoln is contributing to the debate, at least I haven't got my head up my a@$e.

Hudswell: As usual you put two and two together and get five. You have no idea.

Comrade Jim

I was referring more to your idea that I support Corbyn or Abbot rather than any mathematical calculations she may doing. You appear to believe (like most Tory supporters) that anyone left of Thatcher is a rabid Socialist which is laughable.

Jim

Diane Abbott - a fool in sheeps clothing. Was going to say - how did this woman get to be the Shadow Home Secretary - a Shadow Home Secretary who hadn't a flipping clue about the police budget for crying out loud - but answered my own question! Corbyn's ex, say no more!
Says as much about him as her. What a shambles this Labour party really is.

Jim B wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2017 5:12 pm Hudswell

You should really try and diversify where you get your information from and then you may have a more balanced view of what is going on.

You should have possibly heeded your own advice before posting this little gem (in response to a perfectly reasonable question) and then having to delete it - realising it was completely false...

I didn't delete anything. You should check your information.

Jim
.