EU shows its true colours

Hereward

Member
Location
Peterborough
What BS? I have had a quick read through the leaflet and it all seems fairly reasonable and accurate.

Did the Brexitear promoters have any BS on their side? Farage et. al. seemed to be concerned with regaining your Sovereignty, which is something you always had so why did you need to regain it? And how is everything progressing with the extra £350 million per week for the NHS?

I am only asking as even though I am on the other side of the world Brexit is reported daily on our news, maybe we have more balanced reporting than you seem to.
Unfortunately the official leave campaign is not in government, so any chance of delivering an extra £350 million per week is not in their hands and the remonaners holding the keys would sooner give £39billion, yes I said billion not million, to the EU.

The BS was the skewed language and message in the leaflet, you would hope the government would give a balanced view of the pro and cons. We have a positive balance of trade in cash terms with the EU, yet by quoting percentage figures it made it look like the UK has a deficit.
Thankfully the majority are able to see through all this and did the right thing for the future of their country.
 

rob1

Member
Location
wiltshire
I agree with you, the decision is yours to make whether it was the right or wrong one only the future will tell. It was also a majority, it would have been more convincing with a reasonable majority but it is still a majority
I think many of those who voted out did so because we dont want a united states of europe, not because we are anti france/germany or any where but because we dont believe it would work, the russians tried it in the ussr and it caused misery and finacial ruin, the EU has got just too big and those at the top are blind to the concerns of the public, juncker said after the vote that the answer to brexit was more europe not less,how blind can anyone be,they denied for years they were going to have an EU army yet not we are at a point where they will soon have that, they want fiscal union etc etc. Many of those keen on the EU say oh yes it needs reform to improve but it never ever reforms it just pushes forward to a single state, we had a chance to get out and grabbed it, we now must make sure we dont fall at the final hurdle, now if in ten years time the eu has been taken over by those who return it to a freed trade group of nations who want to live and work together then I would happily rejoin as Im sure most would
 

Danllan

Member
Location
Sir Gar / Carms
To answer your questions, even though they way you put them is very one sided I will answer as best I can.

1. Firstly I will apologise for answering a question with a question, but just who or what is the unelected legislature that you are subject to? the Commissioners of the EU are appointed by their respective member states, i.e. your elected representatives in Parliament send someone who they deem to be suitable for the role. The UK Commissioner, among his roles, is responsible for Migration which is fairly ironic as this appears to be one of the reasons for Brexit.
I do not see allowing others from another country access to work as a negative, far from it if it is a country at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale, by allowing them access to work this lifts their relative living standards which in turn means they can then buy goods from the weathier nations, NZ does this all the time, as for under cutting needy people I take it you are joking.

This is surely preferable to just sending foreign aid or are you suggesting that the UK should not help any other countries around the globe, even though they are financially able to do so.

2. Nothing at all wrong with wanting to be able to trade more freely with more countries, why then choose Brexit where you are potentially trading with less, or at least on more difficult terms.

The posts I read from those supporting remain don't appear bitter, most of them put up a fairly reasoned argument for staying, as do most of the Brexitears for leaving, with the vote so close around half the voters will be p!ssed off which ever way it went.
My turn to apologise for a slow reply, very aged family were visiting over the weekend... :eek:*

Firstly, you haven't 'answered' my questions at all. You have side-stepped or - less charitably - ignored them because the honest answers don't suit your case. (y)

Nonetheless, in anticipation of a rash of honesty breaking out around the beautiful Bay of Plenty, I'll respond to the points you have made. The EC is the principal body to which I was referring, if you hold illusions regarding its democratic accountability you need to re-examine Directives, Regulations and Direct Effect; and to take a very close look at the role played by the commission in 'persuading' - i.e. coercing - the governments of the smaller EU states to 'do the right thing' (right for the EC, of course, in its plan for a single super-state, rather than right for the people of said countries).

As in NZ, the UK parliament has virtually no say in governmental appointments and ECs are appointed by governments. Traditionally EC appointments have been made to ensure that a key player with a vested interest doesn't get to hold sway in that area, or to put the 'awkward squad' in difficult positions - a good analogy in internal UK affairs is that of putting an senior but inconvenient politician in the Home Office or in charge of Health.

I guess you are financially comfortable, since if you weren't you'd understand that key to the maintenance of an 'underclass' is having available a very cheap workforce to keep them there (at this point a true cynic might interject that a 'Labour' administration was the implementer...:rolleyes:). NZ is, of course, the shining light and fount of all sociological wisdom from which we should learn much, and I note, after some research, that it very specifically does not allow mass / blanket immigration and does have a system which quantifies desirable and permitted immigration, except for really, really rich ̶p̶a̶s̶s̶p̶o̶r̶t̶ ̶b̶u̶y̶e̶r̶s̶ 'investors'.

Trying to impute that foreign aid should be stopped from my dislike of open-door immigration from the EU and my advocating of choosing the best immigrants from across the globe is both idiotic and a pretty poor and blatant attempt at a bit of virtue flagging. Don't do that. (y)

If you think that NZ is trading with fewer countries and on more difficult terms that ought to be the case, we must assume that you are actively campaigning to join as a state of Australia, the US, Canada or maybe even Indonesia. If this isn't the case it is pretty clear that, if a relatively small economy such as NZ's is fit to do its own deals, the UK will be fine negotiating globally.

Well spotted that the Referendum result was close but, and this is important, in a democracy those who don't win a vote accept the result with good grace - as, to their credit, the vast majority of them have. :)



*'Oh... uncle Alcwyn would never have done that'... to which the honest reply would be 'Uncle Alcwyn wasn't aware of the Agricultural Revolution, let alone the bl**dy Industrial one' :mad:, but instead to which I smiled sweetly and nodded. :angelic:… Glad I've got that off my chest. :)
 

arcobob

Member
Location
Norfolk
My turn to apologise for a slow reply, very aged family were visiting over the weekend... :eek:*

Firstly, you haven't 'answered' my questions at all. You have side-stepped or - less charitably - ignored them because the honest answers don't suit your case. (y)

Nonetheless, in anticipation of a rash of honesty breaking out around the beautiful Bay of Plenty, I'll respond to the points you have made. The EC is the principal body to which I was referring, if you hold illusions regarding its democratic accountability you need to re-examine Directives, Regulations and Direct Effect; and to take a very close look at the role played by the commission in 'persuading' - i.e. coercing - the governments of the smaller EU states to 'do the right thing' (right for the EC, of course, in its plan for a single super-state, rather than right for the people of said countries).

As in NZ, the UK parliament has virtually no say in governmental appointments and ECs are appointed by governments. Traditionally EC appointments have been made to ensure that a key player with a vested interest doesn't get to hold sway in that area, or to put the 'awkward squad' in difficult positions - a good analogy in internal UK affairs is that of putting an senior but inconvenient politician in the Home Office or in charge of Health.

I guess you are financially comfortable, since if you weren't you'd understand that key to the maintenance of an 'underclass' is having available a very cheap workforce to keep them there (at this point a true cynic might interject that a 'Labour' administration was the implementer...:rolleyes:). NZ is, of course, the shining light and fount of all sociological wisdom from which we should learn much, and I note, after some research, that it very specifically does not allow mass / blanket immigration and does have a system which quantifies desirable and permitted immigration, except for really, really rich ̶p̶a̶s̶s̶p̶o̶r̶t̶ ̶b̶u̶y̶e̶r̶s̶ 'investors'.

Trying to impute that foreign aid should be stopped from my dislike of open-door immigration from the EU and my advocating of choosing the best immigrants from across the globe is both idiotic and a pretty poor and blatant attempt at a bit of virtue flagging. Don't do that. (y)

If you think that NZ is trading with fewer countries and on more difficult terms that ought to be the case, we must assume that you are actively campaigning to join as a state of Australia, the US, Canada or maybe even Indonesia. If this isn't the case it is pretty clear that, if a relatively small economy such as NZ's is fit to do its own deals, the UK will be fine negotiating globally.

Well spotted that the Referendum result was close but, and this is important, in a democracy those who don't win a vote accept the result with good grace - as, to their credit, the vast majority of them have. :)



*'Oh... uncle Alcwyn would never have done that'... to which the honest reply would be 'Uncle Alcwyn wasn't aware of the Agricultural Revolution, let alone the bl**dy Industrial one' :mad:, but instead to which I smiled sweetly and nodded. :angelic:… Glad I've got that off my chest. :)
I know that it is said that there a no pure bred Maoris any more but many who have that appearance are Pacific Islanders who have arrived in increasing numbers over the last few years. Perhaps that is why the NZ government are tightening up. I know one health worker over there who said they were a threat and a burden. True or false?
 

Danllan

Member
Location
Sir Gar / Carms
I know that it is said that there a no pure bred Maoris any more but many who have that appearance are Pacific Islanders who have arrived in increasing numbers over the last few years. Perhaps that is why the NZ government are tightening up. I know one health worker over there who said they were a threat and a burden. True or false?
Did you mean to ask me, or mean it for @stewart?

If for me, I don't know a great deal about it other than having had a few chats with some Kiwis, who were not against general immigration at all but thought the 'islanders' should not have automatic entry.
 

Martin Holden

Member
Trade
Location
Cheltenham
I think many of those who voted out did so because we dont want a united states of europe, not because we are anti france/germany or any where but because we dont believe it would work, the russians tried it in the ussr and it caused misery and finacial ruin, the EU has got just too big and those at the top are blind to the concerns of the public, juncker said after the vote that the answer to brexit was more europe not less,how blind can anyone be,they denied for years they were going to have an EU army yet not we are at a point where they will soon have that, they want fiscal union etc etc. Many of those keen on the EU say oh yes it needs reform to improve but it never ever reforms it just pushes forward to a single state, we had a chance to get out and grabbed it, we now must make sure we dont fall at the final hurdle, now if in ten years time the eu has been taken over by those who return it to a freed trade group of nations who want to live and work together then I would happily rejoin as Im sure most would
Agreed!
 

Yacker

Member
As a nation of immigrants (mostly) who are still ruled over by the descendents of William the Conqueror who is in turm of Nordic descent i do struggle with some of these "discussions" our Briton/Celt/Pict heritage is very small (not talking about Welsh Irish Scots)

Fact is we are all a bunch of immigrant mongrels and the only thing that separates "us and them" is time, but hey ho dont let that stop the conversation.
 

Bomber_Harris

Member
Location
London
because of our surrender shortly after 1066 roughly 40% of the English language is derived from French.

For example, any word that ends in 'ion' (approx 1,200 with two or three exceptions) is French

Exception, situation, condition, calibration and so on, all French

that is all (c'est tout)
 
As a nation of immigrants (mostly) who are still ruled over by the descendents of William the Conqueror who is in turm of Nordic descent i do struggle with some of these "discussions" our Briton/Celt/Pict heritage is very small (not talking about Welsh Irish Scots)

Fact is we are all a bunch of immigrant mongrels and the only thing that separates "us and them" is time, but hey ho dont let that stop the conversation.


Not that old tired bunch of lies.

Just exactly how long did this immigration take ?

Remind me how many of people died, what happened to their property and women ?

You make it sound like a picnic in a park .. not mass murder, rape and pillaging.
 

Yacker

Member
Just an observation... not a policy decision..... however 1% of our population owns 70% of the land mostly descended from William the Conqueror and his Barons. So the "immigration" policy of 1066 is still in place
 
because of our surrender shortly after 1066 roughly 40% of the English language is derived from French.

For example, any word that ends in 'ion' (approx 1,200 with two or three exceptions) is French

Exception, situation, condition, calibration and so on, all French

that is all (c'est tout)


Really ?

So latin was never spoken in the UK nor anywhere else .. just a coincidence that Italian, Spainish and French have close links to latin ..
 
Just an observation... not a policy decision..... however 1% of our population owns 70% of the land mostly descended from William the Conqueror and his Barons. So the "immigration" policy of 1066 is still in place


More like the powers that be continue the divide and conquer establishment narrative .. who is the biggest land owner in the world .. care to guess ?
 

Ashtree

Member
I thought we were bad over here harking back to 1690 and good old King Billy, but bringing up the immigration policy in 1066 does take the biscuit(n)

Brian Boru, High King Of Ireland, marched from Co. Clare., in 1014 and sorted out those Norsemen.
I can’t find Billy in my history book:whistle:
 

arcobob

Member
Location
Norfolk
Did you mean to ask me, or mean it for @stewart?

If for me, I don't know a great deal about it other than having had a few chats with some Kiwis, who were not against general immigration at all but thought the 'islanders' should not have automatic entry.
It was aimed at both of you really. I have been out there several times as my wife has relations out there. I always envied the lifestyle but also understood that many of the older generation had been through hard times. On one visit they were going through a period of government shutdown because their hung parliament was totally disfunctional. Everything ran very smoothly for the best part of a year and people seemed quite happy!
 

SFI - What % were you taking out of production?

  • 0 %

    Votes: 79 42.5%
  • Up to 25%

    Votes: 65 34.9%
  • 25-50%

    Votes: 30 16.1%
  • 50-75%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 75-100%

    Votes: 3 1.6%
  • 100% I’ve had enough of farming!

    Votes: 6 3.2%

Red Tractor drops launch of green farming scheme amid anger from farmers

  • 1,287
  • 1
As reported in Independent


quote: “Red Tractor has confirmed it is dropping plans to launch its green farming assurance standard in April“

read the TFF thread here: https://thefarmingforum.co.uk/index.php?threads/gfc-was-to-go-ahead-now-not-going-ahead.405234/
Top