UK PM Johnson defeated on Brexit legislation for first time since election

[Jip99]

6 minutes ago, puipuitom said:

The EU is an UNION of NATIONS, NOT a government of a  normal country.

 

That's why the heads of gevernment of the EU member states are the real cremium of power. And THEY and THEY ONLY elect the president ( former Tusk, now Michel) of the EU Council + the president ( former: Jucker, now Von der Leyen) of the EU Committee, a kind of council of ministers, from each EU member state one.

Time you learn at least something of the EU... or is it you are british so against… whatever… no need to know, as the British know by birth everything better ? ?

 

The secretary general of the UN, NATO, WTO, WHO, FIFA, Olympic Committee, IMF, World Bank,  are also not elected by the voters of the world.

 

 

 

The EU is also history as far as we are concerned so enjoy your undemocratic w4nkfest together.

[puipuitom]

8 hours ago, JonnyF said:

As for your comments on dismantling food security and trust of institutions etc. maybe it's time to get back on the meds.

When the EU retailers and food industry do NOT recognise BRC anymore, but insist for IFS ( or FSSC 22000) , a lot of UK food exporters can forget their export to the EU for a while as such an certification needs a year or so.

Aside of that all, FSA approval, being a governmental institution outside of the EU, is no longer valid anyhow, so a LOT of problems for every import into the EU.

Remind: the UK will also be out of EFSA and the RASFF systems.

 

As Boris INSISTS NOT to follow any EU rule…. the UK is for every importer the same as... Vietnam, Thailand, Brazil... oh.. NOT, as they follow a LOT of EU rules… 

[evadgib]

Meanwhile, back on topic:

 

[Rimmer]

Off topic post about Scottish oil removed

[CG1 Blue]

46 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

Listen to the link below:

 

 

Jim Rogers would say this. He's a firm believer that agriculture, mining and natural resources are the only sectors that will thrive in the near future. He's been known to talk about the farmers driving Lamborghinis in the future, while ex stockbrokers will drive the tractors for them. He does not believe in the other sectors such as the service sector / financial services. 

Oh and by the way, he's close pals with George Soros...so he's a globalist (i.e. anti-Brexit)

 

[Baerboxer]

13 hours ago, smedly said:

means absolutely nothing, which is why that place is a waste of space and should be disbanded 

 

Without an upper house to scrutinize, check, and challenge; suggest amendments to wording etc etc the lower house would be without checks and balances.

 

You, and an alarming number of other posters who like your post seem to think that's a good idea! An unchecked lower house - hmm.

[Baerboxer]

9 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The mob might be any group of the general public, past examples include rioting poll tax opponents, city center rioters.

 

Any group that through mass action might sway parliament, regardless of whether that action is lawful or not.

 

Who knows it might include a religious group acting in unison. 

 

Mobs have a long history predating Parliament by centuries.

 

Mobs - would that be like the French Yellow vests; the French pension protesters; the French Air Traffic Controllers - usually at busy travel times; French farmers etc?

 

 

[Baerboxer]

11 hours ago, JonnyF said:

The House of Lords needs to be very careful. There are already serious questions about abolishing this outdated, unelected body.

 

If they start interfering in Brexit there could be a massive backlash.

 

Personally I think the HOL should be abolished ASAP. It's a disgrace.

 

Many other countries have an unelected upper house too.

 

However, previous Labour governments loved to pack the Lord's with cronies by creating peerages. That's how we got the wonderful Lord Kinnock and Lady Kinnock, both Lords!

 

 

[CG1 Blue]

5 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Without an upper house to scrutinize, check, and challenge; suggest amendments to wording etc etc the lower house would be without checks and balances.

 

You, and an alarming number of other posters who like your post seem to think that's a good idea! An unchecked lower house - hmm.

I think most people who want the HoL abolished would like it to be replaced by something else, a more fit for purpose second chamber. So there would still be checks and balances. 

[smedly]

21 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Without an upper house to scrutinize, check, and challenge; suggest amendments to wording etc etc the lower house would be without checks and balances.

 

You, and an alarming number of other posters who like your post seem to think that's a good idea! An unchecked lower house - hmm.

replaced with elected 

[JAG]

2 hours ago, puipuitom said:

The secretary general of the UN, NATO, WTO, WHO, FIFA, Olympic Committee, IMF, World Bank,  are also not elected by the voters of the world.

But they are not in the process of constructing a de facto federal government, nor do they surround themselves with the trappings of a government, or attempt to regulate the internal affairs of their member countries like a government.

[Scouse123]

3 hours ago, puipuitom said:

 

 

The secretary general of the UN, NATO, WTO, WHO, FIFA, Olympic Committee, IMF, World Bank,  are also not elected by the voters of the world.

 

 

 

Yes,

 

And just look at the job these people in charge have done!

 

These organizations that are and have been scandal hit, rife with corruption, mismanagement, cronyism, nepotism and downright incompetence!

 

What poor examples you gave us as your beacons of light and paths to follow. I'll stick to the UK ballot box of choosing our leadership.

[tomacht8]

12 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

 

Yes,

 

And just look at the job these people in charge have done!

 

These organizations that are and have been scandal hit, rife with corruption, mismanagement, cronyism, nepotism and downright incompetence!

 

What poor examples you gave us as your beacons of light and paths to follow. I'll stick to the UK ballot box of choosing our leadership.

All good. But the UK electoral system is outdated and does not represent the real voting relations of the people in Parliament.

[RuamRudy]

52 minutes ago, smedly said:

replaced with elected 

I am personally not opposed to the idea, but how do you prevent it from being either a carbon copy of the government or the exact opposite, depending upon when in the HoC election cycle you would elect the HoL?

[RuamRudy]

13 minutes ago, Scouse123 said:

 

Yes,

 

And just look at the job these people in charge have done!

 

These organizations that are and have been scandal hit, rife with corruption, mismanagement, cronyism, nepotism and downright incompetence!

 

What poor examples you gave us as your beacons of light and paths to follow. I'll stick to the UK ballot box of choosing our leadership.

Every one of the charges you lay at the door of the institutions you listed could quite easily be cast at our own government in shovelfuls. We are in no position to feel superior, with our faux democracy and our laughable claim to the 'mother of parliaments'.

[Monomial]

12 hours ago, Laughing Gravy said:

Just a reminder for all those 'run to the hills' we need the EU raed the link at the bottom.

As for the HoL they should not be moved to York but disbanded. typical Liberal lefties who care more about others than their own.

 

And Labour are still scratching their head wondering why they lost the election.

 

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/british-economy-will-grow-faster-than-eurozone-rivals-says-imf-k2h3vbdjm

 

Yeah. It is pretty interesting that managing director Christine Lagarde leaves the IMF and gets awarded a cushy job as president of the ECB in November, and suddenly the IMF completely reverses its position on the impact of Brexit to the UK economy.  I have no idea what dynamics were really at play here, but it is hard to believe that these disparate positions held by the IMF recently on the UK after Brexit were genuinely and totally free of political bias.

 

I don't claim to know the truth, but the optics sure make it look like Christine got a payoff for promoting a rather starker view than necessary of Brexit, and that after her departure we are seeing the opposing voices inside the IMF taking their turn. Probably best to assume the truth is somewhere in the middle.

[melvinmelvin]

12 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I am personally not opposed to the idea, but how do you prevent it from being either a carbon copy of the government or the exact opposite, depending upon when in the HoC election cycle you would elect the HoL?

1) leave medieval fptp arrangements behind, allow for real representation in HoC by smaller parties

2) elect HoC for a fixed period, say 4 or 5 years

3) elect Ho? (? cannot be L) for a fixed period, maybe equal length as HoC but offset by say 2 years

 

[smedly]

55 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

I am personally not opposed to the idea, but how do you prevent it from being either a carbon copy of the government or the exact opposite, depending upon when in the HoC election cycle you would elect the HoL?

their function remains the same - how they are selected changes, it is expertise not party driven

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Mobs - would that be like the French Yellow vests; the French pension protesters; the French Air Traffic Controllers - usually at busy travel times; French farmers etc?

 

 

They are effective.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Many other countries have an unelected upper house too.

 

However, previous Labour governments loved to pack the Lord's with cronies by creating peerages. That's how we got the wonderful Lord Kinnock and Lady Kinnock, both Lords!

 

 

And the Tories do likewise.

 

[Scouse123]

10 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Every one of the charges you lay at the door of the institutions you listed could quite easily be cast at our own government in shovelfuls. We are in no position to feel superior, with our faux democracy and our laughable claim to the 'mother of parliaments'.

 

Yep,

 

Very much an imperfect system I agree but the best we have at the moment and until a better system is put in place, it's the only one we have.

 

The referendum was and let's have it out in the open, the people were fed up with unchecked immigration, being constantly overruled and undermined by Brussels, and getting the worst and the criminal elements from the poorest nations in the EU, coming and living on benefits.We did not get the movement of people to find better jobs with in the skilled and unskilled sectors of the UK jobs industry, as we had thought it would have been. Sure, loopholes and weaknesses in the system were exploited.

 

There are certain countries over represented in people moving to the UK for a life of crime and living on government benefits, and when the UK tries to remove them, they hit obstacles under EU law that prevents them from doing so.

 

The Lords should have been abolished many years ago, it is antiquated, useless and not fit for purpose and if people wish to keep the checks and balances of parliament, the Lords needs to move into an elected body in a different format.

 

It is also a bit difficult and a culture clash, when the UK operates under a system where we live as we like to live unless we break the law compared with a European method of the people being told how to live by the law.