By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
So the Tories have voted against Parliament being able to scrutinise any future trade deals. This whole thing was never about our elected MPs taking back control was it?
Brexiters on here, I assume you're as annoyed as I am
It was always about slashing regulation and not having to be accountable for the dodgy deals they wanted to do.
You won't get any Brexiteers now banging on about sovereignty, because they haven't been told to. There won't be a single mention on the front pages today of this move to circumvent much needed parliamentary scrutiny.
So long as the foreigners are all thrown out a large chunk of those who voted for this won't care. Xenophobia being weaponised as per normal in human history.
We are far more primitive as a specie than we think we are. If we had any level of a collective brain we'd be coming together to stop the planet becoming uninhabitable for mainstream societies within the next century. But nah.
So blame people for voting Tory not Brexit! Edit....by equating the two you play into their hands.
[Post edited 21 Jul 2020 9:27]
Lexiteers were fully aware that leaving would almost certainly result in the Tories using it as an opportunity to push for more deregulation, privatisation etc. You own this just as much as Rees Mogg and co
I was concerned when I read about your voting record when the Trade Bill was raised again in Parliament on Monday 20th July. According to the House of Commons website, you chose to vote for the following;
1) Against giving parliament the ability to scrutinise future trade deals 2) Against NHS contracts being excluded from future trade deals 3) Against maintaining food standards post-Brexit
On the first point, I am confused. As a prominent Brexit campaigner in Cornwall during the 2016 referendum, you will be aware that the core Vote Leave campaign message was for our Parliament to "Take Back Control" of our trading arrangements, among other matters. Although I understand the Conservative whip instructed you to vote against the amendment, why could you not support our elected representatives having the opportunity to scrutinise and debate our future trading relationships? At best, this seems like a careless decision and at worst it is deliberately deceptive - it appears you have hoodwinked those who put their trust in the leave campaign to deliver more control to their local representatives, by voting to grant more power to the executive, which is not directly accountable.
Secondly, I am aware that hyperbole was thrown around during the election regarding the potential sale of the NHS during the 2019 General Election, however the Tories were adamant that the NHS was safe in their hands. Whilst your vote doesn't mean we will embrace a private insurance system, it does lead to the potential for companies from the US and elsewhere to gain access to these contracts add more bureaucracy to the NHS system. Despite the theory of more private involvement driving efficiency, I am aware of NHS staff who have claimed that the reforms introduced by your party have actually made the service less efficient, despite the valiant efforts of healthcare workers. As well as this being an example of misleading those who put their trust in the Tories last year, it is a million miles away from the rhetoric about doing away with bureaucracy, which featured heavily in 2016.
I find the third vote, regarding food standards, the most concerning. Although I appreciate that cutting regulation was one of Vote Leave's promises, how does opening up our markets to low-quality produce help either Britain's farmers or the environment? This is particularly damaging in the likely case of a no deal Brexit (something which you appear comfortable with, as you voted against the transition), where our farmers will struggle to sell abroad, why should we flood our domestic markets with cheap (and potentially unhealthy) produce, which will undercut the prices our agricultural workers are able to offer? I understand that the likes of Jacob Rees Mogg have argued for consumers to be able to choose, but it will not be your parliamentary colleagues who are eating chlorinated chicken, it will be many of your constituents, who may not be able to afford the alternatives. I am also aware of Tory MPs arguing that we can actually increase our standards post- Brexit, in which case, why not enshrine this commitment into law?
If you are unable to articulate why you believe this course of action to be beneficial to agricultural workers, perhaps you could raise it with Environment Secretary and Neighbouring MP George Eustice? He was quoted on a 2016 Vote Leave leaflet, saying "If we have the courage to vote leave and take back control, we would be free to think again and could achieve so much more for farmers and our environment"
As the MP for St Ives, a largely rural constituency, you will be aware that agriculture is one of our biggest industries. Many of those workers backed Brexit and voted for you as their local representative. Your job as an MP is to represent your constituents, not to simply toe the party line. Perhaps I am unaware of the wider economic strategy the government is pursuing, but I really struggle to see how any of these votes you cast were either honest or beneficial to those who have put their trust in you, and I would appreciate an explanation.
I was concerned when I read about your voting record when the Trade Bill was raised again in Parliament on Monday 20th July. According to the House of Commons website, you chose to vote for the following;
1) Against giving parliament the ability to scrutinise future trade deals 2) Against NHS contracts being excluded from future trade deals 3) Against maintaining food standards post-Brexit
On the first point, I am confused. As a prominent Brexit campaigner in Cornwall during the 2016 referendum, you will be aware that the core Vote Leave campaign message was for our Parliament to "Take Back Control" of our trading arrangements, among other matters. Although I understand the Conservative whip instructed you to vote against the amendment, why could you not support our elected representatives having the opportunity to scrutinise and debate our future trading relationships? At best, this seems like a careless decision and at worst it is deliberately deceptive - it appears you have hoodwinked those who put their trust in the leave campaign to deliver more control to their local representatives, by voting to grant more power to the executive, which is not directly accountable.
Secondly, I am aware that hyperbole was thrown around during the election regarding the potential sale of the NHS during the 2019 General Election, however the Tories were adamant that the NHS was safe in their hands. Whilst your vote doesn't mean we will embrace a private insurance system, it does lead to the potential for companies from the US and elsewhere to gain access to these contracts add more bureaucracy to the NHS system. Despite the theory of more private involvement driving efficiency, I am aware of NHS staff who have claimed that the reforms introduced by your party have actually made the service less efficient, despite the valiant efforts of healthcare workers. As well as this being an example of misleading those who put their trust in the Tories last year, it is a million miles away from the rhetoric about doing away with bureaucracy, which featured heavily in 2016.
I find the third vote, regarding food standards, the most concerning. Although I appreciate that cutting regulation was one of Vote Leave's promises, how does opening up our markets to low-quality produce help either Britain's farmers or the environment? This is particularly damaging in the likely case of a no deal Brexit (something which you appear comfortable with, as you voted against the transition), where our farmers will struggle to sell abroad, why should we flood our domestic markets with cheap (and potentially unhealthy) produce, which will undercut the prices our agricultural workers are able to offer? I understand that the likes of Jacob Rees Mogg have argued for consumers to be able to choose, but it will not be your parliamentary colleagues who are eating chlorinated chicken, it will be many of your constituents, who may not be able to afford the alternatives. I am also aware of Tory MPs arguing that we can actually increase our standards post- Brexit, in which case, why not enshrine this commitment into law?
If you are unable to articulate why you believe this course of action to be beneficial to agricultural workers, perhaps you could raise it with Environment Secretary and Neighbouring MP George Eustice? He was quoted on a 2016 Vote Leave leaflet, saying "If we have the courage to vote leave and take back control, we would be free to think again and could achieve so much more for farmers and our environment"
As the MP for St Ives, a largely rural constituency, you will be aware that agriculture is one of our biggest industries. Many of those workers backed Brexit and voted for you as their local representative. Your job as an MP is to represent your constituents, not to simply toe the party line. Perhaps I am unaware of the wider economic strategy the government is pursuing, but I really struggle to see how any of these votes you cast were either honest or beneficial to those who have put their trust in you, and I would appreciate an explanation.
I was concerned when I read about your voting record when the Trade Bill was raised again in Parliament on Monday 20th July. According to the House of Commons website, you chose to vote for the following;
1) Against giving parliament the ability to scrutinise future trade deals 2) Against NHS contracts being excluded from future trade deals 3) Against maintaining food standards post-Brexit
On the first point, I am confused. As a prominent Brexit campaigner in Cornwall during the 2016 referendum, you will be aware that the core Vote Leave campaign message was for our Parliament to "Take Back Control" of our trading arrangements, among other matters. Although I understand the Conservative whip instructed you to vote against the amendment, why could you not support our elected representatives having the opportunity to scrutinise and debate our future trading relationships? At best, this seems like a careless decision and at worst it is deliberately deceptive - it appears you have hoodwinked those who put their trust in the leave campaign to deliver more control to their local representatives, by voting to grant more power to the executive, which is not directly accountable.
Secondly, I am aware that hyperbole was thrown around during the election regarding the potential sale of the NHS during the 2019 General Election, however the Tories were adamant that the NHS was safe in their hands. Whilst your vote doesn't mean we will embrace a private insurance system, it does lead to the potential for companies from the US and elsewhere to gain access to these contracts add more bureaucracy to the NHS system. Despite the theory of more private involvement driving efficiency, I am aware of NHS staff who have claimed that the reforms introduced by your party have actually made the service less efficient, despite the valiant efforts of healthcare workers. As well as this being an example of misleading those who put their trust in the Tories last year, it is a million miles away from the rhetoric about doing away with bureaucracy, which featured heavily in 2016.
I find the third vote, regarding food standards, the most concerning. Although I appreciate that cutting regulation was one of Vote Leave's promises, how does opening up our markets to low-quality produce help either Britain's farmers or the environment? This is particularly damaging in the likely case of a no deal Brexit (something which you appear comfortable with, as you voted against the transition), where our farmers will struggle to sell abroad, why should we flood our domestic markets with cheap (and potentially unhealthy) produce, which will undercut the prices our agricultural workers are able to offer? I understand that the likes of Jacob Rees Mogg have argued for consumers to be able to choose, but it will not be your parliamentary colleagues who are eating chlorinated chicken, it will be many of your constituents, who may not be able to afford the alternatives. I am also aware of Tory MPs arguing that we can actually increase our standards post- Brexit, in which case, why not enshrine this commitment into law?
If you are unable to articulate why you believe this course of action to be beneficial to agricultural workers, perhaps you could raise it with Environment Secretary and Neighbouring MP George Eustice? He was quoted on a 2016 Vote Leave leaflet, saying "If we have the courage to vote leave and take back control, we would be free to think again and could achieve so much more for farmers and our environment"
As the MP for St Ives, a largely rural constituency, you will be aware that agriculture is one of our biggest industries. Many of those workers backed Brexit and voted for you as their local representative. Your job as an MP is to represent your constituents, not to simply toe the party line. Perhaps I am unaware of the wider economic strategy the government is pursuing, but I really struggle to see how any of these votes you cast were either honest or beneficial to those who have put their trust in you, and I would appreciate an explanation.
King Regards,
TDS
You'll get a generic "ok pleb" response I imagine.
So blame people for voting Tory not Brexit! Edit....by equating the two you play into their hands.
[Post edited 21 Jul 2020 9:27]
The EU is also in a gigantic hole according to Yanis Varoufakis:
"While the media are reporting the news of the deadlocked EU Summit negotiations over the so-called ‘Recovery Fund’, an eerie silence prevails regarding the Elephant in the Room: The huge wave of austerity the Eurozone is sleepwalking towards. Let’s look at the facts." See this article for his full take on the subject: https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2020/07/18/while-eu-leaders-squabble-the-elephant
And his most recent Tweet: What should Europe do? (As opposed to the comedy of errors coming out of Brussels, Frankfurt & Berlin) Here is DiEM25's videoed answer:
Not that we're sitting any prettier currently in the UK (trade deals or no trade deals)! The world economy is headed for disaster and there's nowhere to hide.
Lexiteers were fully aware that leaving would almost certainly result in the Tories using it as an opportunity to push for more deregulation, privatisation etc. You own this just as much as Rees Mogg and co
Nope...that baby is in the hands of those that rejected a proper 'left' option at the ballot box and spent the previous 3 years or whatever it was equating supporting Brexit with being right wing rather than pushing for a left wing form of leaving. So that would essentially be the entitled middle classes.
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
The EU is also in a gigantic hole according to Yanis Varoufakis:
"While the media are reporting the news of the deadlocked EU Summit negotiations over the so-called ‘Recovery Fund’, an eerie silence prevails regarding the Elephant in the Room: The huge wave of austerity the Eurozone is sleepwalking towards. Let’s look at the facts." See this article for his full take on the subject: https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2020/07/18/while-eu-leaders-squabble-the-elephant
And his most recent Tweet: What should Europe do? (As opposed to the comedy of errors coming out of Brussels, Frankfurt & Berlin) Here is DiEM25's videoed answer:
Not that we're sitting any prettier currently in the UK (trade deals or no trade deals)! The world economy is headed for disaster and there's nowhere to hide.
Man, these bleak reminders really do mess with me. I’d managed to block it out for a week!
But we must live as the market dictates. The market is the only way. The market decides if we get to enjoy life or not.
Nope...that baby is in the hands of those that rejected a proper 'left' option at the ballot box and spent the previous 3 years or whatever it was equating supporting Brexit with being right wing rather than pushing for a left wing form of leaving. So that would essentially be the entitled middle classes.
The EU is also in a gigantic hole according to Yanis Varoufakis:
"While the media are reporting the news of the deadlocked EU Summit negotiations over the so-called ‘Recovery Fund’, an eerie silence prevails regarding the Elephant in the Room: The huge wave of austerity the Eurozone is sleepwalking towards. Let’s look at the facts." See this article for his full take on the subject: https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2020/07/18/while-eu-leaders-squabble-the-elephant
And his most recent Tweet: What should Europe do? (As opposed to the comedy of errors coming out of Brussels, Frankfurt & Berlin) Here is DiEM25's videoed answer:
Not that we're sitting any prettier currently in the UK (trade deals or no trade deals)! The world economy is headed for disaster and there's nowhere to hide.
An interesting watch .... so, more Europe genuinely serving the interests of the citizens rather than the current QE model for banks and big business...good luck with that Yanis. He is right it is going to implode rather than that be allowed to happen.
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
You'll be one of those business as usual remain voters then.
Edit...you must be so proud of how the welfare interests of cheap migrant eastern European workers in abbatoirs and the fields of Europe have been in the forefront of our European political elites concerns!
[Post edited 21 Jul 2020 19:10]
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
Nope...that baby is in the hands of those that rejected a proper 'left' option at the ballot box and spent the previous 3 years or whatever it was equating supporting Brexit with being right wing rather than pushing for a left wing form of leaving. So that would essentially be the entitled middle classes.
You're not stupid enough to believe or be certain that the Great British electorate would vote for a proper left leave option at a subsequent general election. You were knowingly voting for what was highly likely to end up being a deregulation free-for-all.
You're not stupid enough to believe or be certain that the Great British electorate would vote for a proper left leave option at a subsequent general election. You were knowingly voting for what was highly likely to end up being a deregulation free-for-all.
[Post edited 21 Jul 2020 19:09]
You think so....in a country that came within a gnats piss of a green/left/liberal alliance 2 elections ago....if the so called left intelligentsia had devoted a fraction of the energy arguing for such (i.e...a left leave option) as they did trying to rerun the referendum then who knows!! But Jeremy Corbyn doesn't cut it with me!
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
You'll be one of those business as usual remain voters then.
Edit...you must be so proud of how the welfare interests of cheap migrant eastern European workers in abbatoirs and the fields of Europe have been in the forefront of our European political elites concerns!
[Post edited 21 Jul 2020 19:10]
Have they been on the forefront of British politicians?
You talk and good talk about workers rights and such like. But, your vote to leave the EU will help pull the UK further and further down. Well done you and your loud ethics.
Man, these bleak reminders really do mess with me. I’d managed to block it out for a week!
But we must live as the market dictates. The market is the only way. The market decides if we get to enjoy life or not.
Contained in those bleak reminders us the evidence for why Europe is doomed...that it's leaders responded to the financial crisis in the manner they did should tell you all you need to know about staying in that particular club. The Euro was where it all started to go really wrong. Yanis seems to think it can be reformed....I think he is wrong...that supertanker ain't turning in a hurry!
[Post edited 21 Jul 2020 19:39]
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
The EU is also in a gigantic hole according to Yanis Varoufakis:
"While the media are reporting the news of the deadlocked EU Summit negotiations over the so-called ‘Recovery Fund’, an eerie silence prevails regarding the Elephant in the Room: The huge wave of austerity the Eurozone is sleepwalking towards. Let’s look at the facts." See this article for his full take on the subject: https://www.yanisvaroufakis.eu/2020/07/18/while-eu-leaders-squabble-the-elephant
And his most recent Tweet: What should Europe do? (As opposed to the comedy of errors coming out of Brussels, Frankfurt & Berlin) Here is DiEM25's videoed answer:
Not that we're sitting any prettier currently in the UK (trade deals or no trade deals)! The world economy is headed for disaster and there's nowhere to hide.
You think so....in a country that came within a gnats piss of a green/left/liberal alliance 2 elections ago....if the so called left intelligentsia had devoted a fraction of the energy arguing for such (i.e...a left leave option) as they did trying to rerun the referendum then who knows!! But Jeremy Corbyn doesn't cut it with me!
The Brexit position clearly lost the party seats, but the idea that we'd have won with the same leader, same manifesto and AS accusations is for the birds.
Nope...that baby is in the hands of those that rejected a proper 'left' option at the ballot box and spent the previous 3 years or whatever it was equating supporting Brexit with being right wing rather than pushing for a left wing form of leaving. So that would essentially be the entitled middle classes.
Blaming people who voted remain for this brexit is bonkers, and especially coming from someone who voted leave!
You were warned this would happen.
Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
I had the above the wrong way round. The top article came from his most recent tweet. The other one came from a pinned tweet dating back to earlier in the year.
Will have a look at that Guardian link now cheers.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
