trekbusterThe Fail does it again…….caught out being less than accurate in its headlines and reporting
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4913782/IPSO-upholds-complaint-Max-Hill-QC-against-MoS.html
Tut tut
trekbusterThe point is John is that I have not, nor have many people it would appear from the vote last June, felt that our sovereignty has been eroded to the point that it made any discernable difference to the person in the street. Even the immigration issue was a red herring in that there were controls the government could have used to restrict EU migration under exceptional circumstances clauses, it is just successive governments chose not to use it because of the, for want of a better phrase, side effects of invoking those controls. The fact that non-EU migration over which the Govt. did have contol has always exceeded EU migration shows it has been policy not legistlation that has been the issue.
It is a minority who care about it so much that they are willing to risk destabilisation and economic decline purely to regain some notion of ‘taking back control’ of legistlation ( to which to all intents and purposes we already had control of anyway)
It appears that on this forum the majority who have expressed an opinion feel it is of the utmost importance, but to me? No.
Regarding the assertion that an attack on sovereignty usually leads to war. We have been a member for many years, yet I don’t recall that we have had a war over our lack of sovereignty with our neighbours when part of the EEC or EU. So perhaps it isn’t as much of an issue as you appear to believe?
trekbusterPaul, I would suggest you read the IFS report on Brexit finances which is what I was refering to in terms of decline. 11 of 12 studies by economists are suggesting the UK will have a net deficit compared to the status quo as a direct result of Brexit, reinforced by the letter yesterday. It is at least as likely as any other scenario the pro-bexit lobby put forward.
I also have my doubts as beermat has said about the real practical extent of loss of sovereignty in areas that matter to people. The pro-brexit view is simplistic, certainly in terms of the proportionof substantive law passed on important areas that really effect people on a day to day basis such as direct and indirect taxation, defense, education, healthcare, transport etc.etc. that were ‘imposed’ by the EU parliament.
My point is ones position on this may depend on in ones definition, effective or theoretical sovereignty and how this really effected our day to day lives. To many, it was not a burning issue, to some it clearly was and still is.
All the studies post the vote do not support the contention 52% of the population voted leave exclusivelybecause of sovereignty.
Salute
TB
trekbusterAh, I was waiting for this, seems you are a day behind as this was reported yesterday. As usual your analysis is flawed. If you read the article and had actually digested the detail rather than the headline, you would have seen that is fo the most part the greater and earlier uptake of renewable energies, particularly in the developing countries that has slowed the temperature rise and the authors accept the concept of man made warming.
Keep up John
trekbusterBut we are told ad nauseam by the ‘smart people’ that it is better to waive your country’s right to govern itself, purely because it’s better for businesses and the economy.
So It is better to stagnate and gradually but surely see our livings standards fall away but have ‘sovereignty’?
This position is all very well for those towards the end of their lives, with their own homes and savings who won’t, quite frankly, live long enough to see the outcome. But for many young people who have seen their future as they see it taken away without their consent…..
trekbusterThe IFS has said in a letter to the Times that Brexit will make us poorer as a nation even allowing for any reduction in contribution to the EU, showing for certain that Boris’ contention re the £350m a week or therabouts to be the piffle we all know it to be.
Strangely enough I can’t see that this has been reported in the Torygraph. Doesn’t suit their agenda perhaps?
I know some don’t think this is important, but my guess is many who voted leave might not be so sanguine.
P.s. Boris is apparently threatening to resign if he doesn’t get his way. I cant make up my mind if I am very happy to see the back of him as he will undoubtedly then be a thorn in the tory goverments side causing mischief on the outside or that I hope he stays and mucks it up for them from the inside. Either way this is not good news for mrs. may
trekbusterRegain control of our future and set about rebuilding our country free from the stultifying embrace of the sclerotic EU. Nothing in the political and cultural life of a nation rivals total freedom and independence. Sit back and think of how much blood and treasure this country has expended in pursuance of those goals.
This reminded me of that well known quote:
“If nothing else works, then a total pig headed unwillingness to look the facts in the face will see us through….”
Now who said that…….?
trekbusterErrrr, John, I am afraid you are behind the times. China and to a smaller extent India are leading the way with efforts to reduce emissions, especially as under Trump it seems that the USA is reneging on it’s responsibilities as amongst the worlds highest per capita consumer of energy of the industrialised countries
From your rag of choice:
trekbusterNo, it is only poor scientists that are willing to misinterpret the data to form any other conclusion than there is man-made climate change. It is you who are being duped I am afraid.
We will not agree on this. You have been told by those who have an agenda that they have “proved” the data to be false. Unfortunately, innacurate reporting on the leaked emails report you mentioned has generated it’s own self validation amongst climate change deniers. Tell a lie often enough….. There were a number of enquiries into the case at the time and whilst the UEA were criticised for witholding FOI requests because they believed it would break confidentiality agreements, the consensus from all of the reports on the issue was that the IPCC and UEA data was sound. It is only the tin foil hat brigade that wanted to continue the false premise…..
I guess that you are relying on a Torygraph report in 2009. Shame they got it wrong ( although not surprising)
The irony of the Wail’s article was that they were caught deliberately adjusting the slant of a piece that was itself trying to prove the use of inaccurate reporting of data. In otherwords they were decrying the use of innacurate use of data by providing inaccurate graphics and drawing exaggerated conclusions. Probably because they didn’t actually understand the report or the data it was trying ( failing) to dispute.
trekbusteralmost it seems to me, the whole country would like immediate withdrawal
John, that is where you are making the apparent mistake of only listening to other pro-Brexshyters and reading rabidly Pro-Brexshyte papers. I would disagree, from my own perspective virtually no one I know thinks this is going to end well nor do they believe a sudden exit will be in anyones interest. Clearly my circle of work colleagues, friends and acquaintances ( most of whom are graduates, in the age range 45-70+ run their own businesses or are professional people and read widely) is different from yours but I am not naive enough to think that what we think is a universally held belief. So no, the whole country would not like an immediate withdrawal
trekbusterJohn, again you are (deliberately?) missing the point. The Wail has been hauled over the coals for misrepresenting the report and the authors conclusions to suit their agenda and providing a graphic that misrepresented the findings in an attmpt to justify it’s own ( in my humble opinion and that of a large number of very clever people) incorrect agenda. Whether you agree or disagree with the data is immaterial, what I was pointing out is that the Cr@p reporting which is a characteristic of the Dacre rag.
Oh, and by the way, The only fraudulent data is that of the climate deniers. You clearly do genuinely believe in the tosh they peddle. Bless
trekbusterOoops, the Daily fail gets it’s wrist slapped AGAIN by IPSO , this time for falsly representing data regarding climate change.
trekbusterNo John, I am sure if such a person had made the same claims they would also have been slapped down by the Chair of the Statistics Authority just as BoJo’s have today.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41301049
If you would rather have it from the pro-brexshyte Torygraph
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/17/amber-rudd-accuses-boris-johnson-backseat-driving-brexit/
trekbusterRe#2435
You must be Relieved, looking for another job in teaching then John?
Re: Boris.
Putting self before party and country again……very bad form
Re:2438
Thanks from the encouragement, except I’ve put it right for you
In situations similar to those referred to by Greenie it is very necessary to always loudly state your position as an REMAINER and always, always to evangelize and argue your case.
Don’t be defensive. Make your presence felt. Remind yourself that you’ll – more often than not – be arguing with an opposition that has little Understanding of basic economics and almost no appreciation of geopolitical consequences.
trekbusterTo quote Mandy Rice-Davis, he would say that, wouldn’t he. Not exactly unbiased.
Still keeping his nose in the trough isn’t he
Sign In
