|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Apr 14, 2023 12:20:32 GMT
Freedom of Movement was finally signed off by the British government in 1992 when John Major forced The Maasstricht Treaty through Parliament by aligning it with a confidence motion. Separate issue, but the public weren't given a vote on that treaty. If we had been, the Anti Federalist League would never have formed, and evolved into the United Kingdom Independence Party. And odds are, our referendum of 2016 would never have happened. John Major was a bully and a fool. Blair was no better. The official line is that we dont do government by referendum. The reason is if we did or did it more often the elite in charge would have to listen as everyone would vote as everyones vote countrd equally Our FPTP system of electing MPs ensures at most 20 to 30% of the population get what they want and about 20 out of the 650 seats decide who is in power. The so called PR in our devolved shitholes are little better. |
|
|
|
Post by see2 on Apr 14, 2023 12:22:12 GMT
Let each fight for the truth or insinuation behind such claims. I have previously commented on the fact that the Tory propaganda crap machine is a highly polished, experienced and long term successful machine. IMO this sort of shite has played a major part of Conservative success in politics, going as far back as I can recall, which includes the late 1950s. This is why I suspect that fighting fire with fire won't backfire on Starmer. The simple reason being that too many of the UK electorate are so easily led, and now Labour are creating a more level playing field. He's a dodgy lying chancer. And we saw that post 2017 when all his claims of "I won't I won't I won't" turned out to be bollocks. And NO, I don't particularly like the Tories either. But, just after single handedly losing Labour the 2019 election with his unachievable remain stance, he stood for the leadership!!! What on earth was going on in his head? Only if you believe the dodgy lying accusations against him. |
|
|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Apr 14, 2023 12:26:44 GMT
But what he did, abstracted control of policy direction disenfranchising voters. What he should have done was held a public vote on the Treaty of Maastricht. If he'd done that, the Brexit movement of the 2000's and 2010's would never have happened. A public vote with a mindless easily led electorate that kept Thatcher in office for 11 years? You must be joking. For reasons explained in my last post on this thread you cannot equate the rigged system that delivered thatcher the use of No 10 because the gang of four split the left vote ensuring jenkins and co were about as successful as cyril smith and david steel but also that Duffelcoat Man Foot was kept in opposition with a genuine call on everyone to vote equally on an issue. |
|
|
|
Post by dodgydave on Apr 14, 2023 12:50:26 GMT
He's a dodgy lying chancer. And we saw that post 2017 when all his claims of "I won't I won't I won't" turned out to be bollocks. And NO, I don't particularly like the Tories either. But, just after single handedly losing Labour the 2019 election with his unachievable remain stance, he stood for the leadership!!! What on earth was going on in his head? Only if you believe the dodgy lying accusations against him. He has literally lied 3 times LIVE in parliament and then had to back track. His entire leadership campaign was a lie. Personally, I want a Social Democrat government, but not one with somebody in charge who bases his persona on being "the grown up in the room" when he quite clearly isn't. The worst thing you can do is politics is to be preachy then get caught being a hypocrite. The polls are closing now, he is going to throw away a clear majority and end up in coalition with the SNP. They should boot him out now before it is too late. |
|
|
|
Post by Handyman on Apr 14, 2023 12:58:25 GMT
The 60's were good times, 70's were not good Freedom of Movement was finally signed off by the British government in 1992 when John Major forced The Maasstricht Treaty through Parliament by aligning it with a confidence motion. The Maastricht Treaty was signed on behalf of John Majors government in Maastricht by Douglas Hurd The treaty included and ratified the long held principle of Freedom Of Movement across Europe Freedom Of Movement was a principle of European integration, contained within The Treaty Of Rome as signed by Edward Heath when the UK joined the EEC. It was another Conservative government which finally gave Freedom of Movement the green light, it had nothing to do with Tony Blair or any Labour government. I am very aware of that thank you , both Governments Tory and Labour were responsible for what happened to my country, Blairs part in it was allowing and openly encouraging many economic migrants from Asia to come to the UK in large numbers, many of them settled in my native North West and Yorkshire , I will never forget or forgive what both Parties did to my country. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Apr 14, 2023 13:42:05 GMT
Sid, if there was parity of wages across the EU, freedom of movement would work.
But the EU needs full fiscal union.
To make freedom of movement work, and the Euro work, the EU would need to become a country.
It would need a common tax system, a welfare state, it would need to become a democracy.
And it isn't.
Everything they keep pushing for, is for this union to adopt the sovereignty of a country.
But, they are not going about it in a way that I trust.
The relationship was toxic, I'm glad to be out of it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2023 13:42:58 GMT
This could actually be a good thing for Labour, if true, although the article is in the Mail which is not actually famous for it's honesty.
Starmer may have to resign the leadership and Labour could elect a none status quo leader.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Apr 14, 2023 13:53:54 GMT
This could actually be a good thing for Labour, if true, although the article is in the Mail which is not actually famous for it's honesty. Starmer may have to resign the leadership and Labour could elect a none status quo leader. Replace a total prick with yet another total prick then dead nag. You haven't thought this out have you? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Apr 14, 2023 13:54:04 GMT
This could actually be a good thing for Labour, if true, although the article is in the Mail which is not actually famous for it's honesty. Starmer may have to resign the leadership and Labour could elect a none status quo leader. Who might be a good replacement? |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Apr 14, 2023 13:54:56 GMT
This could actually be a good thing for Labour, if true, although the article is in the Mail which is not actually famous for it's honesty. Starmer may have to resign the leadership and Labour could elect a none status quo leader. Who might be a good replacement? Starmers bitch....LOL |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Apr 14, 2023 13:59:47 GMT
Who might be a good replacement? Starmers bitch....LOL Well Rayner may well be elected as leader if they boot Starmer out. It wouldn’t take long before it was obvious that she had been over promoted. She would be like Corbyn but with permanent PMT. |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Apr 14, 2023 14:01:55 GMT
This could actually be a good thing for Labour, if true, although the article is in the Mail which is not actually famous for it's honesty. Starmer may have to resign the leadership and Labour could elect a none status quo leader. Who might be a good replacement? Caroline Flint would have made an ok leader of Labour, but Starmer's folly cost her the seat of Don Valley. |
|
|
|
Post by jonksy on Apr 14, 2023 14:03:11 GMT
Well Rayner may well be elected as leader if they boot Starmer out. It wouldn’t take long before it was obvious that she had been over promoted. She would be like Corbyn but with permanent PMT. The sale of crayons would go up mate. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2023 14:46:58 GMT
This could actually be a good thing for Labour, if true, although the article is in the Mail which is not actually famous for it's honesty. Starmer may have to resign the leadership and Labour could elect a none status quo leader. Replace a total prick with yet another total prick then dead nag. You haven't thought this out have you? Whatever Starmer is he would be a world better than the Tories. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2023 14:47:34 GMT
This could actually be a good thing for Labour, if true, although the article is in the Mail which is not actually famous for it's honesty. Starmer may have to resign the leadership and Labour could elect a none status quo leader. Who might be a good replacement? Noddy or Big Ears, you pick. |
|
