Consequences Of Brexit [Part 9] Read First Post Before Posting

[Litotes 63]

44 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

My bold. 

 

Specifically which national Policy or Policies would that be? 

 

The real ones or just the ones based on hearsay? 

 

Go on, please share? 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/carrie-symonds-lee-cain-downing-street-boris-johnson-b1722031.html

 

"The director of communications’ resignation may be seen as a triumph for Ms Symonds, but it has also raised questions about her influence within her fiancé’s administration."

 

 

[RJRB 688]

2 hours ago, West 77 said:

I'm praising Boris Johnson because I support Brexit , voted to leave the EU and he implemented my democratic choice at the end of January.  When I voted to leave the EU I didn't do so to help Boris Johnson to become Prime Minister.  However, I honestly  believe if Boris Johnson hadn't  become Tory leader and won the general election that the EU referendum result would never have been implemented.

 

 I'm not a washer woman so I've no interest in his girlfriend or his personal life. However, I do believe the lady who he is going to marry held the position of Conservative Party's head of communications before Boris became Tory party leader.  I think someone who has held such a position will be in a better place to judge if an individual is suitable for certain senior roles than both you and I.  

 

Just for completeness, in my World I give praise to Prime Ministers who implement policies  what they said they would do before they had the power or parliament support to do so such as implementing the EU referendum result.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/jun/21/blundering-boris-how-u-turns-and-broken-promises-have-split-the-tories

 

Where is your world?

 

[taxman 12]

3 hours ago, West 77 said:

I'm praising Boris Johnson because I support Brexit , voted to leave the EU and he implemented my democratic choice at the end of January.  When I voted to leave the EU I didn't do so to help Boris Johnson to become Prime Minister.  However, I honestly  believe if Boris Johnson hadn't  become Tory leader and won the general election that the EU referendum result would never have been implemented.

 

 I'm not a washer woman so I've no interest in his girlfriend or his personal life. However, I do believe the lady who he is going to marry held the position of Conservative Party's head of communications before Boris became Tory party leader.  I think someone who has held such a position will be in a better place to judge if an individual is suitable for certain senior roles than both you and I.  

 

Just for completeness, in my World I give praise to Prime Ministers who implement policies  what they said they would do before they had the power or parliament support to do so such as implementing the EU referendum result.

 

Wow, you praise Boris because you support Brexit, yet Boris voted 3 times against May's Brexit deal. We could have had Brexit ages ago apart from Boris and his chums wanting power rather an a deal.

[Anna B 1,414]

9 hours ago, Baron99 said:

Just watched David Davis on BBC Breakfast news discussing the pause in the Brexit negotiations. 

 

He explained, (& he probably knows more than any of us on here & is closer to those involved), that Brussels, (the Commissioners), aren't happy with the late intervention of Macron, as a deal was virtually considered done, especially around the fishing issue.  Macron is merely playing to the gallery, trying to look tough for domestic politics, as he looks towards the French presidential election in 2022.

 

Additionally, Berlin aren't happy with Macron, as Merkel is being pressured by business leaders in Germany, to get a deal done before 31/12/20, as they want some continuity & they recognise that the UK is a valuable market for their goods. 

 

A no deal is bad for all in the short-term, including the French fishing industry who, if there is no deal, won't have ANY ACCESS at all to our fishing waters, come January 1st.

 

So the stumbling block in all this, appears to be one individual, Macron. 

I heard that when a deal is finally decided on, it rhen has  to be agreed on and passed by each of the 27 countries individually?

If just one country doesn't agree, then it's back to the drawing board again.

Is that right?

[RJRB 688]

No Deal is a Bad Deal .

[Baron99 794]

4 hours ago, Litotes said:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/carrie-symonds-lee-cain-downing-street-boris-johnson-b1722031.html

 

"The director of communications’ resignation may be seen as a triumph for Ms Symonds, but it has also raised questions about her influence within her fiancé’s administration."

 

 

The first paragraph of the article; "One of the most surprising elements of the spiralling fracas which developed within 10 Downing Street over the future of communications director Lee Cain was the SUPPOSED role of the prime minister’s fiancée, Carrie Symonds.". My bold & caps. 

 

As I stated earlier, nothing but journalistic hearsay, cleverly not stating that it was a FACT that Ms Symonds has played any role in the comings & goings at number 10.  And don't you just love it when people preface any supposedly factual statement with the word "May"? 

 

But let me remind you that you stated as FACT, that Ms Symonds was influencing Policy? 

 

Where's that evidence? 

Edited December 5, 2020 by Baron99

[Litotes 63]

53 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

Where's that evidence? 

Where's the evidence that Brexit will be a positive move for the UK?

There isn't any, and yet you accept that as fact...

 

You appear to accept innuendo and supposition when it suits you,. but not when it highlights the fact that the country is being influenced by an unelected person who has been shown to have low morals and who is quite willing to throw her weight around to get her way - a way that affects the whole country.

 

What a hypocritical position to take... but no change there then for brexit-supporting people..

 

[El Cid 218]

1 hour ago, RJRB said:

No Deal is a Bad Deal .

I am stocking up on certain food stuffs. Not because we may starve if there are massive queues at the ports. But because food prices could rise. The easiest thing to stock up on, is tins of tuna.

No one knows what will happen with UK fishing rights, but choppy waters are ahead.

[Baron99 794]

2 hours ago, Litotes said:

Where's the evidence that Brexit will be a positive move for the UK?

There isn't any, and yet you accept that as fact...

 

You appear to accept innuendo and supposition when it suits you,. but not when it highlights the fact that the country is being influenced by an unelected person who has been shown to have low morals and who is quite willing to throw her weight around to get her way - a way that affects the whole country.

 

What a hypocritical position to take... but no change there then for brexit-supporting people..

 

Nice try at deflection. 

 

It must be around 12 hours now since your claim that Ms Symonds has had influence on national Policy, & the only 'evidence' is journalistic hearsay, which you appear to take as gospel. 

 

Such evidence wouldn't be accepted by a teacher of CSE politics if presented as 'evidence' by one of their students.  The link to the article you have provided, certainly couldn't be considered as a primary source of evidence.  It wouldn't even pass muster as a secondary source of evidence.  It is just hearsay, yet clearly, like yourself, many would believe such nonsense. 

 

I ask again.  Where is the FACT based evidence of interface in national Policy by Ms Symonds?   

 

Come on, admit it, apart from the hearsay, there is no evidence is there? 

Edited December 5, 2020 by Baron99

[Longcol 600]

3 hours ago, Anna B said:

I heard that when a deal is finally decided on, it rhen has  to be agreed on and passed by each of the 27 countries individually?

If just one country doesn't agree, then it's back to the drawing board again.

Is that right?

Not really - in the current negotiations, if one country veto's the deal then it's no deal - not enough time left.

 

We will still have to negotiate a deal with the EU at some point unless we want to use WTO rules.

 

All the time we where in the EU we had a veto - we weren't forced into anything.

[Litotes 63]

34 minutes ago, Baron99 said:

Nice try at deflection. 

 

It must be around 12 hours now since your claim that Ms Symonds has had influence on national Policy, & the only 'evidence' is journalistic hearsay, which you appear to take as gospel. 

 

Such evidence wouldn't be accepted by a teacher of CSE politics if presented as 'evidence' by one of their students.  The link to the article you have provided, certainly couldn't be considered as a primary source of evidence.  It wouldn't even pass muster as a secondary source of evidence.  It is just hearsay, yet clearly, like yourself, many would believe such nonsense. 

 

I ask again.  Where is the FACT based evidence of interface in national Policy by Ms Symonds?   

 

Come on, admit it, apart from the hearsay, there is no evidence is there? 

There is as much fact, in fact more, as there is journalistic evidence (if there is such a thing) that she has influenced recruitment to policy advisor positions, to civil service positions and has been privvy to governmental decision making despite not being an elected or publicly financed person. Therefore any influence she has had is illegitimate and subject to public scrutiny - and yet the PM will not support that!

 Seems fishy to me...

 

I come back to you, where is the factual evidence, that this whole thread is based on, on the benefit of brexit?

There is none, at least none has been provided  - please provide us some

 

Please provide this before you start picking holes in the undemocratic influence of the morally destitute fiance of the publicly proven racist, sexist, misogynistic, lying bully-supporting that is the PM .

 

FACTS please...

And not hearsay  - where is the evidence???????

 

 

</silence>

The hypocrites have the floor!

[Baron99 794]

9 hours ago, Litotes said:

There is as much fact, in fact more, as there is journalistic evidence (if there is such a thing) that she has influenced recruitment to policy advisor positions, to civil service positions and has been privvy to governmental decision making despite not being an elected or publicly financed person. Therefore any influence she has had is illegitimate and subject to public scrutiny - and yet the PM will not support that!

 Seems fishy to me...

 

I come back to you, where is the factual evidence, that this whole thread is based on, on the benefit of brexit?

There is none, at least none has been provided  - please provide us some

 

Please provide this before you start picking holes in the undemocratic influence of the morally destitute fiance of the publicly proven racist, sexist, misogynistic, lying bully-supporting that is the PM .

 

FACTS please...

And not hearsay  - where is the evidence???????

 

 

</silence>

The hypocrites have the floor!

My bold. 

 

We see you typing statements again but once again you have failed to provide hard evidence of any kind, other than your say so. 

 

As yet, all we have received is a link to an article that 'alledges' a connection but which we have already established falls way, way short of stating, as FACT, that Ms Symonds has any influence in number 10 & is responsible for people being dismissed from their jobs or has caused them to resign. 

 

You started this argument that these were facts, so let's have some conclusion to it by you providing actual, FACTUAL evidence to back up your claims?

 

Once again, because you don't have any evidence, you seek to introduce other information, as stated in your comments above, trying to swing the argument back to Brexit or criticism of the PM, in attempt to try & move away from the argument that Ms Symonds holds any influence.

 

Once again, nice try at a piece of deflection & side-stepping, in an attempt not to provide any evidence but it doesn't work like that.  You make a statement of FACT, be prepared to back it up with the FACTS. 

 

Again, remember what you stated?  Ms Symonds HAS INFLUENCED NATIONAL POLICY.  

 

It is amusing & somewhat childlike, resulting to petty name calling by accusing me of hypocrisy, when despite repeated requests to back up your allegations, you have failed to provide the evidence. 

 

Once again, where is the FACTUAL EVIDENCE, that Carrie Symonds has INFLUENCED NATIONAL POLICY?   

 

When that evidence is produced, we can then start to pick at those bones & move the debate on.  I won't hold my breath though because I believe no such concrete evidence exists?  At least not any evidence that a journalist or yourself are prepared to state is 100%  fact & not hearsay, alledged allegations without any basis of truth? 

 

Conjecture is not fact! 

Edited December 6, 2020 by Baron99