The Trumpian EU has demolished its final reasons for existing

The EU has showed what it really is a ‘bully’ and its complete disregard for for anyone who does not agree with it 100%.

This instance is not the first for there are a number, such as the treatment of Greece from 2009.

But, in the current instance not only was the UK and Northern Ireland

aggrieved, but also many countries within the EU, Ireland for one

The EU needs to understand that it should discuss, and not govern dictatorially, but they have had years doing the latter and rarely challenged by EU member countries, with the possible exception of the UK, while it was a member.

Source: The Trumpian EU has demolished its final reasons for existing

Vaccines. The United Kingdom v a “rules-based organisation”. | Conservative Home

Boris and his Government have made many mistakes leading to substantial failures during this COVID-19 pandemic, but the vaccine situation would appear to be the one and only success.

However, this does not discount the many failures.

Here it is the EU who have failed, but their over  bureaucratic nature means they are unwilling to accept their failure and thereby are causing alarm and concern to an independent country (UK) to overcome this failure.

This can’t be allowed to happen and therefore the EU will have to backdown, something which is not akin to them.

If we were still in the EU none of us would have had any COVID-19 vaccinations, let alone being an European leader.

Unfortunately, the EU will not countenance any UK successes, the EU is showing isolationism and putting the EU first above all others, now where have I heard and seen something similar, well would you believe it, 4 years of President Trump in the US.





Source: Vaccines. The United Kingdom v a “rules-based organisation”. | Conservative Home

Brexit could cause break-up of UK, says ex-Chancellor George Osborne | Daily Mail Online

So, George Osbourne, former Chancellor of the Exchequer, is saying Brexit could be the cause of the break up of the UK, well, if it is then so be it.

But, it is not Brexit, but the actions of previous Governments, with Brexit being the easiest reason to put forward, for previous Governments, be they Labour or Conservative, could not be the cause, could they!

George was never in favour of Brexit, but, then, I was never in favour of George.

Brexit will, eventually, be good for England and any other country within the UK who stays with England.

As to Brexit, I did vote to leave and my conviction to do so, is only strengthened more each day, when I see how the EU is prolonging the discussions on the terms of a Trade Deal between the UK and the EU, for they only wish to punish the UK for daring to leave the EU and to show others who are not happy being in the EU, how they would be treated, if they wished to leave,

What I would say, is if I had known in 1975 what I know now I would have voted to leave then, instead, I mistakenly voted to stay in 1975, my worst vote ever.

Goodbye EU, but hello Europe, for we wish to trade with Europe not the EU.


Source: Brexit could cause break-up of UK, says ex-Chancellor George Osborne | Daily Mail Online

BBC Question Time Audience Destroy Labour MP For Undemocratic Second Brexit Referendum Plan

I did not see the programme but Labour did in 2016 say they would honour the 2016 result and therefore a 2nd referendum in not respecting.

Yes, it was a narrow victory for leave and yes, many on both leave and remain may not have fully understood the full ins and outs of the referendum.

However, the same could be said of any political election and we do not disrespect the results of these.

Also in other political elections, certainly General Elections there are a number of issues mentioned in each parties election manifestos, so can it really be assumed that the result for the victorious party means all those that voted agreed and fully understood every point in the manifestos.

But , just because leave won, in a remain parliament the simple vote for remain or leave is in question.

Surely the lies made by remain MPs, in that they would abide by the result in 2016 shows that most MPs can not be trusted, but we already know that.


6 December 2019

  • BBC Question Time Audience Destroy Labour MP For Undemocratic Second Brexit Referendum Plan
  • Brexiteer Richard Ticeand The BBC Question Time audience in Hull destroyed Labour MP Anneliese Dodds & The Labour Party for its undemocratic Brexit position asking for a second referendum with remain vs remain.
  • We also had a remoaner calling the 2016 referendum result illegitimate.
  • The panel consisted of Brexit party Chairmain Richard Tice, Conservative Party Chairmen James Cleverly, Labour Mp Anneliese Dodds, Lib Dem Ed Davey & SNP’s Ian Blackford Joining BBC’s Fiona Bruce

View original post

Johnson to suspend parliament before Brexit, opposition denounces ‘coup’ – Reuters

Cheered on by U.S President Donald Trump, Johnson launched his boldest move yet to take the country out of the European Union by Oct. 31 with or without a divorce deal, by setting a new date for a state opening of parliament.

Known as the Queen’s Speech, the formal event will be held on Oct. 14 and be preceded by a suspension of the House of Commons, meaning parliament will not sit between mid-September and mid-October.

The move, which had to be approved by Queen Elizabeth, limits the time opponents have to derail a disorderly Brexit, but also increases the chance that Johnson could face a vote of no-confidence in his government, and possibly an election.

It also risks dragging the 93-year-old, politically neutral queen into the dispute. So incensed were leaders of the opposition parties by Johnson’s plan that several have written to the monarch asking for a meeting to express their concern.

The queen acts on the advice of her prime minister. Her office declined to comment. Her speech at the opening of parliament is written by the government, outlining its plans for legislation.


Source: Johnson to suspend parliament before Brexit, opposition denounces ‘coup’ – Reuters

Factbox: How free would a UK-U.S. trade agreement be? – Reuters

Brexit supporters have said rapidly agreed trade accords with the United States and other countries will make a prosperous “Global Britain” outside the European Union.

Both Britain and the United States would need to determine the scope of negotiations, but past experience of Washington’s dealings with other would-be trade partners shows what it is likely to seek and the limits on what it would offer.


The U.S. ambassador’s comment that Britain’s NHS should be “on the table” in a trade deal caused an uproar in Britain.

There are two areas of U.S. interest. First, it would want its companies be allowed to bid for NHS contracts, although tenders are generally open already.

The second area concerns the reference prices the NHS sets for its purchases of drugs.

The United States, which sought to challenge a similar scheme in Australia during trade negotiations, argues that lower set prices are unfair on its pharmaceutical companies and leave U.S. consumers footing the bill.

Britain could exempt its health service from trade talks, as France did for audiovisual services in the EU-U.S. TTIP (Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership) negotiations, although this could limit what Washington would want to offer.

Spending on the NHS totalled 144.3 billion pounds ($183.0 billion) in 2016/17, according to an April 2018 parliamentary briefing paper. OECD data shows that per capita expenditure on health in the UK was $4,246 in 2017 compared to an OECD average of $3,992 and $10,209 in the United States.


Washington is a net exporter of farm products, notably of meat and animal feed, but normally also wants its counterpart to accept its farming standards.


Source: Factbox: How free would a UK-U.S. trade agreement be? – Reuters

A DWP policy that breached UN regulations

What, another one are the Tories going for a record.

The UK is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and while this is not a security issue under the terms of that council it does beggar belief that if this current Conservative Government is not prepared to listen and follow the UN guidance and regulations in other matters why belong to an important council, if, even a member of the UN full stop.

What example is this setting to other member countries, in fact should the UN be there at all or the UK be a member of it.

Britain’s influence in the United Nations is fading – The i 

The United Nations Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, hailed Britain’s role in his organisation yesterday during an interview on the BBC. For those inclined to nostalgia Mr Guterres’s comments were no doubt appealing. But we shouldn’t be fooled. The UK’s influence in the UN is fading.

“In New York, the decline in UK influence is palpable. It’s partly Brexit, but not only,” said Ian Martin, Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General in Libya 2011-12, told a Chatham House meeting this week. Natalie Samarasinghe of United Nations Association UK, agreed: “At the UN, Asian and African countries now more likely to talk to France. Britain needs to adjust to its role as a middle-ranking power.”

Is the UN fit for purpose?


Source: Britain’s influence in the United Nations is fading – The i

I know the ‘great repeal bill’ has its flaws. But we need cooperation to improve it | Caroline Flint | Opinion | The Guardian

It seems I have adopted a rather controversial view about Brexit: that, perhaps, all the partisans – leavers and remainers – should bury our differences and work together. That’s proving more difficult than it should be. No one in politics likes to concede defeat, particularly if they secretly dislike some of their opponents.

The EU referendum opened a chasm in our nation. Two different views: Britain versus Europe, migration versus integration; internationalism versus national identity, metropolitan versus small town, management versus the factory floor. The outcome was not just a shock, and for many it was hard to accept. The European Union, if not loved by many, was taken for granted as part of our political architecture. The “great repeal bill” is the latest staging ground of this fight. Really an adoption bill, it aims to transfer lots of EU legislation into UK law. Businesses, citizens and government agencies need a legal basis to conduct their activities – and this adoption process is essential to a smooth Brexit. But weak governments with complex bills are easy prey. When Theresa May went to the country in April, she claimed she needed a larger majority lest the opposition parties derail the process. Now it is her own benches to which she is casting worried glances.

I campaigned for remain. And I want the UK to retain close ties to Europe and keep many of the benefits of easy trade, workers’ rights and co-operation. But I also recognise that managing migration – understanding public concerns beyond the big cities – will have to be part of any deal. This will require a tailor-made solution for the UK. But to start with businesses, citizens and government agencies need a legal basis to conduct their activities. This great adoption of EU law is essential to a smooth Brexit.

Source: I know the ‘great repeal bill’ has its flaws. But we need cooperation to improve it | Caroline Flint | Opinion | The Guardian