Politics Today

tavyred

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 23, 2004
Messages
9,882
BS - The US is under no obligation to 'take on the concerns' of any faction, it is a co-guarantor that the GFA international treaty is upheld, and respected. The EU is also a co-guarantor of that which the UK freely signed up to - including no border to be reinstated in Ireland.
…and it’s perhaps telling that Lord Trimble one of the architects of GFA is telling us that the protocol as it stands is tearing away from NI the consent and democratic legitimacy that are part of the GFA as it pertains to the loyalist community. If the US is prepared to take at face value the idea that the protocol is vital to protect against a hard border in Ireland, you have to be suspicious when other legitimate concerns from the ‘other side’ are just brushed off and ignored.
It was clear from the start IMO that the U.K. signed up under parliamentary duress to an agreement that it would obviously want to change in fairly short order. Was that a cynical ploy by our Government, you probably think so, in my opinion it’s our Government doing what it has to do to mitigate for an agreement largely fashioned by a PM (May) and a parliament not much interested in embracing the act of leaving the EU properly.
Unfortunately, we are where we are now and the choices are stark for both sides. I’ll personally be cheering my own government on in its negotiations with a sometimes intransigent and tough opponent and hoping that Washington’s, Brussels and Dublin’s game of ‘dare’ with NI’s loyalist community doesn’t bite us all on the backside.
 

arthur

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Aug 18, 2004
Messages
7,548
…and it’s perhaps telling that Lord Trimble one of the architects of GFA is telling us that the protocol as it stands is tearing away from NI the consent and democratic legitimacy that are part of the GFA as it pertains to the loyalist community. If the US is prepared to take at face value the idea that the protocol is vital to protect against a hard border in Ireland, you have to be suspicious when other legitimate concerns from the ‘other side’ are just brushed off and ignored.
It was clear from the start IMO that the U.K. signed up under parliamentary duress to an agreement that it would obviously want to change in fairly short order. Was that a cynical ploy by our Government, you probably think so, in my opinion it’s our Government doing what it has to do to mitigate for an agreement largely fashioned by a PM (May) and a parliament not much interested in embracing the act of leaving the EU properly.
Unfortunately, we are where we are now and the choices are stark for both sides. I’ll personally be cheering my own government on in its negotiations with a sometimes intransigent and tough opponent and hoping that Washington’s, Brussels and Dublin’s game of ‘dare’ with NI’s loyalist community doesn’t bite us all on the backside.
All this talk of the importance of getting the DUPs consent is conditional on whether it suits the Conservative Party or not. Did they seek the DUPs consent before passing the bill that set up the Protocol and established the border in the Irish Sea?

Er, no. The DUP voted against both the Brexit Bill in January 2020 and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement in December 2020. The Tories and their camp followers in West Devon didn't seem too bothered then. Can't think why they're so bothered now. Something to do with having an excuse to start a fight with the EU perhaps?
 

angelic upstart

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Messages
25,251
Interesting developments around Musk/Twitter/Trump!
By interesting, do you mean entirely predictable?

Considering he's not gonna buy it anyway and will soon be in the pockets of China anyway cos they're going to be the biggest buyers of his car. Assuming he's not run them into the ground by then anyway 😂😂😂
 

angelic upstart

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Messages
25,251
FTT5nDVWQAgycwt.jpeg

An interesting* look at how prices rose in the first four years of Thatcher's Govt. I've checked the inflation calculator and it suggests £100 would risen to £145.91 during the same period.

Can anyone around from that period explain why some costs rose quite as much as they did? Genuine question, I'm simply interested.

* If you're someone like me
 

Alistair20000

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
43,840
Location
Hunkered down
The 1970’s were horrendous for inflation due to the trebling of oil prices in 1973, loose monetary policy, poor productivity and wage increases driven by over powerful trade unions. At one point in 1975 it reached nearly 26%. In 1980 into the second year of Mrs Thatcher it was still as high as 18% before falling back particularly after 1982.
 
Top