Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[The Brain]

Not even prima nacho?

[Sheilbh]

Too many tossers are awarded honours in the UK system. Which is a shame as it devalues the awards made to worthy recipients.

Hey our highest civilian honor recenty went to Rush Limbaugh. I challenge the UK honor system to top that,

Sir Jimmy Saville springs to mind

Yes, although IIRC you have to pay a hefty inheritance fee on them.

The last inheritably knighthood (baronetcy) was, I think, created by Thatcher for her husband - so her son would get a title. Apparently the last person awarded an inheritable peerage was Harold MacMillan.

[Valmy]

Sir Jimmy Saville springs to mind

That's different.

[Josquius]

To absolutely everybody's surprise within 2 months the government has flipped from "We love the NHS!" to "NHS for sale".

https://evolvepolitics.com/breaking-tories-vote-down-amendment-to-protect-nhs-from-foreign-control-in-brexit-trade-deals/

The Conservative Party have tonight used their 78-seat majority to vote down an amendment designed to protect the NHS and publicly-funded health and care services from being subject to any form of control from outside the UK in a future post-Brexit Trade Deal.

The amendment, which was put forward by Green Party MP Caroline Lucas and supported by Labour leader Keir Starmer and a number of other senior Labour MPs, was voted down by a margin of 340 to 241 thanks to the Tories' overwhelming parliamentary majority.

Le sigh

[Tamas]

To absolutely everybody's surprise within 2 months the government has flipped from "We love the NHS!" to "NHS for sale".

https://evolvepolitics.com/breaking-tories-vote-down-amendment-to-protect-nhs-from-foreign-control-in-brexit-trade-deals/

The Conservative Party have tonight used their 78-seat majority to vote down an amendment designed to protect the NHS and publicly-funded health and care services from being subject to any form of control from outside the UK in a future post-Brexit Trade Deal.

The amendment, which was put forward by Green Party MP Caroline Lucas and supported by Labour leader Keir Starmer and a number of other senior Labour MPs, was voted down by a margin of 340 to 241 thanks to the Tories' overwhelming parliamentary majority.

Le sigh

Ok, 1. there might have been details there that were too restrictive for the future apart from "zomg no capitalist moneis in teh nhs" 2. it was an opposition amendment so it was never going to be accepted by the government, I don't see how this is a reversal of anything.

[garbon]

To absolutely everybody's surprise within 2 months the government has flipped from "We love the NHS!" to "NHS for sale".

https://evolvepolitics.com/breaking-tories-vote-down-amendment-to-protect-nhs-from-foreign-control-in-brexit-trade-deals/

The Conservative Party have tonight used their 78-seat majority to vote down an amendment designed to protect the NHS and publicly-funded health and care services from being subject to any form of control from outside the UK in a future post-Brexit Trade Deal.

The amendment, which was put forward by Green Party MP Caroline Lucas and supported by Labour leader Keir Starmer and a number of other senior Labour MPs, was voted down by a margin of 340 to 241 thanks to the Tories' overwhelming parliamentary majority.

Le sigh

Doesn't that just mean they didn't want to tie their hands? And in particular didn't want their hands tied by an amendment pushed by the Greens and Labour?

[Admiral Yi]

I'm having trouble finding a source that provides the actual text of the amendment.  It seems it has something to do with US pharma companies, but I'm scratching my head trying to figure out what "NHS controlled" actually means.

[Sheilbh]

Ok, 1. there might have been details there that were too restrictive for the future apart from "zomg no capitalist moneis in teh nhs" 2. it was an opposition amendment so it was never going to be accepted by the government, I don't see how this is a reversal of anything.

Yeah. My guess is it's an amendment that Caroline Lucas and Labour knew wouldn't pass so the text doesn't matter, you just make it as sweeping as possible to make a political point. It's purpose is to embarrass the government/circulate on social media.

[celedhring]

To absolutely everybody's surprise within 2 months the government has flipped from "We love the NHS!" to "NHS for sale".

https://evolvepolitics.com/breaking-tories-vote-down-amendment-to-protect-nhs-from-foreign-control-in-brexit-trade-deals/

The Conservative Party have tonight used their 78-seat majority to vote down an amendment designed to protect the NHS and publicly-funded health and care services from being subject to any form of control from outside the UK in a future post-Brexit Trade Deal.

The amendment, which was put forward by Green Party MP Caroline Lucas and supported by Labour leader Keir Starmer and a number of other senior Labour MPs, was voted down by a margin of 340 to 241 thanks to the Tories' overwhelming parliamentary majority.

Le sigh

Doesn't that just mean they didn't want to tie their hands? And in particular didn't want their hands tied by an amendment pushed by the Greens and Labour?

This happens all the time over here. The opposition pushes a motion with a popular headline, the majority votes it down because it contains enough poison pills or they just don't want to give that victory to the opposition.

[Zanza]

The Tories also passed an act that tied their own hands regarding extension of the transition period, so they are hardly above grand standing for show.

[Sheilbh]

The Tories also passed an act that tied their own hands regarding extension of the transition period, so they are hardly above grand standing for show.

For sure - and obviously the real absurdity of that is the basis of our system is the only thing Parliament can't do is bind another Parliament. So if a government wanted an extension they can just abolish/amend that law and it has no effect. It's utterly pointless.

But we've had this increasingly in recent years - I think it started with New Labour - where governments are changing laws just to make a point rather than change substantive law. There's been a few cases where laws have been passed which just basically re-state the existing position but in a separate piece of legislation. We've not gone fully American and started adopting laws because they have an acronym like the USA PATRIOT Act, but it's still really annoying.

[Sheilbh]

Seeing people go through the Russia report and it's fascinating. It seems like a serious piece of work that actually focuses on the entanglement of Russian business interests (which are often aligned with state interests and organised crime) into the UK economy, politics, society etc.

Broad summary is the Kremlin means us ill and is acting on it. This has been the case for a while and we've underestimated it for a long time. The relevant law enforcement agencies like the National Crime Agency lack the resources or expertise to deal with this. We need new legislation on some issues in particular to tackle the espionage and illicit financial dealings of the Russian elite and their enablers. But it's probably too late to stop (there's a section called "Trying to shut the stable door"), so we may need to focus on how to mitigate the risks and, when there is hostile action discovered, how to address it.

[garbon]

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-labour-russia-report-brexit-islington-a9631896.html

Boris Johnson claims Labour using Russia report as 'Islingtonian Remainer plot to undermine' Brexit

As if he hadn't been my neighbor just a few years ago.

[The Larch]

Islingtonian Remainer plot? 

[celedhring]

Remember remember the end of july
Islington treason and plot
I see no reason why Brexit treason
Should ever be forgot