Nick Posted 1 November 2016 Share Posted 1 November 2016 1 minute ago, MattP said: It was actually in the Queen of Bradgate in town, and the comment was from a bearded hipster who I would have pigeonholed as a Green party member. There used to be a time you could usually tell a political opinion on a persons appearance, not anymore! Hip Beard culture clearly crosses a number of subcultures! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 1 November 2016 Share Posted 1 November 2016 When they talk about reform, this should be at the top of the tree, they need to realise that taxpayers money just can't be treated with this sort of distain.http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/eu-bureaucrat-is-paid-75-000-to-do-nothing-7m2kddxl8 EU bureaucrat is paid £75,000 to do nothing Quote An EU official has been offered a salary of more than £75,000 to “do nothing” for more than two and a half years until he reaches pensionable age. The arrangement was approved in an amendment passed by the European parliament’s budget committee last week. It made provisions for any employee of the European economic and social committee, a consultative body of the EU, to be put on leave and handed a maximum allowance of €18,000 (£16,200) per month until retirement, for up to five years. The Eurocrat, who is the first to benefit from this deal, is due to start his period of “leave in the interests of the service” at the beginning of December and will receive €101,250 in “allowances” between then and the end of June, according to Gérard Deprez, a Belgian MEP who laid out the terms in the budget committee meeting. Thereafter, the official will receive more than £75,000 a year after tax, which is the equivalent of his pension payment, until his retirement in two-and-a-half years’ time, according to a spokesman for the EESC. EU staff regulations set out further details governing “leave in the interests of the service”, stating: “At the earliest, five years before the official’s pensionable age, an official with at least ten years of service may be placed by decision of the appointing authority on leave in the interests of the service for organisational needs linked to the acquisition of new competences within the institutions.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajthefox Posted 2 November 2016 Share Posted 2 November 2016 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/02/brexit-europe-young-people-expats I have some empathy with this and I can understand how the vote may have angered/upset expats, but I can't help feel that a lot of people my age (25) have a rather large sense of entitlement, and that they fail to see that the free movement we have is a luxury, not a right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Posted 2 November 2016 Share Posted 2 November 2016 22 hours ago, MattP said: When they talk about reform, this should be at the top of the tree, they need to realise that taxpayers money just can't be treated with this sort of distain. I agree, Matt. But it's the same as having Farage in those posts - he didn't bother turning up to half of the meetings he could have contributed to and influenced positive change upon. They shouldn't get paid for doing nothing - they should be re-appropriated and so should Farage have been. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webbo Posted 2 November 2016 Share Posted 2 November 2016 2 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said: I agree, Matt. But it's the same as having Farage in those posts - he didn't bother turning up to half of the meetings he could have contributed to and influenced positive change upon. They shouldn't get paid for doing nothing - they should be re-appropriated and so should Farage have been. Farage can be voted out, the official can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 2 November 2016 Share Posted 2 November 2016 3 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said: I agree, Matt. But it's the same as having Farage in those posts - he didn't bother turning up to half of the meetings he could have contributed to and influenced positive change upon. They shouldn't get paid for doing nothing - they should be re-appropriated and so should Farage have been. Webbo has said it for me, if the British public don't like what Farage does in the EU they can vote him out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxinexile Posted 2 November 2016 Share Posted 2 November 2016 In the interests of providing a balance on the amount of money that is wasted - whether by the EU or by British governments - the below link (from the Daily Mail!) highlights some of the ridiculous expenditure that the taxpayer has to suffer from. This is an article from around 3 years ago, but I doubt in that short space of time these issues have been addressed and resolved. £120 billion a year could build a lot of new hospitals ... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2342045/120billion-money-drain-EVERY-year-The-astonishing-Whitehall-waste-send-British-family-annual-luxury-holiday.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ousefox Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 Govt lose the legal challenge. I'd be shocked if it didn't get appealed unless May tries to attempt a quick vote. There is already a date set for the SC I think. Hilarious how this has the potential to go to the European Court Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 On 11/1/2016 at 16:11, MattP said: When they talk about reform, this should be at the top of the tree, they need to realise that taxpayers money just can't be treated with this sort of distain.http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/eu-bureaucrat-is-paid-75-000-to-do-nothing-7m2kddxl8 EU bureaucrat is paid £75,000 to do nothing In most European countries, if you make someone redundancy close to retirement age you have to effectively pay them up to retirement, with additional compensation on top. In this case this looks like a simple way of avoiding that, and just paying them to go away in an efficient way. Makes sense in context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon the Hat Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 25 minutes ago, Watson said: Govt lose the legal challenge. I'd be shocked if it didn't get appealed unless May tries to attempt a quick vote. There is already a date set for the SC I think. Hilarious how this has the potential to go to the European Court Already announced they will appeal. Either way it would be completely unacceptable for parliament to block Brexit. The government commitment to enact the decision, and must do so or lose all credibility. The courts should not have any ability to block it either, Parliament is the ultimate power in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaelicFox Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 9 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said: Already announced they will appeal. Either way it would be completely unacceptable for parliament to block Brexit. The government commitment to enact the decision, and must do so or lose all credibility. The courts should not have any ability to block it either, Parliament is the ultimate power in this country. Democracy is governed by the people for the people and the will of the people is never set in stone it fluctuates , the people were hoodwinked and lied to by all sides but the exit camp were very deceitful the law of the land has said the representatives of the people must have the final say on Brexit and this remarkable ruling now offers clarity and openness in a process that was beginning to look undemocratic this is a victory for law and democracy I cannot see the Supreme Court overturning the fundimental fact that parlement must pass an act to see this process complete , because parliament can only take away an act by means of an act. fantastic day for democracy The 2017 article 50 BILL will never get passed into law as I said all along hard Brexit was never going to happen this referendum was never binding and as such the door was always open to bin the result Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaelicFox Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 38 minutes ago, Watson said: Govt lose the legal challenge. I'd be shocked if it didn't get appealed unless May tries to attempt a quick vote. There is already a date set for the SC I think. Hilarious how this has the potential to go to the European Court Quick vote ? Not a hope , it would be defeated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 The vote in parliament isn't a problem in terms of getting the backing, a huge lump of Labour MP's have already said they will vote for article 50, there are about 20 Tory rebels, the DUP are backing it, May has comfortably enough support to get over the line with ease. You would need 200 Labour MP's voting against it and that's not going to happen. It's just a nuisance to have to get through it, at least we'll see those politicians and have it in writing who are prepared to use their power to overwrite the will of the British people. The Lords are the ones who might block it, what a waste of time this case is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 30 minutes ago, GaelicFox said: Democracy is governed by the people for the people and the will of the people is never set in stone it fluctuates , the people were hoodwinked and lied to by all sides but the exit camp were very deceitful the law of the land has said the representatives of the people must have the final say on Brexit and this remarkable ruling now offers clarity and openness in a process that was beginning to look undemocratic this is a victory for law and democracy I cannot see the Supreme Court overturning the fundimental fact that parlement must pass an act to see this process complete , because parliament can only take away an act by means of an act. fantastic day for democracy The 2017 article 50 BILL will never get passed into law as I said all along hard Brexit was never going to happen this referendum was never binding and as such the door was always open to bin the result You don't seriously think parliament will vote against it do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaelicFox Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 24 minutes ago, MattP said: The vote in parliament isn't a problem in terms of getting the backing, a huge lump of Labour MP's have already said they will vote for article 50, there are about 20 Tory rebels, the DUP are backing it, May has comfortably enough support to get over the line with ease. You would need 200 Labour MP's voting against it and that's not going to happen. It's just a nuisance to have to get through it, at least we'll see those politicians and have it in writing who are prepared to use their power to overwrite the will of the British people. The Lords are the ones who might block it, what a waste of time this case is. Sorry what would they be voting on ??? She might have to now publish a bill and in that bill the terms of Brexit will have to be laid cleared , the issue is the terms of Brexit can't be negotiated till article 50 is triggered ! We are in a vortex and unless that vote is a fully detailed informed vote it will not be passed , not a hope ! This is crazy times , the courts accepted the entire argument and they were unanimous in accepting those , and the courts will be used if the legislation and act of parliament are not enacted constitutional clarity is now being delivered Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaelicFox Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 1 minute ago, MattP said: You don't seriously think parliament will vote against it do you? Yes ! If it's a rushed job 100% the democratic process will rally against any fudge on this there must in my opinion and all legal experts opinions be an act of parliament on Brexit and that act is virtually impossible to frame without being able to tell parliament what they are voting on this is amazing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 3 minutes ago, GaelicFox said: Sorry what would they be voting on ??? She might have to now publish a bill and in that bill the terms of Brexit will have to be laid cleared , the issue is the terms of Brexit can't be negotiated till article 50 is triggered ! We are in a vortex and unless that vote is a fully detailed informed vote it will not be passed , not a hope ! This is crazy times , the courts accepted the entire argument and they were unanimous in accepting those , and the courts will be used if the legislation and act of parliament are not enacted constitutional clarity is now being delivered No they won't at all, the bill will be very simple, one to invoke article 50, if you remember Corbyn wanted the government to do that the day after the referendum. Government negotiations have never entered a parliamentary bill, bills are to act, not to scrutinise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaelicFox Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 Just now, MattP said: No they won't at all, the bill will be very simple, one to invoke article 50, if you remember Corbyn wanted the government to do that the day after the referendum. Government negotiations have never entered a parliamentary bill, bills are to act, not to scrutinise. The vote will have to include the terms of a Brexit exit ! It has to include the terms of the Brexit ! A sane and balanced washed down Brexit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 1 minute ago, GaelicFox said: Yes ! If it's a rushed job 100% the democratic process will rally against any fudge on this there must in my opinion and all legal experts opinions be an act of parliament on Brexit and that act is virtually impossible to frame without being able to tell parliament what they are voting on this is amazing Even the lawyers outside the court are now even saying parliament will still pass it, they only took this case to make sure the juristiction of parliament still held over the royal prerogative. I don't know what you are getting excited about unless you are pinning your hopes on the upper chamber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 Just now, GaelicFox said: The vote will have to include the terms of a Brexit exit ! It has to include the terms of the Brexit ! A sane and balanced washed down Brexit No it does not at all, where on earth have you got that from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaelicFox Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 Just now, MattP said: Even the lawyers outside the court are now even saying parliament will still pass it, they only took this case to make sure the juristiction of parliament still held over the royal prerogative. I don't know what you are getting excited about unless you are pinning your hopes on the upper chamber. Pass what ? They will get the terms of Brexit in the act and if the terms of Brexit are too hard and too risky they will be rejected finally MP's will decide the terms of Brexit not a shadowy cabinet run by shadowy forces Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaelicFox Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 2 minutes ago, MattP said: No it does not at all, where on earth have you got that from? Time will tell Matt ..... sit back and buy a large popcorn this is going to get interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SMX11 Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 A general election is now required imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MattP Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 1 minute ago, GaelicFox said: Pass what ? They will get the terms of Brexit in the act and if the terms of Brexit are too hard and too risky they will be rejected finally MP's will decide the terms of Brexit not a shadowy cabinet run by shadowy forces Pass the bill to invoke article 50. They won't get the terms of anything, the bill will be to invoke and then start negotiations. I don't know people are getting excited about, we already know there is a massive majority for it in parliament anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GaelicFox Posted 3 November 2016 Share Posted 3 November 2016 2 minutes ago, MattP said: Pass the bill to invoke article 50. They won't get the terms of anything, the bill will be to invoke and then start negotiations. I don't know people are getting excited about, we already know there is a massive majority for it in parliament anyway. Can't pass a bill to envoke something without laying out the terms of what your envoking she is making a statement Monday she has a tough weekend ahead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.