Jump to content

mike Meehan

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by mike Meehan

  1. Having achieved their object in respect of immigration, which was the main reason why many voted to leave, it makes me wonder why they are still persisting in going ahead with brexit, or is it as I said earlier brexit has taken on a life of its own and the politicians are either too scared, or just haven't the gumption to do anything about it. That leaves us sleepwalking inti a very uncertain future.
  2. I can see the EU exactly for what it is without being influenced by emotions, personal feelings, prejudice or any external influence. But it is through emotions, personal feelings, prejudice and any external influence that we develop as human beings, hopefully improving and learning as we go along. But you have said what doesn't affect you but what has affected you for you to take the view which you do? That was the original question.
  3. For the past 50 years our various governments have adopted the attitude that it is cheaper to buy off the peg rather than develop our home grown talent, now the chickens are coming home to roost. I have been saying for quite a while now that the youth of a country are the future of that country and as such they should be treated as an investment for the future. But what do I know?
  4. Yes Nick and we will still be saying 'will we or won't we' meanwhile the others will get fed up with no clear policies, so we will go into a decline anyway.
  5. From what I saw of the leave campaign, they did not discriminate too much between EU and non EU immigration to the extent that a number of people who did not know any better thought that the object of brexit was to remove our brown people from out lands (and they did not seek to correct that view either) and this has been re-enforced somewhat by the government's Windrush saga. However as is becoming apparent the average age of our society is aging and as a result we will have fewer workers having to support more aged people with the increased costs of the NHS and care which go with it. It's such a pity that brexit in its wisdom decided to put the brake on eastern Europeans coming here, most of whom were young, some with young families. who could have taken up the strain in the old age of many of us. We tried to tell them but they were so much taken up with the hysteria of migrants coming to our country that they just would listen.
  6. I wouldn't call it bias - more of having the opportunity of being able to meet different people, experience slightly different cultures and all those added together tend to broaden the end and give a wider perspective. We have a wide open continent, where as EU citizens we can roam at will, experience the different peoples and cultures, see fantastic scenery, enjoy the sunshine, enjoy the snow - if you wish you could take a leisurely tour from the tip of Spain, right up to the North Cape. In my life I have only had the opportunity to visit part of what is on offer but my grandchildren would have had that much more opportunity. On top of all that, there is a sense of being together with other Europeans, meeting with them, socialising with them, attempting to speak their language and also with the knowledge that through working together, we can become more than the sum of our component parts. I have often said that the EU is much more than a trading system and the objective of it all is to be able to live more fulfilled and enjoyable lives, whilst continuing to learn and experience different things. Together a great children could unfold for our children and grandchildren. To me, I adopt the view, why look for what divides us instead of looking for what unites us? That to me the above is all objective, positive thinking and it is a vision of what could be. Alfred the Great was one of the best kings we ever have - he thought objectively and positively and as a result set in motion the unifying of England from its former kingdoms. Bearing in mind that travel is so much easier, you could compare the uniting of England, later to become the United Kingdom to the uniting of Europe. Now you have me wondering, you say you view the EU objectively but you will have to explain that - I have followed your posts for a while now but can't really say that I have seen any evidence of it. Now you have me wondering, you say you view the EU objectively but you will have to explain that - I have followed your posts for a while now but can't really say that I have seen any evidence of it. I would be obliged if you could explain exactly what you mean.
  7. As we all know, the referendum was won by the leave side, not just by gilding the lily which most politicians do anyway but by blatant lies designed to gain the result at any cost. By accepting the result of the referendum as it did the government has shown its support of such lies and in effect said that they are permissible. Not only that they have continued through a program of misrepresentative dishonest propaganda in their increasingly desperate attempts to keep the majority of the British public on side. It also comes across quite clearly that the reason they did this was because they hoped it would bring popularity with the masses and confirm their position, which they so earnestly desire, in power but to the detriment of the country as a whole but in the process have revealed themselves to be a group of third rate politicians who have not grasped the basic rules of leadership. This begs the question as to how any normal decent people, both at home and abroad maintain trust and faith in such a government? As a result the international reputation of the UK has fallen quite a bit, further aided by the Windrush Saga, then the likes of David Davis in his supposed negotiations, with the EU, Liam Fox, a previously disgraced cabinet minister scuttling around the world, supposedly trying to drum up support for international trade and Boris (I want my own aeroplane) Johnson, who's former life cannot stand much scrutiny at all, far from being a diplomatic foreign secretary, is more akin to a bull in a china shop. These are not great omens for the success of brexit where, as the leavers would have us believe, that the world is queuing up to do deals with us but is likely to create a situation quite contrary to this.
  8. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/22/eu-trade-talks-australia-new-zealand-brexit-commonwealth?CMP=share_btn_fb This is really the time to stop think of 'weird and wonderful' and wonderful ways of trying to lead the UK into a Brexit brought on by a dishonest referendum where sufficient of the British public were manipulated into voting against what amounts to be contrary to their interests and taking a long hard pragmatic of the whole situation. As far as taking back control is concerned, we have lost it - Brexit has taken on a life of its own where very few of the decision makers are brave enough to actually declare that the emperor is not wearing any clothes. Instead of controlling events, events are controlling them with everything being subservient to this brexit malarkey. If the government were to look around at our country they would see that there are pressing and urgent problems to attend to but there is not the time, the money, nor the political will to do so. It all started with Mrs May thinking that she could ride the crest of the populace wave which would help cement the position of her party and herself in power but instead have built their policies on the foundations in shifting sands. If they have any regard for the country at all they should stop brexit and attend to the matters which really need attention and you know what, the EU would help them. You know what Kent, historically and on average non EU immigration has been higher than EU immigration and there were EU regs which could have been applied to control the latter, only Mrs May in her infinite wisdom, both as Home Secretary and Prime Minister failed to apply. Nice to have the whole picture isn't it?
  9. https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/james-obrien/the-van-driver-being-put-out-of-business-by-brexit/ An example of Brexit's new world - just a smallish business man trying to run his transport business - they should have left this alone - how many more such stories are there like this? But they fall on deaf ears as far as the government is concerned, who are impervious to anything but their own political dogma.
  10. So what reasons do you give for being against the EU Kent? - Make a list if necessary because to date I have not heard any coherent reasons. The reasons they gave in the referendum were just inaccurate moonshine, designed to appeal to peoples' emotions, without any actual substance or fact.
  11. I just wonder who is spinning here but the thing you seem to be forgetting Kent is that Sweden, as with France, as with Poland, Hungary and Austria are not reacting against movement within the EU, they are reacting to people coming in from outside the EU. Take France for example, for some reason, not all the immigrants, mostly from North Africa, do not assimilate easily and this is what has caused the tensions and giving rise to some far right tendencies. The village where my house is voted Front National in the presidential elections - there is a fairly mixed crowd in the village now; the indigenous French, who have been in the region for centuries. some relatively new comers from different parts of France, then English, Irish, German and Dutch which I know of and all fairly well assimilated. Most of us will speak French to varying degrees of competence and this also helps, whilst at the same more and more of the young 'uns are speaking English. Overall there is a good inclusive ambience. Most, apart from the isolated head banger, you get those everywhere, get on well together. Sometimes we go down to Catalonia and find the same there and I have found the same in the Republic of Ireland.
  12. As usual Kent, you pull a small part out of my post to try and spin your own points. In relation to your last sentence, you are quite right, the kind of democracy you speak of is not the kind of democracy I prefer - that is the first past the post method, where as you rightly say, the winning party can get home on 37% of the vote but it does mean in effect that 63% of the electorate were voting for other than the winning party, so in effect just over a third of the electorate get their choice, which could be described as their representation in parliament. I know it is a system we evolved and that it is a system which the two main parties prefer and from a practical point of view it gives them to power to carry out their programs, provided they have enough of a majority. It was Mrs May's intention last year to gain sufficient seats in the election last year for her not to worry too much about her majority and to be reasonably sure of getting anything she proposed through. However it did not work out like that, she lost her majority, so to try a gain a little of it back, she bribed the DUP into supporting her, which from the point of view of most was not a desirable situation. In the first place being an English resident and citizen as opposed to Northern Irish, I, along with all the other English voters took no part at all in the electing the DUP. Secondly the 'bribe' was being taken out of the British taxpayers' pockets without their consent and thirdly it could have repercussions on the GFA. Personally, I would not a call that democratic, it is manipulation. You may but that would indicate that you have a different version of democracy to what I do. What would be more democratic is proportional representation - at least that way most of the people who vote for a candidate stand a much higher chance of at least getting their preferred candidate in parliament to represent them. Then when it comes to forming a government the chances of having a coalition are so much higher - this means that in order to reach decisions more work has to be done via consensus rather than confrontation, which seems to me to be a better form of government, representing more than just 37% of the views of the electorate. In the 2015 election you would even have had some UKIP members actually elected rather than just Carswell defecting as a sitting member to their side. But by the same token there would probably have been more Green members.
  13. It's good news to the remainers that he is feeling despondent and this gives us hope. However I am not sure about his version of democracy - it appears that nowadays there are two different forms - the first is universal democracy which applies equally to us all, then there is the leave democracy which applies to the leavers only, where they feel fit to move the goal posts around and exclude the remainers from this wonderful freedom, of which people in the past have given their lives for. He fails to realise that 'some people' in parliament are quite entitled to do everything they can to neuter brexit - that is democracy, it is also freedom of choice and no doubt those people believe that they are genuinely working for the benefit of the country, rather than just a favoured few.
  14. A number of far right UK parties have bit the dust and UKIP is on the way out, however the people who belong to them don't change substantially - in the UK there has always been marginal group of people who have been attracted to right wing parties and their policies and pretty well all the other countries of the world do as well. There are a total of 8 political parties in Sweden and I take it that you are speaking of the Swedish Democrats, who in 2014 gained 12.0% of the vote. Ahead of them in that election there were the Social Democracy and the Liberal Conservative parties, who took 53.4% of the vote. Generally speaking there is a limit to the number of adherents a far right party will attract and under normal circumstances never likely to form a majority because for most people, their policies are just not their cup of tea, though such parties have attracted some in recent times because of the increase in none EU immigration and this will build up until that natural limit is reached. I think it is more apt to refer to the remainers such as myself and the others as realists - we knew what we were voting for in the referendum - it was for more of the same or retaining the status quo with the EU - we knew what the meant because we have been experiencing it for the past 40 or so years during which time we have made steady progress. As far as the leavers are concerned their reasons for voting leave were many and varied. Some because they were genuinely racist, others not far as that but still xenophobic, others because they were taken in with the lies, misrepresentations and false promises, some because it was the only way they had of sending a message to the government that they were fed up with being ignored and elected and undoubtedly the pro leave sides fed this as a possible option to bring their plight to attention, ten there were others who voted that way because their mates did. But in general the leavers are the surrealists chasing will o' the wisps. They never had anything substantive to put forward and they still don't, some 23 months later. The government picked up on the result and ran with it because they thought it would be a short cut to populism which would enable them to stay in power forever and a day. As it is, it is now quite clear to most that this brexit is going awry and as much as they keep issuing words from the corridors of power, they still don't have a clue of what to do - I suspect that a number of them would like to turn the clock back and start again but being in power at the moment they are frit of losing it, however that is bound to happen one day, so I would have thought the sensible thing to do would be to bite the bullet and start on damage limitation.
  15. Perchance to dream - nothing will be definite until it is signed, sealed and delivered. Our international advertising has been pretty poor at the moment with an inability to make decisions, Home Office faux pas in respect of Windrush and others all in an effort to try and follow some elusive political dream.
  16. However if we had less of an anti EU stance and were a more committed member I am sure we would have been in a better position to influence reform. In respect of the single currency it is beneficial to most within the area, though I have to agree, not so good for the Mediterranean countries, some of which has been brought about through their own lack of fiscal discipline. However, slowly but surely matters are being improved in those areas also. The EU is an evolving organisation and as with all such, especially of the size it is, there are bound to be some blind alleys followed and some errors made - that happens in the best run organisations at times. As for bloated bureaucracy, it is my impression that this has been lessened in the last few years and with the expected changes in the commission in 18 months time, I would expect to see more as a result of incoming more forward looking people with a commitment to increase the democratic principles, which at the time of writing this are in advance of those in our own country. It is a great shame that our government sees fit not to participate in this and really help build an EU for the future.
  17. The galling part of that was the anti brexit section only ever was a minority of the party but gained their way through incessant shouting out of proportion to their numbers. Most of them were third rate politicians but their egos were so large and needed constant bolstering by pushing a blinkered minority view that they never realised that they were third rate in the first place but this gave them the sense of importance they craved. Such a pity that the reasonable majority did not adopt the attitude that empty vessels make the most sound. I suppose we could split the Tory party into two, so we have the HB (head banger Tory party) on one side of the right, then the N (Nice) Tory party on the other. Likewise with the labour party, the T (Trotski) on one side, with the P (Progressive) labour party on the other. So when it comes to elections, at least people will have more of a choice as to who to vote for, then in the case of people wanting to go the EU path, we could possibly end up with an N Tory and P Labour in coalition. I think I will get that organised next week.
  18. http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/ipsiwch-s-inga-lockington-denied-citizenship-1-5529693?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=Social_Icon&utm_campaign=in_article_social_icons This really is appalling - the Home Office are quite happy to accept her fee of more than £1,200 for this procedure, yet reject her application on technicalities when it is quite obvious from looking her antecedents she has been settled in the UK for decades after receiving leave to remain for an indefinite period. There is little doubt in my mind that the seeds of the Home Office behaviour in these matters were originally sown by Mrs May during her period as a Home Secretary. The big danger of these types of things is that they are picked up by the world press and should the UK fall over the cliff with brexit, they are hardly likely to benefit negotiations with others because our reputation for fairness and justice is rapidly going down the pan. The behaviour of our government is tantamount to that of David Koresh who invoked suicide by cop and insisted on taking the followers he had hoodwinked with him. There are at least 16 million of us who have already expressed our disapproval to these shenanigans.
  19. Since the more hard right parties are now descending into oblivion it appears to be a natural choice for the former members of those to go over to a right wing conservative party - I wonder how many ex UKIP people they have now?
  20. That's what she thought last year - General elections, especially in our current period, can be quite unpredictable - who knows? Labour might see the writing on the wall and change their leader to one more user friendly. With further bad news on the Brexit front with a new pro EU labour leader with some talent the political landscape could change substantially. Not that I have ever been a supporter of the labour party but in such a case the enemy of my enemy would be my friend.
  21. Going back to 1959, this was a long dry summer, hot in parts and one to remember - at the time I was living just south of Grimsby and recall that during the spring and early summer we had a number of easterlies bringing in the North Sea Stratus, in similar manner to what we are having now. As far as I recall, this was following a snowless winter, though there were some episodes of cloudy highs, with a more or less even low temperature, interspersed wit Atlantic incursions, one of which brought in some advection fog. I recall this mainly because from February to March I was taking my glider course with the ATC at Kirton in Lindsey and it was only towards the end of this that we were able to get anything like any lift in the shape of weakfish thermals. The spring developed into summer when I was taking my 'O' Levels still with settled weather but with sunshine and some heat developing. The next landmark I recall is when we travelled to our Annual ATC camp at RAF Aldergrove in Northern Ireland, during the first half of September. We travelled by train from east to west, over the Pennines, to Liverpool. I recall that there was brown grass all the way across and I believe we went past the Lady Bower Dam, where the levels of the lake had lowered quite considerably. This was followed by a night crossing on the ferry to arrive at Belfast Dock in the morning, thence being picked up and taken to RAF Aldergrove, looking in amazement at GREEN grass! It was not just green but really a rich emerald shade, or perhaps it was my perception after leaving the land of brown grass but clearly not affected by the drought in the same manner as the mainland. The fine spell lasted well into the autumn, to about the second week of October. It was preceded by gusts of wind blowing the dust about, to be followed after a few hours by the rain. It must have been one of the driest summers on record. Nothing sticks in my mind about the rest of the year but I believe it was business as usual typical British weather with nothing really to write home about. It seems that sometimes we get strong westerly activity and at other times weak. The winter of 1962/63 being a casse in point. The weak allows the highs to develop mostly to our east, but sometimes from the Azores to give us long spells of settled weather, hot in the summer and cold in the winter. Now this year, since the end of February we appear to have been in such a situation with, I suspect, anti cyclonic activity above average, which led us to the Beast from the East, say on about two and a half occasions in March, then changing to near record warmth, 28.5C at Watford in April. The £64,000 question is, what will the weather gods do now, will the westerlies remain weak allowing the best summer for quite some years with an associated draught, or will the jet stream find those tram lines which lead directly to the UK?
  22. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/may/22/brexit-vote-cost-uk-mark-carney-bank-of-england?CMP=share_btn_fb I would suggest that Mark Carney has his finger more on the pulse than a number of the brexiteers who post on here, plus I cannot see any obvious reasons for saying this if he did not believe it to be true.
  23. That's been my point all the way through this saga.
  24. I think part of the problem is that a number of years ago, the advanced course which was required really for pursuit was cut from 5 to 4 weeks, no doubt in an attempt to save money but that meant a 20% cut in the driver instruction, which in my view, made a big difference. The whole emphasis of police advanced driver training is to formulate a system whereby it is possible to drive fast and make progress in a safe manner. I don't agree with the highlighted portion of your post - what I would expect is that the full circumstances of any accident are taken into consideration when a decision it taken whether to prosecute a police driver, and I would expect that if he did drive recklessly he would still be prosecuted. For example, in a pursuit, it is normally the offending car which is being driven recklessly and if through this that driver does have an accident he has been the author of his own misfortune, rather than the following police driver. So very often these people are criminals from whom the public has to be protected - if he is not caught they will probably carry on putting more lives at risk. I remember hearing a story from a mate of mine who was on traffic - he was pursuing a vehicle and the manner of the driving was giving him course for concern. At the time they were in a country, less congested area but heading towards a built up area where the danger to the public would have been much greater. He took the decision to take this other vehicle out (side swiping) to get it off the road before the built up area and possibly saving peoples' lives. I my view he made th right choice. Later on the system came in whereby the Inspector in the forces operations room could order a pursuit to be discontinued but he was not the man on the spot. Basically it is not speed itself which kills but inappropriate speed i.e. wrong speed in the wrong place or circumstances which kills. My other basis premise is that the police are paid to do a job and they should have the proper training and backup to do the job but in so many ways different government have been tying their hands behind their backs in so many ways, yet they still expect to be protected.
  25. If only - sadly, it is now a far cry from the current perfidious government.
  • Create New...