International Brexit News & Discussion v7: British Parliament Rejects Theresa May's Brexit Deal (Again)
- Thread starter Arkain2K
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2010
- Messages
- 20,615
- Reaction score
- 7,417
Wall
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2014
- Messages
- 16,026
- Reaction score
- 1
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2010
- Messages
- 20,615
- Reaction score
- 7,417
Growing Inequality
How Brexit Distracted the UK From Its Real Problems
While British politicians expend all of their energies on Brexit, the country's already troubling levels of inequality have only gotten worse. This could have dramatic consequences for the UK's lawmakers and for its citizens.
REUTERS
An anti-Brexit sign is seen as protesters demonstrate outside the Houses of Parliament in London
Friday, 1/25/2019 06:29 PM
In early January, the British parliament debated one of the country's most pressing problems. Philip Alston, UN Special Rapporteur responsible for extreme poverty, had made a harsh accusation against the United Kingdom's government at the end of last year. After a two-week journey through the fifth richest country in the world, Alston, who mostly focuses on Africa and Central America, had argued that Theresa May's government had systematically pushed countless British citizens into poverty. He said, "this is not just a disgrace but a social calamity and an economic disaster, all rolled into one," and went on to also highlight the country's rising child poverty rates.
This accusation had to be addressed. When the debate in the lower house took place on a Monday evening, only 14 of the 650 parliamentarians were present in the Commons Chamber. The minister responsible sent a deputy in her place. He promised to take Alston's report "seriously." Then the 30 minutes dedicated to the agenda point were over.
ANZEIGE
This coming Tuesday, the British parliament will once again debate Brexit. Many of the lawmakers will struggle to get even standing room space in the lower house. The discussion will once again stretch on for hours. Although everything has already been said, not everyone has spoken. If things go as expected, it will then be even more likely that Brexit, which is currently scheduled for March 29, will be pushed back once more. Maybe a few months. Maybe even a year.
What do the two debates have to do with one another? More than one might think. The contrast between the empty and the full chamber reveal what this country and its politicians still have energy for -- and for what they don't. The more time and energy are absorbed by Brexit, the black hole of British democracy, the more likely it becomes that voters will take their revenge.
ANZEIGE
When Theresa May became prime minister in July 2016, shortly after the Brexit referendum, she seemed to anticipate that the 52 percent of Brits who voted to leave the European Union hadn't merely done so because they passionately hated the EU. She dedicated her first speech to the nation to the millions of British people who, after years of forced austerity, were only "just managing." She called it a "burning injustice" that "if you are born poor, you will die on average nine years earlier than others." May promised she would, in all her governmental decisions, "not think of the powerful, but of you."
A Government Turning in Circles
Two and a half years have passed since then, and all of May's decisions since that point have been either wrong or were reversed shortly after being announced. Most of these decisions were related to Brexit. There was, unfortunately, no time for the "burning injustice." It's no surprise then that the situation has worsened since then.
The UN Special Rapporteur's report only shows one part of the overall malaise. Nine years after the Conservative-led government introduced a brutal austerity policy in the wake of the financial crisis, the country has partly been ruined by the process. A study recently concluded that almost 4 million children in the UK grow up in families that cannot afford healthy food. A new welfare system, called Universal Credit, was supposed to make it easier for them to get welfare -- but has thus far mainly made it easier for them to become poor.
The country's National Health Service, once a source of national pride, is in permanent crisis mode, with tens of thousands of positions unfilled. And even if the official number of unemployed people is sinking, the number of "working poor" is constantly growing.
By contrast, there seem to be unlimited resources for Brexit. Hundreds of millions of pounds have been spent on the project. Hundreds of millions more are in the pipeline. Britain's departure from the EU has paralyzed almost the entire government apparatus. Just two weeks ago, a call went out to about 4,000 government workers to abandon their daily responsibilities in order to concentrate on the preparations for Brexit. Five ministries were left searching for additional workers -- including the ministries responsible for social care and labor. It's a paradox: While the country walks in place on Brexit, the very same problems that were responsible for Brexit in the first place are worsening by the day.
Yes, delaying Brexit would buy the country time. But nothing else. The mammoth task of implementing Brexit in concrete terms would only be delayed. Instead of finally being governed again, the country would simply continue endlessly circling around itself. And what if the parliament in three, or nine, or twelve months still can't agree on a Brexit plan, and once again has to turn to its people to make a decision?
At that point, it's very possible that the government would finally have to pay for its inability to guarantee a functioning state system.
http://www.spiegel.de/international...-uk-from-its-real-problems-a-1249990-amp.html
How Brexit Distracted the UK From Its Real Problems
While British politicians expend all of their energies on Brexit, the country's already troubling levels of inequality have only gotten worse. This could have dramatic consequences for the UK's lawmakers and for its citizens.
REUTERS
An anti-Brexit sign is seen as protesters demonstrate outside the Houses of Parliament in London
Friday, 1/25/2019 06:29 PM
In early January, the British parliament debated one of the country's most pressing problems. Philip Alston, UN Special Rapporteur responsible for extreme poverty, had made a harsh accusation against the United Kingdom's government at the end of last year. After a two-week journey through the fifth richest country in the world, Alston, who mostly focuses on Africa and Central America, had argued that Theresa May's government had systematically pushed countless British citizens into poverty. He said, "this is not just a disgrace but a social calamity and an economic disaster, all rolled into one," and went on to also highlight the country's rising child poverty rates.
This accusation had to be addressed. When the debate in the lower house took place on a Monday evening, only 14 of the 650 parliamentarians were present in the Commons Chamber. The minister responsible sent a deputy in her place. He promised to take Alston's report "seriously." Then the 30 minutes dedicated to the agenda point were over.
ANZEIGE
This coming Tuesday, the British parliament will once again debate Brexit. Many of the lawmakers will struggle to get even standing room space in the lower house. The discussion will once again stretch on for hours. Although everything has already been said, not everyone has spoken. If things go as expected, it will then be even more likely that Brexit, which is currently scheduled for March 29, will be pushed back once more. Maybe a few months. Maybe even a year.
What do the two debates have to do with one another? More than one might think. The contrast between the empty and the full chamber reveal what this country and its politicians still have energy for -- and for what they don't. The more time and energy are absorbed by Brexit, the black hole of British democracy, the more likely it becomes that voters will take their revenge.
ANZEIGE
When Theresa May became prime minister in July 2016, shortly after the Brexit referendum, she seemed to anticipate that the 52 percent of Brits who voted to leave the European Union hadn't merely done so because they passionately hated the EU. She dedicated her first speech to the nation to the millions of British people who, after years of forced austerity, were only "just managing." She called it a "burning injustice" that "if you are born poor, you will die on average nine years earlier than others." May promised she would, in all her governmental decisions, "not think of the powerful, but of you."
A Government Turning in Circles
Two and a half years have passed since then, and all of May's decisions since that point have been either wrong or were reversed shortly after being announced. Most of these decisions were related to Brexit. There was, unfortunately, no time for the "burning injustice." It's no surprise then that the situation has worsened since then.
The UN Special Rapporteur's report only shows one part of the overall malaise. Nine years after the Conservative-led government introduced a brutal austerity policy in the wake of the financial crisis, the country has partly been ruined by the process. A study recently concluded that almost 4 million children in the UK grow up in families that cannot afford healthy food. A new welfare system, called Universal Credit, was supposed to make it easier for them to get welfare -- but has thus far mainly made it easier for them to become poor.
The country's National Health Service, once a source of national pride, is in permanent crisis mode, with tens of thousands of positions unfilled. And even if the official number of unemployed people is sinking, the number of "working poor" is constantly growing.
By contrast, there seem to be unlimited resources for Brexit. Hundreds of millions of pounds have been spent on the project. Hundreds of millions more are in the pipeline. Britain's departure from the EU has paralyzed almost the entire government apparatus. Just two weeks ago, a call went out to about 4,000 government workers to abandon their daily responsibilities in order to concentrate on the preparations for Brexit. Five ministries were left searching for additional workers -- including the ministries responsible for social care and labor. It's a paradox: While the country walks in place on Brexit, the very same problems that were responsible for Brexit in the first place are worsening by the day.
Yes, delaying Brexit would buy the country time. But nothing else. The mammoth task of implementing Brexit in concrete terms would only be delayed. Instead of finally being governed again, the country would simply continue endlessly circling around itself. And what if the parliament in three, or nine, or twelve months still can't agree on a Brexit plan, and once again has to turn to its people to make a decision?
At that point, it's very possible that the government would finally have to pay for its inability to guarantee a functioning state system.
http://www.spiegel.de/international...-uk-from-its-real-problems-a-1249990-amp.html
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2009
- Messages
- 7,203
- Reaction score
- 512
Growing Inequality
How Brexit Distracted the UK From Its Real Problems
While British politicians expend all of their energies on Brexit, the country's already troubling levels of inequality have only gotten worse. This could have dramatic consequences for the UK's lawmakers and for its citizens.
REUTERS
An anti-Brexit sign is seen as protesters demonstrate outside the Houses of Parliament in London
Friday, 1/25/2019 06:29 PM
In early January, the British parliament debated one of the country's most pressing problems. Philip Alston, UN Special Rapporteur responsible for extreme poverty, had made a harsh accusation against the United Kingdom's government at the end of last year. After a two-week journey through the fifth richest country in the world, Alston, who mostly focuses on Africa and Central America, had argued that Theresa May's government had systematically pushed countless British citizens into poverty. He said, "this is not just a disgrace but a social calamity and an economic disaster, all rolled into one," and went on to also highlight the country's rising child poverty rates.
This accusation had to be addressed. When the debate in the lower house took place on a Monday evening, only 14 of the 650 parliamentarians were present in the Commons Chamber. The minister responsible sent a deputy in her place. He promised to take Alston's report "seriously." Then the 30 minutes dedicated to the agenda point were over.
ANZEIGE
This coming Tuesday, the British parliament will once again debate Brexit. Many of the lawmakers will struggle to get even standing room space in the lower house. The discussion will once again stretch on for hours. Although everything has already been said, not everyone has spoken. If things go as expected, it will then be even more likely that Brexit, which is currently scheduled for March 29, will be pushed back once more. Maybe a few months. Maybe even a year.
What do the two debates have to do with one another? More than one might think. The contrast between the empty and the full chamber reveal what this country and its politicians still have energy for -- and for what they don't. The more time and energy are absorbed by Brexit, the black hole of British democracy, the more likely it becomes that voters will take their revenge.
ANZEIGE
When Theresa May became prime minister in July 2016, shortly after the Brexit referendum, she seemed to anticipate that the 52 percent of Brits who voted to leave the European Union hadn't merely done so because they passionately hated the EU. She dedicated her first speech to the nation to the millions of British people who, after years of forced austerity, were only "just managing." She called it a "burning injustice" that "if you are born poor, you will die on average nine years earlier than others." May promised she would, in all her governmental decisions, "not think of the powerful, but of you."
A Government Turning in Circles
Two and a half years have passed since then, and all of May's decisions since that point have been either wrong or were reversed shortly after being announced. Most of these decisions were related to Brexit. There was, unfortunately, no time for the "burning injustice." It's no surprise then that the situation has worsened since then.
The UN Special Rapporteur's report only shows one part of the overall malaise. Nine years after the Conservative-led government introduced a brutal austerity policy in the wake of the financial crisis, the country has partly been ruined by the process. A study recently concluded that almost 4 million children in the UK grow up in families that cannot afford healthy food. A new welfare system, called Universal Credit, was supposed to make it easier for them to get welfare -- but has thus far mainly made it easier for them to become poor.
The country's National Health Service, once a source of national pride, is in permanent crisis mode, with tens of thousands of positions unfilled. And even if the official number of unemployed people is sinking, the number of "working poor" is constantly growing.
By contrast, there seem to be unlimited resources for Brexit. Hundreds of millions of pounds have been spent on the project. Hundreds of millions more are in the pipeline. Britain's departure from the EU has paralyzed almost the entire government apparatus. Just two weeks ago, a call went out to about 4,000 government workers to abandon their daily responsibilities in order to concentrate on the preparations for Brexit. Five ministries were left searching for additional workers -- including the ministries responsible for social care and labor. It's a paradox: While the country walks in place on Brexit, the very same problems that were responsible for Brexit in the first place are worsening by the day.
Yes, delaying Brexit would buy the country time. But nothing else. The mammoth task of implementing Brexit in concrete terms would only be delayed. Instead of finally being governed again, the country would simply continue endlessly circling around itself. And what if the parliament in three, or nine, or twelve months still can't agree on a Brexit plan, and once again has to turn to its people to make a decision?
At that point, it's very possible that the government would finally have to pay for its inability to guarantee a functioning state system.
http://www.spiegel.de/international...-uk-from-its-real-problems-a-1249990-amp.html
It’s a country where people literally inherit positions in the upper house of the legislature. Of course there is massive inequality compared to other nations.
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2010
- Messages
- 48,991
- Reaction score
- 311
this fine gentleman(in the video) is the head of Breitbart in London...... as you can imagine he is a special breed of moron
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2010
- Messages
- 48,991
- Reaction score
- 311
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2010
- Messages
- 20,615
- Reaction score
- 7,417
Ireland cannot compromise. The question is whether the EU will. Don't see it happening. Why would we betray our member?
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2007
- Messages
- 3,953
- Reaction score
- 1,474
For money ? .
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2010
- Messages
- 14,579
- Reaction score
- 5,204
GB can't really use that for negotiations, as it faces just as much economic backlash.
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2017
- Messages
- 8,758
- Reaction score
- 3
Are you pro Brexit or not?
Cant you see how its good to have the UK out? UK=American puppet and interests away from the EU at large
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2010
- Messages
- 48,991
- Reaction score
- 311
morons...... morons everywhere
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2010
- Messages
- 20,615
- Reaction score
- 7,417
I am pro Germany and pro EU (at least in the 2004 borders). Having the UK in the EU makes the EU stronger, generally speaking. I do see the UK culturally closer aligned with the US than with Europe, but I don't think it is as easy as you make it out to be.
That said, the Brits want out, so I would prefer they do gtfo. They got themselves into a huge mess by not defining clearly in their referendum what it is they want.
A year ago I would have said a referendum would be a good way to resolve this. Right now I think there is just no way to get it right. If they revoke Article 50 now and stay in the EU, that would be the worst case outcome for the EU though as Brexiteers would blame the EU and internal friction would maximize. This whole Brexit process has lead to unprecedented unity in the EU and in that sense has been a plus.
The only thing I hope is that in whatever solution people will come up with does not compromise the EU's principles. I think this whole debacle has shown that whether you are satisfied with all aspects of the EU or not, your country is not going to be better off outside.
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2010
- Messages
- 20,615
- Reaction score
- 7,417
Fantastic article in the Independent. I recommend reading it in full.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...se-lords-vote-reform-parliament-a8748036.html
Brexit has shown the crucial flaw in our democracy – there is only one way to solve it
Our parliament is made up of one chamber whose representatives are elected by a system that ensures most people don’t get what they want, and another populated by old boys and cronies
https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...se-lords-vote-reform-parliament-a8748036.html
Brexit has shown the crucial flaw in our democracy – there is only one way to solve it
Our parliament is made up of one chamber whose representatives are elected by a system that ensures most people don’t get what they want, and another populated by old boys and cronies
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2010
- Messages
- 48,991
- Reaction score
- 311
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/...l-law-to-avert-no-deal-brexit-chaos-bfqgzzlrw
oh goody, I cant wait for a Brexiteer to explain to me how when they made their vote, they were hoping for martial law
oh goody, I cant wait for a Brexiteer to explain to me how when they made their vote, they were hoping for martial law
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2006
- Messages
- 4,143
- Reaction score
- 434
Full interview here
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/vide...says-we-re-open-to-compromise-on-brexit-video
The last question and answer show the state of negotiations at this point. "And what are the UK offering you? Well, nothing."
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2010
- Messages
- 14,579
- Reaction score
- 5,204
It's the same stuff from the beginning, the UK being somehow convinced they are a bigger, richer, more powerful market than all of the EU countries combined.
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2010
- Messages
- 48,991
- Reaction score
- 311
its nothing but blind arrogance, being in anyway linked to these buffoons is highly embarrassing. The sooner Scotland becomes independent the better.
they fail to realise that with the hit we are possibly about to take that we may not be able to mass import on the level we do currently due to the possible fall in the currency when it happens. Its genuinely baffling to me. Its like they think that no deal means the status quo continues...... but they will be in for a fright when reality hits and theres military on the streets due to the unrest in society.
