advertisement


Brexit: give me a positive effect... XII

Status
Not open for further replies.
How much are the subsidies we (UK) will no longer provide and to which countries by name?
EU-budget-contribution-frugal-four-2020-summit-latest-2325167.jpg
 
The repetition of this alternative truth even extends to Johnson. He got the same lie in while incontinent with fury, swinging his nappy round his head under pressure from the leader of the opposition. Britain’s ability to acquire and approve vaccines has nothing to do with being in or out of the EU. There.

In other words, benefits of Brexit are so incredibly elusive that it’s necessary for the Prime Minister to fabricate them. Nasty though to exploit a pandemic that’s killed 127k Britons and the anxiety around it to push a political lie.

We've been round the block so many times with this. Yes, the UK could have gone alone with the vaccine development and rollout as an EU member, but the government chose to go it alone. The fact that they acted decisively, selected (in a case of 'intelligent' nepotism) the right team, took a gamble on financially backing and contracting to Oxford AZ and quickly approved Pfizer, provided an informative contrast with the EU's typically turgid, ponderous, over cautious, indicisive, contractually chaotic and parsimonious approach.

It is interesting to consider that a Scotland out of the Union and fulfilled of its dream to become a supine province of Brussels would certainly have joined the EU's scheme, and as a relative outlier would by now have given around 30 vaccines per 100 of the population, as opposed to the UK which is at around 70/100.
 
Ah, gambling and what ifs?- every bit as substantial as ‘the benefits of Brexit’. Meanwhile, the tangibles: the British Prime Minister lied to the public again, this time on the matter of vaccines. It’s as if it should be accepted as truth simply through casual repetition.
 
The repetition of this alternative truth even extends to Johnson. He got the same lie in while incontinent with fury, swinging his nappy round his head under pressure from the leader of the opposition. Britain’s ability to acquire and approve vaccines has nothing to do with being in or out of the EU. There.
The EU did a fantastic job of negotiating a much better vaccine price than team Boris using the size is everything approach. They are still not committing to Valneva (Scotland) or Novavax (Teesside) which should save a few bob if covid reduces.
Boris may be wasting red bus loads of cash investing in several vaccine companies to increase his options of defeating covid but Tory approval rating has increased to 13 points above labour, at the moment.
 
We've been round the block so many times with this. Yes, the UK could have gone alone with the vaccine development and rollout as an EU member, but the government chose to go it alone. The fact that they acted decisively, selected (in a case of 'intelligent' nepotism) the right team, took a gamble on financially backing and contracting to Oxford AZ and quickly approved Pfizer, provided an informative contrast with the EU's typically turgid, ponderous, over cautious, indicisive, contractually chaotic and parsimonious approach.

It is interesting to consider that a Scotland out of the Union and fulfilled of its dream to become a supine province of Brussels would certainly have joined the EU's scheme, and as a relative outlier would by now have given around 30 vaccines per 100 of the population, as opposed to the UK which is at around 70/100.
If Remainers aren't allowed to argue, factually, that things would get worse, because Project Fear, I don't see why Brexitiers should be allowed to argue, hypothetically, that things would have been worse.
 
We just got away from the EUvaccineNazis in the nick of time. Little did they know we had developed the Dambuster vaccine (made in Belgium) with extra blood clots and that we have more patriotic vaccines in the pipeline made in Scotlandshire and Barnard Castle (always read the label).
 
Ah, gambling and what ifs?- every bit as substantial as ‘the benefits of Brexit’. Meanwhile, the tangibles: the British Prime Minister lied to the public again, this time on the matter of vaccines. It’s as if it should be accepted as truth simply through casual repetition.

If Remainers aren't allowed to argue, factually, that things would get worse, because Project Fear, I don't see why Brexitiers should be allowed to argue, hypothetically, that things would have been worse.

Come on, you two, one certain tangible is that Rev Sturgeon and her cult followers are motivated by only one thing, and that is a borderline xenophobic hatred of England generally, and Westminster in particular. Nothing on God's forsaken earth would compel her to 'team up' with 'Westmonster' on any issue, nor to hesitate to grovel to Brussels. The certainty of this is as firm as that night follows day.

Do you not remember, as an aside, that grovelling little fib she projected onto the hideous wall of the Berlaymont, how Europe'heart'Scotland. The ice-cold functionaries of Brussels weren't impressed.
 
We just got away from the EUvaccineNazis in the nick of time. Little did they know we had developed the Dambuster vaccine (made in Belgium) with extra blood clots and that we have more patriotic vaccines in the pipeline made in Scotlandshire and Barnard Castle (always read the label).
Given the choice which customer gets preference, one that invests in your company and agrees a deal or one that dithers, haggles price and takes legal action?
 
Barclays expects UK growth to be strongest since 1948. That will be all those Brits spending the money they have saved up over the last year.

Boris might just be the luckiest PM in years. He and his party are bound to ride any resurgence in the economy and claim it for their own.
 
Given the choice which customer gets preference, one that invests in your company and agrees a deal or one that dithers, haggles price and takes legal action?
I just don't get the legal action.

The EU negotiating team for the vaccine lacked diligence when it came to the contract. The member states should look to this team first. It is not inconceivable that they will need the cooperation of AZ in the near future.
 
Yes - just wait until those Norwegian chappies need some cheese - they'll come back groveling, because they need us more than ...... cont p96

Known as TNUMTWNT by Brexiteers. Didn't make it onto the 50p coin though, which I thought was a missed opportunity for some levity.
 
Come on, you two, one certain tangible is that Rev Sturgeon and her cult followers are motivated by only one thing, and that is a borderline xenophobic hatred of England generally, and Westminster in particular. Nothing on God's forsaken earth would compel her to 'team up' with 'Westmonster' on any issue, nor to hesitate to grovel to Brussels. The certainty of this is as firm as that night follows day.

Do you not remember, as an aside, that grovelling little fib she projected onto the hideous wall of the Berlaymont, how Europe'heart'Scotland. The ice-cold functionaries of Brussels weren't impressed.
Ah yes, that old self-referential “why oh why do they hate us so much?” nugget. You’ve wrung that one dry like your “I knew someone on a Glasgow bus once...” anecdote that grew embellishments with each telling. The truth is far less eye catching- your party, its style of government and Westminster as an institution have become an irrelevance to the majority of voters in Scotland.

Your comments about Sturgeon are a tacit acceptance (held broadly among British voters and even inside the Tory Party) that she is a far better political leader than anything the last four Tory led governments have produced. Johnson sees this and quite rightly recognises the substantial political threat she poses to him.
You’re on the money with one of your points though- the SNP government in Edinburgh and more than 60% of voters are looking to Brussels and the EU for the future.
 
I just don't get the legal action.

The EU negotiating team for the vaccine lacked diligence when it came to the contract. The member states should look to this team first. It is not inconceivable that they will need the cooperation of AZ in the near future.

I'm sure you do "get" the difference between something being in a contract and not delivered v not being in a contract. I don't "get" why you would pretend otherwise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top