Boris Johnson

[fountainhall]

So blustering, lying Boris Johnson has seen his promise to extract the UK from the EU by October 31 come hell or high water all but sunk by the UK parliament. Two votes to stop the October 31 deadline succeeded in the House of Commons. His subsequent attempt to call a general election for mid-October, a move requiring a two thirds majority, then also failed. Those who voted against the General Election want the October 31 vote enshrined in law first, to prevent Jonson from later changing the date of the election to November.

The French newspaper Libération points out that Johnson has thus become the first UK Prime Minister to have lost the first vote he had faced in parliament since the Earl of Rosebery in 1894.

Interestingly, Rosebery plays a role in the downfall of Oscar Wilde. There was intense speculation at that time that the aggressively homophobic 9th Marquess of Queensberry had discovered a two-year homosexual affair involving Rosebery and his eldest son and heir, Viscount Drumlanrig. Drumlanrig was the older brother of Wilde's own lover, Lord Alfred Douglas - also known as Bosie.

In his book The Secret Life of Oscar Wilde, Neil McKenna alleges the Marquess of Queensberry threatened to expose the Prime Minister's affair with his son. Rosebery's Liberal government then pushed through Wilde's trial in 1895 to 'buy off' Queensberry by ruining his other son's lover.

"Oscar was sacrificed to save Rosebery and the Liberals," claims the author.

Lord Drumlanrig died unmarried aged 27 in what was officially claimed an accident during a shooting party. Rumours still abound that he was murdered.

[Jun]

So blustering, lying Boris Johnson has seen his promise to extract the UK from the EU by October 31 come hell or high water all but sunk by the UK parliament. Two votes to stop the October 31 deadline succeeded in the House of Commons. His subsequent attempt to call a general election for mid-October, a move requiring a two thirds majority, then also failed. Those who voted against the General Election want the October 31 vote enshrined in law first, to prevent Jonson from later changing the date of the election to November.

1 Firstly I suspect Boris actually wants a fairer exit deal than the one currently offered by the EU and as anyone can see, the only way to get a better deal is to keep open a real possibility of a no-deal Brexit. This is basic negotiating strategy.
A no-deal Brexit has 3 significant disadvantages for the EU:
(i) They lose our £39billion divorce fee [A ridiculous sum which corresponds to about 8 years NET French contributions and has never been explained properly]
(ii) No backstop or open Irish border
(iii) Tariffs on EU exports to the UK
If the UK stance is we will only leave with a deal, then the UK will get screwed by the EU (see Teresa May deal).
A better stance is we prefer to leave with a reasonable deal, but will not accept an unreasonable one. I think this is where Boris is.

2 The lying opposition leader has been calling for a general election ever since he lost the last one. When he has a chance to vote for an election, he does not.

3 If we have an election, then the voters again have a choice. They can vote Conservative or Brexit party for a Brexit. They can vote Liberal for another referendum and remain. Or if they want a lying incompetent bunch of communists to ruin the economy and a total lack of clarity on Brexit, they can vote Labour. I almost forgot the anti-semitism.

[fountainhall]

The lying opposition leader has been calling for a general election ever since he lost the last one. When he has a chance to vote for an election, he does not.

We have opposing views on UK politics which is perfectly natural. But along with most political pundits I do think that jibe at Jeremy Corbin is quite inaccurate. The opposition MPs were determined to get the no-deal Brexit idea first killed and then enshrined in law before an election can be called. The earliest the law can be finalised is early next week. Thereafter almost everyone is convinced opposition to the calling of a General Election will disappear.

Not that I as a UK citizen will be able to vote. Mrs. Thatcher determined that I had been out of the country too long and I was stripped of a vote 20 years ago. It's a disgrace that a natural born citizen of a country has no right to vote!

[Jun]

We have opposing views on UK politics which is perfectly natural.

Having opposing views on politics is natural.
1 I hope you realise that Jeremy Corbyn and his lunatic shadow chancellor are not the kind of centre left leadership we had under Tony Blair. These guys have hard left anti-capitalist rhetoric & will most likely cause severe damage to the UK economy.
2 If you would really support a hard left Labour leadership, I am somewhat bemused. If I understand correctly, you chose to spend a large portion of your working career in Hong Kong, which if I'm not mistaken, is a proper capitalist country, with a top income tax rate of 20%. That's what I would like to see in the UK.

Not that I as a UK citizen will be able to vote. Mrs. Thatcher determined that I had been out of the country too long and I was stripped of a vote 20 years ago. It's a disgrace that a natural born citizen of a country has no right to vote!

I had to think about that one. On balance, I don't think being born in a country should give anyone an automatic right to vote. If they have emigrated and will not have to pay any of the taxes raised, then voting rights should not be automatic in every case.
However, if someone has worked in the UK for 20 years, paid taxes & national insurance, they have contributed to "the system" and built up pension entitlements (ie they have a stake). So I would probably be inclined to allow people who have emigrated to vote, if they have (say) 20 years NI contributions. Or something substantial.

If they have paid negligible taxes before emigrating and have been abroad for a long time, I would like to know what the argument is in favour of them having voting rights, when they will neither pay taxes, nor benefit/suffer under any laws passed. Of course, if they choose to return to live in the UK, the right to vote should be immediately granted.

Do you think it's right that you could vote in left wing leaders who openly admire Hugo Chavez & his regime, whilst you are not around to pay their taxes ? Effectively representation without taxation.

I'm open to hearing the other side of the argument. I also hope you are interpreting this as a robust political debate, not a personal attack.

[Captain Kirk]

Same old fake news Jun. 'Corbyn will turn the UK into Venezuela'. It's utter nonsense, right wing, give all the money to the wealthiest, twaddle. Personally I'd not be voting for either him or the scumbag Johnson who is more like Trump than I originally thought. A racist if ever I saw one (Johnson that is). Currently, with the Tories going towards far right extremism and Labour lurching to the left it would probably be better with the silly Lib Dems in office.

[fountainhall]

On balance, I don't think being born in a country should give anyone an automatic right to vote. If they have emigrated and will not have to pay any of the taxes raised, then voting rights should not be automatic in every case.
However, if someone has worked in the UK for 20 years, paid taxes & national insurance, they have contributed to "the system" and built up pension entitlements (ie they have a stake). So I would probably be inclined to allow people who have emigrated to vote, if they have (say) 20 years NI contributions. Or something substantial.

First, nothing in my comments is personal. For your information, when I did have the vote, never once did I vote for the Labour Party!

You have said before that those who elect to live abroad for a long time and do not pay UK taxes do not deserve a vote. I really find it hard to accept the argument that voting should be tied to taxation. Many voters in the UK are still at school or are at university. They pay no taxes, yet they have a right to vote as students - even if they leave the UK to work immediately on leaving university. The unemployed are entitled to vote. Even if I had lived overseas my entire career and had paid no National Insurance contributions, on my return to retire, as a citizen I would benefit from all the National Health benefits and probably - but I am speculating - some form of state pension. Most countries I have checked permit natural born citizens the right to vote without restriction. Indeed, quite a few extend voting rights to non-citizens who have settled in their countries after a period of years.

I worked in the UK, paid my taxes in the UK in full prior to leaving for Kong Kong. I did not move there because of low taxation. I could just as easily have moved to Australia where taxes are much higher. Where you move should have no relevance. But since I was never certain how long I would stay working outside the UK, I elected to continue to pay my NI contributions for the full 40 years. This was to ensure I continued to have the right to vote, that I continued to have full access to the National Health Service and continue eventually to enjoy a full pension. Over my time abroad, various British governments stripped me of all three rights (I only receive the basic pension with no annual increases). And not one government official, not one government department, not one Embassy official at any time informed me of those changes! Had I known I could have saved a considerable amount by ceasing my NI contributions.

Purely as an aside, I have a Hong Kong friend a little younger than I who studied in the UK for four years in the late 1970s. As a Hong Kong born citizen, under the rules at the time he obtained a British passport and a National Insurance number. He then returned to HK. Throughout all this period he paid no taxes and no NI contributions. Yet almost 25 years ago he contracted a chronic disease. Since then he has flown to the UK each year for what otherwise would be expensive medical treatment. All is free, barring some prescription costs. For the past 8 years he has owned an apartment in London as an investment and he now spends about two months a year there, always enjoying free health benefits. By what right does he have to the benefits stripped from me only because of an accident of timing? I am certain he is far from the only one!

[Jun]

Since then he has flown to the UK each year for what otherwise would be expensive medical treatment. All is free, barring some prescription costs. For the past 8 years he has owned an apartment in London as an investment and he now spends about two months a year there, always enjoying free health benefits.

Theoretically, if we leave the UK, we lose NHS coverage after 6 months. I don't like that, since we need to be gone for longer than that to escape UK taxation! Anyway, I suspect your Hong Kong friend should not be entitled to the healthcare if he is gone for more than 6 months.

As for voting rights, one fine US principle is no taxation without representation. I still think the converse should be applicable to an extent, since taxpayer representation is diluted if non-taxpayers are voting.
However, there are all sorts of anomalies in the system.
Anyone who lives here temporarily from the EU or the commonwealth is immediately entitled to vote, even if they will not be around for more than a year. People who have no intention of ever working are entitled to vote.

As for your pension, you need a record of NI contributions to get the basic state pension. It takes 30 years to get the full pension and that's reduced pro-rata for lower contributions. No NI contributions means no pension, although I imagine our socialist security system has some kind of safety net.

If I worked in Hong Kong for many years, with a wonderful top income tax rate of 20%, I would expect to have built up my own nest egg to cover retirement & wouldn't expect any UK social security entitlement to be accrued during that time.
I imagine that's what you have done too, but it's a bit rude to discuss other people's finances, so I shall stop there.

Slightly off topic, no matter how many spaces I leave after a full stop, the board software publishes the post with one. Mr Rees Mogg would not be impressed.

[Gaybutton]

Slightly off topic, no matter how many spaces I leave after a full stop, the board software publishes the post with one.

Then don't use spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . use dots.

[Jun]

Same old fake news Jun. 'Corbyn will turn the UK into Venezuela'.

Don't twist what I wrote (due to a lack of a real argument on your part ?). I said they openly admire the Venezuela regime. Which is true.

Evidence:


Now at the very least, this shows extremely poor judgement.
The hard socialist regime in Venezuela has squandered oil wealth and ruined the Venezuela economy, turning a country endowed with oil into one of the poorest in South America. Some of us know this is what always happens with hard socialist regimes. I learnt that by the time I was in my 20s, but Corbyn seems to have not modified a single one of his political views after reviewing the evidence continually presented over his lifetime.

Admiring the Venezuela regime is only one step removed from admiring the North Korea regime.

The Labour leadership have poor judgement and are unfit to lead the country.

If anyone wants to make a case for the Liberal leadership, you may be on more solid ground.

[fountainhall]

One of the better newspaper headlines!