While I am not overly familiar with the reasons behind the BA strike, and I fully support the staffs' right to strike and I am sure the decision has not been taken lightly, it's another nail in the coffin of 'the world's favourite airline'. The only national airline that I have used which I dislike more is Iberia, and surprise, surprise, they are part of the same company. Pathetic leadership, an increasingly 'on the cheap' feel, once passengers are forced to try alternative carriers they won't return. My daughter is off on a school trip to India (bit of sightseeing and a week helping out at a rural school) later this month. They were due to fly from Heathrow with BA, will now be going from the much more convenient Birmingham with Air India, which is also cheaper so I get some cash back. The Avios frequent flyer programme is also aggressively crap. When I got a threatening email telling me I would lose all my points (not many) unless I flew BA again soon, I phoned them up to let them know they should have been asking why I wasn't choosing the worlds favourite airline. The response 'we just run the points programme, the airline service is none of our business'. But baggage handling at Heathrow Terminal 5 remains exemplary.
Out of interest, which specific laws that you say were not agreed on by democratically elected British MEPs are you saying we shouldn't have? I've never found anyone who could seriously answer that question, especially as all relevant EU laws are being written into the UK Statutes, so they will all still apply. Not trying to wind up , just wondering if you (or anyone else) actually have any examples, because I really can't find anybody who can be more specific than 'oh, all of them'...
Although I don't agree with him and won't answer for Col, I don't think that's the point. It's an issue of principle that all laws for the UK should be formulated here and go through the UK legislative process. Of course the EU is democratic, with direct elections to the parliament and indirectly through our elected governments' participation in the Council of Ministers. The Commission isn't elected, but neither is it's equivalent, the UK civil service. But it is still undeniably distant, and laws and regulations which have force here are decided by a majority of non British representatives, unless we have opt outs in place. Doesn't bother me, but I can understand why it does bother some people. They don't need specific examples to have a valid point.
Wimbledon officials are said to be terrified that the 'oh Jeremy Corbyn' chant might break out at the tournament next week, after it was heard at the Lions game today. Hilarious.
Had this conversation with a guy at work and he couldn't name one law that he was unhappy about but voted leave on the basis that we would have our own laws. Bizarre to say the least
The Commission is surely infinitely more powerful and high profile than the civil service not least because its head, presently Junckers, is essentially president of the whole outfit.
Not on paper. Mind you, the British civil service is much less influential than it used to be. Donald Tusk is essentially president of the EU, and he, like Junckers and all the EU Commissioners, is chosen by the leaders of the member states. They picked a wrong 'un this time. Roll on 2019 when he has promised to piss off. Elsewhere, DMG Media, the publishers of the Daily Mail, the rock of patriotic Brexitism, the scourge of anyone with the temerity to want to debate the 'will of the people', the brave and ruthless identifiers and shamers of judges as 'enemies of the people', the shining light urging us to believe in Britain and it's future in the bright, sunny uplands, is preparing to move its whole operation to Ireland. Now why would that be?
Can't find any reference to DMGM moving to Ireland. They do publish a newspaper over there. Where's it being reported?
Ahah, that would be telling. It comes from a private conversation between Lord Rothermere and another peer of the realm.
Seems a significant number of Tory backbenchers want Andrea Loathsome to mount a leadership bid. They just don't get it do they?
I wasn't questioning my pal in sarcastic way but more out of interest. Suppose someone has to make laws but it was a major point to him, so major he couldn't name one. It's like saying I didn't like some of the signings Mark Hughes made but I can't name one of them.
Sorry, but that's a bit of a cop out. If you have no issues with any of the laws, then surely you must be happy with the decisions being made and the people making them. I asked for specific laws, surely you must have some in mind, otherwise your decision was based on ignorance. If you can't cite specifics, what made you vote to leave?
The most important laws Brexit voters wanted rid of were those that removed the UK's right autonomously to decide who came in from the EU and how many. There were also laws that removed exclusive fishing rights from around the British Isles. That's a good start. Having a foreign court preside over UK domestic matters after Brexit is a red line for me, unless for a short, defined transitional period
The EU visitor thing was always in our control because of out Schengen opt out, it was just our border authority was rubbish and is still not fit for purpose. So fishing, is that it? Seems worth the hassle
Being out of Schengen merely meant we were allowed to see a passport - then we had to let the EU visitor come and live here unless we were able to establish they were a serious criminal record. This is at the heart of the Brexit vote, Willy
I flew to Rome once on Ethiopian Arlines. The only time Ive had to walk out to the plane via the tarmac at Heathrow.
