Sovereignty and 'take back control'

Her speech is being spun as an attempt to break the 'deadlock' in negotiations. Why on earth she's giving it in Florence is a mystery. It was reported as being 'significant' at least 2 or 3 weeks ago. I'm wondering what she had in mind when it was first mooted and how it might have changed in the light of Boris's little 'wobble'. I just heard on the news that there was a very long Cabinet meeting this morning; which also makes me wonder who has come out with the upper hand; her, or the Hard Brexiters...

As for your question gillybob how could anyone claim to do any better? it's really hard to know where to start. It's all such a complete shambles

Does anyone know who the speech by May in Florence is being addressed to?

Barnier presumably will continue to negotiate with Davis and team.

If it is to the UK, why on earth go to Florence?

Why give a speech at all?

What puzzles me is how anyone else could claim to do any better?

Okay I get that things are pretty bad but the UK voted to leave the EU (I did personally did not before any jumps down my throat) and we are literally learning as we are going along. Pretty much the same as the powers that be, seem to be making the terms of our leaving, up as they go along too.

Strong stable and fair?

May's oratory skills are definitely not up to scratch. Her speech is stiff and stilted reflecting I think her personality. She is known to be a ditherer and so resorting to tautology makes her feel on safe ground and it is always meaningless, especially if you repeat it often, which she does.

Have you noticed (well, you'd be insensate if you hadn't) that May uses the same rhetorical device every time she opens her mouth, 'x and y'. And it lays her wide open to mockery every time, not to mention boring the pants off everyone. You'd think she'd cotton on and vary it a bit. The problem, as I see it, is that it's not a 'strong' device, unlike the classic orator's three points 'blood, sweat, and tears'.

Anyone witty enough to think up a May speech 'trio'? Like 'deep, special, and lucrative' perhaps...

I trust Maybots offer of an open and generous offer covers our debt to the agreed budget.

Otherwise it will go the same way as "strong and stable"

Brexit effect

UK growth slowed to 1%.

Interesting point about world perception of UK - the UN chamber was almost full to listen to both Trump and Macron - almost empty when Theresa May was speaking. What has happened to all this world standing Britain had.? Wonder if it has anything to do with the behaviour of the current incumbents of the Govt Front benches and a country which argues about the promises of money and contracts it is now doing its best to break!

"If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy.”

Touching wood there are you lemongrove. If we have this wonderful hand to play and the land of milk and honey ahead of us why hasn't May taken the issue of European Union nationals in the UK and British nationals in Europe, out of the negotiations? Using people as pawns is despicable.

I admire hope, but really, that ship has sailed, we are leaving the EU, and doubt there will be any more referendums of any type.

Good gracious no!

I have at least 39 more years - for that is how long the Brexiters managed to keep their arguments going.

Whitewave
Don't you think that horse you've been flogging ( for how long) is dead now.

Over 100000 signatures for a referendum on Brexit final deal.

Don't give our government ideas, Maizie.

I don't think they need any help from me; they're giving it their best shot already...

Can't the EU make them, whitewave?

Is it because they couldn't find any cake and unicorns?

Don't give our government ideas, Maizie.

The green MEP Molly Cato has reported that the government will not publish its findings about the impact of Brexit.

Hmm- now would anyone like to guess why -?

That's not quite what it says in the EU press release:

The Commission's key legal concern identified in the law on the organisation of ordinary courts relates to the discrimination on the basis of gender due to the introduction of a different retirement age for female judges (60 years) and male judges (65 years). This is contrary to Article 157 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and Directive 2006/54 on gender equality in employment. In the Letter of Formal Notice, the Commission also raises concerns that by giving the Minister of Justice the discretionary power to prolong the mandate of judges who have reached retirement age, as well as to dismiss and appoint Court Presidents, the independence of Polish courts will be undermined (see Article 19(1) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) in combination with Article 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights). The new rules allow the Minister of Justice to exert influence on individual ordinary judges though, in particular, the vague criteria for the prolongation of their mandates thereby undermining the principle of irremovability of judges. While decreasing the retirement age, the law allows judges to have their mandate extended by the Minister of Justice for up to ten years for female judges and five years for male judges. Also, there is no time-frame for the Minister of Justice to make a decision on the extension of the mandate, allowing him to retain influence over the judges concerned for the remaining time of their judicial mandate.

europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-17-2205_en.htm

I get the impression that their concerns are echoed by the Polish President who vetoed two of the proposed laws:

The Polish President Andrzej Duda has announced he is vetoing a controversial law to replace Supreme Court judges with government nominees.

"As president I don't feel this law would strengthen a sense of justice," Mr Duda said in a statement broadcast on national television. "These laws must be amended."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40703909

Personally, I'd be pretty worried if our government tried to replace our judges with political appointments and I'd be quite grateful to the EU for stepping in...

They are not going to win on that one. The speaker has had a word about it.
If necessary, Labour members will speak against Labour in order to force a vote.
How silly will that make the Tories look.

It seems very characteristic of hard right Conservative governments to play fast and loose with democracy. May and co. are still trying to avoid certain parliamentary votes which would allow our representatives a say in Brexit.

The 'take back control' thing is just a ridiculous. With various things we agreed to share sovereignty because we felt it was for our benefit. Nobody took it.

www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/peter-geoghegan-adam-ramsay/new-email-release-shows-how-leave-campaigners-used-vast-loo

This helped Brexit to win.