Probably more for the Theresa thread than this one, but I was aware of this fact. How that can turn that into "Mr Raab is seen as a skilled debater who honed his skills as an adversarial lawyer with blue chip legal firm Linklaters" as per this Daily Mail article, I don't know
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... today.html
https://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics ... 0530186081
The fish thing is complete bullshit. Our poor, suffering fishermen sold their fishing rights to foreign companies sailing under British flags. Then they complained about it, having spent their money and realising that the short term gain was probably not worth it in the long run.
A lot of the UK fishing rights are owned by the 1% anyway. I grew up in the NE and when I was in my mid teens late 80s early 90s if you went in to Elgin of an evening the carparks were full of 18 and 19 year old with Golf GTIs and Astra GTEs etc, all brand new and with BCK personalised registrations. A number of my family were at sea on trawlers and to a man seem to blame the EU for shafting their industry.NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 10:16 amThe fish thing is complete bullshit. Our poor, suffering fishermen sold their fishing rights to foreign companies sailing under British flags. Then they complained about it, having spent their money and realising that the short term gain was probably not worth it in the long run.
Yup, it was Arctic waters the kids Grandad fished! He has the furked lungs to prove it!NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 11:39 am A lot of it comes from when the quotas were first set. The EU announced that they’d use historical fishing activity to set the quotas so a lot of the European fleets started hitting the UK waters hard whereas the UK fleets were fishing out towards Iceland. This gave the Euro fleets more access than they would otherwise have had. I can see why they would blame the EU for it, but the reality is that others gamed the system better and the UK fishing fleets were somewhat short sighted. It’s almost as if there’s a pattern emerging...
I’m stealing this. It’s bang on correct.NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 8:17 amNo. They’ll say “I’ve already outlined the benefits” but can’t show you where. They’ll say “there’s no point in going over it again, we won the referendum”. They’ll make excuse after excuse to not give any facts. Don’t bother, they’ve got absolutely nothing credible to say.
The irony of course being that migrants from Europe tend not to be 'darkies', and the extra immigration we'll have from elsewhere in the world after forging trade deals if/when Brexit is done will likely increase the intake of 'darkies'.
I think I'm right in saying that Raab was the Brexit secretary for four months and was a present at the critical time for the negotiations with the EU, for Theresa May's deal.Jobbo wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 8:52 amProbably more for the Theresa thread than this one, but I was aware of this fact. How that can turn that into "Mr Raab is seen as a skilled debater who honed his skills as an adversarial lawyer with blue chip legal firm Linklaters" as per this Daily Mail article, I don't know
If you believe the reports at the time, the role was effectively powerless by the time he took it on. Davis and Barclay have stated that the negotiations they were undertaking were being undermined by May's advisers behind their backs - hence why they quit. May was off doing her own thing essentially.Marv wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2019 7:53 amI think I'm right in saying that Raab was the Brexit secretary for four months and was a present at the critical time for the negotiations with the EU, for Theresa May's deal.Jobbo wrote: ↑Thu May 30, 2019 8:52 amProbably more for the Theresa thread than this one, but I was aware of this fact. How that can turn that into "Mr Raab is seen as a skilled debater who honed his skills as an adversarial lawyer with blue chip legal firm Linklaters" as per this Daily Mail article, I don't know
He then quit being Brexit secretary, so he can oppose the deal he helped negotiate...but ultimately ends up voting yes for May's deal.
What a tool!
I've seen a number of people sold down the river when taking a new job which was a step up from the last (maybe they are power hungry or maybe they feel they can do more than they are already) with promises of this and promises of that. They then get into the role and learn the nuances of the organisation or area they are now leading and these promises either melt away (due to financial constraints) or are tempered to the extent that nothing can really be done by them. I doubt government is any different to big business in this way.
As a general rule I agree with your points, but this was a very public and publicly visible role. He surely did the basic research one would have hoped.drcarlos wrote: ↑Fri May 31, 2019 3:45 pmI've seen a number of people sold down the river when taking a new job which was a step up from the last (maybe they are power hungry or maybe they feel they can do more than they are already) with promises of this and promises of that. They then get into the role and learn the nuances of the organisation or area they are now leading and these promises either melt away (due to financial constraints) or are tempered to the extent that nothing can really be done by them. I doubt government is any different to big business in this way.
As to why someone would walk blindly into a mine field without checking with the people already there first. It's highly likely that those that knew what was going on were in backside covering mode so they will not let on about any displeasure as it would leading them being quickly exited stage left. They keep quiet let the person at the top carry the can and look to move on quietly themselves without rocking the boat and becoming known as a trouble maker.
I don't support him by the way just making an observation about the situation as a whole.
