FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Vote Leave & Leave.EU in the dock?
Vote Leave & Leave.EU in the dock?
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. " Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters" I think we can all agree that both sides misled/lied to the public. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD " But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Why is it ok for us to simply say, oh we know politicians lie, it's just what they do? They are doing it to gain power and a very lucrative job that influences everyone's lives. Start bringing some to book and they'll have to reign it in." Yeah, it would be good if we also made sure papers were telling the truth too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad " Boris will be ok though.. maybe why he covered all the bases..  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad " I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved." Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Remind me again how many of the labour cabinet went along with that whooping lie of weapons of mass destruction waiting to wipe us out!. Now if you really want we'll go through the politicans that called them out on that bullshit... You won't like it though, the guy you dislike and think shouldn't be the leader of the opposition was one of them!" Yet that wasn't subject to a referendum, so the election laws dont apply. The best you could hope for is contempt of parliament. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So we could have prominent Leave Leaders charged with exerting "undue influence" (electoral corruption) in the run up to an "advisory" referendum. When do we start shouting "Lock them up?" Seriously though if (which I doubt) the CPS go forward this and their defence is that it was not electoral corruption because the referendum was only advisory - where exactly does that leave the referendum result?" Maybe the judges should ask the government what judgement they would like them to come to? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Remind me again how many of the labour cabinet went along with that whooping lie of weapons of mass destruction waiting to wipe us out!. Now if you really want we'll go through the politicans that called them out on that bullshit... You won't like it though, the guy you dislike and think shouldn't be the leader of the opposition was one of them! Yet that wasn't subject to a referendum, so the election laws dont apply. The best you could hope for is contempt of parliament. " . If the election laws apply to a referendum I'd suggest the referendum ain't advisory then?. . You can't fix the problem until you know what the problem is, the referendum is a symptom of the problem just like Iraq and Syrian refugees, curing symptoms doesn't make the disease go away..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The remain side will do anything to get the result changed.Both sides made claims that could not be proved but they want to make out that only Brexit told fairy stories,they are using power and money to do this. It is up to the rest of us to put them down by ant means at our diposel.I trust Putin,Trump and Clinton more than I trust these evil megalomaniac remainers. I am shocked that there is so much evil in the judiciary and power brockers of this country" put them down by any means..? care to clarify? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The remain side will do anything to get the result changed.Both sides made claims that could not be proved but they want to make out that only Brexit told fairy stories,they are using power and money to do this. It is up to the rest of us to put them down by ant means at our diposel.I trust Putin,Trump and Clinton more than I trust these evil megalomaniac remainers. I am shocked that there is so much evil in the judiciary and power brockers of this country" and Putin..? really.. that country where LGBT hate crime is something encouraged by the politicians..  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The remain side will do anything to get the result changed.Both sides made claims that could not be proved but they want to make out that only Brexit told fairy stories,they are using power and money to do this. It is up to the rest of us to put them down by ant means at our diposel.I trust Putin,Trump and Clinton more than I trust these evil megalomaniac remainers. I am shocked that there is so much evil in the judiciary and power brockers of this country and Putin..? really.. that country where LGBT hate crime is something encouraged by the politicians.. "Absolutely, transvestites and transsexuals are offered no legal protection in Russia, quite the opposite in fact....they are often beaten in public by gangs with little or any police intervention. That's what you REALLY call evil. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The remain side will do anything to get the result changed.Both sides made claims that could not be proved but they want to make out that only Brexit told fairy stories,they are using power and money to do this. It is up to the rest of us to put them down by ant means at our diposel.I trust Putin,Trump and Clinton more than I trust these evil megalomaniac remainers. I am shocked that there is so much evil in the judiciary and power brockers of this country" Do you think you would be welcome to free to live as you wish in Putin's Russia? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" this isn't Zimbabwe.... " if Mrs Maygabe get's her way it'll be very fucking similar  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If anyone should be in the dock it should be Chuka Umunna and his shit stirring, lying bunch of pathetic criminals at "vote leave watch." They have set up web sites, social media accounts, email addresses and telephone contact numbers. All in an effort to get the BREXIT decision overturned by using misinformation to whip up hysteria. The website and social media outlets also help all those stinking remoaners, who pass on the misinformation by posting on Internet forums. They don't have to do any research, or even use their own limited imagination. All the shit they need is provided for them in advance. They can just simply copy and paste." so its open and able to be accessed and scrutinised, what's wrong with that? unlike as you stated yesterday the secret plans to have another government by people's unknown.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If anyone should be in the dock it should be Chuka Umunna and his shit stirring, lying bunch of pathetic criminals at "vote leave watch." They have set up web sites, social media accounts, email addresses and telephone contact numbers. All in an effort to get the BREXIT decision overturned by using misinformation to whip up hysteria. The website and social media outlets also help all those stinking remoaners, who pass on the misinformation by posting on Internet forums. They don't have to do any research, or even use their own limited imagination. All the shit they need is provided for them in advance. They can just simply copy and paste. so its open and able to be accessed and scrutinised, what's wrong with that? unlike as you stated yesterday the secret plans to have another government by people's unknown.. " Sssshhhh.....don't mention the secret plan!, the first rule of facist club is don't ever mention facist club..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If anyone should be in the dock it should be Chuka Umunna and his shit stirring, lying bunch of pathetic criminals at "vote leave watch." They have set up web sites, social media accounts, email addresses and telephone contact numbers. All in an effort to get the BREXIT decision overturned by using misinformation to whip up hysteria. The website and social media outlets also help all those stinking remoaners, who pass on the misinformation by posting on Internet forums. They don't have to do any research, or even use their own limited imagination. All the shit they need is provided for them in advance. They can just simply copy and paste." Can you give some examples of his lies? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If anyone should be in the dock it should be Chuka Umunna and his shit stirring, lying bunch of pathetic criminals at "vote leave watch." They have set up web sites, social media accounts, email addresses and telephone contact numbers. All in an effort to get the BREXIT decision overturned by using misinformation to whip up hysteria. The website and social media outlets also help all those stinking remoaners, who pass on the misinformation by posting on Internet forums. They don't have to do any research, or even use their own limited imagination. All the shit they need is provided for them in advance. They can just simply copy and paste. Can you give some examples of his lies? " There are many examples, this being one of the most famous. Copy paste link: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_57d837b9e4b0614ca6be60c8 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If anyone should be in the dock it should be Chuka Umunna and his shit stirring, lying bunch of pathetic criminals at "vote leave watch." They have set up web sites, social media accounts, email addresses and telephone contact numbers. All in an effort to get the BREXIT decision overturned by using misinformation to whip up hysteria. The website and social media outlets also help all those stinking remoaners, who pass on the misinformation by posting on Internet forums. They don't have to do any research, or even use their own limited imagination. All the shit they need is provided for them in advance. They can just simply copy and paste. Can you give some examples of his lies? There are many examples, this being one of the most famous. Copy paste link: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_57d837b9e4b0614ca6be60c8" So his most famous lie is a 3 word missatributed quote in the headline off a press release? And you think he should be in court for that? Seriously?  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If anyone should be in the dock it should be Chuka Umunna and his shit stirring, lying bunch of pathetic criminals at "vote leave watch." They have set up web sites, social media accounts, email addresses and telephone contact numbers. All in an effort to get the BREXIT decision overturned by using misinformation to whip up hysteria. The website and social media outlets also help all those stinking remoaners, who pass on the misinformation by posting on Internet forums. They don't have to do any research, or even use their own limited imagination. All the shit they need is provided for them in advance. They can just simply copy and paste. Can you give some examples of his lies? There are many examples, this being one of the most famous. Copy paste link: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_57d837b9e4b0614ca6be60c8 So his most famous lie is a 3 word missatributed quote in the headline off a press release? And you think he should be in court for that? Seriously? "For the entire campaign, not just the one example. He is doing his utmost to derail a democratic national referendum result. He is feeding his bullshit to a bunch of political masturbaters, and stirring them up in an attempt to cause suspicion and mistrust. I have looked at his website, have seen the opinionated garbage that is passed off as "News." So yes, if vote leave should be in the dock, then so should he. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If anyone should be in the dock it should be Chuka Umunna and his shit stirring, lying bunch of pathetic criminals at "vote leave watch." They have set up web sites, social media accounts, email addresses and telephone contact numbers. All in an effort to get the BREXIT decision overturned by using misinformation to whip up hysteria. The website and social media outlets also help all those stinking remoaners, who pass on the misinformation by posting on Internet forums. They don't have to do any research, or even use their own limited imagination. All the shit they need is provided for them in advance. They can just simply copy and paste. Can you give some examples of his lies? There are many examples, this being one of the most famous. Copy paste link: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_57d837b9e4b0614ca6be60c8 So his most famous lie is a 3 word missatributed quote in the headline off a press release? And you think he should be in court for that? Seriously?
For the entire campaign, not just the one example. He is doing his utmost to derail a democratic national referendum result. He is feeding his bullshit to a bunch of political masturbaters, and stirring them up in an attempt to cause suspicion and mistrust.
I have looked at his website, have seen the opinionated garbage that is passed off as "News."
So yes, if vote leave should be in the dock, then so should he. "You said he lied, I asked you what he had lied about and "lie" you chose to represent how bad he was, was a 3 word missatrubuted quote in just a headline of a press release. In your subsequent post you still haven't give any examples of his supposed lies. Vote Leave and Leave.EU are being investigated for demonstrable lies, such as the £350m per week figure that that National Audit Office said was not true. If you think Chuka Umunna lied, then tell us what lies he has told. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why." If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If anyone should be in the dock it should be Chuka Umunna and his shit stirring, lying bunch of pathetic criminals at "vote leave watch." They have set up web sites, social media accounts, email addresses and telephone contact numbers. All in an effort to get the BREXIT decision overturned by using misinformation to whip up hysteria. The website and social media outlets also help all those stinking remoaners, who pass on the misinformation by posting on Internet forums. They don't have to do any research, or even use their own limited imagination. All the shit they need is provided for them in advance. They can just simply copy and paste. Can you give some examples of his lies? There are many examples, this being one of the most famous. Copy paste link: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_57d837b9e4b0614ca6be60c8 So his most famous lie is a 3 word missatributed quote in the headline off a press release? And you think he should be in court for that? Seriously?
For the entire campaign, not just the one example. He is doing his utmost to derail a democratic national referendum result. He is feeding his bullshit to a bunch of political masturbaters, and stirring them up in an attempt to cause suspicion and mistrust.
I have looked at his website, have seen the opinionated garbage that is passed off as "News."
So yes, if vote leave should be in the dock, then so should he.
You said he lied, I asked you what he had lied about and "lie" you chose to represent how bad he was, was a 3 word missatrubuted quote in just a headline of a press release. In your subsequent post you still haven't give any examples of his supposed lies.
Vote Leave and Leave.EU are being investigated for demonstrable lies, such as the £350m per week figure that that National Audit Office said was not true.
If you think Chuka Umunna lied, then tell us what lies he has told."Ok because I have little time to go through and find the worst cases, I will just post his latest "article" which is a complete load of bollocks. http://www.voteleavewatch.org.uk/no_downsides_to_a_hard_brexit_the_government_is_living_in_a_parallel_universe It is the same throughout the entire website. He is either totally unhinged, has an ulterior motive or both. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same?" No, I don't, because I don't believe that they lied. However, if you do, then do something about it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same? No, I don't, because I don't believe that they lied. However, if you do, then do something about it." Something will be done, of that you can be sure.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same? No, I don't, because I don't believe that they lied. However, if you do, then do something about it. Something will be done, of that you can be sure. "Ahhhhh....the Secret Plan | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"If anyone should be in the dock it should be Chuka Umunna and his shit stirring, lying bunch of pathetic criminals at "vote leave watch." They have set up web sites, social media accounts, email addresses and telephone contact numbers. All in an effort to get the BREXIT decision overturned by using misinformation to whip up hysteria. The website and social media outlets also help all those stinking remoaners, who pass on the misinformation by posting on Internet forums. They don't have to do any research, or even use their own limited imagination. All the shit they need is provided for them in advance. They can just simply copy and paste. Can you give some examples of his lies? There are many examples, this being one of the most famous. Copy paste link: http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_57d837b9e4b0614ca6be60c8 So his most famous lie is a 3 word missatributed quote in the headline off a press release? And you think he should be in court for that? Seriously?
For the entire campaign, not just the one example. He is doing his utmost to derail a democratic national referendum result. He is feeding his bullshit to a bunch of political masturbaters, and stirring them up in an attempt to cause suspicion and mistrust.
I have looked at his website, have seen the opinionated garbage that is passed off as "News."
So yes, if vote leave should be in the dock, then so should he.
You said he lied, I asked you what he had lied about and "lie" you chose to represent how bad he was, was a 3 word missatrubuted quote in just a headline of a press release. In your subsequent post you still haven't give any examples of his supposed lies.
Vote Leave and Leave.EU are being investigated for demonstrable lies, such as the £350m per week figure that that National Audit Office said was not true.
If you think Chuka Umunna lied, then tell us what lies he has told.
Ok because I have little time to go through and find the worst cases, I will just post his latest "article" which is a complete load of bollocks.
http://www.voteleavewatch.org.uk/no_downsides_to_a_hard_brexit_the_government_is_living_in_a_parallel_universe
It is the same throughout the entire website. He is either totally unhinged, has an ulterior motive or both. "I've read it, and I can't see any lies. Which parts do you think are lies? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same? No, I don't, because I don't believe that they lied. However, if you do, then do something about it. Something will be done, of that you can be sure. "And will it be peaceful and constitutional? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Some people either haven't read the article or misunderstand the purpose of the people behind the complaint. The complainants aren't biased against Leave, the evidence is. Several studies have found that though both sides exaggerated and scaremongered (well, the Labour and Lib Dem Remain campiagns not so much, Cameron and Osborne and the Tories much more so), it was the Brexiters who ought and out lied. From the article 'Some other cases had been excluded, Watt said, including George Osborne’s so-called “punishment budget” in support of remain, because it was “an expression of opinion” rather than a matter of fact. Advertisement “Whilst that may be considered by some as deplorable, only claims which amount to assertion of fact are likely to meet the test for undue influence,” Watt said. “Our primary aim in seeking prosecution is to try to restore some integrity to our democratic processes. “None of us is willing to allow the UK to be dragged down to some kind of populist ‘who can lie and deceive the most?’ race to the bottom, such as we witnessed earlier this year.” If a case was brought successfully, it would not have any bearing on the referendum result or prevent the UK leaving the EU, but could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. Watt said the laws that “protect against corrupt campaigning practices” needed to be imposed. “Ultimately it will be for parliament to decide, based on the court’s judgment on evidence that there was undue influence, if that has bearing on whether the EU referendum result should be considered as democratically safe,” he said.' " Well I got as far as "several studies have found." That ladies and gents is a very loose definition of "evidence." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same? No, I don't, because I don't believe that they lied. However, if you do, then do something about it." All you have to do is google .... remain campaign lies would be a good start. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So we could have prominent Leave Leaders charged with exerting "undue influence" (electoral corruption) in the run up to an "advisory" referendum. When do we start shouting "Lock them up?" Seriously though if (which I doubt) the CPS go forward this and their defence is that it was not electoral corruption because the referendum was only advisory - where exactly does that leave the referendum result?" It leaves the result in exactly the same place it is now, namely an advisory referendum whose result now needs to be subject to parliamentary debate to decide how exactly they proceed with the withdrawal (or not) from the EU. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So we could have prominent Leave Leaders charged with exerting "undue influence" (electoral corruption) in the run up to an "advisory" referendum. When do we start shouting "Lock them up?" Seriously though if (which I doubt) the CPS go forward this and their defence is that it was not electoral corruption because the referendum was only advisory - where exactly does that leave the referendum result? It leaves the result in exactly the same place it is now, namely an advisory referendum whose result now needs to be subject to parliamentary debate to decide how exactly they proceed with the withdrawal (or not) from the EU. -Matt" Exactly.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same? No, I don't, because I don't believe that they lied. However, if you do, then do something about it." You really need to get some help, The remain side said that there would have to be an emergency budget imediately,DC said he would invoke art 50 the next, he said he would stay on as PM, NONE of those things have happened. As yet we have not left the EU so how can anything that leave said would/could happen have come to pass or not. Even a one eyed loon can see that. I have come to the conclusion you are just a troll,no one with a brain could makethe claims you do with a straight face | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Evil in the judiciary?, they simply upheld the law, this isn't Zimbabwe.... The judiciary are bound by their oath to uphold and defend the law, that's part and parcel of living in our nation, we are in a real bad way if suddenly that has been forgotten." they didn't uphold the law they interpreted the law and passed a judgement | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same? No, I don't, because I don't believe that they lied. However, if you do, then do something about it. You really need to get some help, The remain side said that there would have to be an emergency budget imediately,DC said he would invoke art 50 the next, he said he would stay on as PM, NONE of those things have happened. As yet we have not left the EU so how can anything that leave said would/could happen have come to pass or not. Even a one eyed loon can see that. I have come to the conclusion you are just a troll,no one with a brain could makethe claims you do with a straight face" George Osbourne said that he would do an emergency budget, but was sacked before he could. Cameron did say he would trigger article 50 the next day, and so others made their predictions of what would happen after the vote based on that. However did Cameron know that it was a lie when he said it? was it a demonstrable lie at the time? Was that lie repeated even after it was known to be a lie? And most importantly, would people have voted differently had they known that Article 50 wouldn't be triggered the next day? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same? No, I don't, because I don't believe that they lied. However, if you do, then do something about it. You really need to get some help, The remain side said that there would have to be an emergency budget imediately,DC said he would invoke art 50 the next, he said he would stay on as PM, NONE of those things have happened. As yet we have not left the EU so how can anything that leave said would/could happen have come to pass or not. Even a one eyed loon can see that. I have come to the conclusion you are just a troll,no one with a brain could makethe claims you do with a straight face George Osbourne said that he would do an emergency budget, but was sacked before he could. Cameron did say he would trigger article 50 the next day, and so others made their predictions of what would happen after the vote based on that. However did Cameron know that it was a lie when he said it? was it a demonstrable lie at the time? Was that lie repeated even after it was known to be a lie? And most importantly, would people have voted differently had they known that Article 50 wouldn't be triggered the next day? " Yet AGAIN YOU dont answer the question how can ANYTHING the leave sied said be a lie when we havent left yet sonothing they said we could or would do have come to pass yet so even if they were in power to actually do it. And what about the lies blair told about Iraq ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same? No, I don't, because I don't believe that they lied. However, if you do, then do something about it. You really need to get some help, The remain side said that there would have to be an emergency budget imediately,DC said he would invoke art 50 the next, he said he would stay on as PM, NONE of those things have happened. As yet we have not left the EU so how can anything that leave said would/could happen have come to pass or not. Even a one eyed loon can see that. I have come to the conclusion you are just a troll,no one with a brain could makethe claims you do with a straight face George Osbourne said that he would do an emergency budget, but was sacked before he could. Cameron did say he would trigger article 50 the next day, and so others made their predictions of what would happen after the vote based on that. However did Cameron know that it was a lie when he said it? was it a demonstrable lie at the time? Was that lie repeated even after it was known to be a lie? And most importantly, would people have voted differently had they known that Article 50 wouldn't be triggered the next day? " You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
All politicians of all sides locked up !
Hmmmm | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"so are DC and GO going to be done for lying. The world has gone mad I think the OP's point was pointed at leave, from the title of the thread and his normal posts. IMO the same applies to both campaigns and all elections. Why shouldn't any politician who knowingly lies be prosecuted? I'd do it to any that it could be proved. Well it's only the leave side that have been referred to the DPP thats why. If it was only the remain side being referred to the DPP you would be the first to say that the leave side should also be referred .... so why aren't you saying the opposite now? So do you think the remain side should also be treated the same? No, I don't, because I don't believe that they lied. However, if you do, then do something about it. You really need to get some help, The remain side said that there would have to be an emergency budget imediately,DC said he would invoke art 50 the next, he said he would stay on as PM, NONE of those things have happened. As yet we have not left the EU so how can anything that leave said would/could happen have come to pass or not. Even a one eyed loon can see that. I have come to the conclusion you are just a troll,no one with a brain could makethe claims you do with a straight face George Osbourne said that he would do an emergency budget, but was sacked before he could. Cameron did say he would trigger article 50 the next day, and so others made their predictions of what would happen after the vote based on that. However did Cameron know that it was a lie when he said it? was it a demonstrable lie at the time? Was that lie repeated even after it was known to be a lie? And most importantly, would people have voted differently had they known that Article 50 wouldn't be triggered the next day? Yet AGAIN YOU dont answer the question how can ANYTHING the leave sied said be a lie when we havent left yet sonothing they said we could or would do have come to pass yet so even if they were in power to actually do it. And what about the lies blair told about Iraq ? " The £350m for the NHS was a demonstrable lie, because we dont send that much to the EU. Its quite simple. It doesn't matter when we leave, it was a lie then, it was a lie now, and it will still be a lie if we ever leave the EU. There was no referendum regarding Iraq... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie." could you explain why that figure was a lie? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I think it could open the floodgates
All politicians of all sides locked up !
Hmmmm "That would put the cat amongst the pigeons. Ending the electoral musical chairs cherade. Lock the lot of em up!! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie?" Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt" so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that" Breakdown here: https://fullfact.org/blog/2016/apr/uk-statistics-authority-350-million-eu-membership-fee-potentially-misleading/ Or look at the raw data from the ONS themselves: http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/adhocs/005389uktransactionswiththeeu1973to2014 -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that Breakdown here: https://fullfact.org/blog/2016/apr/uk-statistics-authority-350-million-eu-membership-fee-potentially-misleading/ Or look at the raw data from the ONS themselves: http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/adhocs/005389uktransactionswiththeeu1973to2014 -Matt" potentially misleading? Maybe. But a gross figure isn't pulled from thin air and I get the actual figure as more like £367million a week, so maybe that was the lie | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm thinking of becoming a straw salesman" ......that was funny. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that Breakdown here: https://fullfact.org/blog/2016/apr/uk-statistics-authority-350-million-eu-membership-fee-potentially-misleading/ Or look at the raw data from the ONS themselves: http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/adhocs/005389uktransactionswiththeeu1973to2014 -Matt potentially misleading? Maybe. But a gross figure isn't pulled from thin air and I get the actual figure as more like £367million a week, so maybe that was the lie "Yes, the ONS issued a revised figure. I guess they had already painted their bus. Did you not see the TV adverts directly referring to that figure and saying it could be spent on the NHS?! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yIYq5xMW98I That advert is a blatant lie to suggest that that figure would be available to spend on other things. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that Breakdown here: https://fullfact.org/blog/2016/apr/uk-statistics-authority-350-million-eu-membership-fee-potentially-misleading/ Or look at the raw data from the ONS themselves: http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/adhocs/005389uktransactionswiththeeu1973to2014 -Matt potentially misleading? Maybe. But a gross figure isn't pulled from thin air and I get the actual figure as more like £367million a week, so maybe that was the lie
Yes, the ONS issued a revised figure. I guess they had already painted their bus.
Did you not see the TV adverts directly referring to that figure and saying it could be spent on the NHS?!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yIYq5xMW98I
That advert is a blatant lie to suggest that that figure would be available to spend on other things.
-Matt"But technically when we will leavewe we have 350m to spend however we like so if they wanted to they could | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that Breakdown here: https://fullfact.org/blog/2016/apr/uk-statistics-authority-350-million-eu-membership-fee-potentially-misleading/ Or look at the raw data from the ONS themselves: http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/adhocs/005389uktransactionswiththeeu1973to2014 -Matt potentially misleading? Maybe. But a gross figure isn't pulled from thin air and I get the actual figure as more like £367million a week, so maybe that was the lie
Yes, the ONS issued a revised figure. I guess they had already painted their bus.
Did you not see the TV adverts directly referring to that figure and saying it could be spent on the NHS?!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yIYq5xMW98I
That advert is a blatant lie to suggest that that figure would be available to spend on other things.
-Matt
But technically when we will leavewe we have 350m to spend however we like so if they wanted to they could "I think that will pale into insignificance compared to the amount of money we will have spent between now and then on Brexit-related costs. Let alone the damage done to the economy so far. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that Breakdown here: https://fullfact.org/blog/2016/apr/uk-statistics-authority-350-million-eu-membership-fee-potentially-misleading/ Or look at the raw data from the ONS themselves: http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/adhocs/005389uktransactionswiththeeu1973to2014 -Matt potentially misleading? Maybe. But a gross figure isn't pulled from thin air and I get the actual figure as more like £367million a week, so maybe that was the lie
Yes, the ONS issued a revised figure. I guess they had already painted their bus.
Did you not see the TV adverts directly referring to that figure and saying it could be spent on the NHS?!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yIYq5xMW98I
That advert is a blatant lie to suggest that that figure would be available to spend on other things.
-Matt
But technically when we will leavewe we have 350m to spend however we like so if they wanted to they could
I think that will pale into insignificance compared to the amount of money we will have spent between now and then on Brexit-related costs. Let alone the damage done to the economy so far.
-Matt"We don't have the £350m unless we cut funds from projects we are already funding (farming, research etc.) We have already spent £70bn on monetary policy measures anyway, wiping out years of savings. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that Breakdown here: https://fullfact.org/blog/2016/apr/uk-statistics-authority-350-million-eu-membership-fee-potentially-misleading/ Or look at the raw data from the ONS themselves: http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/adhocs/005389uktransactionswiththeeu1973to2014 -Matt potentially misleading? Maybe. But a gross figure isn't pulled from thin air and I get the actual figure as more like £367million a week, so maybe that was the lie
Yes, the ONS issued a revised figure. I guess they had already painted their bus.
Did you not see the TV adverts directly referring to that figure and saying it could be spent on the NHS?!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yIYq5xMW98I
That advert is a blatant lie to suggest that that figure would be available to spend on other things.
-Matt
But technically when we will leavewe we have 350m to spend however we like so if they wanted to they could
I think that will pale into insignificance compared to the amount of money we will have spent between now and then on Brexit-related costs. Let alone the damage done to the economy so far.
-Matt
We don't have the £350m unless we cut funds from projects we are already funding (farming, research etc.)
We have already spent £70bn on monetary policy measures anyway, wiping out years of savings."That 70bn has been explained to you before | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that Breakdown here: https://fullfact.org/blog/2016/apr/uk-statistics-authority-350-million-eu-membership-fee-potentially-misleading/ Or look at the raw data from the ONS themselves: http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/adhocs/005389uktransactionswiththeeu1973to2014 -Matt potentially misleading? Maybe. But a gross figure isn't pulled from thin air and I get the actual figure as more like £367million a week, so maybe that was the lie
Yes, the ONS issued a revised figure. I guess they had already painted their bus.
Did you not see the TV adverts directly referring to that figure and saying it could be spent on the NHS?!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yIYq5xMW98I
That advert is a blatant lie to suggest that that figure would be available to spend on other things.
-Matt
But technically when we will leavewe we have 350m to spend however we like so if they wanted to they could
I think that will pale into insignificance compared to the amount of money we will have spent between now and then on Brexit-related costs. Let alone the damage done to the economy so far.
-Matt"what damage? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that Breakdown here: https://fullfact.org/blog/2016/apr/uk-statistics-authority-350-million-eu-membership-fee-potentially-misleading/ Or look at the raw data from the ONS themselves: http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/adhocs/005389uktransactionswiththeeu1973to2014 -Matt potentially misleading? Maybe. But a gross figure isn't pulled from thin air and I get the actual figure as more like £367million a week, so maybe that was the lie
Yes, the ONS issued a revised figure. I guess they had already painted their bus.
Did you not see the TV adverts directly referring to that figure and saying it could be spent on the NHS?!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yIYq5xMW98I
That advert is a blatant lie to suggest that that figure would be available to spend on other things.
-Matt
But technically when we will leavewe we have 350m to spend however we like so if they wanted to they could
I think that will pale into insignificance compared to the amount of money we will have spent between now and then on Brexit-related costs. Let alone the damage done to the economy so far.
-Matt
what damage?"Well, drop in value of our currency by 20% for a start. Slower growth in GDP versus predicted before Brexit. And pretty much the weekly headlines of cost of various good and services going up since then. Consdering we've not even left yet, that is all pretty worrying. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The economy was already damaged pre BREXIT vote. It was damaged by the greedy money grubbing bankers who put us in billions of pounds worth of debt. If the phoney establishment don't get their way and BREXIT happens, then we might have a chance of stopping that from happening again. Yet some are worried that the organisations that put us in this mess might leave the UK. Let them fuck off is what I say. They will only shift their HQs, they will all still want to get their hands on our money so don't expect them to move everything. " You totally misunderstand, it's not the British banks that are likely to move their headquarters out of the City, it's the overseas banks and financial houses that will be going....they had NOTHING to do with bank bail outs by our government. But...they pay hundreds of millions in tax into our economy every year....they don't need YOUR money, but our economy needs theirs. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The economy was already damaged pre BREXIT vote. It was damaged by the greedy money grubbing bankers who put us in billions of pounds worth of debt. If the phoney establishment don't get their way and BREXIT happens, then we might have a chance of stopping that from happening again. Yet some are worried that the organisations that put us in this mess might leave the UK. Let them fuck off is what I say. They will only shift their HQs, they will all still want to get their hands on our money so don't expect them to move everything. You totally misunderstand, it's not the British banks that are likely to move their headquarters out of the City, it's the overseas banks and financial houses that will be going....they had NOTHING to do with bank bail outs by our government. But...they pay hundreds of millions in tax into our economy every year....they don't need YOUR money, but our economy needs theirs." The city of London has the crest of the Rothchilds family. All the banks are controlled by them, and that doesn't just mean those in Europe. They won't leave, it's all wind and piss. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Should happen with all politicians in circumstances where they have deliberately misled. What is the actual criminal offence? Is it just general fraus or is there something specific to political life? The £350 million going to the NHS was always impossible to implement by those making the claim, seeing as they weren't in power to decide where the money saved was spent. Yet again they NEVER said it WOULD be spent simply that it COULD But I think that is the crux of the case, they COULDN'T, because the figure was a lie. could you explain why that figure was a lie? Because that figure was claimed to be how much we'd have available to spend on other things if we left the EU. Despite the fact that isn't even the amount we send to the EU in the first place. Let alone the benefits we get from that fee. Even the ONS said the figure was incorrect and misleading and should not be used. -Matt so what is the gross figure? I think you'll find it's slightly more than that Breakdown here: https://fullfact.org/blog/2016/apr/uk-statistics-authority-350-million-eu-membership-fee-potentially-misleading/ Or look at the raw data from the ONS themselves: http://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/adhocs/005389uktransactionswiththeeu1973to2014 -Matt potentially misleading? Maybe. But a gross figure isn't pulled from thin air and I get the actual figure as more like £367million a week, so maybe that was the lie
Yes, the ONS issued a revised figure. I guess they had already painted their bus.
Did you not see the TV adverts directly referring to that figure and saying it could be spent on the NHS?!
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yIYq5xMW98I
That advert is a blatant lie to suggest that that figure would be available to spend on other things.
-Matt
But technically when we will leavewe we have 350m to spend however we like so if they wanted to they could
I think that will pale into insignificance compared to the amount of money we will have spent between now and then on Brexit-related costs. Let alone the damage done to the economy so far.
-Matt
We don't have the £350m unless we cut funds from projects we are already funding (farming, research etc.)
We have already spent £70bn on monetary policy measures anyway, wiping out years of savings.
That 70bn has been explained to you before"No, it was just someone pretending it didn't exist because it didn't fit with his vision of Brexit. You don't think that spending £70bn already is a big deal? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The economy was already damaged pre BREXIT vote. It was damaged by the greedy money grubbing bankers who put us in billions of pounds worth of debt. If the phoney establishment don't get their way and BREXIT happens, then we might have a chance of stopping that from happening again. Yet some are worried that the organisations that put us in this mess might leave the UK. Let them fuck off is what I say. They will only shift their HQs, they will all still want to get their hands on our money so don't expect them to move everything. You totally misunderstand, it's not the British banks that are likely to move their headquarters out of the City, it's the overseas banks and financial houses that will be going....they had NOTHING to do with bank bail outs by our government. But...they pay hundreds of millions in tax into our economy every year....they don't need YOUR money, but our economy needs theirs. The city of London has the crest of the Rothchilds family. All the banks are controlled by them, and that doesn't just mean those in Europe. They won't leave, it's all wind and piss." As I said before, you just don't understand banking. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
i clearly should open a tin foil hat shop in the hove/lewes area ... as well as the pitch-fork and medieval torch shop that i was planning there | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The economy was already damaged pre BREXIT vote. It was damaged by the greedy money grubbing bankers who put us in billions of pounds worth of debt. If the phoney establishment don't get their way and BREXIT happens, then we might have a chance of stopping that from happening again. Yet some are worried that the organisations that put us in this mess might leave the UK. Let them fuck off is what I say. They will only shift their HQs, they will all still want to get their hands on our money so don't expect them to move everything. You totally misunderstand, it's not the British banks that are likely to move their headquarters out of the City, it's the overseas banks and financial houses that will be going....they had NOTHING to do with bank bail outs by our government. But...they pay hundreds of millions in tax into our economy every year....they don't need YOUR money, but our economy needs theirs. The city of London has the crest of the Rothchilds family. All the banks are controlled by them, and that doesn't just mean those in Europe. They won't leave, it's all wind and piss. As I said before, you just don't understand banking." Brexiters think we are talking about losing the places they can cash their giro. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" i clearly should open a tin foil hat shop in the hove/lewes area ... as well as the pitch-fork and medieval torch shop that i was planning there"Hove/Lewis? Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm a good 45 minutes from either destination. Must try harder. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The economy was already damaged pre BREXIT vote. It was damaged by the greedy money grubbing bankers who put us in billions of pounds worth of debt. If the phoney establishment don't get their way and BREXIT happens, then we might have a chance of stopping that from happening again. Yet some are worried that the organisations that put us in this mess might leave the UK. Let them fuck off is what I say. They will only shift their HQs, they will all still want to get their hands on our money so don't expect them to move everything. You totally misunderstand, it's not the British banks that are likely to move their headquarters out of the City, it's the overseas banks and financial houses that will be going....they had NOTHING to do with bank bail outs by our government. But...they pay hundreds of millions in tax into our economy every year....they don't need YOUR money, but our economy needs theirs. The city of London has the crest of the Rothchilds family. All the banks are controlled by them, and that doesn't just mean those in Europe. They won't leave, it's all wind and piss. As I said before, you just don't understand banking." You do keep saying that, don't you? So you deny that the whole world of banking is monopolised by two families? The Rothchilds in Europe and the Rockefellers in the US? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The economy was already damaged pre BREXIT vote. It was damaged by the greedy money grubbing bankers who put us in billions of pounds worth of debt. If the phoney establishment don't get their way and BREXIT happens, then we might have a chance of stopping that from happening again. Yet some are worried that the organisations that put us in this mess might leave the UK. Let them fuck off is what I say. They will only shift their HQs, they will all still want to get their hands on our money so don't expect them to move everything. You totally misunderstand, it's not the British banks that are likely to move their headquarters out of the City, it's the overseas banks and financial houses that will be going....they had NOTHING to do with bank bail outs by our government. But...they pay hundreds of millions in tax into our economy every year....they don't need YOUR money, but our economy needs theirs. The city of London has the crest of the Rothchilds family. All the banks are controlled by them, and that doesn't just mean those in Europe. They won't leave, it's all wind and piss. As I said before, you just don't understand banking. Brexiters think we are talking about losing the places they can cash their giro." So now you are having a pop at the unemployed? Nice! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters" You are obsessed with this, you need to find a hoppy or a life in the real world | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!! "Why should they have? Because the truth hurts?? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??"no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS..... well... at least they saw that coming... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??
no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS.....
well... at least they saw that coming..."Yeah well they would, wouldn't they? More PC bullshit... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??
no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS.....
well... at least they saw that coming...
Yeah well they would, wouldn't they? More PC bullshit... "I don't think you know what PC means. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??
no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS.....
well... at least they saw that coming...
Yeah well they would, wouldn't they? More PC bullshit...
I don't think you know what PC means. "Love to have a one on one debate some time
I can't P M you tho | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??
no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS.....
well... at least they saw that coming...
Yeah well they would, wouldn't they? More PC bullshit...
I don't think you know what PC means. "I do and it is a crock of lefty liberal shit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??
no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS.....
well... at least they saw that coming...
Yeah well they would, wouldn't they? More PC bullshit...
I don't think you know what PC means.
I do and it is a crock of lefty liberal shit."So are you saying that anyone right right therfore is inherently racist, xenophobic, transphoic, homophobic, bigotted etc? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??
no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS.....
well... at least they saw that coming...
Yeah well they would, wouldn't they? More PC bullshit...
I don't think you know what PC means.
I do and it is a crock of lefty liberal shit.
So are you saying that anyone right right therfore is inherently racist, xenophobic, transphoic, homophobic, bigotted etc?"Hope they aren't or I'm done for | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??
no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS.....
well... at least they saw that coming...
Yeah well they would, wouldn't they? More PC bullshit...
I don't think you know what PC means.
I do and it is a crock of lefty liberal shit.
So are you saying that anyone right right therfore is inherently racist, xenophobic, transphoic, homophobic, bigotted etc?"No, I'm saying that the political dogma of PC is totally flawed. We could all get along so much better if we were not forced to do so: | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??
no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS.....
well... at least they saw that coming...
Yeah well they would, wouldn't they? More PC bullshit...
I don't think you know what PC means.
I do and it is a crock of lefty liberal shit.
So are you saying that anyone right right therfore is inherently racist, xenophobic, transphoic, homophobic, bigotted etc?
Hope they aren't or I'm done for "Well he seems to be suggesting the left are PC, so that would make the right, un-PC, by his logic any way. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??
no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS.....
well... at least they saw that coming...
Yeah well they would, wouldn't they? More PC bullshit...
I don't think you know what PC means.
I do and it is a crock of lefty liberal shit.
So are you saying that anyone right right therfore is inherently racist, xenophobic, transphoic, homophobic, bigotted etc?
No, I'm saying that the political dogma of PC is totally flawed. We could all get along so much better if we were not forced to do so:"So if you were able to use offensive slurs, to describe other people they would be more likely to be your friend? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"well people did warn them to take down "that claim" off the side of that big red bus.... did they listen... nooooooooooo!!!!
Why should they have?
Because the truth hurts??
no.... because the ASA (Advertising Standards Authority) said during the campaign that it was "at best misleading, and at worst a lie"... and they warning that someone may eventually take it to the CPS.....
well... at least they saw that coming...
Yeah well they would, wouldn't they? More PC bullshit...
I don't think you know what PC means.
I do and it is a crock of lefty liberal shit.
So are you saying that anyone right right therfore is inherently racist, xenophobic, transphoic, homophobic, bigotted etc?
Hope they aren't or I'm done for
Well he seems to be suggesting the left are PC, so that would make the right, un-PC, by his logic any way. "Thier are always exceptions ! Not sure what I am lol | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brightonish, you never were able to find a single lie from chuka unumma were you? Or did I miss it? " I gave you a link to his latest article, and it was full of shit. What more do you want? The whole website is built on lies. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brightonish, you never were able to find a single lie from chuka unumma were you? Or did I miss it? I gave you a link to his latest article, and it was full of shit. What more do you want? The whole website is built on lies." I understand that you might not agree with it, but which part of the article was actually a lie? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters" Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. " But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? " Has CLCC been silenced again? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? " A massive part of leave campaigned to stop free movement of people to the UK "take control of our borders" from the EU , therefore a major part of being able to trade with the EU is allowing freedom of movement so it made sense for Cameron to say if we leave "to take control of our borders" we'll have to stop trading with the EU. Not rocket science | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Has CLCC been silenced again? "On 12th June on the Andrew Marr show David Cameron, the prime minister said: “What the British public will be voting for is to leave the EU and leave the single market.” I'm sure CLCC could quite easily google it to check the facts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Has CLCC been silenced again?
On 12th June on the Andrew Marr show David Cameron, the prime minister said: “What the British public will be voting for is to leave the EU and leave the single market.”
I'm sure CLCC could quite easily google it to check the facts.
"Or this from Ameet Gill, one of Cameron's senior advisors... “I remember in the campaign, the most significant moment of the campaign that we saw on the Remain side was in mid-April when Michael [Gove] made that speech saying we’re going to leave the single market,” he said, referring to Cameron’s justice secretary, a prominent Leave campaigner. “Now, we spent the next three months trying to hang that round Leave’s neck. We went round saying, ‘Look, a vote to leave is a vote to leave the single market.’ So I do find it a bit weird with some politicians coming now saying that was never on the ballot paper.” | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Has CLCC been silenced again?
On 12th June on the Andrew Marr show David Cameron, the prime minister said: “What the British public will be voting for is to leave the EU and leave the single market.”
I'm sure CLCC could quite easily google it to check the facts.
Or this from Ameet Gill, one of Cameron's senior advisors...
“I remember in the campaign, the most significant moment of the campaign that we saw on the Remain side was in mid-April when Michael [Gove] made that speech saying we’re going to leave the single market,” he said, referring to Cameron’s justice secretary, a prominent Leave campaigner.
“Now, we spent the next three months trying to hang that round Leave’s neck. We went round saying, ‘Look, a vote to leave is a vote to leave the single market.’ So I do find it a bit weird with some politicians coming now saying that was never on the ballot paper.”"So if they were lying at the time, then it blows a hole in CLCC's contention that the remain campaign 'never lied' - in which case we would expect CLCC to say that the remain side should also be investigated by the DPP for lying. But if they were telling the truth, then surely the referendum result is a clear mandate to negotiate on the basis of leaving the single market? Also, during the same Andrew Marr show, Nigel Farage ruled out a second referendum. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Both sides did ! Not right but , they were both equally guilty "Not equally | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? " Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Has CLCC been silenced again?
On 12th June on the Andrew Marr show David Cameron, the prime minister said: “What the British public will be voting for is to leave the EU and leave the single market.”
I'm sure CLCC could quite easily google it to check the facts.
Or this from Ameet Gill, one of Cameron's senior advisors...
“I remember in the campaign, the most significant moment of the campaign that we saw on the Remain side was in mid-April when Michael [Gove] made that speech saying we’re going to leave the single market,” he said, referring to Cameron’s justice secretary, a prominent Leave campaigner.
“Now, we spent the next three months trying to hang that round Leave’s neck. We went round saying, ‘Look, a vote to leave is a vote to leave the single market.’ So I do find it a bit weird with some politicians coming now saying that was never on the ballot paper.”
So if they were lying at the time, then it blows a hole in CLCC's contention that the remain campaign 'never lied' - in which case we would expect CLCC to say that the remain side should also be investigated by the DPP for lying.
But if they were telling the truth, then surely the referendum result is a clear mandate to negotiate on the basis of leaving the single market?
Also, during the same Andrew Marr show, Nigel Farage ruled out a second referendum."If YOU think they lied, the write to the DPP. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It isn't necessarily a bad thing, the single market has been a ball and chain around the British foot for decades. Issues such as the regulation of our fishing waters will help. They have been depleted for too long by the Spaniards and their tight nets. Let the small fish survive." They still have historic access rights and will continue to have the legal right to fish our waters long after we leave. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? " they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention "So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it? Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market? "ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market"
Ah you make me laugh, on a thread about lying you come out with this one! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
Ah you make me laugh, on a thread about lying you come out with this one! "So you're calling me a liar now? Again. Ok, what rules are Norway allowed to make or have influence over with regard to the single market? None. So how can it be a member of that market? How can a country which is not even a member of the EEA such as Stitzerland be a member of the single market? Do you know what EFTA is? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? " Stop avoiding the question did DC say vote leave and end being part of the single market yet now we are told we can be. As usual you get backed into a corner and have no answer so you dont perhaps you should become a MP because you sure know how to dodge the awkward questions | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? Stop avoiding the question did DC say vote leave and end being part of the single market yet now we are told we can be. As usual you get backed into a corner and have no answer so you dont perhaps you should become a MP because you sure know how to dodge the awkward questions" You say he did. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? Stop avoiding the question did DC say vote leave and end being part of the single market yet now we are told we can be. As usual you get backed into a corner and have no answer so you dont perhaps you should become a MP because you sure know how to dodge the awkward questions You say he did." Troll | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
Ah you make me laugh, on a thread about lying you come out with this one!
So you're calling me a liar now? Again. Ok, what rules are Norway allowed to make or have influence over with regard to the single market? None. So how can it be a member of that market? How can a country which is not even a member of the EEA such as Stitzerland be a member of the single market? Do you know what EFTA is?"Well before you were saying that they just weren't full members, implying that that had some other membership status, perhaps "associate member" or some other title. Now you are saying that are not members at all, so maybe you are accusing yourself of lying!
Either way, they are members. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
Ah you make me laugh, on a thread about lying you come out with this one!
So you're calling me a liar now? Again. Ok, what rules are Norway allowed to make or have influence over with regard to the single market? None. So how can it be a member of that market? How can a country which is not even a member of the EEA such as Stitzerland be a member of the single market? Do you know what EFTA is?
Well before you were saying that they just weren't full members, implying that that had some other membership status, perhaps "associate member" or some other title. Now you are saying that are not members at all, so maybe you are accusing yourself of lying!
Either way, they are members. "troll | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market"I'll make it easier.....they are | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Single_Market This clearly shows that Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland are members of the single market, and not members of the EU." I thought you said wikipedia didn't count | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are "then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Going back to the OP . Why the fuss ? All politicians try to mislead us at elections ! What's new ? " Its a lie, a known lie, a demonstrable lie and that is against the law and that's why its being looked at by the DPP. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you"No one has to explain anything to you, they are members of the single market as has been proven to you. Initially even You didn't say that they weren't members. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Going back to the OP . Why the fuss ? All politicians try to mislead us at elections ! What's new ? Its a lie, a known lie, a demonstrable lie and that is against the law and that's why its being looked at by the DPP." Hmm , you may have a point but do you think it could lead to a lot of retrospective cases from other Elections ? Mind perhaps that would be a good thing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Going back to the OP . Why the fuss ? All politicians try to mislead us at elections ! What's new ? Its a lie, a known lie, a demonstrable lie and that is against the law and that's why its being looked at by the DPP. Hmm , you may have a point but do you think it could lead to a lot of retrospective cases from other Elections ? Mind perhaps that would be a good thing "Well I have no idea if there is a statue of limitations on such things, but if the case did go to court, I'm sure it would act as a deterrent in the future. With the referendum and with the US elections, it just feels as though we are living in a post-truth world were people say what ever they want, no matter if it's true or not. Just look above to see someone denying a known fact, a well publicised, verifiable fact, even when proof is in front of them. They just blatantly lie and deny it. Obviously there is no legal ramifications on a forum, but when this happens by political organisations trying to influence how people will vote, then it falls into an area that has been legislated on by our sovereign British parliament, and in line with our system of justice should be considered by the crown prosecution service, should be looked at. If they then decide that there is a reasonable chance of conviction and that the case is in the public interest, then they can take it to court. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Going back to the OP . Why the fuss ? All politicians try to mislead us at elections ! What's new ? Its a lie, a known lie, a demonstrable lie and that is against the law and that's why its being looked at by the DPP. Hmm , you may have a point but do you think it could lead to a lot of retrospective cases from other Elections ? Mind perhaps that would be a good thing
Well I have no idea if there is a statue of limitations on such things, but if the case did go to court, I'm sure it would act as a deterrent in the future.
With the referendum and with the US elections, it just feels as though we are living in a post-truth world were people say what ever they want, no matter if it's true or not. Just look above to see someone denying a known fact, a well publicised, verifiable fact, even when proof is in front of them. They just blatantly lie and deny it. Obviously there is no legal ramifications on a forum, but when this happens by political organisations trying to influence how people will vote, then it falls into an area that has been legislated on by our sovereign British parliament, and in line with our system of justice should be considered by the crown prosecution service, should be looked at. If they then decide that there is a reasonable chance of conviction and that the case is in the public interest, then they can take it to court."I think you have won me over on this one
Won't happen all the time tho
And I still want out | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you"I don't have to explain anything to you, you stated that they were not members of the single market, I confirmed that they in fact are...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you
I don't have to explain anything to you, you stated that they were not members of the single market, I confirmed that they in fact are......
"how have you confirmed it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you
No one has to explain anything to you, they are members of the single market as has been proven to you. Initially even You didn't say that they weren't members.
"the only thing you have proven is that you only believe what is in your prejudiced head and that you cannot answer straight questions when put on the spot | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you
I don't have to explain anything to you, you stated that they were not members of the single market, I confirmed that they in fact are......
how have you confirmed it?"In the case of Norway and Switzerland I know from personal experience, naturally you will want to question that but I'm tired of arguing trivial matters with you....believe what you want, makes no difference to me or anyone on here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you
I don't have to explain anything to you, you stated that they were not members of the single market, I confirmed that they in fact are......
how have you confirmed it?
In the case of Norway and Switzerland I know from personal experience, naturally you will want to question that but I'm tired of arguing trivial matters with you....believe what you want, makes no difference to me or anyone on here."seems you get tired of arguing whenever you have no argument. I'll just give you one FACT. A country that is not a member of the EEA cannot be a member of the single market | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you
I don't have to explain anything to you, you stated that they were not members of the single market, I confirmed that they in fact are......
how have you confirmed it?
In the case of Norway and Switzerland I know from personal experience, naturally you will want to question that but I'm tired of arguing trivial matters with you....believe what you want, makes no difference to me or anyone on here.
seems you get tired of arguing whenever you have no argument. I'll just give you one FACT. A country that is not a member of the EEA cannot be a member of the single market"From the Full Fact website (would link, but forum rules don’t allow it) "Norway is not a member of the EU. It is in the European Economic Area (EEA) instead, along with Iceland and Liechtenstein.” | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you
I don't have to explain anything to you, you stated that they were not members of the single market, I confirmed that they in fact are......
how have you confirmed it?
In the case of Norway and Switzerland I know from personal experience, naturally you will want to question that but I'm tired of arguing trivial matters with you....believe what you want, makes no difference to me or anyone on here.
seems you get tired of arguing whenever you have no argument. I'll just give you one FACT. A country that is not a member of the EEA cannot be a member of the single market
From the Full Fact website (would link, but forum rules don’t allow it) "Norway is not a member of the EU. It is in the European Economic Area (EEA) instead, along with Iceland and Liechtenstein.” "Or maybe you prefer this quote from the FT? "a significant difference between Norway’s position and that of a possible post-Brexit UK: its membership of the European Economic Area. This makes it part of the single market in return for paying into the EU budget and accepting common rules and free movement.” https://www.ft.com/content/11a196a0-96ce-11e6-a1dc-bdf38d484582 Proof enough that they are indeed members of the single market? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you
I don't have to explain anything to you, you stated that they were not members of the single market, I confirmed that they in fact are......
how have you confirmed it?
In the case of Norway and Switzerland I know from personal experience, naturally you will want to question that but I'm tired of arguing trivial matters with you....believe what you want, makes no difference to me or anyone on here.
seems you get tired of arguing whenever you have no argument. I'll just give you one FACT. A country that is not a member of the EEA cannot be a member of the single market
From the Full Fact website (would link, but forum rules don’t allow it) "Norway is not a member of the EU. It is in the European Economic Area (EEA) instead, along with Iceland and Liechtenstein.”
Or maybe you prefer this quote from the FT?
"a significant difference between Norway’s position and that of a possible post-Brexit UK: its membership of the European Economic Area. This makes it part of the single market in return for paying into the EU budget and accepting common rules and free movement.”
https://www.ft.com/content/11a196a0-96ce-11e6-a1dc-bdf38d484582
Proof enough that they are indeed members of the single market?"ffs no! Read things properly. There are 28 full members of the single market and 4 members of EFTA who participate to different degrees in the single market | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you
I don't have to explain anything to you, you stated that they were not members of the single market, I confirmed that they in fact are......
how have you confirmed it?
In the case of Norway and Switzerland I know from personal experience, naturally you will want to question that but I'm tired of arguing trivial matters with you....believe what you want, makes no difference to me or anyone on here.
seems you get tired of arguing whenever you have no argument. I'll just give you one FACT. A country that is not a member of the EEA cannot be a member of the single market
From the Full Fact website (would link, but forum rules don’t allow it) "Norway is not a member of the EU. It is in the European Economic Area (EEA) instead, along with Iceland and Liechtenstein.”
Or maybe you prefer this quote from the FT?
"a significant difference between Norway’s position and that of a possible post-Brexit UK: its membership of the European Economic Area. This makes it part of the single market in return for paying into the EU budget and accepting common rules and free movement.”
https://www.ft.com/content/11a196a0-96ce-11e6-a1dc-bdf38d484582
Proof enough that they are indeed members of the single market?
ffs no! Read things properly. There are 28 full members of the single market and 4 members of EFTA who participate to different degrees in the single market"So now you are back to your “full member” argument are you? it says quite clearly "This makes it part of the single market” is that too complicated a concept? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you
I don't have to explain anything to you, you stated that they were not members of the single market, I confirmed that they in fact are......
how have you confirmed it?
In the case of Norway and Switzerland I know from personal experience, naturally you will want to question that but I'm tired of arguing trivial matters with you....believe what you want, makes no difference to me or anyone on here.
seems you get tired of arguing whenever you have no argument. I'll just give you one FACT. A country that is not a member of the EEA cannot be a member of the single market
From the Full Fact website (would link, but forum rules don’t allow it) "Norway is not a member of the EU. It is in the European Economic Area (EEA) instead, along with Iceland and Liechtenstein.”
Or maybe you prefer this quote from the FT?
"a significant difference between Norway’s position and that of a possible post-Brexit UK: its membership of the European Economic Area. This makes it part of the single market in return for paying into the EU budget and accepting common rules and free movement.”
https://www.ft.com/content/11a196a0-96ce-11e6-a1dc-bdf38d484582
Proof enough that they are indeed members of the single market?
ffs no! Read things properly. There are 28 full members of the single market and 4 members of EFTA who participate to different degrees in the single market
So now you are back to your “full member” argument are you?
it says quite clearly "This makes it part of the single market” is that too complicated a concept?"I honestly wouldn't bother arguing..... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They will continue saying 'it is' and 'it isn't' , using reply+quote each time , until the thread gets to 175 or the server runs out of space "It would make it easier to keep up if people deleted the irrelevant bits and just left the part of the quote they were referring too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They will continue saying 'it is' and 'it isn't' , using reply+quote each time , until the thread gets to 175 or the server runs out of space "You're right, those countries are members of the single market, it has been proven, and the only people who disagree are CandM4U. Everyone accepts this as a matter of fact, so let's move on. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They will continue saying 'it is' and 'it isn't' , using reply+quote each time , until the thread gets to 175 or the server runs out of space
It would make it easier to keep up if people deleted the irrelevant bits and just left the part of the quote they were referring too."Good point
Il try that myself in future | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"They will continue saying 'it is' and 'it isn't' , using reply+quote each time , until the thread gets to 175 or the server runs out of space
You're right, those countries are members of the single market, it has been proven, and the only people who disagree are CandM4U. Everyone accepts this as a matter of fact, so let's move on."correction - there are 2 who think they are. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? they are not full members of the single market. Pay attention
So your arguement is that they are indeed two separate things, and that you can indeed be a member of the single market and not a member of the EU, but the difference is that you wont be a "full member" as you call it?
Please can you explain to us the levels of membership that are available within the Single Market?
ok I'll make it easy for you. They are not members of the single market
I'll make it easier.....they are
then you will be able to explain how a country who is not a member of the EEA can be a member of the single market won't you? That should be easy for you
I don't have to explain anything to you, you stated that they were not members of the single market, I confirmed that they in fact are......
how have you confirmed it?
In the case of Norway and Switzerland I know from personal experience, naturally you will want to question that but I'm tired of arguing trivial matters with you....believe what you want, makes no difference to me or anyone on here.
seems you get tired of arguing whenever you have no argument. I'll just give you one FACT. A country that is not a member of the EEA cannot be a member of the single market
From the Full Fact website (would link, but forum rules don’t allow it) "Norway is not a member of the EU. It is in the European Economic Area (EEA) instead, along with Iceland and Liechtenstein.”
Or maybe you prefer this quote from the FT?
"a significant difference between Norway’s position and that of a possible post-Brexit UK: its membership of the European Economic Area. This makes it part of the single market in return for paying into the EU budget and accepting common rules and free movement.”
https://www.ft.com/content/11a196a0-96ce-11e6-a1dc-bdf38d484582
Proof enough that they are indeed members of the single market?
ffs no! Read things properly. There are 28 full members of the single market and 4 members of EFTA who participate to different degrees in the single market
So now you are back to your “full member” argument are you?
it says quite clearly "This makes it part of the single market” is that too complicated a concept?"what is it you don't understand in the differences between 'part of' and 'member of'? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"According to the EU's own website there are 28 members of the single market and some others that have access to it in various degrees and with various costs " thank you, someone else who can read without interpreting things to suit their own mindset  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"CLCC and CandM , could you start a thread about whether zebras are black with white stripes or white with black stripes? Just from you 2 posting, I'm sure it would hit 175 and move into a pt2 "What's your opinion? Are there members of the single market who aren't members of the EU? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"CLCC and CandM , could you start a thread about whether zebras are black with white stripes or white with black stripes? Just from you 2 posting, I'm sure it would hit 175 and move into a pt2
What's your opinion? Are there members of the single market who aren't members of the EU? "can you not read? The EU says there are 28. How can YOU say there are more? I'll leave this thread now as you're obviously just trolling again | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"CLCC and CandM , could you start a thread about whether zebras are black with white stripes or white with black stripes? Just from you 2 posting, I'm sure it would hit 175 and move into a pt2
What's your opinion? Are there members of the single market who aren't members of the EU? "You are both arguing about 'member' or 'part of' and other minuscule details, so I don't have the will to form an opinion on this one as it's too trivial IMO. I have watched goats butting heads with similar futility. Continue if it makes you happy and you feel it is doing some good. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"CLCC and CandM , could you start a thread about whether zebras are black with white stripes or white with black stripes? Just from you 2 posting, I'm sure it would hit 175 and move into a pt2
What's your opinion? Are there members of the single market who aren't members of the EU?
You are both arguing about 'member' or 'part of' and other minuscule details, so I don't have the will to form an opinion on this one as it's too trivial IMO.
I have watched goats butting heads with similar futility.
Continue if it makes you happy and you feel it is doing some good."Making CandM look foolish is never a waste of time! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I have watched goats butting heads with similar futility. Continue if it makes you happy and you feel it is doing some good. Making CandM look foolish is never a waste of time! "You're both doing a good job of it yourselves. Perhaps form a double act?? Just need to decide on a name, should be quick and easy enough....... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I have watched goats butting heads with similar futility. Continue if it makes you happy and you feel it is doing some good. Making CandM look foolish is never a waste of time!
You're both doing a good job of it yourselves. Perhaps form a double act??
Just need to decide on a name, should be quick and easy enough....... "They do it time and time and time again. They tell blatant lies and play dumb. If I say they sky is blue they would argue something different. Just a couple of weeks ago they were aguing that there was no legal challenges relating to Brexit and the triggering of article 50, yet look at all the press about the high court's judgement. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I have watched goats butting heads with similar futility. Continue if it makes you happy and you feel it is doing some good. Making CandM look foolish is never a waste of time!
You're both doing a good job of it yourselves. Perhaps form a double act??
Just need to decide on a name, should be quick and easy enough.......
They do it time and time and time again. They tell blatant lies and play dumb. If I say they sky is blue they would argue something different. Just a couple of weeks ago they were aguing that there was no legal challenges relating to Brexit and the triggering of article 50, yet look at all the press about the high court's judgement."ok I'll bite. I said there was no legal challenge to Brexit which there wasn't. I never mentioned Article 50 which the legal challenge was about and who had the right to invoke it. And I am getting a bit sick of you calling me a liar. Now answer one simple question - how many members of the single market are there? Am I lyimg or the EU? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 28 members of the European Union are full members of the European Economic Area - the single market. But there are other members of the club too. The four members of the European Free Trade Association also participate in the single market - but to different degrees. Take Norway for instance. Norway has full access to the single market but is not in the EU. It pays a contribution to the EU Budget to gain that access and has to sign up to all the rules of the club - including its common regulations and standards. People from across the EU are free to live and work in Norway too, but the country is exempt from EU rules on agriculture, fisheries, justice and home affairs. The downside for Norway is that it has no say over how the rules of the Single Market are created. Another example is Switzerland. It has a free trade agreement with the EU and a number of bilateral agreements, which give it access to the Single Market for most of its industries. However, it does not have full access to the single market for its banking sector. If Britain left the EU how would it gain access to the single market? In the past week, Leave campaigners have confirmed that they would not want to remain part of the single market by signing deals similar to Norway or Switzerland. They say that because of the strength of the UK economy and the need for EU countries to continue trading freely with the UK, Britain would be in a very strong position to get a deal that exempted the UK from free movement and single market regulations while allowing free access to the single market. Because the UK already complies with single market regulations, a UK-EU free trade deal on goods may be fairly straightforward. But the UK's service sector is about 80% of our economy and the City of London dominates financial services in the EU. In the negotiations that would follow a British exit from the EU everything would depend on the deal the remaining EU members wanted to cut. And the Remain campaign insists the EU would demand the UK accepts free movement and common regulations in any deal that provides single market access. We do not know what the outcome of such negotiations would be - it is one of the biggest question marks hanging over this referendum.' That was from one of the BBC EU Referendum Reality Check. What is your point? " that there are only 28 members of the single market. The EEA is not the single market. The first paragraph refers to other nations being members of the EEA not the single market. What is your point? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? " There we have it folks, CLCC admits by implication that Cameron lied...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" There are only 28 members of the single market. The EEA is not the single market. The first paragraph refers to other nations being members of the EEA not the single market. What is your point?" Being in the EEA allows none EU member states be part of the single market in the case of Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Switzerland have negotiated their own deal where they are in the single market but neither a EU member or EEA member. So there's a few different ways to be part of the single market but they all have one running theme, free movement of people. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" There are only 28 members of the single market. The EEA is not the single market. The first paragraph refers to other nations being members of the EEA not the single market. What is your point? Being in the EEA allows none EU member states be part of the single market in the case of Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Switzerland have negotiated their own deal where they are in the single market but neither a EU member or EEA member. So there's a few different ways to be part of the single market but they all have one running theme, free movement of people." Perfectly explained | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? Stop avoiding the question did DC say vote leave and end being part of the single market yet now we are told we can be. As usual you get backed into a corner and have no answer so you dont perhaps you should become a MP because you sure know how to dodge the awkward questions You say he did." Actually, I said he did, and he did, on the Andrew Marr show on 12th June..... you can quite easily look this up by using google, at which point you would also be able to see the interview itself where he said that. But as another remainer said on another thread when I pointed this out, apparently he wasn't lying, he was saying something that was, and I quote, ..... "Technically incorrect"....... By the same measure, it should be noted that the £350 Million per week claim must therefore be "technically correct". | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So thete are 32 States with access to the European single market, not 28." every state in the world has access to the single market | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" There are only 28 members of the single market. The EEA is not the single market. The first paragraph refers to other nations being members of the EEA not the single market. What is your point? Being in the EEA allows none EU member states be part of the single market in the case of Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Switzerland have negotiated their own deal where they are in the single market but neither a EU member or EEA member. So there's a few different ways to be part of the single market but they all have one running theme, free movement of people." being a part of the single market and being able to to operate in the single market are not the same thing as being a member of the single market. Google the difference if you don't believe me | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" There are only 28 members of the single market. The EEA is not the single market. The first paragraph refers to other nations being members of the EEA not the single market. What is your point? Being in the EEA allows none EU member states be part of the single market in the case of Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Switzerland have negotiated their own deal where they are in the single market but neither a EU member or EEA member. So there's a few different ways to be part of the single market but they all have one running theme, free movement of people. Perfectly explained "The EU are negotiating with the Swiss on free movement (the Swiss had a referendum which overwhelmingly voted against free movement). The EU is in favour of allowing the Swiss to give preferential treatment to their own nationals seeking work over EU citizens, that is, Swiss nationals will be considered above EU citizens when applying for jobs... and that EU citizens can go to Switzerland for 3 months to seek work.... any more than this and they have to prove that they have been looking for work. It is hoped that in this way it will effectively limit immigration from the EU to Switzerland, whilst still allowing 'free movement'. Junker has said that the EU are suggesting this bearing in mind impending negotiations with the UK on Brexit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So thete are 32 States with access to the European single market, not 28. every state in the world has access to the single market" Not in the context we're talking about and only on the say so of the 28 EU member states. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The Director of Public Prosecutions is investigating a complaint that Vote Leave and Leave.EU deliberately misled the public with their Brexit campaigns. Although this wouldn’t have an impact on Brexit, it could result in criminal punishment of anyone held responsible by the courts for making false statements. I wonder if any of the big names from the campaigns will end up in court, or even behind bars? The remain campaign were worse, Costa threatened to put the price of coffee up, the Chancellor said he would impose a emergency budget, they told you that the NHS would be effected due to the lack of nurses, terrorist activities would increase, Britain would sink into recession Now that's intimidation you tell me if this latest dirty trick is that of an establishment you want to be part of https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/07/brexit-cps-considers-complaint-that-leave-campaigns-misled-voters Those are all things that will happen, they just haven't happened yet. But back to what you said earlier, and the question you conveniently haven't answered.... You "don't believe that they (the remain campaign) lied" You have said that we could remain in the single market even though we leave the EU. Cameron said that if we voted leave we would have to leave the single market. Which one is the lie? Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the EU? No. Are Norway, Iceland, Lichtenstein and Switzerland members of the Single Market? Yes. Simple enough proof for you that you can be a member of the single market without being a member of the EU? Stop avoiding the question did DC say vote leave and end being part of the single market yet now we are told we can be. As usual you get backed into a corner and have no answer so you dont perhaps you should become a MP because you sure know how to dodge the awkward questions You say he did. Actually, I said he did, and he did, on the Andrew Marr show on 12th June..... you can quite easily look this up by using google, at which point you would also be able to see the interview itself where he said that. But as another remainer said on another thread when I pointed this out, apparently he wasn't lying, he was saying something that was, and I quote, ..... "Technically incorrect"....... By the same measure, it should be noted that the £350 Million per week claim must therefore be "technically correct"." As context is important, my post from that other thread:- Brexiter : 'Or was Cameron lying? Me :He was certainly technically incorrect. However the important thing is that he was responding to the misleading impression Leave Campaigns were fostering that the trading part of our relationship with Europe AND be able to stop the free movement of labour. Brxiter: In which case the £350M per week was technically correct. Thank you for clearing that up for everyone." Me: The £350m was a lie. It was factually incorrect about something that was already happening and measurable. As for Cameron, the issue of immigration control became the main topic of conversation at various times in the election. So if Cameron's comments were in that context ie if the primary aim of leaving the EU was to restrict the freedom of movement, then it does almost certainly mean we would have to leave the single market. That's not really a lie. Some Leave campaigners suggested we could get our own unique deal however. But it is wrong to say that leaving the EU absolutely means leaving the single market because there are several countries, such as Norway and Switzerland, who are part of the single market and not part of the EU." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" There are only 28 members of the single market. The EEA is not the single market. The first paragraph refers to other nations being members of the EEA not the single market. What is your point? Being in the EEA allows none EU member states be part of the single market in the case of Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Switzerland have negotiated their own deal where they are in the single market but neither a EU member or EEA member. So there's a few different ways to be part of the single market but they all have one running theme, free movement of people. Perfectly explained
The EU are negotiating with the Swiss on free movement (the Swiss had a referendum which overwhelmingly voted against free movement). The EU is in favour of allowing the Swiss to give preferential treatment to their own nationals seeking work over EU citizens, that is, Swiss nationals will be considered above EU citizens when applying for jobs... and that EU citizens can go to Switzerland for 3 months to seek work.... any more than this and they have to prove that they have been looking for work. It is hoped that in this way it will effectively limit immigration from the EU to Switzerland, whilst still allowing 'free movement'.
Junker has said that the EU are suggesting this bearing in mind impending negotiations with the UK on Brexit. "Not sure your use of 'overwhelming' is entirely appropriate. 50.3% of voters voted for immigration controls. However when it became clear to them that they are soon to lose the 120 bilateral agreements that give them access to the single market, a majority of the Country have now changed their mind and called for a second referendum. The government have rejected that and are trying to come up with a compromise/fudge before 2017 when they run out of time. 'The plan would encourage employers to give them and local Swiss nationals priority for job openings, and to advertise vacancies at local job centres before recruiting from abroad, in particular economic sectors if net immigration went above average levels in other European countries. Crucially, the plan does not include any fixed limits to EU immigration, and stipulates that specific EU approval would have to be obtained before any such curbs could be imposed. The European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, said after talks with the Swiss confederation president, Johann Schneider-Ammann, in Zurich on Monday that he could back the proposal as long as a joint EU-Swiss commission approved it. “This will be possible without a doubt,” Juncker said, although he added that some questions remained. “I am more optimistic than I was in recent weeks.” In an apparent warning to Britain not to read anything into an eventual Swiss agreement, he added that any deal would be tailor-made and “Switzerland-specific.”.' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" There are only 28 members of the single market. The EEA is not the single market. The first paragraph refers to other nations being members of the EEA not the single market. What is your point? Being in the EEA allows none EU member states be part of the single market in the case of Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. Switzerland have negotiated their own deal where they are in the single market but neither a EU member or EEA member. So there's a few different ways to be part of the single market but they all have one running theme, free movement of people. Perfectly explained
The EU are negotiating with the Swiss on free movement (the Swiss had a referendum which overwhelmingly voted against free movement). The EU is in favour of allowing the Swiss to give preferential treatment to their own nationals seeking work over EU citizens, that is, Swiss nationals will be considered above EU citizens when applying for jobs... and that EU citizens can go to Switzerland for 3 months to seek work.... any more than this and they have to prove that they have been looking for work. It is hoped that in this way it will effectively limit immigration from the EU to Switzerland, whilst still allowing 'free movement'.
Junker has said that the EU are suggesting this bearing in mind impending negotiations with the UK on Brexit.
Not sure your use of 'overwhelming' is entirely appropriate. 50.3% of voters voted for immigration controls.
However when it became clear to them that they are soon to lose the 120 bilateral agreements that give them access to the single market, a majority of the Country have now changed their mind and called for a second referendum. The government have rejected that and are trying to come up with a compromise/fudge before 2017 when they run out of time.
'The plan would encourage employers to give them and local Swiss nationals priority for job openings, and to advertise vacancies at local job centres before recruiting from abroad, in particular economic sectors if net immigration went above average levels in other European countries.
Crucially, the plan does not include any fixed limits to EU immigration, and stipulates that specific EU approval would have to be obtained before any such curbs could be imposed.
The European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, said after talks with the Swiss confederation president, Johann Schneider-Ammann, in Zurich on Monday that he could back the proposal as long as a joint EU-Swiss commission approved it.
“This will be possible without a doubt,” Juncker said, although he added that some questions remained. “I am more optimistic than I was in recent weeks.” In an apparent warning to Britain not to read anything into an eventual Swiss agreement, he added that any deal would be tailor-made and “Switzerland-specific.”.'
"He also added that the deal with Switzerland and the U.K. are interlinked. But if a Swiss specific deal is done, then surely that in itself creates a precedent? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
