FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Article 50...
Article 50...
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Can be unilaterally revoked by the United Kingdom and it would not need the consent of the other 27 nations. So says an advocat general from the European Court of Justice. Interesting days ahead with an almost certain defeat for Theresa May, possible leadership challenge and the Changing mood of the country." What site is this reported on ? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Has that been officially announced? " Yes. This is not the final ruling, but an opinion by an advocat general has never been overturned in a final ruling. It is a solid indicator of the direction of travel. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision." Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. " The one thing I would say.... don't underestimate this government for doing completely illogical and irrational things! I don't think this government has any feeling left in it's lower limbs. -Matt | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. " I was referring to a ardent BREXIT fanatic's statement that the ruling would be appealed which would take months and by that time we'd have left the EU anyway  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"The UK Government wants the legal position withheld. It went to court to stop this case being heard and lost. Parliament wants the legal status of the withdrawal agreement to published, but it refuses. So who is “taking back control” - the country, or a clique at the centre of it?" Agree - except for "centre of it" - "right of it" - tongue in cheek | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. " If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. " Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future." So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised. 
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. " You are making the very point made by the counsel for the EU when arguing why any member should not be able to revoke Article 50 unilaterally. This must be a first - you and the EU on the same side of the argument. Are you feeling OK? I imagine one of the things the EU will want to achieve from this whole process is a “lessons learned” and to revise Article 50 in light of that, since it has been untested until now. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger. "You know that laws and rules, as well as terms and conditions from everything to using websites, eating in restaurants and laws of the land, are always work in progress. Nothing is static, everything changes. There is nothing wrong with changing rules and conditions when an evident flaw has been highlighted. What is wrong with that? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. " Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"He is simply taking the EU’s own submission to the court - that any member in future could use Art 50 as a weapon to force unilateral concessions before withdrawing it - and using it as a stick to beat the EU." Quite pathetic really... " The EU’s argument is that surrender of Art 50 ought to require the consent of the other member states." Yep, so it's been a loophole / grey area highlighted so they will be acting to close / clarify the issue which can only be applauded as good governance which I'm sure every single member on here will be fully behind | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this?" Dobre! You have called him out. He writes all sorts of crap - whatever comes into his head first! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this?" He hasn't heard about it, just plucked it from his what if/they could/may happen/I really really wish list.. Tis but an guess, Twas ever thus.. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I think mr brexit is having a breakdown.Hes been very random lately..The bullshit is standard . "Too true  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Kind of feels like there has been a plan all along. UK votes to leave Cameron fucks off May, a remained put in charge Insists we need a deal EU gives a crap deal May says only choice EU says, hang on, you can change your mind UK decides to stay Call me a conspiracy theorist ". Welcome to the machine | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Kind of feels like there has been a plan all along. UK votes to leave Cameron fucks off May, a remained put in charge Insists we need a deal EU gives a crap deal May says only choice EU says, hang on, you can change your mind UK decides to stay Call me a conspiracy theorist "I wouldn't bet too much against that | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"But the Eu hasn’t. It’s the ecj (by proxy). " Tusk has said it quite a few times before today. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I asked my kids if they wanted a milkshake ice-cream, they said yes, then I read the nutritional info on the only milkshake ice-cream available and it was that bad I didn't want them to have it. My kids voted yes to having it... do I have an irreversible mandate to supply them with something so bad some could argue it's child abuse "Your mandate obliges you to protect your children from something that is bad. Very good comparison. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I asked my kids if they wanted a milkshake ice-cream, they said yes, then I read the nutritional info on the only milkshake ice-cream available and it was that bad I didn't want them to have it. My kids voted yes to having it... do I have an irreversible mandate to supply them with something so bad some could argue it's child abuse
Your mandate obliges you to protect your children from something that is bad. Very good comparison. "I agree | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
You know that laws and rules, as well as terms and conditions from everything to using websites, eating in restaurants and laws of the land, are always work in progress. Nothing is static, everything changes.
There is nothing wrong with changing rules and conditions when an evident flaw has been highlighted.
What is wrong with that?"There are evident flaws in free movement of people laws and rules in the EU, which has not only been highlighted by the Brexit vote, but also by anti immigration parties gaining higher vote shares all over Europe, and in some cases winning outright such as in Italy. Yet the EU still insists free movement of people rules and conditions cannot be changed or reformed? So if nothing is static and everything changes as you say, why can't they change it in the face of growing opposition to it? It just makes the EU look like a ridiculous organisation if they insist free movement rules cannot be changed or reformed and yet they are willing to completely re-write Article 50 at the click of a finger like you suggest. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this?" It was suggested that Poland could do it in the future in the court case, keep up. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this? He hasn't heard about it, just plucked it from his what if/they could/may happen/I really really wish list.. Tis but an guess, Twas ever thus.. " I did hear about it because i've been keeping tabs on the court case. So its not a guess, its a fact this argument was put forward in the hearings. You clearly have no clue what you're talking about here do you. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I think mr brexit is having a breakdown.Hes been very random lately..The bullshit is standard . "Playing the man instead of the ball again Bob, shows you have no argument if this is all you can come up with. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I think mr brexit is having a breakdown.Hes been very random lately..The bullshit is standard .
Too true "Oh look, another one who plays the man instead of the ball. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It's great that this is the likely condition for Article 50, such that a responsible government could cancel it, should it be evident that it's not in the majority of the populations' interests, or it's clear that it needs to be revoked for other reasons." Not going to happen though is it, as the government already stated they have no intention of withdrawing article 50. Therefore this court case is just an amusing side show. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Not going to happen though is it, as the government already stated they have no intention of withdrawing article 50. Therefore this court case is just an amusing side show. " I am not contradicting you Centy (I think you may be correct on this matter), but how many times has May and this current batch of Tories said or promised one thing and then done the opposite or broken their promise? Considering their history I find your willingness to believe a singe thing they say utterly idiotic. Just saying. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this? It was suggested that Poland could do it in the future in the court case, keep up. " Bad suggestion, but if it's your point of view then it's ok, good luck. It's a waste of time to talk to people like you. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I think mr brexit is having a breakdown.Hes been very random lately..The bullshit is standard .
Too true
Oh look, another one who plays the man instead of the ball. "I play the ball mostly but I also play you because of your total inconsistencies and rubbish you post on here | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It's great that this is the likely condition for Article 50, such that a responsible government could cancel it, should it be evident that it's not in the majority of the populations' interests, or it's clear that it needs to be revoked for other reasons. Not going to happen though is it, as the government already stated they have no intention of withdrawing article 50. Therefore this court case is just an amusing side show. " Let's see how Dominic Grieve's surprise amendment gets voted on today. He proposed it previously and it received wide support then, but on request from Theresa May he ended up voting against his own amendment. He says now that he voted against it then, because Theresa May said that it would compromise her Brexit negotiating strategy. The negotiation is now over. Basically, the amendment will hand the Brexit issue to Parliament if Theresa May's deal is voted down next week. His amendment is signed by 16 Conservative MP's meaning that if they all voted for it along with all of the opposition parties - it will pass. Is Brexit unravelling???? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this? He hasn't heard about it, just plucked it from his what if/they could/may happen/I really really wish list.. Tis but an guess, Twas ever thus.. I did hear about it because i've been keeping tabs on the court case. So its not a guess, its a fact this argument was put forward in the hearings. You clearly have no clue what you're talking about here do you. " Has Poland or any of the countries triggered article 50,the answer is as you know a solid no.. You could be an alien, you could be made out of green cheese, I could be the pope.. All are of the same logic as you having grasped at straws again in your desparation for others to do what we have done, but they have not.. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this? He hasn't heard about it, just plucked it from his what if/they could/may happen/I really really wish list.. Tis but an guess, Twas ever thus.. I did hear about it because i've been keeping tabs on the court case. So its not a guess, its a fact this argument was put forward in the hearings. You clearly have no clue what you're talking about here do you. Has Poland or any of the countries triggered article 50,the answer is as you know a solid no.. You could be an alien, you could be made out of green cheese, I could be the pope.. All are of the same logic as you having grasped at straws again in your desparation for others to do what we have done, but they have not.. "
But the court case didn't say Poland had already triggered it, the court case said other EU countries (of which Poland is one), could trigger it in future as a tactic to get concessions from the EU, before withdrawing it. Do you know the difference between past, present and future? Thats what we're talking about here and thats what's been said in the court hearings. You still have no clue what you're talking about here do you. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this? He hasn't heard about it, just plucked it from his what if/they could/may happen/I really really wish list.. Tis but an guess, Twas ever thus.. I did hear about it because i've been keeping tabs on the court case. So its not a guess, its a fact this argument was put forward in the hearings. You clearly have no clue what you're talking about here do you. Has Poland or any of the countries triggered article 50,the answer is as you know a solid no.. You could be an alien, you could be made out of green cheese, I could be the pope.. All are of the same logic as you having grasped at straws again in your desparation for others to do what we have done, but they have not..
But the court case didn't say Poland had already triggered it, the court case said other EU countries (of which Poland is one), could trigger it in future as a tactic to get concessions from the EU, before withdrawing it. Do you know the difference between past, present and future? Thats what we're talking about here and thats what's been said in the court hearings. You still have no clue what you're talking about here do you. "I don’t quite follow your logic. We will have gained nothing by reversing article 50. It would be the status quo. So I’m not sure what strategy others will use. Threading to waste everyone’s time and money ? I’d guess per capita Brexit negotiations have been more costly to us. Even ignoring the opportunity cost (our government has been at a stand still on other issues) At most people may be more comfortable triggering knowing (in theory) any deal would need to be at least as good as staying. But I’m not convinced that will happen given our experience. I know you think may or wto is better than the Eu, but given how passionate you are, I’m not sure you’re the best barometer for the average leave voter. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this? He hasn't heard about it, just plucked it from his what if/they could/may happen/I really really wish list.. Tis but an guess, Twas ever thus.. I did hear about it because i've been keeping tabs on the court case. So its not a guess, its a fact this argument was put forward in the hearings. You clearly have no clue what you're talking about here do you. Has Poland or any of the countries triggered article 50,the answer is as you know a solid no.. You could be an alien, you could be made out of green cheese, I could be the pope.. All are of the same logic as you having grasped at straws again in your desparation for others to do what we have done, but they have not..
But the court case didn't say Poland had already triggered it, the court case said other EU countries (of which Poland is one), could trigger it in future as a tactic to get concessions from the EU, before withdrawing it. Do you know the difference between past, present and future? Thats what we're talking about here and thats what's been said in the court hearings. You still have no clue what you're talking about here do you. "Do you have any idea what you talk / write about? I don't think so (and not only me) . Poland will not do it because why would Poland do it? Show me reasons? I have not heard that something like this can happen from any politician in Poland, so how can a court know about it? The same is in Hungary. You base your theories on something that is not true. Where did you hear about it? In TV? In the Sun? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. The one thing I would say.... don't underestimate this government for doing completely illogical and irrational things! I don't think this government has any feeling left in it's lower limbs. -Matt" the tories are dead from the neck up | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It's great that this is the likely condition for Article 50, such that a responsible government could cancel it, should it be evident that it's not in the majority of the populations' interests, or it's clear that it needs to be revoked for other reasons. Not going to happen though is it, as the government already stated they have no intention of withdrawing article 50. Therefore this court case is just an amusing side show. Let's see how Dominic Grieve's surprise amendment gets voted on today. He proposed it previously and it received wide support then, but on request from Theresa May he ended up voting against his own amendment. He says now that he voted against it then, because Theresa May said that it would compromise her Brexit negotiating strategy. The negotiation is now over. Basically, the amendment will hand the Brexit issue to Parliament if Theresa May's deal is voted down next week. His amendment is signed by 16 Conservative MP's meaning that if they all voted for it along with all of the opposition parties - it will pass. Is Brexit unravelling????" just a quick update regarding the grieve amendment vote.... 28 tories ended up rebelling against the government, and his amendment won! the ERG boys are not going to like this... they are slowly being squeezed into a corner where they face the option of voting for TM's plan... or potentially MPs forcing then into a much closer customs union/single market or no brexit at all..... anyway... anyone see bojo's speech in the brexit debate, the man waffling on and not having a clue!!! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It's great that this is the likely condition for Article 50, such that a responsible government could cancel it, should it be evident that it's not in the majority of the populations' interests, or it's clear that it needs to be revoked for other reasons. Not going to happen though is it, as the government already stated they have no intention of withdrawing article 50. Therefore this court case is just an amusing side show. Let's see how Dominic Grieve's surprise amendment gets voted on today. He proposed it previously and it received wide support then, but on request from Theresa May he ended up voting against his own amendment. He says now that he voted against it then, because Theresa May said that it would compromise her Brexit negotiating strategy. The negotiation is now over. Basically, the amendment will hand the Brexit issue to Parliament if Theresa May's deal is voted down next week. His amendment is signed by 16 Conservative MP's meaning that if they all voted for it along with all of the opposition parties - it will pass. Is Brexit unravelling???? just a quick update regarding the grieve amendment vote.... 28 tories ended up rebelling against the government, and his amendment won! the ERG boys are not going to like this... they are slowly being squeezed into a corner where they face the option of voting for TM's plan... or potentially MPs forcing then into a much closer customs union/single market or no brexit at all..... anyway... anyone see bojo's speech in the brexit debate, the man waffling on and not having a clue!!!" As above, the Grieve amendment will hand the process to Parliament next week, after the May deal is voted down. It will then be down to MPs to reconcile themselves with the wishes of their constituents. Some will not be forgiven if the Leave process is thwarted. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Has that been officially announced? " No. It is just the opinion of one legal professional as I understand it | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Poland has never used article 50 as a strategy against the EU. Where did you hear about something like this? He hasn't heard about it, just plucked it from his what if/they could/may happen/I really really wish list.. Tis but an guess, Twas ever thus.. I did hear about it because i've been keeping tabs on the court case. So its not a guess, its a fact this argument was put forward in the hearings. You clearly have no clue what you're talking about here do you. Has Poland or any of the countries triggered article 50,the answer is as you know a solid no.. You could be an alien, you could be made out of green cheese, I could be the pope.. All are of the same logic as you having grasped at straws again in your desparation for others to do what we have done, but they have not..
But the court case didn't say Poland had already triggered it, the court case said other EU countries (of which Poland is one), could trigger it in future as a tactic to get concessions from the EU, before withdrawing it. Do you know the difference between past, present and future? Thats what we're talking about here and thats what's been said in the court hearings. You still have no clue what you're talking about here do you. "All it shows is that you now are agreeing with someone who has used a none existing wild guess to try and make a point, so far it's been shown to have no effect on the very likely outcome.. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. I was referring to a ardent BREXIT fanatic's statement that the ruling would be appealed which would take months and by that time we'd have left the EU anyway "I already told him it can't be and why. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. " I agree, this not a good ruling for the EU, that's why they made representations to say it should be interpreted differently. But "sed lex dura lex" and the EU will just have to live with it. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger. "No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"It's great that this is the likely condition for Article 50, such that a responsible government could cancel it, should it be evident that it's not in the majority of the populations' interests, or it's clear that it needs to be revoked for other reasons. Not going to happen though is it, as the government already stated they have no intention of withdrawing article 50. Therefore this court case is just an amusing side show. " You think? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
"The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50 | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50"“this” government... A week is a long time in politics and by this time next week “this” Governments landmark policy on which they have huiltvevwrything on - is likely to be in tatters. Where then does that leave “this” Govt? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
“this” government...
A week is a long time in politics and by this time next week “this” Governments landmark policy on which they have huiltvevwrything on - is likely to be in tatters.
Where then does that leave “this” Govt?"It leaves this government still in power. There can only be a change of government if a no confidence vote wins in Parliament and the tories and the DUP won't support a vote of no confidence in the government to allow Corbyn in. A more likely question is if Theresa May loses this vote where does that leave Theresa May? I think she'll try to force a 2nd vote and if she loses a 2nd vote she'll be out the door and a new Tory leader installed at Number 10. The government will still remain in power. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50"Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" A more likely question is if Theresa May loses this vote where does that leave Theresa May? I think she'll try to force a 2nd vote and if she loses a 2nd vote she'll be out the door and a new Tory leader installed at Number 10. The government will still remain in power. " Lol. In office perhaps. In power, certainly not. Not under this leader nor the next one. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
"And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
“this” government...
A week is a long time in politics and by this time next week “this” Governments landmark policy on which they have huiltvevwrything on - is likely to be in tatters.
Where then does that leave “this” Govt?
It leaves this government still in power. There can only be a change of government if a no confidence vote wins in Parliament and the tories and the DUP won't support a vote of no confidence in the government to allow Corbyn in.
A more likely question is if Theresa May loses this vote where does that leave Theresa May? I think she'll try to force a 2nd vote and if she loses a 2nd vote she'll be out the door and a new Tory leader installed at Number 10. The government will still remain in power. "Changing the Tory leader won't change anything. May's deal is the best deal on offer and, if it goes down, Parliament will insist that the Government either drop BREXIT, settle for EEA+ or put it back to the people in a third referendum. And it's looking increasing likely that any referendum will be a binary choice between some deal (May's or EEA+) or no BREXIT. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people" That's exactly what they are doing. Yesterday when a Labour MP yelled the government was in contempt, Theresa May stood up and said Parliament was in contempt of the people by trying to ignore the result of the referendum. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people"What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530 | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530
"And yet its ok by you for the government tp spend 9 million on its leaflet, Just reread it not ONE word about costs of being in the EU etc or and possible benefits of leaving one sided is an understatement and it says at the end the government will implement the voters decision, goodness you bad losers are having a real tantrum now no deal is looking likely. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
That's exactly what they are doing. Yesterday when a Labour MP yelled the government was in contempt, Theresa May stood up and said Parliament was in contempt of the people by trying to ignore the result of the referendum."You mean the referendum fought with an illegal campaign by Leave and which is likely to be declared void. It never was the 'will of the people' to Leave and there is no valid mandate to be had from an illegally gained result. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530
And yet its ok by you for the government tp spend 9 million on its leaflet, Just reread it not ONE word about costs of being in the EU etc or and possible benefits of leaving one sided is an understatement and it says at the end the government will implement the voters decision, goodness you bad losers are having a real tantrum now no deal is looking likely."The thing is, however much you may not like it, the Government's leaflet was legal. Also the Government never claimed to be neutral and had the absolute right, under law, to publish its opinion. If you don't like the law you can try to change but not liking the law does not give you, or the Leave campaign, the right to break it in pursuit your own agenda. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530
And yet its ok by you for the government tp spend 9 million on its leaflet, Just reread it not ONE word about costs of being in the EU etc or and possible benefits of leaving one sided is an understatement and it says at the end the government will implement the voters decision, goodness you bad losers are having a real tantrum now no deal is looking likely.
The thing is, however much you may not like it, the Government's leaflet was legal.
Also the Government never claimed to be neutral and had the absolute right, under law, to publish its opinion. If you don't like the law you can try to change but not liking the law does not give you, or the Leave campaign, the right to break it in pursuit your own agenda.
"Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530
And yet its ok by you for the government tp spend 9 million on its leaflet, Just reread it not ONE word about costs of being in the EU etc or and possible benefits of leaving one sided is an understatement and it says at the end the government will implement the voters decision, goodness you bad losers are having a real tantrum now no deal is looking likely.
The thing is, however much you may not like it, the Government's leaflet was legal.
Also the Government never claimed to be neutral and had the absolute right, under law, to publish its opinion. If you don't like the law you can try to change but not liking the law does not give you, or the Leave campaign, the right to break it in pursuit your own agenda.
Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country "Not yet, but that's part of the problem. It takes so long to put together an investigation, to get all the facts for them proceed to a water tight case! Give it time - and yes it will probably be after we have left the EU- ultimately too late! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530
And yet its ok by you for the government tp spend 9 million on its leaflet, Just reread it not ONE word about costs of being in the EU etc or and possible benefits of leaving one sided is an understatement and it says at the end the government will implement the voters decision, goodness you bad losers are having a real tantrum now no deal is looking likely.
The thing is, however much you may not like it, the Government's leaflet was legal.
Also the Government never claimed to be neutral and had the absolute right, under law, to publish its opinion. If you don't like the law you can try to change but not liking the law does not give you, or the Leave campaign, the right to break it in pursuit your own agenda.
Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country "Why would Democracy be dead?? What sort of thinking is that? More democracy does not mean that democracy is dead. An informed democratic vote is not a failure of democracy. Nobody voted to make this country poorer, less secure and less influential. I am watching the Debate right now on TV and the last three speakers have all assumed three different reasons why they think that people voted for Brexit and of those, one will be voting for Theresa May’s Bill and two are not. How can this be right and how can those divisions ever be reconciled? I will say though, that if there were to be a 2nd referendum and it was decided on less than a 10% margin then I would not accept it as being truly settled - whichever way it went. The most important issue for this country is to somehow reconcile the divisions - perhaps by focusing on what is really important in our lives and stop obsessing over the EU. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530
And yet its ok by you for the government tp spend 9 million on its leaflet, Just reread it not ONE word about costs of being in the EU etc or and possible benefits of leaving one sided is an understatement and it says at the end the government will implement the voters decision, goodness you bad losers are having a real tantrum now no deal is looking likely.
The thing is, however much you may not like it, the Government's leaflet was legal.
Also the Government never claimed to be neutral and had the absolute right, under law, to publish its opinion. If you don't like the law you can try to change but not liking the law does not give you, or the Leave campaign, the right to break it in pursuit your own agenda.
Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country "LOL. I posted the link to the case being heard on Friday and it's not looking good for Leave. Green Arrow me and you'll find the thread with today's article on it. All this talk of the end of democracy doesn't wash. BREXITERS were angry before the referendum, they've been angry since the referendum and they'll be angry, regardless of what happens, in the future. It's what happens when you read too many conspiracy sites about one elite or another secretly plotting your downfall or some mad plan to take over the world, and actually believe it. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530
And yet its ok by you for the government tp spend 9 million on its leaflet, Just reread it not ONE word about costs of being in the EU etc or and possible benefits of leaving one sided is an understatement and it says at the end the government will implement the voters decision, goodness you bad losers are having a real tantrum now no deal is looking likely.
The thing is, however much you may not like it, the Government's leaflet was legal.
Also the Government never claimed to be neutral and had the absolute right, under law, to publish its opinion. If you don't like the law you can try to change but not liking the law does not give you, or the Leave campaign, the right to break it in pursuit your own agenda.
Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country
LOL. I posted the link to the case being heard on Friday and it's not looking good for Leave. Green Arrow me and you'll find the thread with today's article on it.
All this talk of the end of democracy doesn't wash. BREXITERS were angry before the referendum, they've been angry since the referendum and they'll be angry, regardless of what happens, in the future. It's what happens when you read too many conspiracy sites about one elite or another secretly plotting your downfall or some mad plan to take over the world, and actually believe it.
"You have been getting increasingly more and more angry on here the closer the Brexit deadline in March gets. Your grasping at straws is also becoming increasingly desperate. Come March I expect you to blow a blood vessel if you don't calm down a bit. Also no ruling has been made on any court case these are still unproved allegations. As I told you last time you came out with this crap, you would do well to remember the convention in law in this country is innocent until proven guilty. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530
And yet its ok by you for the government tp spend 9 million on its leaflet, Just reread it not ONE word about costs of being in the EU etc or and possible benefits of leaving one sided is an understatement and it says at the end the government will implement the voters decision, goodness you bad losers are having a real tantrum now no deal is looking likely.
The thing is, however much you may not like it, the Government's leaflet was legal.
Also the Government never claimed to be neutral and had the absolute right, under law, to publish its opinion. If you don't like the law you can try to change but not liking the law does not give you, or the Leave campaign, the right to break it in pursuit your own agenda.
Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country
LOL. I posted the link to the case being heard on Friday and it's not looking good for Leave. Green Arrow me and you'll find the thread with today's article on it.
All this talk of the end of democracy doesn't wash. BREXITERS were angry before the referendum, they've been angry since the referendum and they'll be angry, regardless of what happens, in the future. It's what happens when you read too many conspiracy sites about one elite or another secretly plotting your downfall or some mad plan to take over the world, and actually believe it.
You have been getting increasingly more and more angry on here the closer the Brexit deadline in March gets. Your grasping at straws is also becoming increasingly desperate. Come March I expect you to blow a blood vessel if you don't calm down a bit.
Also no ruling has been made on any court case these are still unproved allegations. As I told you last time you came out with this crap, you would do well to remember the convention in law in this country is innocent until proven guilty. "You can rest assured that I'm far from angry, in fact I'm positively jubilant. No straws here. There may well still be a BREXIT on 29 March but it won't be the BREXIT you wanted but more like the Remain I want. You really need to wake up and smell the coffee. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50"Theyre not going to be the government for that long if they carry on tearing themselves apart | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people"What is the will of the people? leave with May's deal? Leave with no deal? Leave with an as yet unnegotiated deal? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530
And yet its ok by you for the government tp spend 9 million on its leaflet, Just reread it not ONE word about costs of being in the EU etc or and possible benefits of leaving one sided is an understatement and it says at the end the government will implement the voters decision, goodness you bad losers are having a real tantrum now no deal is looking likely.
The thing is, however much you may not like it, the Government's leaflet was legal.
Also the Government never claimed to be neutral and had the absolute right, under law, to publish its opinion. If you don't like the law you can try to change but not liking the law does not give you, or the Leave campaign, the right to break it in pursuit your own agenda.
Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country
LOL. I posted the link to the case being heard on Friday and it's not looking good for Leave. Green Arrow me and you'll find the thread with today's article on it.
All this talk of the end of democracy doesn't wash. BREXITERS were angry before the referendum, they've been angry since the referendum and they'll be angry, regardless of what happens, in the future. It's what happens when you read too many conspiracy sites about one elite or another secretly plotting your downfall or some mad plan to take over the world, and actually believe it.
You have been getting increasingly more and more angry on here the closer the Brexit deadline in March gets. Your grasping at straws is also becoming increasingly desperate. Come March I expect you to blow a blood vessel if you don't calm down a bit.
Also no ruling has been made on any court case these are still unproved allegations. As I told you last time you came out with this crap, you would do well to remember the convention in law in this country is innocent until proven guilty. "Have you read the article? It's those rich fucking UK elites living in the EU bringing the case (Nigel Lawson behind it as he's changed his mind lol). They are going to fast track it too - Just imagine if the whole vote was declared void due to leave cheating! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere that this kind of ruling can be challenged like someone posted on here, it's not like one side is taking the other to court so there will be a looser who can appeal, it's just a legal interpretation decision. Why would anyone from the U.K. challenge this? The U.K. Govt had to try to make a case in the hearing but to challenge this ruling would be tantamount to removing your left foot altogether, having already shot yourself in the right foot. Logically, it may never be used - but conceptually it is a very good ruling for the U.K. - irrespective of Brexit/Remain. If the final ruling of the ECJ comes out this way (and this is not the final ruling btw) then I think it's the EU who has shot themselves in the foot. You could now see disgruntled countries in the EU like Italy, Poland and Hungary triggering article 50 as a strategic tactic to force concessions from Brussels and then withdrawing it again. The ECJ has opened Pandoras box with this. Not quite. A Brit originally wrote A50 with the inderstanding that it would probably never be used. What will happen now is that A50 will be re-written to prevent this happening in the future. So it's yet another case of the EU changing the rules to suit it's own agenda then, why am I not surprised.
The EU insists things like free movement of people rules can't be changed but now you're saying they'll change the rules on article 50 at the click of a finger.
No, not at the click of a finger but by due process, just like bad law is charged in every democracy. But for now the law stands as it is and we can ditch BREXIT if we want.
The key word being want, and as reiterated in pmqs today the govt do not want to and wont revoke article 50
Govetments come and Govetments go. If this Government tries to ignore the will of Parliament it will have to go.
And yet Parliament its appears is ignoring the will of the people
What 'will of the People'. Parliament is the only and sole reflection of the will of the people, not some illegally fought plebiscite. Leave, like everything else backed with Russian money, cheated and the result is likely to be declared null and void, possibly before Christmas. Turns out Leave never was the will of the people and no Leave mandate ever existed.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/vote-leave-referendum-overspending-high-court-brexit-legal-challenge-void-oxford-professor-a8668771.html?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#Echobox=1544024530
And yet its ok by you for the government tp spend 9 million on its leaflet, Just reread it not ONE word about costs of being in the EU etc or and possible benefits of leaving one sided is an understatement and it says at the end the government will implement the voters decision, goodness you bad losers are having a real tantrum now no deal is looking likely.
The thing is, however much you may not like it, the Government's leaflet was legal.
Also the Government never claimed to be neutral and had the absolute right, under law, to publish its opinion. If you don't like the law you can try to change but not liking the law does not give you, or the Leave campaign, the right to break it in pursuit your own agenda.
Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country "So you're fine with May's deal? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country So you're fine with May's deal?" No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country So you're fine with May's deal? No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit" But "just leave" is not what the Leave campaign said we would do during the referendum campaign. What the Leave campaign actually said was that, when we Leave, we would negotiate a better deal than we currently have, because we hold all the cards. So how can you claim that leaving with 'no deal' is the 'will of the people' when it's not what the Leave campaign said they'd actually do? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country So you're fine with May's deal? No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit" But “no deal” is not just about trade as has been quite correctly pointed out out on many, many occasions. Our entire regulatory framework is entwined in EU law, but the day we leave without any agreements with the EU - all of the laws and regulations that impact our day to day lives and which are connected to the EU will cease to exist. For a “no deal” to happen, all of the UK Agencies the deal with EU matters like the CAA, DEFRA, Home Office, HMRC (and probably more) will have to be massively enlarged so that U.K. Standards actually exist again and the U.K. is in a position to make bilateral standards agreements. I don’t see a huge recruitment drive - do you? No UK Govt will walk towards a no deal exit that will instantly cause border chaos, import and export restrictions, problems with agriculture, shipping and aviation just because a handful of half-wit Tories can’t see further than the end of their noses. The U.K. could go it alone, I have no doubt about that. But it would take ten years to prepare for it, the cost would be astronomical and at some point, we are all going to wake up from this stupid nonsense and wonder what it is actually all about, | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit" did you see any of the execs in the car industry talking to the Commons business committee yesterday?... if not i'd take an hour out an watch it (iplayer bbc parliament) fascinating them talking to the head of toyota uk, where he said they use a JIT (just in time) processes to keep down overheads.... theres is 4 hrs!! nissans in sunderland is one day...... BMW remember as bringing forward there month shutdown 3 months early as to not have to deal with chaos in the first few weeks.... remember they are factoring the channel tunnel being shut for the first 2weeks!! remember that the nhs are now beginning to stockpile medicines.... remember that food manufacurers are doing the same thing.... but... you think everything will be fine... so.... quick question... what do you know that they don't? what makes you more intelligent than those in the industries themselves? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit did you see any of the execs in the car industry talking to the Commons business committee yesterday?... if not i'd take an hour out an watch it (iplayer bbc parliament) fascinating them talking to the head of toyota uk, where he said they use a JIT (just in time) processes to keep down overheads.... theres is 4 hrs!! nissans in sunderland is one day...... BMW remember as bringing forward there month shutdown 3 months early as to not have to deal with chaos in the first few weeks.... remember they are factoring the channel tunnel being shut for the first 2weeks!! remember that the nhs are now beginning to stockpile medicines.... remember that food manufacurers are doing the same thing.... but... you think everything will be fine... so.... quick question... what do you know that they don't? what makes you more intelligent than those in the industries themselves?" Dont claim to be more intelligent than anyone, the fact is all these companies will have plans to deal with any problems, did they go bust when the bad weather hit ? of course not if we end up with no deal they will have a couple of months to prepare for any teething problems just as any business will, as for the comment someone made about the gov not recruiting people, certainly in the Ag sector they are as I know someone who had an interview today for a job dealing with brexit issues | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit did you see any of the execs in the car industry talking to the Commons business committee yesterday?... if not i'd take an hour out an watch it (iplayer bbc parliament) fascinating them talking to the head of toyota uk, where he said they use a JIT (just in time) processes to keep down overheads.... theres is 4 hrs!! nissans in sunderland is one day...... BMW remember as bringing forward there month shutdown 3 months early as to not have to deal with chaos in the first few weeks.... remember they are factoring the channel tunnel being shut for the first 2weeks!! remember that the nhs are now beginning to stockpile medicines.... remember that food manufacurers are doing the same thing.... but... you think everything will be fine... so.... quick question... what do you know that they don't? what makes you more intelligent than those in the industries themselves? Dont claim to be more intelligent than anyone, the fact is all these companies will have plans to deal with any problems, did they go bust when the bad weather hit ? of course not if we end up with no deal they will have a couple of months to prepare for any teething problems just as any business will, as for the comment someone made about the gov not recruiting people, certainly in the Ag sector they are as I know someone who had an interview today for a job dealing with brexit issues" So only about two years too late then....there’s nothing like being prepared is there? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country So you're fine with May's deal? No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit But "just leave" is not what the Leave campaign said we would do during the referendum campaign. What the Leave campaign actually said was that, when we Leave, we would negotiate a better deal than we currently have, because we hold all the cards. So how can you claim that leaving with 'no deal' is the 'will of the people' when it's not what the Leave campaign said they'd actually do? " None of that was on the ballot paper though, there was only one question on the ballot paper which was Leave or remain. The people chose Leave. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country So you're fine with May's deal? No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit" Sounds rather simple - it's a pity that the those who organised the referendum and completed the negotiations couldn't have found a facile outcome, or even agreed a simple plan before they started. There's been so much that's wrong with Brexit from the start that a cancellation of Article 50 would be prudent, so that the UK would only ever, if it were to, leave under the very best terms for the country. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country So you're fine with May's deal? No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit But "just leave" is not what the Leave campaign said we would do during the referendum campaign. What the Leave campaign actually said was that, when we Leave, we would negotiate a better deal than we currently have, because we hold all the cards. So how can you claim that leaving with 'no deal' is the 'will of the people' when it's not what the Leave campaign said they'd actually do? None of that was on the ballot paper though, there was only one question on the ballot paper which was Leave or remain. The people chose Leave. "Which is what we (the remain side) have been saying all along. So let's Leave with EEA+. It's still Leave. If you'd agreed to that back in March 2017 this whole BREXIT thing would have been sorted out before the end of that Summer. Now we'd be out of the EU with no border problems or backstops issues, out of CAP and CAF, and goods and services trading almost as good as ever. Why have you waisted almost 1 1/2 years? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit" He isn't worth any attention, he has no idea what's going on. A typical nationalist. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit" I wish I’d thought of that one | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit" | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit I wish I’d thought of that one "I doubt Eddie thought of it as there was a picture of Theresa May mocked up in the papers as the black knight in the Holy grail and so probably got the idea from there. Plagiarism doesn't really require a lot of wit or thought. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit He isn't worth any attention, he has no idea what's going on. A typical nationalist. " Have you any idea what's going on in your home country? There is a huge nationalist uprising going on in Poland, plenty of your countrymen and women don't like the EU either. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit He isn't worth any attention, he has no idea what's going on. A typical nationalist. Have you any idea what's going on in your home country? There is a huge nationalist uprising going on in Poland, plenty of your countrymen and women don't like the EU either. " No but it is a good metaphor for Brexiteers in general. Not a leg left to stand on, but still going! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit He isn't worth any attention, he has no idea what's going on. A typical nationalist. Have you any idea what's going on in your home country? There is a huge nationalist uprising going on in Poland, plenty of your countrymen and women don't like the EU either. " Nah...somehow doubt I'd read the same papers as you...just an obvious analogy...you still haven't answer a few questions on other threads...I know it's a hard time for you at the moment though ! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country So you're fine with May's deal? No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit" Im glad you know better than those whose job it is to assess risk who think we are woefully unprepared for a no deal brexit on 29/3/19. The imposition of tariffs together with the interruption of JIT supplies will lead to chaos in manufacturing. A No Deal will also blow the GFA out of the water (possibly literally) | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I don't actually see anywhere Has anyone yet said that the result was illegal just because remainers might claim it is doesnt mean it was, all this trying to defeat the will of the people will backfire if brexit doesnt happen then democracy is dead in this country So you're fine with May's deal? No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit But "just leave" is not what the Leave campaign said we would do during the referendum campaign. What the Leave campaign actually said was that, when we Leave, we would negotiate a better deal than we currently have, because we hold all the cards. So how can you claim that leaving with 'no deal' is the 'will of the people' when it's not what the Leave campaign said they'd actually do? None of that was on the ballot paper though, there was only one question on the ballot paper which was Leave or remain. The people chose Leave. "May's deal is leaving yet noone wants it....not quite as simple as you make out then is it? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" No we just leave and be done with it, all this shit about it being a disaster is just scare tactics, average tariffs are only 3/4 % if folks in the EU want our goods they will buy them, anyone who runs a business knows the price you charge is the price the market will bear and that is down to demand for your product, if you want it you pay for it, even the boss of the cbi on radio the other day said it would settle down and be sorted quickly as businesses that want to survive would find solutions, there are bigger problems for business than brexit did you see any of the execs in the car industry talking to the Commons business committee yesterday?... if not i'd take an hour out an watch it (iplayer bbc parliament) fascinating them talking to the head of toyota uk, where he said they use a JIT (just in time) processes to keep down overheads.... theres is 4 hrs!! nissans in sunderland is one day...... BMW remember as bringing forward there month shutdown 3 months early as to not have to deal with chaos in the first few weeks.... remember they are factoring the channel tunnel being shut for the first 2weeks!! remember that the nhs are now beginning to stockpile medicines.... remember that food manufacurers are doing the same thing.... but... you think everything will be fine... so.... quick question... what do you know that they don't? what makes you more intelligent than those in the industries themselves? Dont claim to be more intelligent than anyone, the fact is all these companies will have plans to deal with any problems, did they go bust when the bad weather hit ? of course not if we end up with no deal they will have a couple of months to prepare for any teething problems just as any business will, as for the comment someone made about the gov not recruiting people, certainly in the Ag sector they are as I know someone who had an interview today for a job dealing with brexit issues" So he/she will be able to start their new job in a couple of months? That's plenty of time to sort out the shitstorm isnt it? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I this country But "just leave" is not what the Leave campaign said we would do during the referendum campaign. What the Leave campaign actually said was that, when we Leave, we would negotiate a better deal than we currently have, because we hold all the cards. So how can you claim that leaving with 'no deal' is the 'will of the people' when it's not what the Leave campaign said they'd actually do? None of that was on the ballot paper though, there was only one question on the ballot paper which was Leave or remain. The people chose Leave. "Ok Centy, you've obviously choosen your point of view stance irrevocably now that no rhetoric can be used as evidence to support either leave or remain options on the ballot paper
So, your vision of BREXIT means we don't need to leave the Single Market or the Customs Union, I'm so pleased you've cleared that issue up for us all.
I'm sure you'll be popping that Champaign then if we sign up to the EEA to continue the 4 Freedom's & Customs Union.
You could of told us all that's what you really wanted ages ago | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit He isn't worth any attention, he has no idea what's going on. A typical nationalist. Have you any idea what's going on in your home country? There is a huge nationalist uprising going on in Poland, plenty of your countrymen and women don't like the EU either. " Of course I know what is going on in Poland. How much is plenty for you? The latest statistics especially for you: Stay :71% Leave:11% Don't know: 18% So I have to understand that 11% of those who don't like the EU is a plenty for you? Again you write about something you have no idea about.  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit He isn't worth any attention, he has no idea what's going on. A typical nationalist. Have you any idea what's going on in your home country? There is a huge nationalist uprising going on in Poland, plenty of your countrymen and women don't like the EU either. Of course I know what is going on in Poland. How much is plenty for you? The latest statistics especially for you: Stay :71% Leave:11% Don't know: 18% So I have to understand that 11% of those who don't like the EU is a plenty for you? Again you write about something you have no idea about. "He would probably add those numbers and make 99, or 101 but never 100! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit He isn't worth any attention, he has no idea what's going on. A typical nationalist. " Whereas you would rather be rude about someone who has a different point of view, class | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Centaur reminds me of the black knight in the Holy Grail...in fact so does brexit He isn't worth any attention, he has no idea what's going on. A typical nationalist. Whereas you would rather be rude about someone who has a different point of view, class" In fairness, that’s the only reason you should be rude to someone. Not because of their colour, not nationality, not race, not religion, not sexuality. But if someone has a horrific hate-filled world view, then why not? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
I did see the 1922 committee is trying to delay the vote now. They've rumbled what's going on and are trying to stall. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I’m glad we had some real figures regarding Polish nationalism and there overwhelming desire to leave the EU! Most of the polish people I know are either happily settled with families here or have gone back to Poland because in case you hadn’t noticed they are really hard working people (next door to Germany - any coincidence there?) and lots of multi national companies want to invest in them. Remember Cadbury’s was sold out by its board to Kraft for lots of Yankee dollars and they promptly shifted masses of production to Poland and changed the recipes to be more cost effective. Now was that the EUs fault or the board selling the family silver to carpetbaggers who took it away to make more profit and who did well out of that deal? " while there has been plenty of claims about cadburys recieving eu grants move ive not found any evidence they did(not looked that hard) but twinnings and ford both had grants and or cheap loans to dump british jobs do you support the eu using subsidies to make UK workers unemployed ? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I’m glad we had some real figures regarding Polish nationalism and there overwhelming desire to leave the EU! Most of the polish people I know are either happily settled with families here or have gone back to Poland because in case you hadn’t noticed they are really hard working people (next door to Germany - any coincidence there?) and lots of multi national companies want to invest in them. Remember Cadbury’s was sold out by its board to Kraft for lots of Yankee dollars and they promptly shifted masses of production to Poland and changed the recipes to be more cost effective. Now was that the EUs fault or the board selling the family silver to carpetbaggers who took it away to make more profit and who did well out of that deal? while there has been plenty of claims about cadburys recieving eu grants move ive not found any evidence they did(not looked that hard) but twinnings and ford both had grants and or cheap loans to dump british jobs do you support the eu using subsidies to make UK workers unemployed ?" All governments offer incentives to business - it gets the jobs | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I’m glad we had some real figures regarding Polish nationalism and there overwhelming desire to leave the EU! Most of the polish people I know are either happily settled with families here or have gone back to Poland because in case you hadn’t noticed they are really hard working people (next door to Germany - any coincidence there?) and lots of multi national companies want to invest in them. Remember Cadbury’s was sold out by its board to Kraft for lots of Yankee dollars and they promptly shifted masses of production to Poland and changed the recipes to be more cost effective. Now was that the EUs fault or the board selling the family silver to carpetbaggers who took it away to make more profit and who did well out of that deal? while there has been plenty of claims about cadburys recieving eu grants move ive not found any evidence they did(not looked that hard) but twinnings and ford both had grants and or cheap loans to dump british jobs do you support the eu using subsidies to make UK workers unemployed ? All governments offer incentives to business - it gets the jobs" yes and if they are above board thats fine but what isnt fine IMVHO is the eu giving incentives to take jobs from one country to another, especially using money from a net contributor country to take jobs from it and give them to another | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I’m glad we had some real figures regarding Polish nationalism and there overwhelming desire to leave the EU! Most of the polish people I know are either happily settled with families here or have gone back to Poland because in case you hadn’t noticed they are really hard working people (next door to Germany - any coincidence there?) and lots of multi national companies want to invest in them. Remember Cadbury’s was sold out by its board to Kraft for lots of Yankee dollars and they promptly shifted masses of production to Poland and changed the recipes to be more cost effective. Now was that the EUs fault or the board selling the family silver to carpetbaggers who took it away to make more profit and who did well out of that deal? while there has been plenty of claims about cadburys recieving eu grants move ive not found any evidence they did(not looked that hard) but twinnings and ford both had grants and or cheap loans to dump british jobs do you support the eu using subsidies to make UK workers unemployed ?" Yet more BREXIT lies. A claim by Pro-Brexit Euro-MP Daniel Hannan that “the EU gave Ford a grant to relocate from Southampton to Turkey” is tendentious. In 2012 Ford did receive a loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB), an EU institution, of around £150 million for a factory in Turkey. The loan was not to relocate, as Hannan says, though it occurred around the same time as Ford chose to close its factory in Southampton. The closer in Southampton was nothing to do with the loan. However it should also be put in the context of EIB lending in Britain, which w is worth around £6 billion a year. EIB loans fund projects like Crossrail and the Midlands Metropolitan Hospital in Birmingham. Notably also, the bank lent Ford £450 million in 2010 to develop a new generation of greener vehicles here in the UK. Twinings never received a loan or grant from the EU to move any where. Twinings had applied for a £10.5 million loan from the EU to open a plant in Poland but the EU declined because it believed Twinings were trying to use the money for relocation rather than regeneration. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-13632135 | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I’m glad we had some real figures regarding Polish nationalism and there overwhelming desire to leave the EU! Most of the polish people I know are either happily settled with families here or have gone back to Poland because in case you hadn’t noticed they are really hard working people (next door to Germany - any coincidence there?) and lots of multi national companies want to invest in them. Remember Cadbury’s was sold out by its board to Kraft for lots of Yankee dollars and they promptly shifted masses of production to Poland and changed the recipes to be more cost effective. Now was that the EUs fault or the board selling the family silver to carpetbaggers who took it away to make more profit and who did well out of that deal? while there has been plenty of claims about cadburys recieving eu grants move ive not found any evidence they did(not looked that hard) but twinnings and ford both had grants and or cheap loans to dump british jobs do you support the eu using subsidies to make UK workers unemployed ? Yet more BREXIT lies. A claim by Pro-Brexit Euro-MP Daniel Hannan that “the EU gave Ford a grant to relocate from Southampton to Turkey” is tendentious. In 2012 Ford did receive a loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB), an EU institution, of around £150 million for a factory in Turkey. The loan was not to relocate, as Hannan says, though it occurred around the same time as Ford chose to close its factory in Southampton. The closer in Southampton was nothing to do with the loan. However it should also be put in the context of EIB lending in Britain, which w is worth around £6 billion a year. EIB loans fund projects like Crossrail and the Midlands Metropolitan Hospital in Birmingham. Notably also, the bank lent Ford £450 million in 2010 to develop a new generation of greener vehicles here in the UK. Twinings never received a loan or grant from the EU to move any where. Twinings had applied for a £10.5 million loan from the EU to open a plant in Poland but the EU declined because it believed Twinings were trying to use the money for relocation rather than regeneration. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-13632135 " Well twinings say they received it
If you cant see the difference between a grant/loan for an infrastructure project which creates new jobs or benefits to a locality and one given to a company to take jobs from one country and replace them in another then there is little hope for you | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I’m glad we had some real figures regarding Polish nationalism and there overwhelming desire to leave the EU! Most of the polish people I know are either happily settled with families here or have gone back to Poland because in case you hadn’t noticed they are really hard working people (next door to Germany - any coincidence there?) and lots of multi national companies want to invest in them. Remember Cadbury’s was sold out by its board to Kraft for lots of Yankee dollars and they promptly shifted masses of production to Poland and changed the recipes to be more cost effective. Now was that the EUs fault or the board selling the family silver to carpetbaggers who took it away to make more profit and who did well out of that deal? while there has been plenty of claims about cadburys recieving eu grants move ive not found any evidence they did(not looked that hard) but twinnings and ford both had grants and or cheap loans to dump british jobs do you support the eu using subsidies to make UK workers unemployed ? Yet more BREXIT lies. A claim by Pro-Brexit Euro-MP Daniel Hannan that “the EU gave Ford a grant to relocate from Southampton to Turkey” is tendentious. In 2012 Ford did receive a loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB), an EU institution, of around £150 million for a factory in Turkey. The loan was not to relocate, as Hannan says, though it occurred around the same time as Ford chose to close its factory in Southampton. The closer in Southampton was nothing to do with the loan. However it should also be put in the context of EIB lending in Britain, which w is worth around £6 billion a year. EIB loans fund projects like Crossrail and the Midlands Metropolitan Hospital in Birmingham. Notably also, the bank lent Ford £450 million in 2010 to develop a new generation of greener vehicles here in the UK. Twinings never received a loan or grant from the EU to move any where. Twinings had applied for a £10.5 million loan from the EU to open a plant in Poland but the EU declined because it believed Twinings were trying to use the money for relocation rather than regeneration. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-13632135 Well twinings say they received it
If you cant see the difference between a grant/loan for an infrastructure project which creates new jobs or benefits to a locality and one given to a company to take jobs from one country and replace them in another then there is little hope for you"I can't see anything about it in Twinings site. To fair to you, Twinings did receive a regeneration grant in 2010 to build a factory in Poland but it was withdrawn in 2011 for the reasons I stated above. As for your comments about not knowing the difference between relocation and regeneration, I don't know who they're ment to be directed at. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I’m glad we had some real figures regarding Polish nationalism and there overwhelming desire to leave the EU! Most of the polish people I know are either happily settled with families here or have gone back to Poland because in case you hadn’t noticed they are really hard working people (next door to Germany - any coincidence there?) and lots of multi national companies want to invest in them. Remember Cadbury’s was sold out by its board to Kraft for lots of Yankee dollars and they promptly shifted masses of production to Poland and changed the recipes to be more cost effective. Now was that the EUs fault or the board selling the family silver to carpetbaggers who took it away to make more profit and who did well out of that deal? while there has been plenty of claims about cadburys recieving eu grants move ive not found any evidence they did(not looked that hard) but twinnings and ford both had grants and or cheap loans to dump british jobs do you support the eu using subsidies to make UK workers unemployed ? Yet more BREXIT lies. A claim by Pro-Brexit Euro-MP Daniel Hannan that “the EU gave Ford a grant to relocate from Southampton to Turkey” is tendentious. In 2012 Ford did receive a loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB), an EU institution, of around £150 million for a factory in Turkey. The loan was not to relocate, as Hannan says, though it occurred around the same time as Ford chose to close its factory in Southampton. The closer in Southampton was nothing to do with the loan. However it should also be put in the context of EIB lending in Britain, which w is worth around £6 billion a year. EIB loans fund projects like Crossrail and the Midlands Metropolitan Hospital in Birmingham. Notably also, the bank lent Ford £450 million in 2010 to develop a new generation of greener vehicles here in the UK. Twinings never received a loan or grant from the EU to move any where. Twinings had applied for a £10.5 million loan from the EU to open a plant in Poland but the EU declined because it believed Twinings were trying to use the money for relocation rather than regeneration. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-13632135 Well twinings say they received it
If you cant see the difference between a grant/loan for an infrastructure project which creates new jobs or benefits to a locality and one given to a company to take jobs from one country and replace them in another then there is little hope for you"so lets name some infrusture projects that EU money has gone toward.... lets start in the south west since you are down there.... the eden project! the manchester metrolink..... liverpool john lennon airport.... crossrail...... newcastle/gateshead quayside.... cardiff airport and the cardiff airport/city centre train link... HS1 in the uk enterprise rail link electrifacation... between belfast and dublin the nissan car factory in sunderland the hitachi train factory in newton aycliffe (you know those shiny next gen inter city express trains that run thru bath!....youre welcome!!!) | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I’m glad we had some real figures regarding Polish nationalism and there overwhelming desire to leave the EU! Most of the polish people I know are either happily settled with families here or have gone back to Poland because in case you hadn’t noticed they are really hard working people (next door to Germany - any coincidence there?) and lots of multi national companies want to invest in them. Remember Cadbury’s was sold out by its board to Kraft for lots of Yankee dollars and they promptly shifted masses of production to Poland and changed the recipes to be more cost effective. Now was that the EUs fault or the board selling the family silver to carpetbaggers who took it away to make more profit and who did well out of that deal? while there has been plenty of claims about cadburys recieving eu grants move ive not found any evidence they did(not looked that hard) but twinnings and ford both had grants and or cheap loans to dump british jobs do you support the eu using subsidies to make UK workers unemployed ? Yet more BREXIT lies. A claim by Pro-Brexit Euro-MP Daniel Hannan that “the EU gave Ford a grant to relocate from Southampton to Turkey” is tendentious. In 2012 Ford did receive a loan from the European Investment Bank (EIB), an EU institution, of around £150 million for a factory in Turkey. The loan was not to relocate, as Hannan says, though it occurred around the same time as Ford chose to close its factory in Southampton. The closer in Southampton was nothing to do with the loan. However it should also be put in the context of EIB lending in Britain, which w is worth around £6 billion a year. EIB loans fund projects like Crossrail and the Midlands Metropolitan Hospital in Birmingham. Notably also, the bank lent Ford £450 million in 2010 to develop a new generation of greener vehicles here in the UK. Twinings never received a loan or grant from the EU to move any where. Twinings had applied for a £10.5 million loan from the EU to open a plant in Poland but the EU declined because it believed Twinings were trying to use the money for relocation rather than regeneration. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-13632135 Well twinings say they received it
If you cant see the difference between a grant/loan for an infrastructure project which creates new jobs or benefits to a locality and one given to a company to take jobs from one country and replace them in another then there is little hope for you
so lets name some infrusture projects that EU money has gone toward....
lets start in the south west since you are down there.... the eden project!
the manchester metrolink.....
liverpool john lennon airport....
crossrail......
newcastle/gateshead quayside....
cardiff airport and the cardiff airport/city centre train link...
HS1 in the uk
enterprise rail link electrifacation... between belfast and dublin
the nissan car factory in sunderland
the hitachi train factory in newton aycliffe (you know those shiny next gen inter city express trains that run thru bath!....youre welcome!!!)
"You need to go to spec savers, I wasnt complaining about eu money to regeneration projects but about money to companies to move uk jobs abroad. Didnt bother to look at the rest but the 40 million nissan money was a UK GOVERNMENT grant which was approved by the eu there was as far as I can find on google one cent of eu money. Of course you may know different | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"I’m glad we had some real figures regarding Polish nationalism and there overwhelming desire to leave the EU! Most of the polish people I know are either happily settled with families here or have gone back to Poland because in case you hadn’t noticed they are really hard working people (next door to Germany - any coincidence there?) and lots of multi national companies want to invest in them. Remember Cadbury’s was sold out by its board to Kraft for lots of Yankee dollars and they promptly shifted masses of production to Poland and changed the recipes to be more cost effective. Now was that the EUs fault or the board selling the family silver to carpetbaggers who took it away to make more profit and who did well out of that deal? while there has been plenty of claims about cadburys recieving eu grants move ive not found any evidence they did(not looked that hard) but twinnings and ford both had grants and or cheap loans to dump british jobs do you support the eu using subsidies to make UK workers unemployed ?" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon "Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave "Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave
Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be?
"If you read what I wrote properly I said PERHAPS. As I have said mant times the benefits among many and in no particular order are, £350 a wk and rising to spend how WE like, freedom to trade with whom and how WE like, freedom to choose who WE allow in or not, freedom from the ECJ, freedom from being forced into the eu army, the eu tax system,the eu currency, the eu single state. now anyone can disagree about wanting some, none or all of those things and thats fine but I dont want any of them. I want to remain great friends, traders with and supporters of our nearest and farest neighbours and welcome their citizens to work, study and visit here but under our control, we will continue to cooperate on security and many other matters. I hope they feel the same | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave
Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be?
If you read what I wrote properly I said PERHAPS.
As I have said mant times the benefits among many and in no particular order are, £350 a wk and rising to spend how WE like, freedom to trade with whom and how WE like, freedom to choose who WE allow in or not, freedom from the ECJ, freedom from being forced into the eu army, the eu tax system,the eu currency, the eu single state.
now anyone can disagree about wanting some, none or all of those things and thats fine but I dont want any of them. I want to remain great friends, traders with and supporters of our nearest and farest neighbours and welcome their citizens to work, study and visit here but under our control, we will continue to cooperate on security and many other matters. I hope they feel the same"Strange that there are people who believe in it,£350 a wk it is big bullshit. The word freedom? You keep writing it. Are you a slave? Whose slave are you? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave
Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be?
If you read what I wrote properly I said PERHAPS.
As I have said mant times the benefits among many and in no particular order are, £350 a wk and rising to spend how WE like, freedom to trade with whom and how WE like, freedom to choose who WE allow in or not, freedom from the ECJ, freedom from being forced into the eu army, the eu tax system,the eu currency, the eu single state.
now anyone can disagree about wanting some, none or all of those things and thats fine but I dont want any of them. I want to remain great friends, traders with and supporters of our nearest and farest neighbours and welcome their citizens to work, study and visit here but under our control, we will continue to cooperate on security and many other matters. I hope they feel the same
Strange that there are people who believe in it,£350 a wk it is big bullshit. The word freedom? You keep writing it. Are you a slave? Whose slave are you?"TBH anyone who still quotes the £350 million a week figure is either a pathological lier or gullible beyond the point where any reasonable facts will convince them that what they've been tricked into believing is in fact a lie. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave
Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be?
If you read what I wrote properly I said PERHAPS.
As I have said mant times the benefits among many and in no particular order are, £350 a wk and rising to spend how WE like, freedom to trade with whom and how WE like, freedom to choose who WE allow in or not, freedom from the ECJ, freedom from being forced into the eu army, the eu tax system,the eu currency, the eu single state.
now anyone can disagree about wanting some, none or all of those things and thats fine but I dont want any of them. I want to remain great friends, traders with and supporters of our nearest and farest neighbours and welcome their citizens to work, study and visit here but under our control, we will continue to cooperate on security and many other matters. I hope they feel the same"I'm not even going to discuss the £350 million a week BREXIT lie because even most BREXITERS now accept that that figure was a untrue. As for the rest of what you claim you want we either already have it, it's never going to happen or what you're asking for is no more possible outside the EU than in. freedom to trade with whom and how we like. We are already free to trade with whom we like but no country is allowed to trade with another country how they like whether in the EU or not. All trade with other countries has to be done under some sort of agreed framework. It's not a free for all anywhere. freedom to choose who WE allow in or not We already have the freedom to allow or disallow people into this country and to send back those that come here who do not meet the requirements to stay. However all immigration has to be done through a system of law, whether EU or not, and currently that system of law allows 220,000 non EU migrants in each year compared to 70,000 EU migrants. If the government really wanted to cut immigration it could do it now without leaving the EU. Freedom from the ECJ. If we have any comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU we will be bound, either directly or indirectly, to the ECJ or something very like it because all comprehensive free trade agreements require some sort of final court of binding arbitration. You simply cannot have any comprehensive free trade agreement with anyone, whether it's the EU or anyone else, and expect your courts alone to have complete jurisdiction. Freedom from being forced into the eu army. No member-states want to cede sovereignty on defence policy. All EU decisions on defence (and foreign) policy require unanimity in the Council of Ministers. This is what David Cameron referred to when he said that “suggestions of an EU army are fanciful: national security is a national competence, and we would veto any suggestion of an EU army”. There is no EU army and there never will be. What there might be is closer cooperation on defense across the whole of Europe, whether part of the EU or not. The UK is fully signed up to closer and better cooperation in European defence. This won't change whether we're in the EU or not. Freedom from the eu tax system. The EU does not have a tax system and has no role in raising taxes or setting tax rates. The amount of tax we pay is decided by our government, not the EU. Freedom from the eu currency. We are. It may have escaped your notice but here in the UK we use (£)GBP not (€)EUR. Freedom from the eu single state. There is no EU single state. The whole idea of an EU single state has only ever existed in the fertile imaginations and dreams of some post WWII europhile federalist (including Winston Churchill) and the febrile machinations and nightmares of europhobe BREXITERS. It's no more realistic or likely to happen than the land of milk, honey, fairies and unicorns that BREXITERS dream of if we leave. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave
Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be?
If you read what I wrote properly I said PERHAPS.
As I have said mant times the benefits among many and in no particular order are, £350 a wk and rising to spend how WE like, freedom to trade with whom and how WE like, freedom to choose who WE allow in or not, freedom from the ECJ, freedom from being forced into the eu army, the eu tax system,the eu currency, the eu single state.
now anyone can disagree about wanting some, none or all of those things and thats fine but I dont want any of them. I want to remain great friends, traders with and supporters of our nearest and farest neighbours and welcome their citizens to work, study and visit here but under our control, we will continue to cooperate on security and many other matters. I hope they feel the same
I'm not even going to discuss the £350 million a week BREXIT lie because even most BREXITERS now accept that that figure was a untrue.
As for the rest of what you claim you want we either already have it, it's never going to happen or what you're asking for is no more possible outside the EU than in.
freedom to trade with whom and how we like.
We are already free to trade with whom we like but no country is allowed to trade with another country how they like whether in the EU or not. All trade with other countries has to be done under some sort of agreed framework. It's not a free for all anywhere.
freedom to choose who WE allow in or not
We already have the freedom to allow or disallow people into this country and to send back those that come here who do not meet the requirements to stay. However all immigration has to be done through a system of law, whether EU or not, and currently that system of law allows 220,000 non EU migrants in each year compared to 70,000 EU migrants. If the government really wanted to cut immigration it could do it now without leaving the EU.
Freedom from the ECJ.
If we have any comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU we will be bound, either directly or indirectly, to the ECJ or something very like it because all comprehensive free trade agreements require some sort of final court of binding arbitration. You simply cannot have any comprehensive free trade agreement with anyone, whether it's the EU or anyone else, and expect your courts alone to have complete jurisdiction.
Freedom from being forced into the eu army.
No member-states want to cede sovereignty on defence policy. All EU decisions on defence (and foreign) policy require unanimity in the Council of Ministers. This is what David Cameron referred to when he said that “suggestions of an EU army are fanciful: national security is a national competence, and we would veto any suggestion of an EU army”. There is no EU army and there never will be. What there might be is closer cooperation on defense across the whole of Europe, whether part of the EU or not. The UK is fully signed up to closer and better cooperation in European defence. This won't change whether we're in the EU or not.
Freedom from the eu tax system.
The EU does not have a tax system and has no role in raising taxes or setting tax rates. The amount of tax we pay is decided by our government, not the EU.
Freedom from the eu currency.
We are. It may have escaped your notice but here in the UK we use (£)GBP not (€)EUR.
Freedom from the eu single state.
There is no EU single state. The whole idea of an EU single state has only ever existed in the fertile imaginations and dreams of some post WWII europhile federalist (including Winston Churchill) and the febrile machinations and nightmares of europhobe BREXITERS. It's no more realistic or likely to happen than the land of milk, honey, fairies and unicorns that BREXITERS dream of if we leave.
"My goodness what a dream world you live in. we send 350 million a wk to the EU and rising that is a fact, yes we get some back but that is under the rules of the eu and spent how the eu dictates. As for all the rest of course trade is done under agreement but can we sign a free trade deal with the US or Oz to name just two while in the EU ? NO The EU army is now coming YOU know it and so does anyone with a brain, they may not yet call it the EU army but thats what it is. as for a single state that is the end goal. Tax harmonisation is coming https://www.irishtimes.com/.../eu-tax-plan-is-a-bigger-threat-to-ireland-than-brexit-1.3. https://www.euronews.com › News › World Now I have no problem with any of that or the currency IF thats what anyone wants as long as WE get a vote on it. I dont want any of that Carry on sleep walking if you like. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" we send 350 million a wk to the EU and rising that is a fact, yes we get some back but that is under the rules of the eu and spent how the eu dictates." actually.... not only is this statement wrong... its wrong then wrong again! 1) we do not and have never sent 350 million per week to the EU.... the figure doesn't take into account of the Rebate thatcher got back in 1985! so of the 18.7 billion we sent, 1/3 of that is thatcher rebate.... so the figure is closer to 12.9 billion 2) ironically... the figure we give to is actually going down due the slowdown in GDP (since we now have the slowest growing economy in the EU28) and the devaluation of the pound " As for all the rest of course trade is done under agreement but can we sign a free trade deal with the US or Oz to name just two while in the EU ? NO " actually australia is actually in first stage talks of an FTA with the EU....and is one of the countries that rejected the first proposed UK WTO schedule! the US don't want group based FTA's they want bilateral agreements to take advantage of there size to push their agenda (you know that thing that comes up about accepting chlorinated chicken and steroid induced beef.... that sort of stuff) remember that the EU already have FTA's with 68 different countries that you are walking away from come march 30th! (if your looking for a samsung tv or mobile phone.. buy one before then, because south korea has an FTA with the EU)
"The EU army is now coming YOU know it and so does anyone with a brain, they may not yet call it the EU army but thats what it is. as for a single state that is the end goal." the UK has a national security "opt out" on this.... so does ireland and denmark actually as well! "Tax harmonisation is coming https://www.irishtimes.com/.../eu-tax-plan-is-a-bigger-threat-to-ireland-than-brexit-1.3. https://www.euronews.com › News › World" you mean tax harmonisation across the eurozone..... which again the UK is not a part of! "Now I have no problem with any of that or the currency IF thats what anyone wants as long as WE get a vote on it. I dont want any of that" again.... last time i checked my wallet it has pounds in there... that isn't changing anytime soon... and again the UK has an opt out! "Carry on sleep walking if you like. " i think its interesting that if someone who voted to remain had said what you said in all the highlighted bits, you would probably the first person to scream "project fear"! ooooh... and one last thing about the ECJ..... do you know how many ECJ rulings go against the UK....... the answer is 3%... which means 97% of the time, the ECJ actually agrees with the UK... I bet that you and your wife don't agree that often!!!! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave
Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be?
If you read what I wrote properly I said PERHAPS.
As I have said mant times the benefits among many and in no particular order are, £350 a wk and rising to spend how WE like, freedom to trade with whom and how WE like, freedom to choose who WE allow in or not, freedom from the ECJ, freedom from being forced into the eu army, the eu tax system,the eu currency, the eu single state.
now anyone can disagree about wanting some, none or all of those things and thats fine but I dont want any of them. I want to remain great friends, traders with and supporters of our nearest and farest neighbours and welcome their citizens to work, study and visit here but under our control, we will continue to cooperate on security and many other matters. I hope they feel the same
I'm not even going to discuss the £350 million a week BREXIT lie because even most BREXITERS now accept that that figure was a untrue.
As for the rest of what you claim you want we either already have it, it's never going to happen or what you're asking for is no more possible outside the EU than in.
freedom to trade with whom and how we like.
We are already free to trade with whom we like but no country is allowed to trade with another country how they like whether in the EU or not. All trade with other countries has to be done under some sort of agreed framework. It's not a free for all anywhere.
freedom to choose who WE allow in or not
We already have the freedom to allow or disallow people into this country and to send back those that come here who do not meet the requirements to stay. However all immigration has to be done through a system of law, whether EU or not, and currently that system of law allows 220,000 non EU migrants in each year compared to 70,000 EU migrants. If the government really wanted to cut immigration it could do it now without leaving the EU.
Freedom from the ECJ.
If we have any comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU we will be bound, either directly or indirectly, to the ECJ or something very like it because all comprehensive free trade agreements require some sort of final court of binding arbitration. You simply cannot have any comprehensive free trade agreement with anyone, whether it's the EU or anyone else, and expect your courts alone to have complete jurisdiction.
Freedom from being forced into the eu army.
No member-states want to cede sovereignty on defence policy. All EU decisions on defence (and foreign) policy require unanimity in the Council of Ministers. This is what David Cameron referred to when he said that “suggestions of an EU army are fanciful: national security is a national competence, and we would veto any suggestion of an EU army”. There is no EU army and there never will be. What there might be is closer cooperation on defense across the whole of Europe, whether part of the EU or not. The UK is fully signed up to closer and better cooperation in European defence. This won't change whether we're in the EU or not.
Freedom from the eu tax system.
The EU does not have a tax system and has no role in raising taxes or setting tax rates. The amount of tax we pay is decided by our government, not the EU.
Freedom from the eu currency.
We are. It may have escaped your notice but here in the UK we use (£)GBP not (€)EUR.
Freedom from the eu single state.
There is no EU single state. The whole idea of an EU single state has only ever existed in the fertile imaginations and dreams of some post WWII europhile federalist (including Winston Churchill) and the febrile machinations and nightmares of europhobe BREXITERS. It's no more realistic or likely to happen than the land of milk, honey, fairies and unicorns that BREXITERS dream of if we leave.
My goodness what a dream world you live in.
we send 350 million a wk to the EU and rising that is a fact, yes we get some back but that is under the rules of the eu and spent how the eu dictates.
As for all the rest of course trade is done under agreement but can we sign a free trade deal with the US or Oz to name just two while in the EU ? NO
The EU army is now coming YOU know it and so does anyone with a brain, they may not yet call it the EU army but thats what it is. as for a single state that is the end goal.
Tax harmonisation is coming
https://www.irishtimes.com/.../eu-tax-plan-is-a-bigger-threat-to-ireland-than-brexit-1.3.
https://www.euronews.com › News › World
Now I have no problem with any of that or the currency IF thats what anyone wants as long as WE get a vote on it. I dont want any of that
Carry on sleep walking if you like. "The only people sleep walking are the hard line paranoid Europhobes who are sleep walking over the edge of the BREXIT cliff. It reminds of that scene at the end of the Westworld series where all the rebots, seeing a promised land of milk and honey, run in to it but, in reality, they're all running over the edge of a cliff to their own distribution. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" we send 350 million a wk to the EU and rising that is a fact, yes we get some back but that is under the rules of the eu and spent how the eu dictates. actually.... not only is this statement wrong... its wrong then wrong again! 1) we do not and have never sent 350 million per week to the EU.... the figure doesn't take into account of the Rebate thatcher got back in 1985! so of the 18.7 billion we sent, 1/3 of that is thatcher rebate.... so the figure is closer to 12.9 billion 2) ironically... the figure we give to is actually going down due the slowdown in GDP (since we now have the slowest growing economy in the EU28) and the devaluation of the pound As for all the rest of course trade is done under agreement but can we sign a free trade deal with the US or Oz to name just two while in the EU ? NO actually australia is actually in first stage talks of an FTA with the EU....and is one of the countries that rejected the first proposed UK WTO schedule! the US don't want group based FTA's they want bilateral agreements to take advantage of there size to push their agenda (you know that thing that comes up about accepting chlorinated chicken and steroid induced beef.... that sort of stuff) remember that the EU already have FTA's with 68 different countries that you are walking away from come march 30th! (if your looking for a samsung tv or mobile phone.. buy one before then, because south korea has an FTA with the EU)
The EU army is now coming YOU know it and so does anyone with a brain, they may not yet call it the EU army but thats what it is. as for a single state that is the end goal.
the UK has a national security "opt out" on this.... so does ireland and denmark actually as well!
Tax harmonisation is coming
https://www.irishtimes.com/.../eu-tax-plan-is-a-bigger-threat-to-ireland-than-brexit-1.3.
https://www.euronews.com › News › World
you mean tax harmonisation across the eurozone..... which again the UK is not a part of!
Now I have no problem with any of that or the currency IF thats what anyone wants as long as WE get a vote on it. I dont want any of that
again.... last time i checked my wallet it has pounds in there... that isn't changing anytime soon... and again the UK has an opt out!
Carry on sleep walking if you like.
i think its interesting that if someone who voted to remain had said what you said in all the highlighted bits, you would probably the first person to scream "project fear"!
ooooh... and one last thing about the ECJ.....
do you know how many ECJ rulings go against the UK....... the answer is 3%...
which means 97% of the time, the ECJ actually agrees with the UK... I bet that you and your wife don't agree that often!!!! "But Fabio that's all just alternative facts! But it's great how you disect each point with a fact! Keep up the good work! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave
Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be?
If you read what I wrote properly I said PERHAPS.
As I have said mant times the benefits among many and in no particular order are, £350 a wk and rising to spend how WE like, freedom to trade with whom and how WE like, freedom to choose who WE allow in or not, freedom from the ECJ, freedom from being forced into the eu army, the eu tax system,the eu currency, the eu single state.
now anyone can disagree about wanting some, none or all of those things and thats fine but I dont want any of them. I want to remain great friends, traders with and supporters of our nearest and farest neighbours and welcome their citizens to work, study and visit here but under our control, we will continue to cooperate on security and many other matters. I hope they feel the same
I'm not even going to discuss the £350 million a week BREXIT lie because even most BREXITERS now accept that that figure was a untrue.
As for the rest of what you claim you want we either already have it, it's never going to happen or what you're asking for is no more possible outside the EU than in.
freedom to trade with whom and how we like.
We are already free to trade with whom we like but no country is allowed to trade with another country how they like whether in the EU or not. All trade with other countries has to be done under some sort of agreed framework. It's not a free for all anywhere.
freedom to choose who WE allow in or not
We already have the freedom to allow or disallow people into this country and to send back those that come here who do not meet the requirements to stay. However all immigration has to be done through a system of law, whether EU or not, and currently that system of law allows 220,000 non EU migrants in each year compared to 70,000 EU migrants. If the government really wanted to cut immigration it could do it now without leaving the EU.
Freedom from the ECJ.
If we have any comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU we will be bound, either directly or indirectly, to the ECJ or something very like it because all comprehensive free trade agreements require some sort of final court of binding arbitration. You simply cannot have any comprehensive free trade agreement with anyone, whether it's the EU or anyone else, and expect your courts alone to have complete jurisdiction.
Freedom from being forced into the eu army.
No member-states want to cede sovereignty on defence policy. All EU decisions on defence (and foreign) policy require unanimity in the Council of Ministers. This is what David Cameron referred to when he said that “suggestions of an EU army are fanciful: national security is a national competence, and we would veto any suggestion of an EU army”. There is no EU army and there never will be. What there might be is closer cooperation on defense across the whole of Europe, whether part of the EU or not. The UK is fully signed up to closer and better cooperation in European defence. This won't change whether we're in the EU or not.
Freedom from the eu tax system.
The EU does not have a tax system and has no role in raising taxes or setting tax rates. The amount of tax we pay is decided by our government, not the EU.
Freedom from the eu currency.
We are. It may have escaped your notice but here in the UK we use (£)GBP not (€)EUR.
Freedom from the eu single state.
There is no EU single state. The whole idea of an EU single state has only ever existed in the fertile imaginations and dreams of some post WWII europhile federalist (including Winston Churchill) and the febrile machinations and nightmares of europhobe BREXITERS. It's no more realistic or likely to happen than the land of milk, honey, fairies and unicorns that BREXITERS dream of if we leave.
My goodness what a dream world you live in.
we send 350 million a wk to the EU and rising that is a fact, yes we get some back but that is under the rules of the eu and spent how the eu dictates.
As for all the rest of course trade is done under agreement but can we sign a free trade deal with the US or Oz to name just two while in the EU ? NO
The EU army is now coming YOU know it and so does anyone with a brain, they may not yet call it the EU army but thats what it is. as for a single state that is the end goal.
Tax harmonisation is coming
https://www.irishtimes.com/.../eu-tax-plan-is-a-bigger-threat-to-ireland-than-brexit-1.3.
https://www.euronews.com › News › World
Now I have no problem with any of that or the currency IF thats what anyone wants as long as WE get a vote on it. I dont want any of that
Carry on sleep walking if you like.
The only people sleep walking are the hard line paranoid Europhobes who are sleep walking over the edge of the BREXIT cliff. It reminds of that scene at the end of the Westworld series where all the rebots, seeing a promised land of milk and honey, run in to it but, in reality, they're all running over the edge of a cliff to their own distribution.
"rebate what rebate ? https://www.independent.co.uk › News › UK › UK Politics AS for all the rest we may have opt outs for some of them but how long for? remember we were promised a vote on masstricht, I must have missed that one, they are all happening and I dont believe we will not be involved history has shown that bit by bit we have been dragged into more and more europe, once again I have no desire to be in any of it but will accept them as long as the uk public decide to join in. those of you who deny any of it is happening are either very trusting or just deluded | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave
Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be?
If you read what I wrote properly I said PERHAPS.
As I have said mant times the benefits among many and in no particular order are, £350 a wk and rising to spend how WE like, freedom to trade with whom and how WE like, freedom to choose who WE allow in or not, freedom from the ECJ, freedom from being forced into the eu army, the eu tax system,the eu currency, the eu single state.
now anyone can disagree about wanting some, none or all of those things and thats fine but I dont want any of them. I want to remain great friends, traders with and supporters of our nearest and farest neighbours and welcome their citizens to work, study and visit here but under our control, we will continue to cooperate on security and many other matters. I hope they feel the same
I'm not even going to discuss the £350 million a week BREXIT lie because even most BREXITERS now accept that that figure was a untrue.
As for the rest of what you claim you want we either already have it, it's never going to happen or what you're asking for is no more possible outside the EU than in.
freedom to trade with whom and how we like.
We are already free to trade with whom we like but no country is allowed to trade with another country how they like whether in the EU or not. All trade with other countries has to be done under some sort of agreed framework. It's not a free for all anywhere.
freedom to choose who WE allow in or not
We already have the freedom to allow or disallow people into this country and to send back those that come here who do not meet the requirements to stay. However all immigration has to be done through a system of law, whether EU or not, and currently that system of law allows 220,000 non EU migrants in each year compared to 70,000 EU migrants. If the government really wanted to cut immigration it could do it now without leaving the EU.
Freedom from the ECJ.
If we have any comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU we will be bound, either directly or indirectly, to the ECJ or something very like it because all comprehensive free trade agreements require some sort of final court of binding arbitration. You simply cannot have any comprehensive free trade agreement with anyone, whether it's the EU or anyone else, and expect your courts alone to have complete jurisdiction.
Freedom from being forced into the eu army.
No member-states want to cede sovereignty on defence policy. All EU decisions on defence (and foreign) policy require unanimity in the Council of Ministers. This is what David Cameron referred to when he said that “suggestions of an EU army are fanciful: national security is a national competence, and we would veto any suggestion of an EU army”. There is no EU army and there never will be. What there might be is closer cooperation on defense across the whole of Europe, whether part of the EU or not. The UK is fully signed up to closer and better cooperation in European defence. This won't change whether we're in the EU or not.
Freedom from the eu tax system.
The EU does not have a tax system and has no role in raising taxes or setting tax rates. The amount of tax we pay is decided by our government, not the EU.
Freedom from the eu currency.
We are. It may have escaped your notice but here in the UK we use (£)GBP not (€)EUR.
Freedom from the eu single state.
There is no EU single state. The whole idea of an EU single state has only ever existed in the fertile imaginations and dreams of some post WWII europhile federalist (including Winston Churchill) and the febrile machinations and nightmares of europhobe BREXITERS. It's no more realistic or likely to happen than the land of milk, honey, fairies and unicorns that BREXITERS dream of if we leave.
My goodness what a dream world you live in.
we send 350 million a wk to the EU and rising that is a fact, yes we get some back but that is under the rules of the eu and spent how the eu dictates.
As for all the rest of course trade is done under agreement but can we sign a free trade deal with the US or Oz to name just two while in the EU ? NO
The EU army is now coming YOU know it and so does anyone with a brain, they may not yet call it the EU army but thats what it is. as for a single state that is the end goal.
Tax harmonisation is coming
https://www.irishtimes.com/.../eu-tax-plan-is-a-bigger-threat-to-ireland-than-brexit-1.3.
https://www.euronews.com › News › World
Now I have no problem with any of that or the currency IF thats what anyone wants as long as WE get a vote on it. I dont want any of that
Carry on sleep walking if you like.
The only people sleep walking are the hard line paranoid Europhobes who are sleep walking over the edge of the BREXIT cliff. It reminds of that scene at the end of the Westworld series where all the rebots, seeing a promised land of milk and honey, run in to it but, in reality, they're all running over the edge of a cliff to their own distribution.
rebate what rebate ?
https://www.independent.co.uk › News › UK › UK Politics
AS for all the rest we may have opt outs for some of them but how long for? remember we were promised a vote on masstricht, I must have missed that one, they are all happening and I dont believe we will not be involved history has shown that bit by bit we have been dragged into more and more europe, once again I have no desire to be in any of it but will accept them as long as the uk public decide to join in. those of you who deny any of it is happening are either very trusting or just deluded"Strange how you call others deluded just after every single point you made has been laid out with the facts to show you were wrong on every single count plus extra for good measure. Your link about the rebate, it doesn't work, what are you trying to say about the rebate, ie, the section of membership fee we don't pay, send etc ? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave
Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be?
If you read what I wrote properly I said PERHAPS.
As I have said mant times the benefits among many and in no particular order are, £350 a wk and rising to spend how WE like, freedom to trade with whom and how WE like, freedom to choose who WE allow in or not, freedom from the ECJ, freedom from being forced into the eu army, the eu tax system,the eu currency, the eu single state.
now anyone can disagree about wanting some, none or all of those things and thats fine but I dont want any of them. I want to remain great friends, traders with and supporters of our nearest and farest neighbours and welcome their citizens to work, study and visit here but under our control, we will continue to cooperate on security and many other matters. I hope they feel the same
I'm not even going to discuss the £350 million a week BREXIT lie because even most BREXITERS now accept that that figure was a untrue.
As for the rest of what you claim you want we either already have it, it's never going to happen or what you're asking for is no more possible outside the EU than in.
freedom to trade with whom and how we like.
We are already free to trade with whom we like but no country is allowed to trade with another country how they like whether in the EU or not. All trade with other countries has to be done under some sort of agreed framework. It's not a free for all anywhere.
freedom to choose who WE allow in or not
We already have the freedom to allow or disallow people into this country and to send back those that come here who do not meet the requirements to stay. However all immigration has to be done through a system of law, whether EU or not, and currently that system of law allows 220,000 non EU migrants in each year compared to 70,000 EU migrants. If the government really wanted to cut immigration it could do it now without leaving the EU.
Freedom from the ECJ.
If we have any comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU we will be bound, either directly or indirectly, to the ECJ or something very like it because all comprehensive free trade agreements require some sort of final court of binding arbitration. You simply cannot have any comprehensive free trade agreement with anyone, whether it's the EU or anyone else, and expect your courts alone to have complete jurisdiction.
Freedom from being forced into the eu army.
No member-states want to cede sovereignty on defence policy. All EU decisions on defence (and foreign) policy require unanimity in the Council of Ministers. This is what David Cameron referred to when he said that “suggestions of an EU army are fanciful: national security is a national competence, and we would veto any suggestion of an EU army”. There is no EU army and there never will be. What there might be is closer cooperation on defense across the whole of Europe, whether part of the EU or not. The UK is fully signed up to closer and better cooperation in European defence. This won't change whether we're in the EU or not.
Freedom from the eu tax system.
The EU does not have a tax system and has no role in raising taxes or setting tax rates. The amount of tax we pay is decided by our government, not the EU.
Freedom from the eu currency.
We are. It may have escaped your notice but here in the UK we use (£)GBP not (€)EUR.
Freedom from the eu single state.
There is no EU single state. The whole idea of an EU single state has only ever existed in the fertile imaginations and dreams of some post WWII europhile federalist (including Winston Churchill) and the febrile machinations and nightmares of europhobe BREXITERS. It's no more realistic or likely to happen than the land of milk, honey, fairies and unicorns that BREXITERS dream of if we leave.
My goodness what a dream world you live in.
we send 350 million a wk to the EU and rising that is a fact, yes we get some back but that is under the rules of the eu and spent how the eu dictates.
As for all the rest of course trade is done under agreement but can we sign a free trade deal with the US or Oz to name just two while in the EU ? NO
The EU army is now coming YOU know it and so does anyone with a brain, they may not yet call it the EU army but thats what it is. as for a single state that is the end goal.
Tax harmonisation is coming
https://www.irishtimes.com/.../eu-tax-plan-is-a-bigger-threat-to-ireland-than-brexit-1.3.
https://www.euronews.com › News › World
Now I have no problem with any of that or the currency IF thats what anyone wants as long as WE get a vote on it. I dont want any of that
Carry on sleep walking if you like.
The only people sleep walking are the hard line paranoid Europhobes who are sleep walking over the edge of the BREXIT cliff. It reminds of that scene at the end of the Westworld series where all the rebots, seeing a promised land of milk and honey, run in to it but, in reality, they're all running over the edge of a cliff to their own distribution.
rebate what rebate ?
https://www.independent.co.uk › News › UK › UK Politics
AS for all the rest we may have opt outs for some of them but how long for? remember we were promised a vote on masstricht, I must have missed that one, they are all happening and I dont believe we will not be involved history has shown that bit by bit we have been dragged into more and more europe, once again I have no desire to be in any of it but will accept them as long as the uk public decide to join in. those of you who deny any of it is happening are either very trusting or just deluded
Strange how you call others deluded just after every single point you made has been laid out with the facts to show you were wrong on every single count plus extra for good measure.
Your link about the rebate, it doesn't work, what are you trying to say about the rebate, ie, the section of membership fee we don't pay, send etc ?"It says that it will end in 2020 even if we stay in | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
". Your link about the rebate, it doesn't work, what are you trying to say about the rebate, ie, the section of membership fee we don't pay, send etc ? It says that it will end in 2020 even if we stay in" The level of the UK rebate is decided every seven years, as part of the EU's long-term budget, the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), which is negotiated by the EU leaders. The long-term budget determines EU spending levels and priorities and it has to be approved unanimously by all 28 EU leaders. Last time, as part of the 2014-2020 budget negotiations, the UK rebate was preserved. It will remain in place in the current form until 2020. When the EU starts to negotiate the next MFF, the rebate will certainly be on the table again. Many other EU countries would like to see it scrapped or reduced. But with the EU leaders required to approve the MFF unanimously, the UK could use its veto to stop the erosion of the rebate. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" we send 350 million a wk to the EU and rising that is a fact, yes we get some back but that is under the rules of the eu and spent how the eu dictates. actually.... not only is this statement wrong... its wrong then wrong again! 1) we do not and have never sent 350 million per week to the EU.... the figure doesn't take into account of the Rebate thatcher got back in 1985! so of the 18.7 billion we sent, 1/3 of that is thatcher rebate.... so the figure is closer to 12.9 billion 2) ironically... the figure we give to is actually going down due the slowdown in GDP (since we now have the slowest growing economy in the EU28) and the devaluation of the pound As for all the rest of course trade is done under agreement but can we sign a free trade deal with the US or Oz to name just two while in the EU ? NO actually australia is actually in first stage talks of an FTA with the EU....and is one of the countries that rejected the first proposed UK WTO schedule! the US don't want group based FTA's they want bilateral agreements to take advantage of there size to push their agenda (you know that thing that comes up about accepting chlorinated chicken and steroid induced beef.... that sort of stuff) remember that the EU already have FTA's with 68 different countries that you are walking away from come march 30th! (if your looking for a samsung tv or mobile phone.. buy one before then, because south korea has an FTA with the EU)
The EU army is now coming YOU know it and so does anyone with a brain, they may not yet call it the EU army but thats what it is. as for a single state that is the end goal.
the UK has a national security "opt out" on this.... so does ireland and denmark actually as well!
Tax harmonisation is coming
https://www.irishtimes.com/.../eu-tax-plan-is-a-bigger-threat-to-ireland-than-brexit-1.3.
https://www.euronews.com › News › World
you mean tax harmonisation across the eurozone..... which again the UK is not a part of!
Now I have no problem with any of that or the currency IF thats what anyone wants as long as WE get a vote on it. I dont want any of that
again.... last time i checked my wallet it has pounds in there... that isn't changing anytime soon... and again the UK has an opt out!
Carry on sleep walking if you like.
i think its interesting that if someone who voted to remain had said what you said in all the highlighted bits, you would probably the first person to scream "project fear"!
ooooh... and one last thing about the ECJ.....
do you know how many ECJ rulings go against the UK....... the answer is 3%...
which means 97% of the time, the ECJ actually agrees with the UK... I bet that you and your wife don't agree that often!!!! "Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again "The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in , As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand. As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
"It doesn't matter what bollocks newspapers print go to the facts instead and you'll see that ANY changes to the UK rebate requires UNANIMOUS consent. I can't believe so many people still only believe what stupid news organisations say in this day & age. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" You live in Bath and yet you paid little attention to the Cadbury sell out even though it meant the closure of the old somerdale fry’s factory in keynsham? I’m not quite sure I can believe that as you seem to be able to pontificate about many of the more hysterical facts on here. Perhaps your not a fan of chocolate or the people of keynsham who lost their livelihood. I guess that’s progress though isn’t it although I am not sure the fry family won’t be spinning in their graves at this triumph of mammon
Kraft screwed the workers over they didnt need much help from the EU, cadburys choc isnt what it used to be, the problem with a lot of things that go on in this country is that they are viewed in the short term, that aplies to the government as well as companies and individuals, and it most definately is the case with brexit, short term pain perhaps but long term gain if we leave
Well at least we all agree now about the short term pain BREXIT is going to deliver. Maybe you can tell exactly what the long term gains are going to be?
If you read what I wrote properly I said PERHAPS.
As I have said mant times the benefits among many and in no particular order are, £350 a wk and rising to spend how WE like, freedom to trade with whom and how WE like, freedom to choose who WE allow in or not, freedom from the ECJ, freedom from being forced into the eu army, the eu tax system,the eu currency, the eu single state.
now anyone can disagree about wanting some, none or all of those things and thats fine but I dont want any of them. I want to remain great friends, traders with and supporters of our nearest and farest neighbours and welcome their citizens to work, study and visit here but under our control, we will continue to cooperate on security and many other matters. I hope they feel the same
I'm not even going to discuss the £350 million a week BREXIT lie because even most BREXITERS now accept that that figure was a untrue.
As for the rest of what you claim you want we either already have it, it's never going to happen or what you're asking for is no more possible outside the EU than in.
freedom to trade with whom and how we like.
We are already free to trade with whom we like but no country is allowed to trade with another country how they like whether in the EU or not. All trade with other countries has to be done under some sort of agreed framework. It's not a free for all anywhere.
freedom to choose who WE allow in or not
We already have the freedom to allow or disallow people into this country and to send back those that come here who do not meet the requirements to stay. However all immigration has to be done through a system of law, whether EU or not, and currently that system of law allows 220,000 non EU migrants in each year compared to 70,000 EU migrants. If the government really wanted to cut immigration it could do it now without leaving the EU.
Freedom from the ECJ.
If we have any comprehensive free trade agreement with the EU we will be bound, either directly or indirectly, to the ECJ or something very like it because all comprehensive free trade agreements require some sort of final court of binding arbitration. You simply cannot have any comprehensive free trade agreement with anyone, whether it's the EU or anyone else, and expect your courts alone to have complete jurisdiction.
Freedom from being forced into the eu army.
No member-states want to cede sovereignty on defence policy. All EU decisions on defence (and foreign) policy require unanimity in the Council of Ministers. This is what David Cameron referred to when he said that “suggestions of an EU army are fanciful: national security is a national competence, and we would veto any suggestion of an EU army”. There is no EU army and there never will be. What there might be is closer cooperation on defense across the whole of Europe, whether part of the EU or not. The UK is fully signed up to closer and better cooperation in European defence. This won't change whether we're in the EU or not.
Freedom from the eu tax system.
The EU does not have a tax system and has no role in raising taxes or setting tax rates. The amount of tax we pay is decided by our government, not the EU.
Freedom from the eu currency.
We are. It may have escaped your notice but here in the UK we use (£)GBP not (€)EUR.
Freedom from the eu single state.
There is no EU single state. The whole idea of an EU single state has only ever existed in the fertile imaginations and dreams of some post WWII europhile federalist (including Winston Churchill) and the febrile machinations and nightmares of europhobe BREXITERS. It's no more realistic or likely to happen than the land of milk, honey, fairies and unicorns that BREXITERS dream of if we leave.
My goodness what a dream world you live in.
we send 350 million a wk to the EU and rising that is a fact, yes we get some back but that is under the rules of the eu and spent how the eu dictates.
As for all the rest of course trade is done under agreement but can we sign a free trade deal with the US or Oz to name just two while in the EU ? NO
The EU army is now coming YOU know it and so does anyone with a brain, they may not yet call it the EU army but thats what it is. as for a single state that is the end goal.
Tax harmonisation is coming
https://www.irishtimes.com/.../eu-tax-plan-is-a-bigger-threat-to-ireland-than-brexit-1.3.
https://www.euronews.com › News › World
Now I have no problem with any of that or the currency IF thats what anyone wants as long as WE get a vote on it. I dont want any of that
Carry on sleep walking if you like. "se folks, now THAT'S what you call project fear | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work"Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €. Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO! The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world. | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work
Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €.
Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO!
The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world. "This new life in France can't be up to much, you spend most of your time on here!Get some fresh air it might stop you moaning for a while! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work
Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €.
Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO!
The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world.
This new life in France can't be up to much, you spend most of your time on here!Get some fresh air it might stop you moaning for a while! "Sitting in the sun thanks. Voulez vous une verre? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work
Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €.
Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO!
The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world.
This new life in France can't be up to much, you spend most of your time on here!Get some fresh air it might stop you moaning for a while!
Sitting in the sun thanks. Voulez vous une verre? "Sunny on the outside miserable as sin on the inside! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work
Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €.
Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO!
The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world.
This new life in France can't be up to much, you spend most of your time on here!Get some fresh air it might stop you moaning for a while!
Sitting in the sun thanks. Voulez vous une verre?
Sunny on the outside miserable as sin on the inside! "You’ve obviously spent too long in front of the mirror again  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work
Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €.
Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO!
The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world.
This new life in France can't be up to much, you spend most of your time on here!Get some fresh air it might stop you moaning for a while!
Sitting in the sun thanks. Voulez vous une verre?
Sunny on the outside miserable as sin on the inside!
You’ve obviously spent too long in front of the mirror again "Talking of bores another one pops up! I liked to spend 5 minutes with you and see what you say when you aren't behind your keyboard!Lol | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work
Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €.
Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO!
The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world.
This new life in France can't be up to much, you spend most of your time on here!Get some fresh air it might stop you moaning for a while!
Sitting in the sun thanks. Voulez vous une verre?
Sunny on the outside miserable as sin on the inside!
You’ve obviously spent too long in front of the mirror again
Talking of bores another one pops up! I liked to spend 5 minutes with you and see what you say when you aren't behind your keyboard!Lol "You are genuine class arent you and so funny with it....tell us another one maestro  | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work
Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €.
Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO!
The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world.
This new life in France can't be up to much, you spend most of your time on here!Get some fresh air it might stop you moaning for a while!
Sitting in the sun thanks. Voulez vous une verre?
Sunny on the outside miserable as sin on the inside!
You’ve obviously spent too long in front of the mirror again
Talking of bores another one pops up! I liked to spend 5 minutes with you and see what you say when you aren't behind your keyboard!Lol "So are you threatening physical violence or just spouting off again ? | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work
Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €.
Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO!
The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world.
This new life in France can't be up to much, you spend most of your time on here!Get some fresh air it might stop you moaning for a while!
Sitting in the sun thanks. Voulez vous une verre?
Sunny on the outside miserable as sin on the inside!
You’ve obviously spent too long in front of the mirror again
Talking of bores another one pops up! I liked to spend 5 minutes with you and see what you say when you aren't behind your keyboard!Lol
So are you threatening physical violence or just spouting off again ?"There is a phrase "the pen is mightier than the sword"! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work
Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €.
Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO!
The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world.
This new life in France can't be up to much, you spend most of your time on here!Get some fresh air it might stop you moaning for a while!
Sitting in the sun thanks. Voulez vous une verre?
Sunny on the outside miserable as sin on the inside!
You’ve obviously spent too long in front of the mirror again
Talking of bores another one pops up! I liked to spend 5 minutes with you and see what you say when you aren't behind your keyboard!Lol
So are you threatening physical violence or just spouting off again ?"Why are you going to cry to your mommy or fetch your dad!? I thought you would be out cruising now you have found a new hobby! Lol | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
" Ouch! I almost feel sorry for you rob after that comprehensive drubbing! Fabio....you have my respect again and again
The figure we sentin 15/16 which is the last year I have found figures for was up by 1.5 billionso no its not reducing,even the guardian says we will lose the rebate if we stay in ,
As for trade deals im not sure what point he is trying to make, we will be free to make them with anyone when we leave what the eu does is up to them. To be honest apart from food,cars and one or two others tariffs are a red herring in any case currency differences make far more difference and as anyone in business knows good sell at what a market will stand.
As for all the things we have an opt out for thats in the here and now, do you really believe that will continue? its not long ago that the idea of an eu army was dismmissed as rubbish well its interesting even raminers not admit its going to happen, depending on who is in government will could well give up these opt outs, remember how close blair was into taking us into the euro?I dont recall any mention of asking the public about that, as I keep saying if you want those things thats fine, I dont not because I dont like europe or europeans but because I dont believe it will work
Well, for something that's not working, the Euro is worth 1.11€ to the £. Sadly, it's the £ that's falling and not the €.
Ok a falling £ means more exports - but only 8% of British businesses export! Have exports significantly increased? NO!
The £ has been falling in value all my life - funnily enough, ever since WW1 - when, we started to pass our dominance over to the Americans! There is a trend here, the decline of the empire, and Britain's influence in the world.
This new life in France can't be up to much, you spend most of your time on here!Get some fresh air it might stop you moaning for a while!
Sitting in the sun thanks. Voulez vous une verre?
Sunny on the outside miserable as sin on the inside!
You’ve obviously spent too long in front of the mirror again
Talking of bores another one pops up! I liked to spend 5 minutes with you and see what you say when you aren't behind your keyboard!Lol
So are you threatening physical violence or just spouting off again ?
There is a phrase "the pen is mightier than the sword"! "Just another one of those sayings that isn't true! Try squirting your fountain pen when someone is shooting at you with an AK47 and you will find out! | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
"Why don’t you two shut the fuck up Like a couple of 10 year olds " Soz | |||
Reply privately (thread closed by moderator) | |||
