|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 15, 2018 16:26:38 GMT
A report from the uber pro-EU Economist from 8 years ago. Righto. Have you read the report? Thought not. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 15, 2018 16:29:23 GMT
And also a good time to remember You don't half write some garbage. |
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Oct 15, 2018 16:33:32 GMT
Corbyn said at PMQ's this afternoon that there was a deal that Parliament and the whole country can get behind rather than what is currently being negotiated. Without resorting to shit slinging, what is his magic formula? Does anyone know, and would it be acceptable to the EU?
|
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Oct 15, 2018 16:36:11 GMT
Corbyn said at PMQ's this afternoon that there was a deal that Parliament and the whole country can get behind rather than what is currently being negotiated. Without resorting to shit slinging, what is his magic formula? Does anyone know, and would it be acceptable to the EU? He is an unprincipled whore , his policy is whatever will get him into downing st . |
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Oct 15, 2018 16:49:19 GMT
Corbyn said at PMQ's this afternoon that there was a deal that Parliament and the whole country can get behind rather than what is currently being negotiated. Without resorting to shit slinging, what is his magic formula? Does anyone know, and would it be acceptable to the EU? He is an unprincipled whore , his policy is whatever will get him into downing st . Yeah, but apart from that  |
|
sharpy
Academy Starlet
Posts: 104
|
Post by sharpy on Oct 15, 2018 16:50:17 GMT
Labours 6 tests. Number 2 sums up the flip flopping twats to a tee.
1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU?
2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union?
3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities?
4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom?
5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime?
6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK?
|
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Oct 15, 2018 16:51:47 GMT
He is an unprincipled whore , his policy is whatever will get him into downing st . Yeah, but apart from that My guess would be keeping us in the single market |
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Oct 15, 2018 17:26:15 GMT
A report from the uber pro-EU Economist from 8 years ago. Righto. Have you read the report? Thought not. Have you read the one- I posted the other day? Possibly some of it, but of course you wouldn't comment on that because it does show balance where as you just post material that fits your agenda. |
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Oct 15, 2018 17:39:14 GMT
The problem with a no deal (WTO rules) is that it doesn't solve the Northern Ireland border problem..the main sticking point. A temporary customs union could go on forever. That's not acceptable to the Government or the DUP. Chequers is not acceptable to enough MPs. A 'Peoples Vote' is completely undemocratic. A general election would probably end up in another Hung Parliament.  |
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Oct 15, 2018 17:41:14 GMT
Labours 6 tests. Number 2 sums up the flip flopping twats to a tee. 1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK? So how can he tick all those boxes and have a deal acceptable to the EU? Management of immigration (4) is not acceptable in or out of the SM or CU (2) to the EU. (Boo Boo!!) |
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Oct 15, 2018 18:13:27 GMT
The problem with a no deal (WTO rules) is that it doesn't solve the Northern Ireland border problem..the main sticking point. A temporary customs union could go on forever. That's not acceptable to the Government or the DUP. Chequers is not acceptable to enough MPs. A 'Peoples Vote' is completely undemocratic. A general election would probably end up in another Hung Parliament. Should we leave the EU with no deal and revert to trade under WTO rules the Irish border then becomes an Irish republic / EU problem . Barnier was asked by a journalist a few months ago if we left under these circumstances would the EU insist on a hard border he refused to answer the question despite being asked repeatedly. Utter hypocrisy from these officials. It's worth noting that goods from outside of the EU pass through our customs in much less than an hour mostly . All the talk of goods rotting on the port side is none sense |
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Oct 15, 2018 18:17:32 GMT
I still believe once they sort it out we will be fine It’s all posturing. Give us a deal or no deal then let us crack on. This country will make it work Personally I think a deal will be struck at the last minute with little afterthought, which will please no-one, certainly won't be as good as the status quo and will show this Government to be the shower of shit they truly are. But we'll be ok in 50 years or so, so that's good. We're not ok, now, are we? |
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Oct 15, 2018 18:20:17 GMT
Corbyn said at PMQ's this afternoon that there was a deal that Parliament and the whole country can get behind rather than what is currently being negotiated. Without resorting to shit slinging, what is his magic formula? Does anyone know, and would it be acceptable to the EU? Does it involve "no upper levels of immigration"? |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 15, 2018 18:24:20 GMT
A report from the uber pro-EU Economist from 8 years ago. Righto. Have you read the report? Thought not. Have you read the one- I posted the other day? Possibly some of it, but of course you wouldn't comment on that because it does show balance where as you just post material that fits your agenda. I've not read anything you've posted but if you're proposing Sir Ivan Rogers as a balanced voice of Brexit I'll probably continue that policy. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Oct 15, 2018 18:31:15 GMT
The problem with a no deal (WTO rules) is that it doesn't solve the Northern Ireland border problem..the main sticking point. A temporary customs union could go on forever. That's not acceptable to the Government or the DUP. Chequers is not acceptable to enough MPs. A 'Peoples Vote' is completely undemocratic. A general election would probably end up in another Hung Parliament. Should we leave the EU with no deal and revert to trade under WTO rules the Irish border then becomes an Irish republic / EU problem . Barnier was asked by a journalist a few months ago if we left under these circumstances would the EU insist on a hard border he refused to answer the question despite being asked repeatedly. Utter hypocrisy from these officials. It's worth noting that goods from outside of the EU pass through our customs in much less than an hour mostly . All the talk of goods rotting on the port side is none sense Also the actual reality is that the WTO don't stop lorries or close factories. It's only a common rules based organisation. I laugh when people say that WTO insist on border checks, as if trade stops if that's not in place. |
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 15, 2018 19:00:03 GMT
One scenario could be that the EU give some ground on the Northern Ireland issue so that May can claim that she has been strong, stood up to the EU and has some sort of victory... when in fact we have BRINO.
Alternatively t could be that no deal is reached and this is portrayed as such a disaster that somehow article 50 is delayed.... and I've no idea how..... whether it could be by some mutual EU/UK agreement ( I think that the treaty article does allow this).
Alternatively May decides to go to the country again if her deal is rejected by Parliament.Presumably the Labour and Liberal manifestos would include the offer of a third Referendum.
If May is defeated in Parliament and letters are sent to the 1922 committee...have the Tories gota unifying candidate. I'm not sure Boris nor ERG have enough support or they would have challenged by now. Davis? Jenkins?Patel? Rees-Mogg? none are unifying.
( Just my ramblings in response to the OP, what happens next with Brexit...I haven't a clue and don't know who to trust..if anyone?)
( and I must add , trying to PREDICT what could happen , given that the Political class largely don't want BREXIT, but want to sort of pretend that they are honouring the Referendum result...ISa completely different issue/ question than " knowing what you voted for...the purpose of the Referendum was clear")
|
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 15, 2018 19:00:30 GMT
Actually, 52% of the people who voted on 26 June 2016 voted to leave the EU. There’s never been a poll for what you said and it certainly didn’t ask the entire UK population! Brexiteers have read far, far to much into the question asked at the ballot box on that day. My ballot paper said Remain or Leave, can you tell me which bit of the question I read TOO much into please. Exactly, you didn’t vote to have “sod all to do with the EU” as Wagastokie puts it |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 15, 2018 19:04:48 GMT
Labours 6 tests. Number 2 sums up the flip flopping twats to a tee. 1. Does it ensure a strong and collaborative future relationship with the EU? 2. Does it deliver the “exact same benefits” as we currently have as members of the Single Market and Customs Union? 3. Does it ensure the fair management of migration in the interests of the economy and communities? 4. Does it defend rights and protections and prevent a race to the bottom? 5. Does it protect national security and our capacity to tackle cross-border crime? 6. Does it deliver for all regions and nations of the UK? Number 2 is what the then Brexit Secretary of State David Davis assured us he could get in Parliament. That’s why it’s on the list. |
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Oct 15, 2018 19:23:40 GMT
Have you read the one- I posted the other day? Possibly some of it, but of course you wouldn't comment on that because it does show balance where as you just post material that fits your agenda. I've not read anything you've posted but if you're proposing Sir Ivan Rogers as a balanced voice of Brexit I'll probably continue that policy. And yet you're happy to post material from Open Europe as stuff we should believe? About as balanced as the New European.
|
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Oct 15, 2018 19:30:39 GMT
My ballot paper said Remain or Leave, can you tell me which bit of the question I read TOO much into please. Exactly, you didn’t vote to have “sod all to do with the EU” as Wagastokie puts it I did |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 15, 2018 19:32:48 GMT
Exactly, you didn’t vote to have “sod all to do with the EU” as Wagastokie puts it I did That option wasn’t on my ballot. We are all eagerly waiting to see the details of what you did in fact vote for. |
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Oct 15, 2018 19:44:09 GMT
That option wasn’t on my ballot. We are all eagerly waiting to see the details of what you did in fact vote for. Evening oggy I’m eager to tell you what I voted I voted to leave the Eu with the hardest possible brexit I am more than happy to exist on wto rules and will happily vote for any proposal that screws the Eu into the ground I hope this helps |
|
|
|
Post by pearo on Oct 15, 2018 19:56:38 GMT
That option wasn’t on my ballot. We are all eagerly waiting to see the details of what you did in fact vote for. Just a couple of definitions of the words that people voted on Remain :- stay in the same place / state Leave :- depart permanently / quit I struggle to see how anyone of a sound mind can be confused about those two options, no where in the OED does either word mean partial change, or rethink. |
|
|
|
Post by LL Cool Dave on Oct 15, 2018 20:01:05 GMT
Personally I think a deal will be struck at the last minute with little afterthought, which will please no-one, certainly won't be as good as the status quo and will show this Government to be the shower of shit they truly are. But we'll be ok in 50 years or so, so that's good. We're not ok, now, are we? Not at all, but most of the reasons why we're not have got fuck all to do with being in the EU. |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 15, 2018 21:07:13 GMT
That option wasn’t on my ballot. We are all eagerly waiting to see the details of what you did in fact vote for. Just a couple of definitions of the words that people voted on Remain :- stay in the same place / state Leave :- depart permanently / quit I struggle to see how anyone of a sound mind can be confused about those two options, no where in the OED does either word mean partial change, or rethink. Exactly. Leave the EU to not be a member of it, be like Switzerland or Noway for example. |
|
|
|
Post by pearo on Oct 15, 2018 21:15:25 GMT
Just a couple of definitions of the words that people voted on Remain :- stay in the same place / state Leave :- depart permanently / quit I struggle to see how anyone of a sound mind can be confused about those two options, no where in the OED does either word mean partial change, or rethink. Exactly. Leave the EU to not be a member like Switzerland or Noway for example. At last the penny has dropped |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 15, 2018 21:16:39 GMT
Exactly. Leave the EU to not be a member like Switzerland or Noway for example. At last the penny has dropped But Switzerland and Norway have a lot to do with the EU. Wagastokie wants nothing to do with the EU (N Korea perhaps?). |
|
|
|
Post by pearo on Oct 15, 2018 21:25:01 GMT
At last the penny has dropped But Switzerland and Norway have a lot to do with the EU. Wagastokie wants nothing to do with the EU (N Korea perhaps?). But Switzerland and Norway weren’t allowed to vote. |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 15, 2018 21:46:41 GMT
But Switzerland and Norway have a lot to do with the EU. Wagastokie wants nothing to do with the EU (N Korea perhaps?). But Switzerland and Norway weren’t allowed to vote. The Swiss vote was far more specific than ours. They voted no to EEA membership. Norway voted slightly more than us to not be a member. 52.2%. So because of the split almost down the middle they stayed a member of the EEA rather than throwing their toys out of the pram and claiming they want nothing to do with the EU like some nutty brexiteers. |
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Oct 15, 2018 22:00:48 GMT
Aren't we out, yet? What's the hold up?
|
|
