|
|
Post by Hiram on Nov 16, 2018 15:28:50 GMT
Turkeys vote for Christmas then moan about being stuffed full of Paxo and roasted.
|
|
|
|
Post by yeokel on Nov 16, 2018 15:30:14 GMT
Good question now to me this total capitulation by the UK seems to be retaining the benefits of customs union membership and free single market access for the period of transition which to me seems quite close to effective free EU membership, now a year or 18 months of that is fine with me and also another reason why I can't see the EU would want the backstop anymore than us so lets crack on with the Free Trade Agreement and nothing is agreed until everything is agreed thats the EU mantra so it still applies I assume, No. The Withdrawal agreement is International Law binding future UK Governments. Within the WA are the 3 items; Citizens rights, Irish border and financial payment. Once past 29th March 2019 the idea that an FTA can be agreed and implemented by 31st December 2020 is supposedly 'optimistic' so any further negotiating period comes in two forms. 1) Extend the so called transition period beyond 2020. 2) Trigger the 'backstop'. Applying for either of these is only allowed once. I say apply because the UK can either choose to open negotiations into extending the transition period or choose to open negotiations into triggering the backstop. That is the only unilateral choice the UK has. Extending the transition period comes with most of responsibilities of being in the EU customs union, single market, freedom of movement etc, etc and paying the usual EU contributions. Some contributions will not be paid as some responsibilities stop after 2020 BUT the rebate also stops so the pay-to-play extension period is a more expensive place per day then where we are now. The UK also risks being involved with the next EU 7 yearly financial budget cycle that kicks in after 2020. The length of the extension could be up to 2099. Triggering the backstop commits the whole UK to be in a 'customs area' until the FTA is completed. The UK can change certain domestic rules within this 'customs area' but Northern Ireland can't. So politically no PM would actually change anything because this would see NI continue to follow the EU's rules whilst the rest of the UK diverges. This backstop continues until the FTA (including the Irish border) satisfies both parties. The the FTA is implemented and the backstops ceases and can't be revived. If at any point during this backstop the UK think that an agreement on an FTA will never be reached they can ask for a 'Joint Review Panel' to assess the progress so far. That JRP is made up of 5 members, 2 appointed by the EU, 2 appointed by the UK and 1 which they both agree to appoint. It would up to the UK to convince the JRP that the EU are not acting in good faith and we'd like to leave the negotiations. If the JRP agreed then I assume we'd walk away with anything agreed in place and whatever wasn't agreed as outstanding and then coming under WTO or the relevant International body but maybe not and if there couldn't be 100% agreement over an FTA then there was nothing. So Brexiteers argue that it's easiest thing in the world for the EU to not agree to an extension period leaving the UK with only the backstop option and then never agreeing an FTA. Just decades of endless negotiation just doing barely enough to keep the JRP happy of which two and a half members are EU sympathetic anyway. The UK can never diverge because we'd leave NI behind and we get sucked into endless financial commitments for less in return. The £39 Billion is not dependent on an FTA being agreed. The EU start to get that from March next year come what may. Free movement of people is very complicated and much depends on the "end of the transition" period which includes any extension. So, as long as the EU looks as if it is trying to come to an agreement with the UK, it can actually delay our departure for ever? And will still be collecting the cash from us as well as already having get banked the £39 billion? Who the hell negotiated that deal for us. Oggy? |
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Nov 16, 2018 15:30:33 GMT
Turkeys vote for Christmas then moan about being stuffed full of Paxo and roasted. Tit. |
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Nov 16, 2018 15:31:58 GMT
Saw something about this on Twitter the other day. Apparently, he's protesting on College Green and he's perfectly allowed to do so by law. He'd be arrested if he was using a loudspeaker though! Fucking hell fire, isn't he? I couldn't listen to that all day! Is this the lobend who was yorping 'stop Brexit' outside the Palace of Westminster when the Cabinet were meeting at No.10?  |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 16, 2018 15:32:02 GMT
No. The Withdrawal agreement is International Law binding future UK Governments. Within the WA are the 3 items; Citizens rights, Irish border and financial payment. Once past 29th March 2019 the idea that an FTA can be agreed and implemented by 31st December 2020 is supposedly 'optimistic' so any further negotiating period comes in two forms. 1) Extend the so called transition period beyond 2020. 2) Trigger the 'backstop'. Applying for either of these is only allowed once. I say apply because the UK can either choose to open negotiations into extending the transition period or choose to open negotiations into triggering the backstop. That is the only unilateral choice the UK has. Extending the transition period comes with most of responsibilities of being in the EU customs union, single market, freedom of movement etc, etc and paying the usual EU contributions. Some contributions will not be paid as some responsibilities stop after 2020 BUT the rebate also stops so the pay-to-play extension period is a more expensive place per day then where we are now. The UK also risks being involved with the next EU 7 yearly financial budget cycle that kicks in after 2020. The length of the extension could be up to 2099. Triggering the backstop commits the whole UK to be in a 'customs area' until the FTA is completed. The UK can change certain domestic rules within this 'customs area' but Northern Ireland can't. So politically no PM would actually change anything because this would see NI continue to follow the EU's rules whilst the rest of the UK diverges. This backstop continues until the FTA (including the Irish border) satisfies both parties. The the FTA is implemented and the backstops ceases and can't be revived. If at any point during this backstop the UK think that an agreement on an FTA will never be reached they can ask for a 'Joint Review Panel' to assess the progress so far. That JRP is made up of 5 members, 2 appointed by the EU, 2 appointed by the UK and 1 which they both agree to appoint. It would up to the UK to convince the JRP that the EU are not acting in good faith and we'd like to leave the negotiations. If the JRP agreed then I assume we'd walk away with anything agreed in place and whatever wasn't agreed as outstanding and then coming under WTO or the relevant International body but maybe not and if there couldn't be 100% agreement over an FTA then there was nothing. So Brexiteers argue that it's easiest thing in the world for the EU to not agree to an extension period leaving the UK with only the backstop option and then never agreeing an FTA. Just decades of endless negotiation just doing barely enough to keep the JRP happy of which two and a half members are EU sympathetic anyway. The UK can never diverge because we'd leave NI behind and we get sucked into endless financial commitments for less in return. The £39 Billion is not dependent on an FTA being agreed. The EU start to get that from March next year come what may. Free movement of people is very complicated and much depends on the "end of the transition" period which includes any extension. Yeah I have heard some of these arguments but there is also a good faith clause so if the EU drags it all out they invalidate the agreement, any agreement can be cancelled whatever law it is written under. This agreement can only be cancelled via the Joint Committee. But "good faith" has no measures. There isn't a list of things that have been agreed that need checking off every month. For example, timing. As the EU I appoint 4 negotiators. They will take 10 years at least to negotiate an FTA. Is this bad faith? They work 40 hours a week and are very capable but you complain this will take forever. So what. There's no obligation to speed anything up. They're working as hard as they can. "Drags it out" has not been defined or agreed in the WA. |
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Nov 16, 2018 15:34:25 GMT
Turkeys vote for Christmas then moan about being stuffed full of Paxo and roasted. Tit. Brextit means Brextit |
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Nov 16, 2018 15:34:55 GMT
Fucking hell fire, isn't he? I couldn't listen to that all day! Is this the lobend who was yorping 'stop Brexit' outside the Palace of Westminster when the Cabinet were meeting at No.10? That's the fucker. Dave says he's allowed to as long as he hasn't got a loudspeaker. He doesn't need one, although I would like to glue one to his bleeding mouth. |
|
|
|
Post by M on Nov 16, 2018 15:37:20 GMT
But they don't need to to adopt a position. They've largely avoided committing to a position because they don't need to. Why adopt a position and then be the fall guys for it not happening. Apparently from what I read there is a near 50/50 split in the Tory party about Brexit so I don't think it matters what deal is put forward, they wouldn't get anywhere near enough of their own party to support it before even taking it to the house. Strong and stable leadership and all that. Still think May will fight any challenge off though just because she's probably the best of a bad bunch there and any aspiring young leader would probably want to avoid coming in to this shit storm. Totally agree. But would`nt you think that perhaps they would all sing the same tune ?. You could`nt play a game of snap with their vocal vision of thier Brexit strategy could you. But bar the greens who are unanimous with their solitary MP to remain, The Lib Dems have what, 8 MPs and I think two of them oppose Brexit. Labour MPs are largely pro remain, and so is reportedly the majority of the membership (well at lease to get a vote on the outcome) so that's it really. I thought that was clear that bar the Tories who have always been split on the EU the rest were largely pro... All Labour have done is say their titbits about the 6 challenges (which to be fair to them May said she had no issue with and thought she could achieve those targets) and they all just left the Tories to it as it's their responsibility. Also I believe all the parties (or at least MPs from each party) expressed interest in forming a cross party negotiating team but May decided to surround herself by a dozen Tories to do it so what more could anyone form the opposition do? I can't see without a change by government how it would be any different now regardless of the opposition publicly supporting them or not. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 16, 2018 15:38:22 GMT
No. The Withdrawal agreement is International Law binding future UK Governments. Within the WA are the 3 items; Citizens rights, Irish border and financial payment. Once past 29th March 2019 the idea that an FTA can be agreed and implemented by 31st December 2020 is supposedly 'optimistic' so any further negotiating period comes in two forms. 1) Extend the so called transition period beyond 2020. 2) Trigger the 'backstop'. Applying for either of these is only allowed once. I say apply because the UK can either choose to open negotiations into extending the transition period or choose to open negotiations into triggering the backstop. That is the only unilateral choice the UK has. Extending the transition period comes with most of responsibilities of being in the EU customs union, single market, freedom of movement etc, etc and paying the usual EU contributions. Some contributions will not be paid as some responsibilities stop after 2020 BUT the rebate also stops so the pay-to-play extension period is a more expensive place per day then where we are now. The UK also risks being involved with the next EU 7 yearly financial budget cycle that kicks in after 2020. The length of the extension could be up to 2099. Triggering the backstop commits the whole UK to be in a 'customs area' until the FTA is completed. The UK can change certain domestic rules within this 'customs area' but Northern Ireland can't. So politically no PM would actually change anything because this would see NI continue to follow the EU's rules whilst the rest of the UK diverges. This backstop continues until the FTA (including the Irish border) satisfies both parties. The the FTA is implemented and the backstops ceases and can't be revived. If at any point during this backstop the UK think that an agreement on an FTA will never be reached they can ask for a 'Joint Review Panel' to assess the progress so far. That JRP is made up of 5 members, 2 appointed by the EU, 2 appointed by the UK and 1 which they both agree to appoint. It would up to the UK to convince the JRP that the EU are not acting in good faith and we'd like to leave the negotiations. If the JRP agreed then I assume we'd walk away with anything agreed in place and whatever wasn't agreed as outstanding and then coming under WTO or the relevant International body but maybe not and if there couldn't be 100% agreement over an FTA then there was nothing. So Brexiteers argue that it's easiest thing in the world for the EU to not agree to an extension period leaving the UK with only the backstop option and then never agreeing an FTA. Just decades of endless negotiation just doing barely enough to keep the JRP happy of which two and a half members are EU sympathetic anyway. The UK can never diverge because we'd leave NI behind and we get sucked into endless financial commitments for less in return. The £39 Billion is not dependent on an FTA being agreed. The EU start to get that from March next year come what may. Free movement of people is very complicated and much depends on the "end of the transition" period which includes any extension. So, as long as the EU looks as if it is trying to come to an agreement with the UK, it can actually delay our departure for ever? And will still be collecting the cash from us as well as already having get banked the £39 billion? Who the hell negotiated that deal for us. Oggy? Yep. But this is only the Withdrawal Agreement. The future relationship that Raab wanted a firm commitment, agreed in legal text, within the WA is Article 184 of the Withdrawal Agreement and contains a clause requiring both parties to negotiate the future relationship referred to the political declaration to “their best endeavours” and “in good faith.” That's it. That's the extent of the commitment to negotiate a Future Trade Agreement. No promises, no targets, nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2018 15:39:59 GMT
Turkeys vote for Christmas then moan about being stuffed full of Paxo and roasted. I'd be careful who you're calling turkeys Billy...seems you're leaving a trail of feathers behind you ...inbetween all that shit of course Wait until you see what they have install For you a few years from now |
|
|
|
Post by Clayton Wood on Nov 16, 2018 15:43:13 GMT
Arlene Foster very quite today. Last Twitter post was last night about the Republic v NI football match.  |
|
|
|
Post by Hiram on Nov 16, 2018 15:43:55 GMT
Why did the Brexit chicken cross the road?
I never said there was a road. Or a chicken...
|
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 16, 2018 15:55:37 GMT
No. The Withdrawal agreement is International Law binding future UK Governments. Within the WA are the 3 items; Citizens rights, Irish border and financial payment. Once past 29th March 2019 the idea that an FTA can be agreed and implemented by 31st December 2020 is supposedly 'optimistic' so any further negotiating period comes in two forms. 1) Extend the so called transition period beyond 2020. 2) Trigger the 'backstop'. Applying for either of these is only allowed once. I say apply because the UK can either choose to open negotiations into extending the transition period or choose to open negotiations into triggering the backstop. That is the only unilateral choice the UK has. Extending the transition period comes with most of responsibilities of being in the EU customs union, single market, freedom of movement etc, etc and paying the usual EU contributions. Some contributions will not be paid as some responsibilities stop after 2020 BUT the rebate also stops so the pay-to-play extension period is a more expensive place per day then where we are now. The UK also risks being involved with the next EU 7 yearly financial budget cycle that kicks in after 2020. The length of the extension could be up to 2099. Triggering the backstop commits the whole UK to be in a 'customs area' until the FTA is completed. The UK can change certain domestic rules within this 'customs area' but Northern Ireland can't. So politically no PM would actually change anything because this would see NI continue to follow the EU's rules whilst the rest of the UK diverges. This backstop continues until the FTA (including the Irish border) satisfies both parties. The the FTA is implemented and the backstops ceases and can't be revived. If at any point during this backstop the UK think that an agreement on an FTA will never be reached they can ask for a 'Joint Review Panel' to assess the progress so far. That JRP is made up of 5 members, 2 appointed by the EU, 2 appointed by the UK and 1 which they both agree to appoint. It would up to the UK to convince the JRP that the EU are not acting in good faith and we'd like to leave the negotiations. If the JRP agreed then I assume we'd walk away with anything agreed in place and whatever wasn't agreed as outstanding and then coming under WTO or the relevant International body but maybe not and if there couldn't be 100% agreement over an FTA then there was nothing. So Brexiteers argue that it's easiest thing in the world for the EU to not agree to an extension period leaving the UK with only the backstop option and then never agreeing an FTA. Just decades of endless negotiation just doing barely enough to keep the JRP happy of which two and a half members are EU sympathetic anyway. The UK can never diverge because we'd leave NI behind and we get sucked into endless financial commitments for less in return. The £39 Billion is not dependent on an FTA being agreed. The EU start to get that from March next year come what may. Free movement of people is very complicated and much depends on the "end of the transition" period which includes any extension. So, as long as the EU looks as if it is trying to come to an agreement with the UK, it can actually delay our departure for ever? And will still be collecting the cash from us as well as already having get banked the £39 billion? Who the hell negotiated that deal for us. Oggy? I sometimes wonder if people are so committed to trying to win the argument that they are not really looking at what we are actually doing ( of course that accusation can work both ways). If we weren't already in the EU would we really contemplate such a deal. It seems like madness to me....as a stand alone deal. If we were an independent sovereign country , what can of mutually beneficial deal would we expect? Hypothetical of course. |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Nov 16, 2018 15:57:37 GMT
Yeah I have heard some of these arguments but there is also a good faith clause so if the EU drags it all out they invalidate the agreement, any agreement can be cancelled whatever law it is written under. This agreement can only be cancelled via the Joint Committee. But "good faith" has no measures. There isn't a list of things that have been agreed that need checking off every month. For example, timing. As the EU I appoint 4 negotiators. They will take 10 years at least to negotiate an FTA. Is this bad faith? They work 40 hours a week and are very capable but you complain this will take forever. So what. There's no obligation to speed anything up. They're working as hard as they can. "Drags it out" has not been defined or agreed in the WA. So what are the penalties for just leaving unilaterally, how would they be enforced I would be surprised if this backstop actually had any teeth.... |
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Nov 16, 2018 16:01:34 GMT
Why did the Brexit chicken cross the road? I never said there was a road. Or a chicken... See even the chlorinated chicken doesn't want to remain |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2018 16:02:59 GMT
If may survives this the Tories have fucked up big time
Down the shitter with you ...swirling around with Blair Brown and new Labour
|
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Nov 16, 2018 16:04:25 GMT
I would appreciate Oatcakers views on this hypothetical scenario. ( I don't think I've got a hidden agenda here, just curious)
Suppose the UK genuinely left the EU. Then say 5 years down the line Scotland gained independence through a referendum. Irrespective of whether they were allowed to join the EU ( if it still exists in its current form)...I recognise that at the moment the EU says that it could not join...........What issues would it throw up in respect of the border/ trade etc? .... would it be possible/ allowed for Scotland to actually leave? Would membership of the EU by an independent Scotland make any difference?
Perhaps more applicable to the current issue....if Scotland gained independence whilst we were still in the EU how would the border be handled..... because as I understand it , they would also be out of the EU.
Apologies for the rambling, it's Friday, I'm going for a pint.
|
|
|
|
Post by M on Nov 16, 2018 16:16:17 GMT
I would appreciate Oatcakers views on this hypothetical scenario. ( I don't think I've got a hidden agenda here, just curious) Suppose the UK genuinely left the EU. Then say 5 years down the line Scotland gained independence through a referendum. Irrespective of whether they were allowed to join the EU ( if it still exists in its current form)...I recognise that at the moment the EU says that it could not join...........What issues would it throw up in respect of the border/ trade etc? .... would it be possible/ allowed for Scotland to actually leave? Would membership of the EU by an independent Scotland make any difference? Perhaps more applicable to the current issue....if Scotland gained independence whilst we were still in the EU how would the border be handled..... because as I understand it , they would also be out of the EU. Apologies for the rambling, it's Friday, I'm going for a pint. No idea but I believe as a mandatory for new entrants they have to accept the currency whereas we don't 'currently'. In terms of borders when Croatia joined in 2013 overnight their borders with Bosnia became hard borders and it wasn't pretty. Not read it all but here's something on it... www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/17/ireland-brexit-headache-border |
|
|
|
Post by capto on Nov 16, 2018 17:10:28 GMT
Carole CadwalladrVerified account @carolecadwalla Carole Cadwalladr Retweeted J.K. Rowling I cannot contain my disgust for these appalling profiteers. Odey was a major Vote Leave donor who turned a £873,323 bet on Brexit into £220 million on the night. Now this.
J.K. RowlingVerified account @jk_rowling ‘Bad days tend to be good days for us,’ says Brexiteer hedge fund tycoon making millions from the collapse of the pound.
Liz Webster 🔶 🏴 🇪🇺 #FBPE @abcpoppins · Parliament was meant to decide to satisfy A50(1). They didn’t - the PM decided and that decision was based on a vote which is steeped in fraud. So the decision is unconstitutional and based on fraud. Does that make sense?
John SimpsonVerified account @johnsimpsonnews · ‘Getting out of the EU can be quick & easy. The UK holds most of the cards’ - John Redwood. ‘There will be no downside to Brexit’ - David Davis. ‘The Free Trade Agreement that we will do with the EU should be one of the easiest in human history’ - Liam Fox.
Carole CadwalladrVerified account @carolecadwalla OMG. Here's the video. Theresa May is asked a direct question by @benpbradshaw. Did she block intelligence services investigation into Arron Banks? May: "We do not comment on criminal investigations." That was not the question. And it was very definitely not a denial.
Nicholas SoamesVerified account @nsoames · It should be a point of Honour to see off the ERG and it’s hard right members who have been ruining the fortunes of our Party for years #enoughisenoughyouvegonetoofar
1. For every £1.00 (0.6% of GDP) we contribute to the EU, the country earns over £10 from membership
2. For every £10 the UK earns, 82%, so £8-20 goes to the top 1% of the population.
3. Everything quitters, leavers, brexiteers, far-right, MSM etc you about the EU is lies
4. Ask the question - why would they lie?
|
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 16, 2018 18:25:33 GMT
I would appreciate Oatcakers views on this hypothetical scenario. ( I don't think I've got a hidden agenda here, just curious) Suppose the UK genuinely left the EU. Then say 5 years down the line Scotland gained independence through a referendum. Irrespective of whether they were allowed to join the EU ( if it still exists in its current form)...I recognise that at the moment the EU says that it could not join...........What issues would it throw up in respect of the border/ trade etc? .... would it be possible/ allowed for Scotland to actually leave? Would membership of the EU by an independent Scotland make any difference? Perhaps more applicable to the current issue....if Scotland gained independence whilst we were still in the EU how would the border be handled..... because as I understand it , they would also be out of the EU. Apologies for the rambling, it's Friday, I'm going for a pint. Issues regarding border and trade? Not many in the real world. Maybe some in the political world. Enjoy your pint. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 16, 2018 19:53:23 GMT
Oily Bobbins and Treason May.
|
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Nov 16, 2018 20:16:43 GMT
Carole CadwalladrVerified account @carolecadwalla Carole Cadwalladr Retweeted J.K. Rowling I cannot contain my disgust for these appalling profiteers. Odey was a major Vote Leave donor who turned a £873,323 bet on Brexit into £220 million on the night. Now this. J.K. RowlingVerified account @jk_rowling ‘Bad days tend to be good days for us,’ says Brexiteer hedge fund tycoon making millions from the collapse of the pound. Liz Webster 🔶 🏴 🇪🇺 #FBPE @abcpoppins · Parliament was meant to decide to satisfy A50(1). They didn’t - the PM decided and that decision was based on a vote which is steeped in fraud. So the decision is unconstitutional and based on fraud. Does that make sense? John SimpsonVerified account @johnsimpsonnews · ‘Getting out of the EU can be quick & easy. The UK holds most of the cards’ - John Redwood. ‘There will be no downside to Brexit’ - David Davis. ‘The Free Trade Agreement that we will do with the EU should be one of the easiest in human history’ - Liam Fox. Carole CadwalladrVerified account @carolecadwalla OMG. Here's the video. Theresa May is asked a direct question by @benpbradshaw. Did she block intelligence services investigation into Arron Banks? May: "We do not comment on criminal investigations." That was not the question. And it was very definitely not a denial. Nicholas SoamesVerified account @nsoames · It should be a point of Honour to see off the ERG and it’s hard right members who have been ruining the fortunes of our Party for years #enoughisenoughyouvegonetoofar 1. For every £1.00 (0.6% of GDP) we contribute to the EU, the country earns over £10 from membership 2. For every £10 the UK earns, 82%, so £8-20 goes to the top 1% of the population. 3. Everything quitters, leavers, brexiteers, far-right, MSM etc you about the EU is lies 4. Ask the question - why would they lie? Guess what I couldn’t give a flying fuck about the political views of a third rate children’s fantasy writer |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 16, 2018 20:44:53 GMT
So confirmation of a "real" EU Army from Frau Merkel and now this from Herr Blair. Friends, neighbours, future partners my bumhole. <iframe width="11.199999999999989" height="4.199999999999989" style="position: absolute; width: 11.199999999999989px; height: 4.199999999999989px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 5px; top: 50px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_12412030" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="11.199999999999989" height="4.199999999999989" style="position: absolute; width: 11.2px; height: 4.2px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 502px; top: 50px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_38551540" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="11.199999999999989" height="4.199999999999989" style="position: absolute; width: 11.2px; height: 4.2px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 5px; top: 204px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_33836507" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="11.199999999999989" height="4.199999999999989" style="position: absolute; width: 11.2px; height: 4.2px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 502px; top: 204px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_34271841" scrolling="no"></iframe> |
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on Nov 16, 2018 20:48:46 GMT
So confirmation of a "real" EU Army from Frau Merkel and now this from Herr Blair. Friends, neighbours, future partners my bumhole. <iframe width="11.199999999999989" height="4.199999999999989" style="position: absolute; width: 11.199999999999989px; height: 4.199999999999989px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 5px; top: 50px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_12412030" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="11.199999999999989" height="4.199999999999989" style="position: absolute; width: 11.2px; height: 4.2px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 502px; top: 50px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_38551540" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="11.199999999999989" height="4.199999999999989" style="position: absolute; width: 11.2px; height: 4.2px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 5px; top: 204px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_33836507" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="11.199999999999989" height="4.199999999999989" style="position: absolute; width: 11.2px; height: 4.2px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 502px; top: 204px;" id="MoatPxIOPT0_34271841" scrolling="no"></iframe> I fucking detest that man. If there was no other reason for voting for Brexit, the fact that that twat is against it would make me do so. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 16, 2018 21:11:08 GMT
Amazing what changing the Editor does. I wonder what could happen with a change of Prime Minister? Bearing in mind they're only trying to deliver what was promised. Attachment Deleted |
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on Nov 16, 2018 21:25:06 GMT
We were on the edge of something special and still the establishment managed to fuck us.
The May deal is a complete and utter example of government ineptitude and is an illustration of what happens when the public place their trust in a bunch of incompetent half wits to carry out a basic instruction by the majority of the country.
For me it comes down to a 'basic remain as we are' or 'leave with no deal' as May's abortion of a deal doesn't even enter the reckoning.
Bearing in mind that it's unlikely that the EU will let us remain under our previous status the only option is to leave with no deal.
The problem with this country is lily-livered politicians from all sides of the spectrum.
|
|
|
|
Post by rogerjonesisgod on Nov 16, 2018 21:26:10 GMT
Deep State.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dingdangdoo on Nov 16, 2018 21:29:18 GMT
It would/will be interesting too see that if we went/go to a second vote what would be on offer from the EU.
After all the consensus is give the decision back to the people
now they know the deal, but has anyone thought to ask the EU for a counter deal?
It’s obvious they don’t want us to leave, hence the hardball tactics, so, make us an offer.
|
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Nov 16, 2018 21:30:01 GMT
So what are the penalties for just leaving unilaterally, how would they be enforced I would be surprised if this backstop actually had any teeth.... If a side has to go around spouting how they have won hands down you often find they haven't, if they really had won so much no need to say anything, its like the guy bragging about how pretty his wife / girlfriend / person who identifies as female is  I also understand the point about being in a customs union and its not a long term option if you cant negotiate your own trade deals but how do you get trapt in a customs union, there is not a single agreement I know of that is not breakable / cancel-able, if East Germany can leave the Soviet block I am pretty sure we can leave a customs union when it comes to it..... |
|
|
|
Post by xchpotter on Nov 16, 2018 21:34:28 GMT
It would/will be interesting too see that if we went/go to a second vote what would be on offer from the EU. After all the consensus is give the decision back to the people now they know the deal, but has anyone thought to ask the EU for a counter deal? It’s obvious they don’t want us to leave, hence the hardball tactics, so, make us an offer. Exactly this. Unfortunately though we sent fuckin kids who were born in a lighthouse to negotiate with hardened poker players. I’d love to play cards with this government and the weak as piss civil servants involved in the negotiations....it’d be like taking candy from a baby. |
|
