How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 11)
Discussion
sunbeam alpine said:
It's OK - I've posted this before - but for the Brexiters Cummings is perfectly acceptable. Unelected bureaucrats are fine, so long as they're not nasty foreign ones... 
No, unelected bureaucrats are necessary, possibly even desirable, so long as they are under the absolute and direct control of someone who is democratically accountable.ClaphamGT3 said:
crankedup said:
andymadmak said:
Garvin said:
andymadmak said:
. . . . . . . Honestly guys, I am utterly stunned that anyone imagines that the EU is going to negotiate sensibly on a new WA if we take No Deal off the table. . . . . . . . .
Andy, calm down. Everyone knows this, at least anyone capable of rational thought. The Remainers don't want a true Brexit deal they want to remain, revoke A50 back to the, so called, status quo. Failing that, May's terrible WA will do for them as it isn't really leaving. You are wearing out your keyboard for no real purpose. If these Remainers really wanted a decent deal they would put some energy into helping draft out alternative approaches to the issues that caused the WA to be voted down not once, but three times. Not one has, they have just thrown bricks at those who do and believe that the backstop is absolutely necessary, no questions asked - it demonstrates beyond any doubt their true intentions, yet they accuse others of being disingenuous!p1stonhead said:
Garvin said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
Get a grip. No one has voted against Brexit. The majority of the House of Commons have voted against a no-deal Brexit
I seriously think you are insulting your own intelligence here.The bare facts support what you are saying, but the underlying reasoning is different and, deep down, you know it, don't you.
It's no difference to BoJo proroguing Parliament. The bare facts are for the preparation of a Queen's speech such that he, as a new PM with a new Cabinet, can outline his administration's intentions over the next Parliamentary period. The underlying reasoning, which everyone knows deep down, is to restrict, as much as possible, debate on Brexit.
It's an irrelevance anyway, the only people who think May's WA is leaving the EU are remainers, the reality is it's a surrender document.
No point in trying to debate with remainers. Since they cannot see (or more accurately pretend they cannot see) the difference between the government taking the people of the UK into the EU without a mandate from the people to do so, Nor first giving them the chance to vote on the matter, no legal challenges or debates for the people to see. They have a selective version of democracy or severe double standards which they believe lets them twist the facts, any way they like, in support of their position
For them, it was perfectly OK for the government to take the people of the UK into the EU, without first asking them if this was what they wanted and without a mandate from the people to do so, yet somehow it is not OK for the government to take the UK out of the EU even after giving the people of the UK the first and only vote they have ever had on the matter.
They did not get thevanswer they expected or wanted in 2016, and so believe it is OK to ignore, or overturn that vote.
Democracy began to die when a mainly remainer tory party elected a remainer Prime Minister to get the UK out of the EU. (wonder how they would like it, if Farage had been appointed to lead the remain campaign?)
Yesterdays doings show that democracy in the UK has been further eroded.
What is the point of voting at all, when certain politicians do everything they can to overturn the democratic vote of the people, instead of just enacting the vote as they stated they would do when the 2016 referendum was announced?
Very interesting times lay ahead.
For them, it was perfectly OK for the government to take the people of the UK into the EU, without first asking them if this was what they wanted and without a mandate from the people to do so, yet somehow it is not OK for the government to take the UK out of the EU even after giving the people of the UK the first and only vote they have ever had on the matter.
They did not get thevanswer they expected or wanted in 2016, and so believe it is OK to ignore, or overturn that vote.
Democracy began to die when a mainly remainer tory party elected a remainer Prime Minister to get the UK out of the EU. (wonder how they would like it, if Farage had been appointed to lead the remain campaign?)
Yesterdays doings show that democracy in the UK has been further eroded.
What is the point of voting at all, when certain politicians do everything they can to overturn the democratic vote of the people, instead of just enacting the vote as they stated they would do when the 2016 referendum was announced?
Very interesting times lay ahead.
ClaphamGT3 said:
crankedup said:
andymadmak said:
Garvin said:
andymadmak said:
. . . . . . . Honestly guys, I am utterly stunned that anyone imagines that the EU is going to negotiate sensibly on a new WA if we take No Deal off the table. . . . . . . . .
Andy, calm down. Everyone knows this, at least anyone capable of rational thought. The Remainers don't want a true Brexit deal they want to remain, revoke A50 back to the, so called, status quo. Failing that, May's terrible WA will do for them as it isn't really leaving. You are wearing out your keyboard for no real purpose. If these Remainers really wanted a decent deal they would put some energy into helping draft out alternative approaches to the issues that caused the WA to be voted down not once, but three times. Not one has, they have just thrown bricks at those who do and believe that the backstop is absolutely necessary, no questions asked - it demonstrates beyond any doubt their true intentions, yet they accuse others of being disingenuous!or had you missed that fact? Voting against the only proposal on the table for brexit (brino) has now led us to this crisis. We will now hold a G.E. with the candidates being a choice of two coalitions, votes for a marxist led Labour/SNP/Lib Dem or Tory /TBP .
Earthdweller said:
Isn’t the last three years evidence enough ?
Not at all.I am no great fan of MP's but I cannot believe they are currently acting for their own best interests alone.
The fact that they have a different opinion of what is best for the UK to you does not mean they are fundamentally dishonest.
don'tbesilly said:
p1stonhead said:
Garvin said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
Get a grip. No one has voted against Brexit. The majority of the House of Commons have voted against a no-deal Brexit
I seriously think you are insulting your own intelligence here.The bare facts support what you are saying, but the underlying reasoning is different and, deep down, you know it, don't you.
It's no difference to BoJo proroguing Parliament. The bare facts are for the preparation of a Queen's speech such that he, as a new PM with a new Cabinet, can outline his administration's intentions over the next Parliamentary period. The underlying reasoning, which everyone knows deep down, is to restrict, as much as possible, debate on Brexit.
It's an irrelevance anyway, the only people who think May's WA is leaving the EU are remainers, the reality is it's a surrender document.
Pan Pan Pan said:
No point in trying to debate with remainers.
For them, it was perfectly OK for the government to take the people of the UK into the EU, without first asking them if this was what they wanted and without a mandate from the people to do so, yet somehow it is not OK for the government to take the UK out of the EU even after giving the people of the UK the first and only vote they have ever had on the matter.
For them, it was perfectly OK for the government to take the people of the UK into the EU, without first asking them if this was what they wanted and without a mandate from the people to do so, yet somehow it is not OK for the government to take the UK out of the EU even after giving the people of the UK the first and only vote they have ever had on the matter.
Every single day. Set your watch by it.
banjowilly said:
The retort of the drowning man. Face it Andy, you're one of the terminally convinced, immune to the evidence around you, evidence that is provided too.
Acceptance is an important stage in the grief process & I'd climb on board sharpish if I were you.
And become bandwagonwilly, how many reinventions would that be, Eddie? Acceptance is an important stage in the grief process & I'd climb on board sharpish if I were you.
p1stonhead said:
don'tbesilly said:
p1stonhead said:
Garvin said:
ClaphamGT3 said:
Get a grip. No one has voted against Brexit. The majority of the House of Commons have voted against a no-deal Brexit
I seriously think you are insulting your own intelligence here.The bare facts support what you are saying, but the underlying reasoning is different and, deep down, you know it, don't you.
It's no difference to BoJo proroguing Parliament. The bare facts are for the preparation of a Queen's speech such that he, as a new PM with a new Cabinet, can outline his administration's intentions over the next Parliamentary period. The underlying reasoning, which everyone knows deep down, is to restrict, as much as possible, debate on Brexit.
It's an irrelevance anyway, the only people who think May's WA is leaving the EU are remainers, the reality is it's a surrender document.
Garvin said:
Mrr T said:
Garvin said:
Andy, calm down. Everyone knows this, at least anyone capable of rational thought. The Remainers don't want a true Brexit deal they want to remain, revoke A50 back to the, so called, status quo. Failing that, May's terrible WA will do for them as it isn't really leaving. You are wearing out your keyboard for no real purpose. If these Remainers really wanted a decent deal they would put some energy into helping draft out alternative approaches to the issues that caused the WA to be voted down not once, but three times. Not one has, they have just thrown bricks at those who do and believe that the backstop is absolutely necessary, no questions asked - it demonstrates beyond any doubt their true intentions, yet they accuse others of being disingenuous!
So remainders are in your view not capable of rational thought but you really want us to come up with a plan for leave? 1. I never said that Remainers aren't capable of rational thought, you just made that up. No surprise, it is concrete evidence of your lack of simple comprehension. I still think it is both a lack of education and intellect on your part because you still persist in making primary school spelling mistakes in your posts (and they most certainly aren't simple typos or autocorrects).
2. I stated, in different words but I'll make it easy for you here, that anyone (that's Remainers, Leavers and neutrals alike) who is capable of rational thought knows that the EU will not budge to a different deal if and when no deal is taken off the table.
3. If those rational thinking Remainers were honest about getting a deal, apart from the current WA, through Parliament then at least some of them would try to help define alternative approaches/solutions but they haven't.
4. Therefore, the logical conclusion is that they don't really want a deal, they just want to remain full stop but are not being honest about it pretending that they somehow want a deal. They are no different to the Leavers they throw insults at.
Now have you got it?
Now that's what I call a great plan.
I will ignore your insults in the knowledge I am likely much better qualified than you.
banjowilly said:
Pan Pan Pan said:
No point in trying to debate with remainers.
For them, it was perfectly OK for the government to take the people of the UK into the EU, without first asking them if this was what they wanted and without a mandate from the people to do so, yet somehow it is not OK for the government to take the UK out of the EU even after giving the people of the UK the first and only vote they have ever had on the matter.
For them, it was perfectly OK for the government to take the people of the UK into the EU, without first asking them if this was what they wanted and without a mandate from the people to do so, yet somehow it is not OK for the government to take the UK out of the EU even after giving the people of the UK the first and only vote they have ever had on the matter.
Every single day. Set your watch by it.
But as we all know remainers like you cannot handle the truth, so you try to shout it down, or hide it as much as possible. the more you whinge about how many times I put the truth up there for all to see, the more I will post it up, because I know the truth frightens the cr*p out of you. Enjoy!
Pan Pan Pan said:
No point in trying to debate with remainers. .........
From my point of view as a 'leaver', the government taking us in to a "free trade zone" was a no brainer. Something that didn't really require the consent of the public. It was a pure national interest decision.But as the EU morphed from a 'trading partnership' in to a 'political-government entity' then this is when the public should have been given a voice.
MPs likely knew the opposition which is why they kept the whole process within the walls of westminster.
But now as the British public has given its voice, and has voted to leave, the UK should be leaving. There are cases for and against leaving in terms of the national interest, and with the public's consent the decision should be made.
If that decision by MPs is still to remain, then just fooking retract Article 50 and be done with it!
If however MPs are playing games with a "not on my watch" scenario with claims that they are respecting their constituents by pretending to act in favour of the referendum but actually not, then we need a GE so that we can vote them all OUT.
Anyone got any thoughts on this?
In a nutshell it says that should the bill pass both houses then the government could refuse to take it to be signed into law via royal assent as they don't agree with the very specific details it contains which they couldn't do previously with the Cooper-Letwin bill because it was much more vague. The article suggests this was intentional to avoid this issue and presumably they were confident May would request the extension without any terms that would be unacceptable to the EU which wouldn't be the case with Boris.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/09/02/proponen...
If Labour reject the request for the GE on 15th October as they say they will I can envisage the government using any means necessary to stop the bill passing and this looks like it could be their ticket to me.
In a nutshell it says that should the bill pass both houses then the government could refuse to take it to be signed into law via royal assent as they don't agree with the very specific details it contains which they couldn't do previously with the Cooper-Letwin bill because it was much more vague. The article suggests this was intentional to avoid this issue and presumably they were confident May would request the extension without any terms that would be unacceptable to the EU which wouldn't be the case with Boris.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2019/09/02/proponen...
If Labour reject the request for the GE on 15th October as they say they will I can envisage the government using any means necessary to stop the bill passing and this looks like it could be their ticket to me.
Mrr T said:
I have it now. In an attempt to get a better deal we should threaten to shoot ourselves. I have always called it the reverse Russian roulette strategy, but others seem to call it the blazing saddles strategy.
Now that's what I call a great plan.
I will ignore your insults in the knowledge I am likely much better qualified than you.
You're at it again. It is your hyperbole that no deal will kill the UK. Nobody seriously believes that. Some of us have an opinion that no deal will be uncomfortable but in no way 'disastrous'.Now that's what I call a great plan.
I will ignore your insults in the knowledge I am likely much better qualified than you.
As for being better qualified and having knowledge of it (which, of course, you most certainly do not), I cannot believe anyone with such a tenuous grip on basic English and comprehension can be so highly qualified. You are just a Walt.
one thing the current situation has done for me is highlight just how long politicians have been lying on a grand scale. never again will i place any stock in claims that "the tories did this, labour did that" and the opposition could do nothing about it. it has just been shown the house can take control from the government and stop them doing something they don't like.
so all the pit closures during maggie's tenure were as much the fault of labour and the lib dems. all the money spent under labour as much the fault of the tories and lib dems. remember that gold gordon brown sold ? yup, the entire house was complicit in that.
so all the pit closures during maggie's tenure were as much the fault of labour and the lib dems. all the money spent under labour as much the fault of the tories and lib dems. remember that gold gordon brown sold ? yup, the entire house was complicit in that.
Garvin said:
Mrr T said:
I have it now. In an attempt to get a better deal we should threaten to shoot ourselves. I have always called it the reverse Russian roulette strategy, but others seem to call it the blazing saddles strategy.
Now that's what I call a great plan.
I will ignore your insults in the knowledge I am likely much better qualified than you.
You're at it again. It is your hyperbole that no deal will kill the UK. Nobody seriously believes that. Some of us have an opinion that no deal will be uncomfortable but in no way 'disastrous'.Now that's what I call a great plan.
I will ignore your insults in the knowledge I am likely much better qualified than you.
As for being better qualified and having knowledge of it (which, of course, you most certainly do not), I cannot believe anyone with such a tenuous grip on basic English and comprehension can be so highly qualified. You are just a Walt.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff