woody2 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 1 minute ago, TheTeapot said: You are (purposfully?) misinterpreting the data. nope- they add up to 95%........ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody2 Posted January 17, 2019 Share Posted January 17, 2019 12 minutes ago, manxman1980 said: 1-Because Corbyn is a bloody idiot. As I said it is because the Act was badly written, so passed into law in a badly worded fashion leaving it open to legal challenge. I will try and find the relevant legal advice when I have time. 2-Prof? Who are we talling about? 3-Also don't forget that there has been changes on the electoral register in 2 years. More young people eligible to vote, EU citizens who have obtained British Citizenship, and older voters who have passed away. 4-All that may shift the balance but we don't know for sure. Your assertion that everyone who voted for Brexit wanted a hard Brexit is unlikely to be true, given that some people admitted they voted in favour as a protest vote (Yes, they are idiots). 5-A soft Brexit would not temper the hard-core Brexit supporters though. That's like leaving the club, still paying membership fees but having no say in the rules that you will still have to comply with. The EU are simply not going to back down on their core principles which brings us back to three choices which no one is happy with. 1- no change to the leave date- i have just checked- it doesn't require an agreement with the eu..... 2-prof curtice...... 3-see point 2....... 4- people voted to leave the eu- hard or soft is remoaner talk...... 5- wait till the money stops then you'll see another side to the eu- many are already speaking against the eu's approach...... not a single member state has had any say- zero mep's have voted- this is the unelected dictators show only....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody2 Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 13 hours ago, manxman1980 said: As I said it is because the Act was badly written, so passed into law in a badly worded fashion leaving it open to legal challenge. I will try and find the relevant legal advice when I have time. turns out its not badly written........ have you been reading the guardian......... Quote If the agreement the prime minister has negotiated with the EU fails to pass the House of Commons, the UK will leave with no deal at all unless something changes, because leaving the EU is written into UK law. The EU Withdrawal Act sets 29 March as the date of departure. The wording of the act does allow a minister to change the definition of "exit day" relatively quickly using a statutory instrument - a piece of secondary legislation - rather than an entirely new act of Parliament that would need to be debated. A minister would have to propose the change and MPs would have to approve it. but........ Quote But there is a second and more significant reason why no deal would become the default position: that's what EU law says. Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is the formal route for any country leaving the EU and it allows for a two-year process of negotiation. At the end of that period "the treaties shall cease to apply to the state in question" unless Article 50 is extended or revoked. The most obvious way therefore to stop a no-deal Brexit, or any form of Brexit, is to revoke Article 50. But it seems highly unlikely that the House of Commons would vote to revoke Article 50 unless there had been another referendum, or maybe an election, in which the public backed the UK remaining in the EU. The government rejects the idea of holding another referendum anyway - and the time to do so before the end of March has run out. and....... Quote So, the other way to avoid a no-deal Brexit in the short term is to play for time and extend the Article 50 period. The government would need to propose that and MPs would have to approve it. But, crucially, unlike in the case of revoking Article 50, to extend it the UK would also need the agreement of all 27 other EU countries. It would probably need to persuade them that something important had changed in UK politics to warrant an extension - perhaps a looming election, or another referendum, rather than more of the same argument. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46799778 also parliament would have to approve an agreement before a referendum otherwise you would possibly end up in the same situation....... if an agreement was passed you wouldn't need another referendum........ bad luck......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody2 Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 13 hours ago, manxman1980 said: Also don't forget that there has been changes on the electoral register in 2 years. More young people eligible to vote, EU citizens who have obtained British Citizenship, and older voters who have passed away. old people are dead, young people aren't....... this highlights another remoaner lie..... because remoaners have constantly claimed that only old people voted to leave (it's untrue but this is remoaner logic)...... guess what? those that voted last time are now older so would vote leave....... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 The big mistake UK made was dancing to the EU's tune and conducting the negotiations to the EU's agenda. That is why there have been no splits among member states. They know if they stick together they will have an outcome where the UK pays them big bucks (either current deal, customs union or, their preference, UK stays in). If they thought for a moment that they were going to have to shell out more/receive less, then the claws would be out for each other. The handling of the negotiations by the UK has been appalling, but even so, anyone wanting to get out should have taken the current deal. If it had been offered 10 years ago, the likes of Redwood and Rees-Mogg would have jumped at it. Have they never heard of establishing a beach head? At least it draws a line politically and gets us out with a finite (reduced) cost. By insisting on winning 7-nil in normal time, they are in grave danger now of losing 4-3. Presumably May is telling them that. No deal not gonna happen. It would be fine, of course, but contrary forces have convinced too big a proportion of the country, and not least many rather simple politicians, that it would be a catastrophe. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody2 Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 5 minutes ago, woolley said: The big mistake UK made was dancing to the EU's tune and conducting the negotiations to the EU's agenda. That is why there have been no splits among member states. They know if they stick together they will have an outcome where the UK pays them big bucks (either current deal, customs union or, their preference, UK stays in). If they thought for a moment that they were going to have to shell out more/receive less, then the claws would be out for each other. The handling of the negotiations by the UK has been appalling, but even so, anyone wanting to get out should have taken the current deal. If it had been offered 10 years ago, the likes of Redwood and Rees-Mogg would have jumped at it. Have they never heard of establishing a beach head? At least it draws a line politically and gets us out with a finite (reduced) cost. By insisting on winning 7-nil in normal time, they are in grave danger now of losing 4-3. Presumably May is telling them that. No deal not gonna happen. It would be fine, of course, but contrary forces have convinced too big a proportion of the country, and not least many rather simple politicians, that it would be a catastrophe. alan johnson said the same thing about labour last night...... all may needs to do is remove the backstop, it would pass then...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 Totally agree woolley (of course, yapyapyap ) It's entirely possible the climate could rapidly turn from those contrary, doom-laden predictions and consequence should there be a leadership change. The sooner May realises her game is up, and preserves whatever credibility and integrity she has remaining (pun intended) and steps down, the better it will be. She is but a puppet dangling from her Whitehall advisers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody2 Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 oily needs to go...... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbie Bobster Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 I thought QT was actually quite illuminating last night. Mostly constructive, intelligent contributions - with the exceptions of Diane Abbott and Isabel Oakeshott. Rory Stewart played a blinder with his unemptional assessment and reluctance to make political points (the latter mostly shared by Kirdsty Blackman). And he couldn't conceal his glee when Diane walked herself into a political corner and then like a confused Roomba kept on bumping. I was impressed by Anand Menon's point about #BrexRef2. To paraphrase - a reasonably likely (but note, not a given!) outcome of a 52/48 result for remain but with a lower turnout than the first vote wouldn't help, it would probably make things worse. The second-best outcome for the UK economy now would seem to be an adjustment to the current deal that does the minimum possible to satisfy the hard Brexiteers whilst staying as close to the single market as possible. Whether that particular venn diagram has an overlap, though, I'm not so sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody2 Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 4 minutes ago, Bobbie Bobster said: I was impressed by Anand Menon's point about #BrexRef2. To paraphrase - a reasonably likely (but note, not a given!) outcome of a 52/48 result for remain but with a lower turnout than the first vote wouldn't help, it would probably make things worse. apart from no one supports a second ref....... Quote "You are going to lose a second referendum by a bigger margin than the first one" Alan Johnson warns @heidiallen75 "Tell them again, louder" chips in #choochoo 6 minutes ago, Bobbie Bobster said: The second-best outcome for the UK economy now would seem to be an adjustment to the current deal that does the minimum possible to satisfy the hard Brexiteers whilst staying as close to the single market as possible. Whether that particular venn diagram has an overlap, though, I'm not so sure. nope- you either have the single market and/or the customs union or nothing...... this different version has been turned down from day 1...... you are more deluded than may if you the libdums or snp will vote for any type of exit........ that leaves labour...... if you think 117 labour mp's are going to go against the labour leadership you are more deluded than may...... remove the backstop it will go through or no agreement exit is the default......... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbie Bobster Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 3 minutes ago, woody2 said: you are more deluded Exactly the sort of comment that was conspicuous by its absence on the left hand side of the panel on QT last night. C'mon woodster, you're better than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody2 Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 2 hours ago, Bobbie Bobster said: Exactly the sort of comment that was conspicuous by its absence on the left hand side of the panel on QT last night. C'mon woodster, you're better than that. because qt is full of remoaners bar one on the panel....... so do you think 117 labour mp's are going to go against the labour leadership...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woody2 Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 High-profile Germans plead with UK to stay in EU https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-46918009 nothing to do with them having to pay billion more to the eu........ bet they wish they did a deal with "call me dave" now....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobbie Bobster Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 3 hours ago, woody2 said: nope you are more deluded you are more deluded 3 hours ago, Bobbie Bobster said: Exactly the sort of comment that was conspicuous by its absence on the left hand side of the panel on QT last night. C'mon woodster, you're better than that. 1 hour ago, woody2 said: because qt is full of remoaners It seems you are not better than that. Oh well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolley Posted January 18, 2019 Share Posted January 18, 2019 4 hours ago, Bobbie Bobster said: I thought QT was actually quite illuminating last night. Mostly constructive, intelligent contributions - Things have certainly changed since I last saw it then. Do you think Dimple knees was the problem all along? 1 hour ago, woody2 said: because qt is full of remoaners bar one on the panel....... so do you think 117 labour mp's are going to go against the labour leadership...... I suppose the only thing that has going for it is that the Labour leadership is Corbyn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.