Re: Brexit
 

It makes for uncomfortable viewing watching Farage dig himself a hole big enough for him and his 29 MEPs.

Re: Brexit
 

It's A trench, classic warfare preparations readying themselves to destroy the enemy from within it's own borders.


29 MEP'S did anyone else get that many?

Re: Brexit
 

I think the other 722 MEPs might outvote them, if they ever bother to turn up.

Re: Brexit
 

I love the smell of napalm in the morning... sorry I meant wartime analogies.

Re: Brexit
 

They don't like it up em capt mainwaring

Re: Brexit
 

Yes Dad's Army just about sums up the Brexit Brigade.

Re: Brexit
 

You think Brexit is the only nationalist party in Strasbourg? There are plenty of others who will vote along similar lines to them (if they ever have to attend, and let’s not forget the general idea is that electing them should reinforce Brexit).

There are enough nationalist and populist MEPs now to cause mischief if they really want to.

Re: Brexit
 

Sometimes you have to stop being troublemakers, and actually deliver something. That why Farage keeps being found out.

Re: Brexit
 

After all this time and i’m Concerned that you and others still just don’t get it.

After 3 years, all those that voted Brexit ( and there will be some that have changed their mind, conversely there will also be Remainers that have changed their mind....i’m One) are so annoyed that you can take the piss out of Farage, you can make all the pro-Remain / anti -Brexit points etc, etc. It’s irrelevant, they want the result of the referendum enacted, and will support anyone that can deliver it.

The time for debating the pros and cons of Brexit is over, it’s been done. If you don’t know or understand what it entails now you never will. People have had enough time and positions are now well and truly entrenched.

Any “confirmatory vote” on any deal presented, would only work if the vote was accept the deal or leave with no deal.

Any other 2nd referendum would only invoked to potentially reverse the first. In my opinion I don’t believe that would be correct but if that is the direction that was taken I believe it would only be legitimate if it was on the exact same question as the first.

I’d be happy to run that again, but only if it was decided that to win Remain had to win by a margin of victory was higher than the first.

Otherwise, it wouldn’t settle the argument, that probably wouldn’ Either, but you get where i’m Coming from.

---------- Post added at 19:48 ---------- Previous post was at 19:43 ----------

Do ever read what you type before sending?

Replace the last sentence with “ that’s why our Parliament has been found out”.

That is so much more accurate as they are actually in the position to deliver it, whereas Farage isn’t.

And the Dads Army jibes, As in my previous post, it’s boring now. The sly digs on both sides are boring.

Re: Brexit
 

See your Brexit holiday has been cut short, yet again ;)

Re: Brexit
 

It was a one night stand 👼

Re: Brexit
 

Well, as long as we can still take the piss out of Farage :D

Re: Brexit
 

Papers are suggesting it's a distraction for the Equality and Human Rights Commission investigation. Could be onto something. Anyway, back to Brexit.

Re: Brexit
 

Good News Brexiteers ! Bercow is staying on after all :)

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...y_to_clipboard

Re: Brexit
 

And more than 13 Million Remainers from Referendum in 2016, did not vote for "Bollocks to Brexit", Liberal Democrats last week, your meaningless point is?

Seems you have dropped the mic on your head because a petition of six million does not beat 17.4 Million. The petition creator pleaded to get that tally beaten - they failed and rightly so.

You should be the uncomfortable one knowing that 10 million people, all Remainers did not sign that petition in the end and you should be all grown up enough to acknowledge that democracy is measured at the ballot box, not pathetic e-petitions. :rolleyes:

---------- Post added at 21:25 ---------- Previous post was at 21:22 ----------

As long as we can still take the piss out of Vince Cable, who cannot get the profanity laden slogan right, turn up for a debate on time and even get his facts right, no problem.

But seriously - this kind of debate is becoming child like and it needs to stop and it will stop.

Re: Brexit
 

I mean there is probably loads to take the piss out of Vince Cable with.

Re: Brexit
 

He's stepping down soon anyway. Just the Labour Party that needs a change at the top now.

Re: Brexit
 

probably happy with what he had, didn't need an extension (unlike others) ;)

Re: Brexit
 

I very nearly didn't vote, just didn't see the point, it was literally due to a large queue of traffic at the top of my road that made me stop and go in and I was tempted to vote kipper, the only one canvassing outside the was an old boy, he'd been stood there all day and I admired him for it, sadly not quite enough to change sides again but credit to him, no one else bothered and it's not like he didn't know it was going to be one last hurrah for them.

Mmm liberals and leaflets have history,.anyone remember the straight choice and how "straight" Simon Hughes turned out to be

A trench, bit like a grave then...

Re: Brexit
 

I'll give you the 29 Brexit MEPs and the 5 Anti EU MEPs.

As this time round there are more pro EU MEPs with 39. :D

Re: Brexit
 

Those on the purer ends of the Remain and Leave positions won't agree with her, but I think this piece from Sky's Beth Rigby is insightful. It's worth reading the whole article but this is part of her conclusion.
https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views...omise-11730565

Re: Brexit
 

I agree, Andrew. Compromise is, however, a dirty word now. The populist approach which places spin over substance is dominant. So many people, for different reasons, are happy with a Hard Brexit. Most are not questioning how will it impact their personal situation. They are just repeating the dogma sound bites but not asking the really important questions e.g. "Show me exactly why I will not be poorer?"

For a nation that had a global reputation for pragmatism and common sense, we have basically lost it, big style.

---------- Post added at 09:44 ---------- Previous post was at 09:31 ----------

Your argument, such as it is, is predicated on a basis on certainty and entitlement.

Certainty:

The Leave voters believe, not beyond reasonable doubt but beyond *any* doubt that they have right on their side. History tells us that is a recipe for things that nations tend to regret.

Entitlement:

They believe that an ill judged and ill conceived referendum result gives the Leave side an incontrovertible mandate to impose a national structural & economic change based on a vote that had no minimal turnout and a legal result that could be decided by a single person's vote. They also think they have no need to accommodate the wishes and concerns of 48% of the electorate that voted Remain. The 'Winner Takes All" attitude is why we are in this mess.

On both counts, no surprise here, I think they are wrong. They have every right to believe they are correct and I have every to believe (and articulate) why they are wrong.

I totally "get it" ..

Re: Brexit
 

No need to worry - according to a Brexit Party candidate (now MEP), it will only be "short-term".

https://www.indy100.com/article/brex...-years-8919786

Re: Brexit
 

Me thinks (and sorry I haven't trawled through all posts to check this) that the results of the EU elections can be summarised as "Leave or don't leave, there is no May".

Yes there are negotiations and compromise on exactly how but a result is needed and it should follow the desires from the referendum.

Re: Brexit
 

The notion of Brexit contains certain core principles. The so-called compromises violate one or more of those core principles. That is not coming to a compromise. A Customs Union would violate more than one of those core principles.


Also bear in mind that the WA is NOT a final agreement. It could get worse, especially if Corbyn got hold of things.

Re: Brexit
 

Do you not think the consequence of No Deal with led to the circumstances in which Corbyn does get hold of things?

Re: Brexit
 

Well you obviously don’t get it, or just can’t read as that waffle you have just typed out has nothing to do with the point I was making.

The point being that regardless of who you may think is right or wrong -

(and you can whinge all day long about the legitimacy of the referendum as you have just done above, it is gone, it happened, as I tell my kids crying about it won’t change it - they seem to understand the concept and they’re 8 & 4 respectively)

- doesn’t matter. Leavers and Remainers are now entrenched in their positions. All the information is out there, no one is now going to change their minds and the longer this goes on the more hardcore will the positions become. Leave at all costs/ remain at all costs.

So pointing out terrible and damaging a Brexit and particularly a no-deal Brexit is now just a waste of time you’re not going to convert anyone to your point of view and vice versa.

As mentioned previously and in the Sky piece, compromise is required, but compromise is a vote loser. The WA was compromise and both sides hated it.

We are at an impasse and I don’t think it will be resolved. The EU are adamant the WA will not be revisited and that is all that is on the table.

Perhaps a new President of the Commission and Council may be prepared to re-open talks but if not Oct 31st will come around very quickly and if nothing has changed what do you do? Ask for another extension? For what?

I honestly have no clue how or when this is going to end, I don’t think anyone does.

Re: Brexit
 

Same could be said of you. Always thinking your view is right. You are not.

Still peddling the project fear bullshit, still trying to delegitimise a Democratic process because you don’t agree with the result and so is Hugh.

The argument about staying and leaving is done with. The majority of people voted to leave, they can see past the lies and project fear from the Remainers. We’ve voted to leave, three times now, that is democracy, you keep going on about people being poorer, utter bullshit. You’re just a sheep following the negative Remainer narrative that leaving will be bad for Britain. It will not, the people voted out so we should leave.

We do not need to be in a corrupt union that mocks us and scorns at us and treats us like shit, why you Remainers want to be associated and Remain in this disgusting bloc is beyond me. They have handicapped us for 40+ years and we can be free of them and stop paying the absolute con job fee to be in their ugly corrupt club.

Re: Brexit
 

Boris Johnson to face court over alleged EU referendum misconduct

https://news.sky.com/story/boris-joh...nduct-11730747

Re: Brexit
 

Good to see a genuine little guy taking on the establishment.

Re: Brexit
 

Why single Boris out, you could summons almost all of Parliament by that yardstick.

And really are we going to go over the 350 million thing again, that was debated and clarified a thousand times during the debate, and mislead no one.

Re: Brexit
 

Personally l don't like Boris Johnson at all but given this has come out today l would say there are some political shenanigans at work here.

Re: Brexit
 

Mick, Ian is agreeing with the need for compromise on the issue and I urge everyone to do the same. A puritanical Brexit or puritanical Remain stance is not the way to solve the situation. A solution involves stepping down from entrenched positions on both sides of the debate.
The country does not want a hard Brexit, a second referendum or another election.
We need to find a grown-up way through this mess.

---------- Post added at 11:01 ---------- Previous post was at 10:57 ----------

You have to start somewhere. If this forces politicians of all colours to be more honest then it's a good thing in my book. Unfortunately, politicians have exempted themselves from the rules laid out by the Advertising Standards Authority.

Re: Brexit
 

Who ? Boris ?? :D

Re: Brexit
 

Sad that you have to resort (again) to trying to belittle people (whinge, kids crying, etc) instead of making a cogent point.

---------- Post added at 11:05 ---------- Previous post was at 11:05 ----------

I wonder if this will damage his PM chances?

Re: Brexit
 

The court case is unlikely to get anywhere but I am surprised they actually managed to get a summons out of it! I am not sure what actual law you can get him on.

Re: Brexit
 

I can multitask belittling people and making a cogent point all in one post and the points i have made in my previous posts still stand.

Re: Brexit
 

This was from Boris Johnson's defence:

Re: Brexit
 

Maybe it should be a matter of law, then the politicians couldn't get away with all the porky pies.

Re: Brexit
 

Pierre, I think with the bolded parts you've nailed the position we're in.

None of the options we have available will work for the country as a whole, regardless of which side you're on.

Re: Brexit
 

What?

And tie up our judicial system for every politician that lies...

Okay let's get Tony Blair for the Iraq War.

Let's get Nick Clegg for lying about not increasing tuition fees...

Let's go that extra mile and prosecute all these Remainers who said on TV there should not be another referendum and that the first should be honoured but are now saying there should be one...

The whole thing is just Banana republic crazy, this is 2019, not the 1930's FFS. :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

I'd gladly see Blair and Clegg in court. Politicians should be brought to account if they deliberately deceive. We just seem to accept they lie these days.

Re: Brexit
 

I think the idea is that if you prosecute one politician, it acts as a deterrent to the rest.

Re: Brexit
 

You don't prosecute at all - it's just utter madness, you punish people who you believe to lie at the ballot box not through the judicial system, this case should be thrown out as it is waste of resources and money.

Re: Brexit
 

The problem with the ballot box is that it can take 5 years before we can bring them to account. Lies are now just accepted way of getting power. They hope the mugs will have forgotten by the time of re-election, or they can always lie again...
e.g Tory leadership campaign and candidates promising massive tax cuts and improvements to public services. We all know its a lie, but just accept it as 'part of the game'. Our democracy is in a bad state.

Re: Brexit
 

One court case against the huge benefits gained is a great use of resources. This is a move to raise the standards of democracy in this country and I welcome it.

Re: Brexit
 

I think the problem is that 'lie' is very hard to concluseily prove and is in many cases subjective.

Did Nick Clegg lie about tuition fees? Well they said they would abolish them and instead raised them. Would seem pretty clear cut but then they were in coalition so does that still count? If a party promises a certain degree of spending then a recession hits was that a lie?

You can't start criminalising people based on subjective opinions of what constitutes a lie and if the person knew they are lying.

Re: Brexit
 

Well I don't and don't talk to me about raising the standards of democracy because that is you being a total hypocrite, when you and or your remainer buddies go on and on about nullifying the referendum result of 2016.

There is no benefits to this court case at all - it just turns this country in to something resembling North Korea, you really want to take this country down this path?

It just utter crazy, prosecuting a politician for lying during a political campaign.

Re: Brexit
 

The point that people appear to be overlooking is that he not going to court for lying as a politician, but for lying as a politician in "High Office", so he is being charged with misconduct in a Public Office.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48445430

Re: Brexit
 

FFS, I've never gone on about nullifying the referendum result. I've always accepted it. :dunce:

Re: Brexit
 

Clearly - It's only in a bad state if you are constantly on the "losing side".

Re: Brexit
 

Good point.

Re: Brexit
 

So, couple of differences

1) Boris's words MAY have influenced the way in which a subset of voters voted during the referendum

2) I don't see how this compares to some people who may wish to rerun something and it hasn't been rerun.

Holding those in a position of power and/or responsibility accountable for actions should be seen as a good thing. it sets the expectation of the standards that are required.

NOT holding them accountable is more akin to the North Korea which you keep referring too.

Re: Brexit
 

Thank you for highlighting the fact that Article 24 is even admitted by the BBC as being possible, which has been denied up until now by many antiBrexiteers.

The key paragraphs are:

It would mean no tariffs or taxes would be imposed on goods crossing borders between the UK and its largest trading partner, the European Union.

The trouble with that argument is that you can only use Article 24 if two parties are willing to make an agreement - in this case, the UK and the EU. Neither can impose it on the other.

That's a bit different from 'impossible' and sounds doable to me, particularly as the EU wants a non-tariff arrangement as much as we do.

The big advantage of this is that we will have a ten year protection period so that we can negotiate a trade deal, which gives us plenty of time to resolve the Irish border question. The £39bn would be paid provided that the EU agreed to such an arrangement.

As far as I can see, this is the only means of exiting the EU that is available to us, given that we have a stubborn rump of Conservative MPs who refuse to vote for the 'no deal' solution and the EU will not re-negotiate the Withdrawal Agreement.

Re: Brexit
 

And that is not a crime.

If we invent stuff as we are going along here - So we can go after George Osborne, for lying saying there would be thousands of job losses right after a leave result, prosecute David Cameron for lying saying he would be around to enact the referendum result...

As already mentioned, Tony Blair for the Iraq War and WMD lie.... They were all in high office.

This list is endless, this is just a hit job on Boris because he is the scapegoat for the many pathetic Remainers who cannot accept the result that people in the UK do actually want to leave the corrupted EU.

Absolute one sided rubbish and you know it. Why don't we go after people who lied in the Remain camps who probably swayed people to vote Remain, like all the lies of project fear ?

Oh Remain lost, this is why so it doesn't matter to you. Gimme a break FFS. :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

Article 24 is of course an option that can be delivered.

There's a slight issue that under the terms of Article 24 that EU & the UK could only invoke Article 24 on the provisio we have a “plan and schedule” agreed for concluding a final deal.



Achievable by Halloween ? I highly doubt it.


Another extension anyone?

Re: Brexit
 

So many anti-free speech and democracy deniers contributing to this thread. Makes you want to pull your hair out that there are people in this country who would be in favour of thought control and totalitarianism. This is not the country we are, and we don't want such politics here, thanks very much. :afire:

Re: Brexit
 

How about, you let me answer the question rather than answering for me...

IF there's any evidence that remain campaigners made statements that could be construed as misconduct in public office then they should absolutely be investigated and if warranted charged accordingly.

Re: Brexit
 

Do you not understand that no deal is not an agreement?


---------- Post added at 12:53 ---------- Previous post was at 12:49 ----------

Read Hugh's post - it's about misconduct in public office. You may be happy to drag us down to the standards of democracy in North Korea and Venezuela. I'm not.

Re: Brexit
 

Apparently the guy started down the line of bringing private prosecutions against those in power three years ago. Says it took a while to narrow the list of 'targets' down to just the one.

IMO if it goes ahead, the others who were in the list are just as culpable and should be dragged into it - misconduct in positions of high power - let's get em all in ;)

oh, and carries a life sentence :rofl:

Re: Brexit
 

You say that now - but your prior post was very one sided as usual. :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

Remainer buddies? How about everyone has their own opinion on the subject rather than clumping everyone together

Re: Brexit
 

Not really, i thought it was self explanatory. apologies if not the case.

Whilst I'm an ardent remainer, I try to maintain a balanced view, and have prior in this thread corrected people when they have blamed Brexit for things such as a loss of motor vehicle manufacturing jobs etc.

Re: Brexit
 

For a sense of perspective, read this.

https://brexitcentral.com/managed-no...ariffs-quotas/

Re: Brexit
 

Ah, you're catching up eventually.

For starters, the Brexit Party has not advocated for a no deal exit. They advocated for a WTO exit (article 24). (Just thought I'd throw that in).

Perhaps if the EU had offered or agreed to a deal and allowed it to be put on the table to be agreed we may be further ahead without such a divide having been created.

When whoever you are negotiating with refuses to come to a deal without first getting an agreement from you to have your hands tied you would be a fool not to walk away or at least offer article 24 as an alternative.

If the backstop, as the EU have continually emphasised, is only temporary and they do not want to implement it then the 10yr article 24 option should cry out for acceptance.

If not, the backstop is not as temporary as we are told and designed purely to keep us in the EU indefinitely.

Re: Brexit
 

Is this you showing the "voice of reason" card?

Forgive me if I ignore it. Us Brexiteers on here, get clumped together all the time by most of you Remainer lot. :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

No, a 'no deal' means no withdrawal agreement. What is proposed is that we simply agree to pin down what needs to go in the trade agreement, and that will be the rationale for invoking the protection agreement.

You are clutching at straws here, Andrew. An Article 24 arrangement is perfectly possible and in fact it is the key to our leaving the EU.

Re: Brexit
 

Given the choice of second referendum, election or extension, an extension will always win. Now we've gone past the deadline of a European election, there's less to lose by it and a new prime minister will be more readily forgiven.

Re: Brexit
 

Exactly, pip. Couldn't have put it better!

Re: Brexit
 

RE: Article 24:https://fullfact.org/europe/article-24/

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-br...-idUKKCN1PH24V

Re: Brexit
 

Nope. 31st October and article 24 agreement possible in that time.

Re: Brexit
 

That's clearly not on offer by the EU and the UK signed up to an agreed withdrawal agreement process.
If you can go back in time to when Theresa May first took power then this may have been something we could propose, but not now.

Re: Brexit
 

No it isn't, I just think it's unfair labeling some people as remainer buddies just because they voted remain. People voted for different reasons and can agree or disagree on different things. It was a cheap shot in my opinion. I personally have never seen it happen on here.

Re: Brexit
 

You don't Mick.
Let's be positive and treat one another as individuals whom we agree with on some occasions and disagree with on others.

Re: Brexit
 

How did the UK sign up to a withdrawal agreement process. The UK parliament has rejected it several times.

Re: Brexit
 

How so?

Re: Brexit
 

Link
Withdrawal Agreement.

Re: Brexit
 

Agreement and process are different.

Re: Brexit
 

What is not on offer by the EU is any amendment to the Withdrawal Agreement.

An agreement on the objectives of a future trade deal is a different matter altogether.

Let's look at finding a way out of this to deliver the referendum instead of raising all these red herrings.

Re: Brexit
 

An alternative arrangement would have to cover all the things in the Withdrawal Agreement including the financial settlement and Irish border. Not just trade.

---------- Post added at 13:24 ---------- Previous post was at 13:22 ----------

The Irish border and financial settlement are not red herrings. The EU won't agree anything unless they're resolved.

Re: Brexit
 

Then show where the UK signed up to a withdrawal agreement.

Article 50 puts the onus on the EU to come up with an agreement on the withdrawal and future relationship. There is no such onus on the UK.

Re: Brexit
 

Seen it. I have provided the Brexit answer to this. So what is your point?

Those who are opposed to Brexit are desperate to make people believe that Article 24 is impossible. Even the anti-Brexit BBC has now finally conceded that it is, indeed, possible, and given that GATT provides for it, doesn't it just show how establishment figures and organisations try to mislead us?

---------- Post added at 13:26 ---------- Previous post was at 13:24 ----------

How not?

Re: Brexit
 

My point still stands.

---------- Post added at 13:29 ---------- Previous post was at 13:28 ----------


No, they didn't, they rejected the agreement that was reached, not the process itself.

Re: Brexit
 

You don't understand. Article 24 provides for the status quo to be maintained while a trade agreement is being negotiated. Once again, you are putting forward problems that don't exist.

Why can you not post solutions instead of objections? That would be much more constructive and stop this thread going around in circles.

Re: Brexit
 

It has taken nearly 3 years of work fundraising and getting legal advice, plus building a case. So the timing is as much based on court availability as anything else.

Worth remembering Boris Johnson is innocent until proven guilty or the case is thrown out.

---------- Post added at 13:32 ---------- Previous post was at 13:30 ----------

The important term in this is "agreement". At the moment with a no deal exit, there is no agreement.

Re: Brexit
 

Which point?

Re: Brexit
 

A plan and schedule MUST be in place and agreed by BOTH sides before Article24 can be invoked.

It's not objections, it's statement of fact. get those two things achieved and the country can quite rightly leave on those terms.

Re: Brexit
 

My point is that those seem more credible sources than Brexit Central or yourself, no offence, so I am inclined to believe them.

Neither of those sources have claimed it's impossible, just very unlikely to the point of not being worth discussing as a serious option.

Re: Brexit
 

We need to accept that we are not going to get the withdrawal agreement through parliament. So what the new PM needs to do is to acknowledge that, and the concerns expressed about a 'no deal', and propose instead that we agree with the EU a set of objectives to be resolved for a trade agreement. As my Brexit link stated, this does not have to be a detailed document and could be agreed relatively quickly. Any tricky areas could be expressed in terms of matters to be resolved.

Parliament could then be reassured that we would have 10 years to agree a trade deal from outside of the EU, and if Canada could do it in 7 years, that should be a doddle, given we already meet EU standards on the goods we export to them.

---------- Post added at 13:39 ---------- Previous post was at 13:38 ----------

NOT difficult.

Re: Brexit
 

Neither is understanding this

A plan and schedule MUST be in place and agreed by BOTH sides before Article24 can be invoked.

---------- Post added at 13:40 ---------- Previous post was at 13:39 ----------

Achievable by 31st October?

If not difficult, why hasn't it been done already?

Re: Brexit
 

You don't say why you believe that the Brexit link is not a credible way forward. Do you seriously believe that the EU would not accept this solution when a 'no deal' is the only remaining alternative?

Of course not.

---------- Post added at 13:45 ---------- Previous post was at 13:42 ----------

Because Theresa May opted for the Withdrawal Agreement, that's why!

A plan and a schedule could be agreed with the EU very quickly and it doesn't have to be detailed. If padding was necessary, a lot of the wording can be lifted from the draft withdrawal agreement!

Such negativity is incredible! Do you create so many problems if your wife wants you to do anything?

Re: Brexit
 

A District Judge, with 41 years legal experience, disagrees with you.

Re: Brexit
 

I see... so why don't we just go back to the EU then when a new PM is chosen and present the new option of agreeing time lines for an A24 exit and see if they agree to it? If it's that easy of course.

Please don't bring my wife into this again. Thank you.

Re: Brexit
 

Seems it's either Life in Prisonment or 10 Downing St. for Boris. He is probably just guilty of not fact checking the crap he puts his name to, and being stupid. In which case he's perfect for PM ;)

Re: Brexit
 

Ha ha, you are an absolute scream! :p:

I'm sure that 10 years is long enough, even for the EU! :LOL:

---------- Post added at 13:53 ---------- Previous post was at 13:52 ----------

Now we are getting into the realms of the ridiculous. I mean, even MORE ridiculous!

Re: Brexit
 

Sorry, you haven't answered the question. When a new PM is chosen why do they simply not go back to the EU with the A24 proposal?

Re: Brexit
 

He wasn't acting as somebody in public office. He was acting as an individual.
Eg Police officers have been convicted for having consensual sex whilst on duty. It would be rather silly if that also applied outside work time.

Re: Brexit
 

Wrong as usual HUGH.

To be determined means it is not a crime as yet but may be if the crown court sets a precedent.

She has done a Pontius Pilate and passed it on to someone else to decide.

Re: Brexit
 

So he's either a lying minister or a lying individual..

Re: Brexit
 

Who's to say they wouldn't? That is exactly what I am saying, isn't it? However, you have put the cart before the horse. The new PM would need to present all the arguments and all the alternatives to Parliament first and get their endorsement. That, in fact, is the main hurdle, not the EU!