Cable Forum
Page 4 of 56 123 4 56781454 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Cable Forum (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/index.php)
-   Current Affairs (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/forumdisplay.php?f=20)
-   -   UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal (https://www.cableforum.uk/board/showthread.php?t=33708171)

Sephiroth 21-09-2019 19:43
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36011039)
It’s to protect the Single Market. As I’ve said before we wouldn’t accept uncontrolled migration over an open border why would the EU accept an uncontrolled flood of goods?
That's incidental. The real reason for the backstop to be under the EU's control is as I've said earlier.

nomadking 21-09-2019 19:44
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36011039)
It’s to protect the Single Market. As I’ve said before we wouldn’t accept uncontrolled migration over an open border why would the EU accept an uncontrolled flood of goods?
But that would be an issue for the EU, not the UK. It is the receiving country responsible for controlling things coming into their country. That is how it works in every other part of the world.

OLD BOY 21-09-2019 19:46
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36011012)
As I see it, we have several public takes on Brexit negotiations:

1 Varadkar - keen to do a deal in New York next week;
2 Coveney - we’re miles away from a deal;
3 Juncker - a deal could be done by 31-Aug;
4 Barclay - we share the same ideals and objectives;
5 Barnier - neither optimistic nor pessimistic;
6 Finnish bloke - final proposals required by 30-Sep;
7 Verhofstat - the usual claptrap.

Looks bad for a deal.
Ignore. It's all rhetoric. I've said from the very start, we will get a deal. The EU is not going to shoot itself in the foot!

jfman 21-09-2019 19:59
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36011040)
Unless you block non-UK compliant goods coming from Ireland/France and going on to France/Ireland, you have the SIMILAR risk of leaking into the UK internal market.
Link
You don’t. Shipments can be checked entering and exiting the UK to ensure they didn’t go for a detour.

---------- Post added at 19:59 ---------- Previous post was at 19:57 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36011044)
But that would be an issue for the EU, not the UK. It is the receiving country responsible for controlling things coming into their country. That is how it works in every other part of the world.
Indeed, the EU are concerned about this which is why it’s a backstop or a border.

nomadking 21-09-2019 20:17
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36011047)
You don’t. Shipments can be checked entering and exiting the UK to ensure they didn’t go for a detour.

---------- Post added at 19:59 ---------- Previous post was at 19:57 ----------



Indeed, the EU are concerned about this which is why it’s a backstop or a border.
It was Dublin that insisted on the backstop and including it as part of the Withdrawal Agreement, in order to IMPOSE conditions on the UK.
Link(again)

Quote:
In October Kenny agreed with the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, that technical talks between officials in Brussels and Dublin would open. They met again in January 2017 and agreed “there was no technical solution” to the border.
They were beginning to realise that only a political solution – specifically, regulatory alignment between Northern Ireland and the EU – could avert a hard border. This was the genesis of the backstop.
...
The Irish goal was to get the border into a legally binding withdrawal agreement – Dublin’s point of maximum leverage – rather than future trade relations, when Dublin would struggle to be heard.

jfman 21-09-2019 20:25
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36011049)
It was Dublin that insisted on the backstop and including it as part of the Withdrawal Agreement, in order to IMPOSE conditions on the UK.
Link(again)
Ireland would have more to lose with a flood of non-EU regulated goods into its territory.

I’m going to point out this isn’t a “new development” it’s just anti-Irish sentiment and moaning about the EU protecting the Single Market we are adamant we want to leave.

Hugh 21-09-2019 20:53
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Bored now - next provocative pointless post will result in a time out for the poster (and anyone who responds).

This is a discussion forum, not an argument forum - learn, or get fracked.

nomadking 21-09-2019 21:21
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36011050)
Ireland would have more to lose with a flood of non-EU regulated goods into its territory.

I’m going to point out this isn’t a “new development” it’s just anti-Irish sentiment and moaning about the EU protecting the Single Market we are adamant we want to leave.
You mean like horse meat masquerading as beef?:rolleyes:

The article is from "The Guardian".

Flood? The regulations will be the same or very similar. The bigger problem is dodgy stuff and people coming from the EU. The EU could always follow our changes in regulations.

Link(again)
Quote:
Prime Minister Leo Varadkar said: "It's not enough on its own.
"We would need a single Irish economic zone, or whatever you would like to call it, to cover more than agriculture and food."
Which apparently includes:-
Link
Quote:
Northern Ireland would therefore remain fully part of the UK’s customs territory and would remain aligned with UK rules governing the regulation of industrial goods, state aid, fiscal rules and so on.
How is that anything but a takeover of NI?

Quote:
It is also potentially perilous for Dublin. Ireland has long resisted any notion that the UK would have a unilateral exit from the backstop. No serious discussions have yet started on what a consent mechanism might look like. But what if, as part of some overall deal, the Assembly could vote to exit the backstop, and the effect of that was to restore checks and controls at the border?
The Ireland-UK-France issues should be covered by
TIR (Transports Internationaux Routiers, International Road Transport)system.
Quote:
Although each EU Member State is a Contracting Party to the TIR Convention, the European Union is considered to be a single territory for the purposes of the TIR procedure. This means TIR can only be used in the Union for international movements, i. e. where the movement either starts or ends in a third country, or where the goods move between two or more EU Member States via the territory of a third country.
...
Each EU Member State, including the Union itself, is a Contracting Party to the TIR Convention 1975.
Still adds extra costs and delays for the Irish.

jfman 21-09-2019 22:37
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
I’m not sure your point. They’re protecting the Single Market, for a multitude of reasons including those you have specified.

Mick 23-09-2019 12:58
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
BREAKING: UK Supreme Court to give verdict on Miller/Cherry Prorogation cases, tomorrow 10.30am.

OLD BOY 23-09-2019 14:57
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36011204)
BREAKING: UK Supreme Court to give verdict on Miller/Cherry Prorogation cases, tomorrow 10.30am.
Well, I hope the judges remember the Bill of Rights. They need to keep their noses out. If the judges interfere with this, there are major implications for our Constitution.

Boris has not broken any laws. All this fuss over five extra days!

jfman 23-09-2019 15:01
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
You don't get to decide if he has or hasn't broken any laws. That's opinion on your part.

You imply that major implications for our Constitution is a bad thing. The fact we don't have a written one leaving it open to interpretation seems like the problematic issue here!

papa smurf 23-09-2019 15:14
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36011228)
Well, I hope the judges remember the Bill of Rights. They need to keep their noses out. If the judges interfere with this, there are major implications for our Constitution.

Boris has not broken any laws. All this fuss over five extra days!
I don't think there is a law to actually break,be interesting to see if the court manages to cobble one together.

Gavin78 23-09-2019 15:33
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
You can't break the law if there wasn't one in the first place. Seems we need a law to keep MP's from taking over the country.

Mr K 23-09-2019 15:36
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavin78 (Post 36011234)
You can't break the law if there wasn't one in the first place. Seems we need a law to keep MP's from taking over the country.
Umm, we elected them to do that ?

Mick 23-09-2019 15:45
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36011235)
Umm, we elected them to do that ?
Funny that, because most were elected on a manifesto to honour the referendum result and leaving the EU.

That said, we are not going down old arguments Mr K.

Hugh 23-09-2019 17:22
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gavin78 (Post 36011234)
You can't break the law if there wasn't one in the first place. Seems we need a law to keep MP's from taking over the country.
That’s why it is being mooted as being unlawful, not illegal.

Chris 23-09-2019 18:02
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36011255)
That’s why it is being mooted as being unlawful, not illegal.
I’ll be surprised if their lordships go for that.

Prorogation has been occurring on advice from the PM without any specific parliamentary authorisation for centuries. How could the Supreme Court possibly judge which previous prorogations were allowable and which were not? If no reasons for prorogation have ever been authorised, which reasons can be said to be unauthorised? And even if it is possible to show that prorogation intended to kill legislation or scrutiny was unlawful, in the present context it is an uncomfortable truth, from the appellants point of view, that this prorogation ended the longest parliamentary session since the English civil war. The “legitimate” reason to prorogue in such circumstances is extremely powerful.

If I were a betting man, I’d be betting that the judges will decline to go anywhere near it. I suspect that tomorrow they will observe that advice to prorogue was given without parliamentary authorisation just as it has always been, that it therefore is not unlawful, and that parliament has the right to determine when and how prorogation should occur in future if it so chooses.

Pierre 23-09-2019 18:56
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36011230)
You don't get to decide if he has or hasn't broken any laws. That's opinion on your part.
Would love to know what statute he has contravened though.

---------- Post added at 18:56 ---------- Previous post was at 18:50 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36011260)
If I were a betting man, I’d be betting that the judges will decline to go anywhere near it. I suspect that tomorrow they will observe that advice to prorogue was given without parliamentary authorisation just as it has always been, that it therefore is not unlawful, and that parliament has the right to determine when and how prorogation should occur in future if it so chooses.
I would hope you’re right, but in this current “beyond the looking glass” world we find ourselves, there is always someone wanting to make themselves famous or infamous, that can get so wrapped up in their own self grandiosity.......they’ll do anything.

jfman 23-09-2019 19:00
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Wouldn't we all. I'm sure if that's the outcome there will be a thorough explanation.

papa smurf 23-09-2019 19:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36011270)
Wouldn't we all. I'm sure if that's the outcome there will be a thorough explanation.
if i recall correctly before the case started they said they would rule then give their reasoning at some later date

Sephiroth 23-09-2019 19:17
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
It might well turn on whether or not Boris acted contrary to the public interest, which would be unlawful.

So what is the public interest? The guvmin carrying out the Referendum Mandate? The guvmin not preventing parliamentary scrutiny? Would the latter turn on the fact that after 14-October, when Parliament reconvenes, it can scrutinise?

Can't wait.

Damien 23-09-2019 22:23
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
I imagine the case will hinge on if the length of time for which it was prorogued and if they assume he motivation was to avoid Parliament having their say/interfering.

Sephiroth 23-09-2019 22:35
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36011292)
I imagine the case will hinge on if the length of time for which it was prorogued and if they assume he motivation was to avoid Parliament having their say/interfering.
I think your assessment would prevail only if the SC thought that Boris had acted against the public interest.

1andrew1 23-09-2019 22:42
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36011294)
I think your assessment would prevail only if the SC thought that Boris had acted against the public interest.
Evading the scrutiny of elected MPs is against the public interest. Proving this is the reason for proroguing Parliament is a different kettle of fish.

Mick 23-09-2019 22:46
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36011295)
Evading the scrutiny of elected MPs is against the public interest. Proving this is the reason for proroguing Parliament is a different kettle of fish.
One could ask how much scrutiny do they need, they’ve had over 3 years !

1andrew1 23-09-2019 23:07
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36011296)
One could ask how much scrutiny do they need, they’ve had over 3 years !
Right now, despite BoJo promising 33 days ago to deliver a solution to No Deal in 30 days, there's nothing to scrutinise. So proving this is the reason for proroguing Parliament could be interesting.

Chris 23-09-2019 23:13
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Well, we should know in 11 hours ...

ianch99 24-09-2019 08:44
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Of course the SC will rule in favour of the Government. The track record of the Establishment voting against the Establishment is not a long one :) They would have been reminded of their obligation not to rock the boat and not to create a dangerous precedent.

jonbxx 24-09-2019 09:41
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
It's certainly a fascinating case and could potentially mark a significant change in the relations between the roles of the three pillars of UK democracy (Executive, Legislative and Judicial). As I see it, the heart of the question is when, why and how one branch, the Executive can close another, the Legislative.

Closing of Parliament is a thing of course but this case will establish whether conditions need to be applied to this. The hypothetical situations put forward by John Major are a good argument for a conditional prorogation.

All fascinating stuff!

My predictions - too close to call. I'm sitting on the fence for this one...

Mick 24-09-2019 09:55
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
BREAKING: National Crime Agency clears Leave.EU and Arron Banks after finding 'no evidence that any criminal offences have been committed.

pip08456 24-09-2019 10:20
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36011321)
Of course the SC will rule in favour of the Government. The track record of the Establishment voting against the Establishment is not a long one :) They would have been reminded of their obligation not to rock the boat and not to create a dangerous precedent.
The track record of the SC as always been to apply the rule of law in their decision. Nothing else is expected or possible by them.

Prorogation of parliament ruled unlawful.

Damien 24-09-2019 10:37
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
They’ve said it is a matter for them

mrmistoffelees 24-09-2019 10:42
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Decision to prorogue parliament is unlawful

Damien 24-09-2019 10:42
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
And it looks like they saying it wasn’t a normal prorogation and it was intended to stop Parliament. Looking bad for the government

1andrew1 24-09-2019 10:42
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
The decision to advise the Queen to prorogue parliament was unlawful

Damien 24-09-2019 10:43
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Wow

mrmistoffelees 24-09-2019 10:44
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36011347)
Wow

Wow indeed.... amazing times....

---------- Post added at 10:44 ---------- Previous post was at 10:44 ----------

Parliament HAS NOT been prorogued


Just wow....

Hugh 24-09-2019 10:46
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Unanimous judgement.

Prorogation void, squashed.

ianch99 24-09-2019 10:46
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36011348)
Wow indeed.... amazing times....

---------- Post added at 10:44 ---------- Previous post was at 10:44 ----------

Parliament HAS NOT been prorogued


Just wow....
Double wow .. unanimous verdict.

denphone 24-09-2019 10:47
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Devastating news...

Chris 24-09-2019 10:47
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Oooft!

pip08456 24-09-2019 10:48
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
This is going to have further ramifications in the future.

mrmistoffelees 24-09-2019 10:49
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36011352)
Double wow .. unanimous verdict.
Yup....


Lady Hale laying the smacketh down....

Damien 24-09-2019 10:49
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
I feel sorry for the Queen really. Awkward for her!

pip08456 24-09-2019 10:53
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
It's going to be interesting to see what parliament does now.

Joanna Cerry is mouting off again. "No-one including the Queen is above the law".

Damien 24-09-2019 10:54
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
So does Boris go to a normal prison or is it a Tower of London thing?

denphone 24-09-2019 10:54
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Laura Kuenssberg.

Quote:
Bercow statement says Parliament must convene as a matter of urgency - he will consult party leaders ASAP

1andrew1 24-09-2019 10:58
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Is BoJo going to appeal to the ECJ? :D

mrmistoffelees 24-09-2019 10:59
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36011362)
Is BoJo going to appeal to the ECJ? :D

:D

jfman 24-09-2019 11:00
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36011362)
Is BoJo going to appeal to the ECJ? :D
Hopefully!

---------- Post added at 11:00 ---------- Previous post was at 10:59 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36011334)
BREAKING: National Crime Agency clears Leave.EU and Arron Banks after finding 'no evidence that any criminal offences have been committed.
Good time to bury bad news.

pip08456 24-09-2019 11:00
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
You couldn't make it up, they are now "demanding" for Boris to go yet he tried twice to get a General Election and they wouldn't support it.

1andrew1 24-09-2019 11:02
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36011366)
You couldn't make it up, they are now "demanding" for Boris to go yet he tried twice to get a General Election and they wouldn't support it.
To the Tower I hope!

Maggy 24-09-2019 11:03
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36011358)
It's going to be interesting to see what parliament does now.

Joanna Cerry is mouting off again. "No-one including the Queen is above the law".
Not if she was lied to or misled..

Hugh 24-09-2019 11:08
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36011366)
You couldn't make it up, they are now "demanding" for Boris to go yet he tried twice to get a General Election and they wouldn't support it.
Two different things - one is not letting BJ have an election when it’s favourable to him, the other is that he gave the Queen unlawful advice.

Anyway, it would appear Dom Cumming’s "cunning plan" turned out to be one of Baldrick’s...

Mr K 24-09-2019 11:11
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Lock him up.

pip08456 24-09-2019 11:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36011370)
Two different things - one is not letting BJ have an election when it’s favourable to him, the other is that he gave the Queen unlawful advice.

Anyway, it would appear Dom Cumming’s "cunning plan" turned out to be one of Baldrick’s...
Then let's have a general election so that the people decide who is right.

Hugh 24-09-2019 11:13
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36011373)
Then let's have a general election so that the people decide who is right.
Sure - in November... ;)

mrmistoffelees 24-09-2019 11:16
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36011373)
Then let's have a general election so that the people decide who is right.
Never fight a battle on your enemies terms.

Warfare 101

---------- Post added at 11:16 ---------- Previous post was at 11:15 ----------

Nigel Farage calls for Dominic Cummings to go

Mick 24-09-2019 11:17
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Not really surprised by the ruling, kind of expected it, with how they were asking their questions last week, during the hearing, that said, what we really need now is ****A GENERAL ELECTION****!

But you just know the Remainiacs in Parliament will now ride rough shot and do their upmost to frustrate Brexit further. Possibly legislate a new referendum, revoke A50, if some people think this will answer everything, it will not, the country will be in a big big crisis, far bigger than the dire predictions of what Brexit would look like.

The Fixed Term Parliament Act - worse piece of legislation ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36011358)
It's going to be interesting to see what parliament does now.

Joanna Cerry is mouting off again. "No-one including the Queen is above the law".
She has not got a fecking clue what she is on about - the Queen is above the law. The Queen could quite rightfully enter "Her" Supreme Court and overrule her Justices, say Parliament is Prorogued - they are her subordinates, obviously she won't, but in theory she could because she cannot be legally challenged on anything, we are dealing with the advice she was given that has been quashed.

What if at this late stage in her reign, she got so fed up of what is going on and entered the political arena and insisted Parliament is still prorogued and that she is making that decision on her own accord and not Boris - again she won't do that, but could and noone could stop her, so Cherry, is wrong, but she is feeling the "high and mighty" rush at the moment, that has obviously gone to her head.

OLD BOY 24-09-2019 11:18
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36011374)
Sure - in November... ;)
Yes, we will have left the EU by then.

All this court decision does is reinstate the commotion stirred up by the remainers for another few weeks. Absolute mayhem.

Mick 24-09-2019 11:20
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36011374)
Sure - in November... ;)
No, we need one right now.

Chris 24-09-2019 11:21
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
I predict, firstly, that prediction is in present climes a mug’s game; and secondly, that BoJo isn’t going to resign, which would be doing Corbyn’s job for him - he will challenge him to either agree to an election, or declare a no-confidence vote.

jfman 24-09-2019 11:21
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36011377)
Not really surprised by the ruling, kind of expected it, with how they were asking their questions last week, during the hearing, that said, what we really need now is ****A GENERAL ELECTION****!

But you just know the Remainiacs in Parliament will now ride rough shot and do their upmost to frustrate Brexit further. Possibly legislate a new referendum, revoke A50, if some people think this will answer everything, it will not, the country will be in a big big crisis, far bigger than the dire predictions of what Brexit would look like.

The Fixed Term Parliament Act - worse piece of legislation ever.



She has not got a fecking clue what she is on about - the Queen is above the law. The Queen could quite rightfully enter "Her" Supreme Court and overrule her Justices, say Parliament is Prorogued - they are her subordinates, obviously she won't, but in theory she could because she cannot be legally challenged on anything, we are dealing with the advice she was given that has been quashed.

What if at this late stage in her reign, she got so fed up of what is going on and entered the political arena and insisted Parliament is still prorogued and that she is making that decision on her own accord and not Boris - again she won't do that, but could and noone could stop her, so Cherry, is wrong, but she is feeling the "high and mighty" rush at the moment, that has obviously gone to her head.
Republic! Republic!

Mr K 24-09-2019 11:23
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
The Pound has just started to do very well....

---------- Post added at 11:23 ---------- Previous post was at 11:21 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris (Post 36011380)
I predict, firstly, that prediction is in present climes a mug’s game; and secondly, that BoJo isn’t going to resign, which would be doing Corbyn’s job for him - he will challenge him to either agree to an election, or declare a no-confidence vote.
Yes, don't go into to legal profession with your predictions...

OLD BOY 24-09-2019 11:27
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
I think the electorate will have their say in the end. The majority will be rightly angry with Parliament being reconvened just to go through all these ridiculous arguments again.

Boris will be rewarded when he can finally get a General Election called.

Those smug faces we have seen this morning following the judgement will soon disappear when the public eventually have their say.

mrmistoffelees 24-09-2019 11:36
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36011384)
I think the electorate will have their say in the end. The majority will be rightly angry with Parliament being reconvened just to go through all these ridiculous arguments again.

Boris will be rewarded when he can finally get a General Election called.

Those smug faces we have seen this morning following the judgement will soon disappear when the public eventually have their say.

Boris can't get anything done

---------- Post added at 11:36 ---------- Previous post was at 11:30 ----------

How does leave the relationship between the Queen & Boris?

I suspect HM will not be happy with him?

Dave42 24-09-2019 11:36
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36011378)
Yes, we will have left the EU by then.

All this court decision does is reinstate the commotion stirred up by the remainers for another few weeks. Absolute mayhem.
would not count on that OB like I and lots of said we still be in on 1st November

Mr K 24-09-2019 11:40
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36011385)
Boris can't get anything done

---------- Post added at 11:36 ---------- Previous post was at 11:30 ----------

How does leave the relationship between the Queen & Boris?

I suspect HM will not be happy with him?
Love to be a fly on the wall at their next meeting. 'Now then PM, about these lies you told me....'

Dave42 24-09-2019 11:42
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36011379)
No, we need one right now.
then we be in exact same mess with another hung parliament and what if we elect mostly remain parliament again will you except that

mrmistoffelees 24-09-2019 11:44
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36011390)
Love to be a fly on the wall at their next meeting. 'Now then PM, about these lies you told me....'

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

I'm not au fait with regards to the political relationship between HM & PM

Could she sack him? (if she could she probably wouldn't i suspect)

---------- Post added at 11:44 ---------- Previous post was at 11:43 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36011391)
then we be in exact same mess with another hung parliament and what if we elect most remain again parliament will you except that
It's going to come to a 2nd referendum i suspect

No Deal vs Remain

(A deal has demonstrated to be unreachable and should therefore be disregarded)

Carth 24-09-2019 11:49
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Well, can't say I'm surprised by that ruling at all.

All those times it was said about respecting/honoring/enacting the 'will of the people and the referendum result' . . . yet all we see are the ones in power trying to overthrow it.

Looks like we're back to the Parliamentary hamsters taking turns running the brexit wheel in both directions until someone - somewhere, somehow - takes the wheel off them.

My only hope now is that the EU tell us to 'P' off . . . yeah, fat chance :(

Maggy 24-09-2019 11:52
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Actually Boris is saying that he won't rule out suspending Parliament again

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-49807552

Mick 24-09-2019 11:54
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36011391)
then we be in exact same mess with another hung parliament and what if we elect mostly remain parliament again will you except that
I have no issues with accepting the Democratic decisions of people. Pitty you and others do, which is why we are in the whole sorry mess. Over 3 years ago, the decision was made and "some" of you Remainers have kicked and screamed and thrown your toys out the pram, which is why we are in this stalemate.

Do you honestly think if Brexit is cancelled that will solve everything? Do you?

Do you think the Brexiteers desire to leave a disgusting and corrupt "empire", (empire, not my terminology, but Verhoftstadt's.) will falter ?

I can tell you, mine won't, I do not want my country to remain in a corrupt and disgusting union, I have the right to live in a truly independent country, free from foreign interference, that will never go away.

Mr K 24-09-2019 11:54
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36011395)
Actually Boris is saying that he won't rule out suspending Parliament again

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-49807552
A repeat offender? lock and throw away the key then.... A habitual liar in every aspect of his life.

mrmistoffelees 24-09-2019 11:55
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36011395)
Actually Boris is saying that he won't rule out suspending Parliament again

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-49807552
He can't be that stupid surely?


Actually....

:erm:

Mick 24-09-2019 11:55
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36011390)
Love to be a fly on the wall at their next meeting. 'Now then PM, about these lies you told me....'
Where in the Judgement did Lady Hale say he lied?

The advice was ruled unlawful - doesn't mean a lie was told.

Damien 24-09-2019 11:55
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Would be interesting to see the legal advice the government got when deciding to prorogue...

1andrew1 24-09-2019 11:57
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36011400)
Would be interesting to see the legal advice the government got when deciding to prorogue...
That's what the Cabinet are now saying too. ;)

Mr K 24-09-2019 11:57
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36011396)
I have no issues with accepting the Democratic decisions of people. Pitty you and others do, which is why we are in the whole sorry mess. Over 3 years ago, the decision was made and "some" of you Remainers have kicked and screamed and thrown your toys out the pram, which is why we are in this stalemate.

Do you honestly think if Brexit is cancelled that will solve everything? Do you?

Do you think the Brexiteers desire to leave a disgusting and corrupt "empire", (empire, not my terminology, but Verhoftstadt's.) will falter ?

I can tell you, mine won't, I do not want my country to remain in a corrupt and disgusting union, I have the right to live in a truly independent country, free from foreign interference, that will never go away.
Think you'll have to direct the corrupt disgusting etc. words at your own Govt.

mrmistoffelees 24-09-2019 11:58
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36011402)
Think you'll have to direct the corrupt disgusting, corrupt etc. words at your own Govt.

:clap:

1andrew1 24-09-2019 11:59
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36011399)
Where in the Judgement did Lady Hale say he lied?

The advice was ruled unlawful - doesn't mean a lie was told.
I think she's had it up to here with Tory politicians what with Cameron's indiscrete revelations so wouldn't put it past her to not mince her words.

Hugh 24-09-2019 12:01
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36011378)
Yes, we will have left the EU by then.

All this court decision does is reinstate the commotion stirred up by the remainers for another few weeks. Absolute mayhem.
The Chair of the Brexit Party disagrees with you...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-49807552 @11:58
Quote:
Richard Tice, chairman of the Brexit Party, tells the BBC that today's decision is "seismic, historic" but MPs must think about what happens next.

"As soon as Parliament is recalled tomorrow, Boris Johnson is probably going to have to offer his resignation," he says.

"There may well be a vote of no confidence."

He says the public must now realise that "we're not leaving the EU on 31 October".

"There will have to be an extension. When that penny drops, people are going to be increasingly angry across the country," he says.

Mr Tice says there will probably have to be an election in the first half of November.

"What does it say about the so-called master strategist Dominic Cummings? I trust he will be offering his resignation today."

jfman 24-09-2019 12:03
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Now if Boris was genuinely proroguing Parliament to bring forward a bold policy platform why doesn't he do so for the minimum period? A week maybe?

1andrew1 24-09-2019 12:03
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
I can't see Cummings surviving this. He has wrecked the Conservative Party.

jonbxx 24-09-2019 12:04
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36011399)
Where in the Judgement did Lady Hale say he lied?

The advice was ruled unlawful - doesn't mean a lie was told.
Too right, lying was not raised in the judgement.

The lack of witness statements from the Government was noted throughout. There must be some good reason why none was supplied. It does raise suspicions why the Government did not choose to defend itself in this way. A cynical mind might think that such a statement would either be untrue and therefore perjury or evidence that the Government did lie to Her Maj

jfman 24-09-2019 12:06
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Unless his Advice started "this is probably against the law but I'm going to chance my arm..."

denphone 24-09-2019 12:06
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36011407)
I can't see Cummings surviving this. He has wrecked the Conservative Party.
Dominic Cummings position is pretty well untenable.

Damien 24-09-2019 12:10
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Doesn’t the Attorney General need to resign? Isn’t his job to avoid these things?

Carth 24-09-2019 12:14
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36011411)
Doesn’t the Attorney General need to resign? Isn’t his job to avoid these things?
Did he see anything to avoid?

denphone 24-09-2019 12:14
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36011411)
Doesn’t the Attorney General need to resign? Isn’t his job to avoid these things?
Indeed a Attorney General should know the law and how to apply the law without breaking the law..

Dave42 24-09-2019 12:14
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Parliament resumes tomorrow at 11:30 speaker just said but no PMQ's tomorrow

Damien 24-09-2019 12:16
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36011412)
Did he see anything to avoid?
We don’t know what his advice was but he is responsible in the end. If he didn’t see it then there are questions about his competence and if he did then he knowingly let it happen anyway.

1andrew1 24-09-2019 12:20
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Pointed tweet from Guy Verhofstadt ✔
Quote:
@guyverhofstadt
At least one big relief in the Brexit saga: the rule of law in the UK is alive & kicking. Parliaments should never be silenced in a real democracy.
I never want to hear Boris Johnson or any other Brexiteer say again that the European Union is undemocratic.
https://news.sky.com/story/live-supr...ament-11818306

Chris 24-09-2019 12:21
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36011382)
The Pound has just started to do very well....

---------- Post added at 11:23 ---------- Previous post was at 11:21 ----------



Yes, don't go into to legal profession with your predictions...
All my posts are silently prefixed IANAL. As the vast majority of posts on this forum are (or should be) ;)

Carth 24-09-2019 12:22
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36011415)
We don’t know what his advice was but he is responsible in the end. If he didn’t see it then there are questions about his competence and if he did then he knowingly let it happen anyway.
What I'm saying is, did he at the time see anything that could be shown (proven) to be illegal.

Possibly it was borderline, but it's taken 4 attempts to get it ruled 'unlawful', so it obviously wasn't a clear cut case was it.

Chris 24-09-2019 12:24
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36011416)
Pointed tweet from Guy Verhofstadt ✔

https://news.sky.com/story/live-supr...ament-11818306
I wonder how much real power Verhofstwat and his fellow MEPs had over the appointment of all the various presidents the EU has.

The right, or otherwise, of one branch of the EU’s bureaucracy to prorogue another, is not by any means a full measure of democracy.

But let’s not forget, Verhofstwat used to be the Prime Minister of Belgium and is now an MEP, and clearly thinks that represents a promotion, so his political ambition is about as great as his influence.

Carth 24-09-2019 12:26
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
@guyverhofstadt
At least one big relief in the Brexit saga: the rule of law in the UK is alive & kicking. Parliaments should never be silenced in a real democracy.
I never want to hear Boris Johnson or any other Brexiteer say again that the European Union is undemocratic.
Where I come from that's fighting talk :D :D

Mick 24-09-2019 12:32
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36011402)
Think you'll have to direct the corrupt disgusting etc. words at your own Govt.
Absolute rubbish - no corruption in the government, I see it absolutely in the disgusting union you support, which is a shameful disgrace on your part that you support a union that is undemocratic and wants to become an empire.

Carth 24-09-2019 12:35
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
I don't see anything corrupt about offering firms substantial handouts to move from the UK to the EU, nope, nothing at all


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:30.
Page 4 of 56 123 4 56781454 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum