Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

... which is precisely the line the continuity remain campaign has been pushing for the last 2 years. It all began with the appearance in the media of the terms “hard” and “soft” Brexit.

The idea that nobody really knows what Brexit means is nonsense. During the referendum campaign, the remain campaign was as clear about what Brexit would mean as the leave campaign was. At the time, Remain thought that the unalloyed truth - out of the single market, out of the customs union all the rest - would scare people into voting their way. It didn’t work. As a result they switched to plan B, which has always been to muddy the waters enough that people either wouldn’t notice us failing to properly leave the EU, or else would come to believe that fully leaving the EU (aka Brexit, or, indeed, what the majority voted for) would indeed be a tragedy and a so-called “soft” Brexit (not really leaving at all) was preferable.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Leaving the EU is one thing but what replaces it is another. The Leave campaign never had a direct answer for this and now the Government has to come up with one. Those on the Leave campaign have been happy to attack May for every single possible concessions she even considered making when trying to come up with a plan they never had. Johnson criticising May for not being able to deliver the assurances of Leave. It isn't only continuity Remain that have moved the goalposts here.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

There should be no concessions. The result was binary, leave won - so there should be no compromises, because we would not have got any had Remain won - The leave campaign have said all along that when we leave the EU, in it's entirety, we fall on WTO terms - It was not up to the Brexit campaign to enact the leave process. The point of a campaign is to win, when the leave camp won, it ceased to be a campaign after 24/6/16.

At the end of the day - May is rightly getting criticised because she previously drew all these red lines, saying Brexit means Brexit... then this Brexit White Paper is released after two years and it is a disaster, effectively making the UK worse off than it is now, while we are in the EU. Vassal State - nobody voted for that shit.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

So the Leave campaign bears no responsibility for any of it’s campaign promises?

That really is having your cake and eating it...

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

It isn't that simple as 'we won', Mick, if you thought it was you've been very misled.
No deal would mean food shortages, drug shortages etc. It really isn't an option even if we are pretending it is. Brexit is a crazy concept, sorry but that's the truth. The people have voted for it , fair enough, but the Govt., have to ensure we keep afloat. What was the leave plan btw?

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

I am talking about concessions in order to get a new deal with the European Union. Yes it's not up to the Brexit campaign to enact their promises hence why they promised things they cannot deliver on.

So would a WTO option that immediately puts tariffs on goods, including food imports, a border in NI.

Where is the option where we get the excellent rich Brexit that was meant to happen?

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

The leave campaign was not and is not the government and has never been in a position to make good on any “campaign promises” ... as I’m sure you’re fully aware, so using phrases that imply the referendum was in any way similar to a general election is a tad disingenuous.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

I do not think I have ever said leaving would be a get rich quick scheme nor would it be an overnight economic miracle. We would be however, be able to make our own trade deals with the rest of the world.

The EU has tied our hands for decades and the stupid unstable thicko May, wants our hands to be still be tied with the Commons rule book with this half in, half out shambles, which is not delivering on the Democratic result.

---------- Post added at 22:59 ---------- Previous post was at 22:48 ----------

It is no such thing.

I think Chris has covered it well in his post - none of the people in the Official Leave campaign, were in any of the top Senior jobs in Government.

Boris Johnson, Michael Gove (was Justice Secretary), Chris Grayling etc...

Top cabinet posts prior to June 2016.

Chancellor of the Exchequer: George Osborne. (Remainer)

Foreign Secretary: Philip Hammond (Remainer)

Home Secretary: Theresa May (Remainer)

Defence Secretary: Michael Fallon (Remainer)

You tell me Hugh how those in the Leave campaign were to enact the Democratic result when their side won.... ???

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

So why promise something that no one could deliver?

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

I don’t recall any “promises” being made. I saw “suggestions”.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Why suggest things that no one could deliver?

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

That’s a false narrative. They can be delivered. We leave on WTO terms, don’t give them the 40 Billion quid, no deal is better than a bad deal, May’s deal is a bad deal.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

If we don’t fulfil our part in previously agreed treaties, why would anyone enter into new treaties with us?

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

But what about future trade deals which will also require regulatory standards changing, impositions on our own laws and extranational judication on disputes? May's deal is just a matter of degrees further on a trade deal but then the EU is by far our biggest trading partner and the biggest economic block in the World.


That's because they quit. David Davies was Brexit Secretary, Boris Johnson was Foreign Secretary, Liam Fox is international trade Secretary. There were a few others but not in Brexit related roles (i.e Priti Patel as International Trade Secretary).

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Er no, they were not in government in 2016, I did say that in that post.

They cannot quit a position they were never in just after the Brexit vote.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

You are correct. We did have holidays. New Years Day, Good Friday, Easter Monday, Spring Holiday, Summer Holiday, Christmas Day and Boxing Day.

A whopping 7 of them. May day was added after we joined.

It was only in the mid 1990's that the right to paid holidays was introduced. Originally at 20 including the above public holidays, and then in the early 2000s changed to 28 including public holidays.

Until the Social directive of 20 days, there was no right to paid holidays other than the 8 public holidays. The Labour opposition at the time in the early 90s actually objected to its introduction although it was one of the first acts of the Tony Blair Government to introduce.

So, shall be now talk about the right to be sacked if a woman was pregnant which was only abolished after we joined as well?

Lots of the things we now take for granted were only introduced as a result of the EC. And why some people think it is ok to force people to work for more than 48 hours per week is beyond me.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Sigh - all them laws will be protected once we leave - they will not be changed, we do not need to be stuck in a corrupt institution to be protected by laws we will already have.

That said - Some people WANT to work 48 hours a week, which is why they can tell their employer to waive the Working Time Directive on this issue.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

You are confusing the codification of pretty well everything which the EU likes to do with the way we used to work, which was simply by making rules where they were needed (by statute), and common law. We may not have had an actual statute about minimum holiday entitlements, but then again, how wohld any company recruit if it didn't offer paid holidays?

My father worked as a toolmaker, a milkman and a bus driver in his time and always received paid holidays.

By the way, you talk about people being forced to work more than 48 hours per week as if the Working Time Directive has stopped such practices. Are you aware of the number of hours per week doctors have been working since the Directive was implemented in the UK?

The fact is, the partially effective Directive seeks to control how many hours you can work on a voluntary basis as well. The 'opt out' was a hard won concession to Britain, but the EU never liked that and would seek to get rid of it at every opportunity. People should be free to work however many hours they goddam liked. By preventing that, some people on low wages with big commitments and were working the number of hours they were to survive suddenly had their lucrative overtime payments reduced, which put them in an impossible position.

You can try to paint this vaneer of respectability on the huge wealth of regulation the EU have created, but in the end it restricts our ability to compete and aims at exerting more and more control over how we live our lives. We simply don't need this.

---------- Post added at 09:30 ---------- Previous post was at 09:26 ----------

I let this go at the time, but having now seen the interview, I don't know how you can say that. She answered every question, and anything she did not say was due to continuing interruptions by Andrew Marr, who seems to prefer asking questions and not waiting to hear the answers unless it looks like the politician may have to admit something embarrassing. Then he frolicks in the squirming.

There was no squirming in this interview, so I think Theresa May won that contest.

---------- Post added at 09:31 ---------- Previous post was at 09:30 ----------

Agreed, Mick.

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

I have some sympathy with that, because the referendum decision was to leave the EU. WTO rules would apply to all trade with other nations except where trade deals could be done, and much was made about forging new trade deals.

As far as the EU is concerned, I look at our negotiations as being just one of those trade deals. It should not tie us to the EU, but it should aim at achieving smoother trading relationships than we would get without such a deal.

I am looking at the progress on this very carefully because anything that smacks of drawing us back in needs to be resisted.

TM says there will be no free movement, we'll be outside the jurisdiction of the EU and out of the single market and customs union, CAP, Common Fisheries Policy, etc. To me, so far so good. But there is much in the White Paper that needs clarifying and I wait to see what is negotiated before passing judgement on that.

If the EU won't accept this limit on how far we are prepared to go, we need to walk away, we get WTO and Brexiteers will be happy. If she's criticised for that, at least she would be able to say that she tried, and everyone will be able to see that she did.

If they do accept, then most of our existing trade with the EU will be protected and we are out of the EU, free to forge our own trade deals. By the way, there is no reason why TM needs to accept a deal that restricts our ability to trade elsewhere. For me, that is a step too far.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Fake News. From the official Leave campaign web site:

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/...g_newdeal.html

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

I stand by my post - we fall on WTO terms.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

You are wrong on every count. The fact is many employers like to pay the bare minimum - whilst unemployment is low, competition for employees is only at one end of the spectrum; the low paid, low skilled jobs employers do not really care about employee attrition - they will always find someone to do the job until they can find something better. By the end of next year 12% of all employees will be paid the National Minimum Wage/National Living Wage. There is no competition for the low end spectrum and employers will try and get away with what they can - and they do. Look at how many get caught trying to get away with it. The last report from HMRC had over 800 employers on it - and they are the ones that were caught and reported.

It is the EU directive that has protected British workers, without it we would still be in the 90's of 7 days holiday and the rest by negotiation. You may be capable of expressing yourself, many aren't.

I think you ought to take a read of the WTD. If you had you know that Doctors and other emergency services are not covered by it.

Germany is one of the most regulated employment law countries in the world. It seems it is hard to go to the toilet without having to go through a works council. Their laws would send JRM into a permanent state of corma if they were to come in this country. Yet they don't seem to have any problems with competitiveness, with low wages, etc etc - and they are now allowed to work more than 35 hours per week, not 48 hours!

By the way, the bit about people losing their overtime etc is rubbish. The number that it affected was actually tiny. So small in fact that at the time they could not produce any figures to show.

So, show me one single EU regulation that has restricted "our ability to compete and aims at exerting more and more control over how we live our lives."

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Ninth resignation over Theresa May's Brexit plan

https://news.sky.com/story/live-nint...-plan-11438505

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

There can't be many chairs left now on the sinking ship..

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

There's a long way to go to match jezza's record ;) but it's not doing her any good ,i expect more to come .

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

You seem to be missing the point that the side that campaigned to change the structural and economic future of the country for a generation or more had a duty to provide a detailed, workable plan on how they could deliver their goals.

Or are you saying that anyone can just pitch up, promise anything with no obligation to explain how, in the complex real world, their goal can be delivered?

---------- Post added at 12:31 ---------- Previous post was at 12:30 ----------

Stand or fall, make your mind up :)

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

But they were only suggestions (by people who then became Government Ministers*...).

https://infacts.org/cut-keep-list-to...teer-promises/

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Not my words but the words of Bagehot (Adrian Wooldridge ) in his column in the Economist (paywall).

https://www.economist.com/britain/20...f-conservatism

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-politics-live

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Mick, I'm afraid they have promised or suggested a whole list of things as Hugh has highlighted. The benefits or otherwise of WTO rules is a different matter.

---------- Post added at 14:17 ---------- Previous post was at 14:15 ----------

Good article. Touches upon the pragmatsim v ideology debate which I've previously touched upon. Conservative in name only.
They also used to be the party of sound financial standing. They seem to be keen on losing this USP too.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

You are right, a very good description of the Tories of old.

There is a fascinating narrative developing: Mrs May is tried to sell a deal that is nothing to no-one. For the Remainers, it sells them less than they already had but at a real tangible cost to them (and others). For the Leavers, esp. those that believed the snake oil salesmen, it is not the Britain of the past they are seeking.

So, who will vote Tory now?

The Remainers? Some but a lot will say "What the hell, even Corbyn the clown is better than this rabble" I mean when Labour catch on that Corbyn is really a hard Brexiteer, along comes David Milliband to save the day. At least, that is what a lot of the moderate Labour supporters would hope for.

The Leavers? Less so now that Mrs May has sold them out as a large number of them would see it. If UKIP resurfaces then the more extreme Leavers would desert together with those that previously voted Tory because they were supposed to be a "safe pair of hands".

Add the demographic push from Leave to Remain and this leaves the Tories in a pickle and the UK with Clown Corbyn as P.M.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Once again, Den, you have taken your eye off the ball. I mean, who wants to take a seat while their ship is sinking? ;)

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Better to be sat down OB when the ship is sinking as its better to go out with grace sitting down rather then standing up and getting in the way of everybody else..;)

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Looks like Chequers deal is completely dead btw.

I cannot see the Government agreeing even a starting position to take to the EU, there is no majority for anything in Parliament.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Robert Peston summed it up aptly.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

I agree. It seems that the EU has got the back up of so many people, the Brexiteers who want a clean break are prepared to scupper any kind of deal at all with Brussels, which is a shame, given that we are looking to do trade deals with the rest of the world.

So it looks like we are heading towards WTO and no deal. I hope all those who have made Theresa May's life a misery with all their claptrap about 'soft Brexits', 'cliff edges' and the like are satisfied. Had they supported her against the hard liners instead of trying to avoid Brexit altogether in defiance of the referendum result, we would have had a proposal for the EU long ago.

However, this is not the end of the world, we can make this work. Unfortunately, without any kind of deal, there will be some casualties.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

No majority means she is caught between two sides neither of which can come to an agreement. We have no effective government. History will look upon this Parliament very badly.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Open warfare on the Tory benches tonight.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

As a boat owner i can confirm the captain remains seated as the ship goes down .

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Not really. A proposed deal the EU won't accept will not be accepted and will simply result in article 50 being invoked without a deal. Simple.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

I doubt history will share your rosy views of this current Parliament, Old Boy.
Who knows what will happen if no deal exists by March 2019. Will Theresa May resign? Will the Speaker refer matters back to Parliament for a vote? Totally unprecedented situation.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Whether or not Theresa May resigns won't make much difference now. Parliament is not going to agree any kind of deal that the EU is likely to accept, so what option is there but WTO?
Parliament has just turned down a motion to put it back to the people.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

If she resigns I would expect an election and a delay to Article 50.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Who would instigate the delay?

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

The EU will likely accept an EEA deal or a Canada deal. They've made it quite clear there are several options open the UK. The difference is we don't want either because the former is too close to EU membership and the latter wouldn't work for our industries. So we want a bespoke deal which is harder to achieve since we're largely aiming for the single market part of the deal without the ECJ and freedom of movement.

The most likely option to me seems that we kick the can down the road, agree the extension period, while we work on a Canada++ or a Norway-- deal.

But let's stop pretending we've been rejected time and time again from the EU because we only came up with the White Paper last week so this notion that is being created in the event we leave of the EU rejecting every proposal was turned down is pure fan-fiction.

---------- Post added at 21:25 ---------- Previous post was at 21:24 ----------

We request to the EU. However I don't think it would be a delay but the 'transition period'.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

I guess PM Jeremy?

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

:D Dream on, Andrew! There will be no delay to Article 50 - it has already been invoked. Any delay would not go down well with the electorate.

The way this will play out is the new leader would scrap the Chequers Agreement in its entirety and notify the EU that there will be no proposal but we are open to offers of a trade deal. In the meantime, WTO rules apply. Only then would there be an election.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Government survives rebellion by three votes.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

BREAKING: 10th Resignation from Government: Defence minister Guto Bebb quits government

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Is the EU likely to agree to collect UK taxes or was this added as a "poison pill" amendment?

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Just to add, this is unlike the other resignations - this is a resignation on the ERG Amendments to the White Paper that were agreed to this evening.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Apparently propped up by three rebellious Labour Eurosceptics - Frank Field, Kate Hoey and Graham Stringer.
We just don't know, Old Boy. All we know is that Theresa May is not going down well with the electorate at the moment. :D

Meanwhile, Michael Gove attempts to rewrite history.
Michael Gove: I wanted 'different feel' to Vote Leave campaign
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics...mpaign=bbcnews

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

l ain't no fan of this administration but l ain't no fan of Jezza either but sadly OB can't take off his rose tinted glasses to see what a omnishambles it is and the deep mire we are in...

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Because the numbers don't add up, Den. You czn see that, right?

That's why governments work best when they have a good majority.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Breaking: Vote Leave heavily fined and referred to Police for breaking the law. The organisation's lack of co-operation suggests it was not an honest mistake.
https://news.sky.com/story/vote-leav...l-law-11439218

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Which was better before she called a general election which she stated on many many occasions that there would never be one so there is only one person to blame for that is there not OB?..

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7688471.html

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Hypocrisy by sore losers
what about this bit of spending ,article is written just before the referendum .

Nearly £10million pounds of taxpayers’ money is to be spent sending a leaflet to every UK home warning about the dangers of a “Brexit”, prompting a Cabinet row over the use of public money.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...-home-warning/

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

One of these was legal and the other one wasn't

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Could this possibly make the referendum invalid ? ;). Some one will test it in court for sure.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

As previously stated, she wanted a bigger majority to get Brexit through while riding high in the polls before fouling up in the campaign. The motive for calling the election was good, though.

---------- Post added at 10:46 ---------- Previous post was at 10:46 ----------

Nope.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Whether it was legal or not is irrelevant. It shouldn’t have happened. Neither should a U.S President Obama, interfering doing the Remain camps bidding.

This is just another futile attempt to thwart the legitimate Democratic leave result by Remainers.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

so if a party break electoral law and win that you don't like that be ok too right

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Just because a politician states that is their declared reason it does not mean that is..

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

If the accusations are to be believed which I don’t, it’s conveniently took two years to drop this revelation, this can be seen right through for what is.

It does not invalidate the result. We are leaving the EU!

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44857687 It’s not dead, it’s just resting...

Beautiful plumage! It’s not dead, it’s just stunned - probably pining for the fjords.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

But we're going to follow their rules anyway, so why bother? It just leaves us without a say on them.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Then I am sure they will appeal if the charge isn't true

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

What is extra frightening is that the leave campaign was orchestrated by a 12 year old called Darren from his bedroom :D
Scary looking youth too ! Reminds me of Adrian Mole.
https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2018/07/26.png

Anyway, he's been a naughty boy and Mum and Dad are going to have to fork out £20k in fines !

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Didn't you get the Memo?

Brexiteer MPs forced May's hands yesterday and 4 ERG Amendments were made.

---------- Post added at 13:33 ---------- Previous post was at 13:28 ----------

I do not give a shit either way - my vote and I am sure all 17.4 Million people who voted leave did so because they are actually pissed off with the corrupt EU, not because their vote was bought.

Let's not the forget Remain camp spent way more and also got the government leaflet, on top of that, whether it was legal is irrelevant, it should NOT have been, tax payer money funding a campaign, that is taking the piss. All the money spent, all the scheming and blackmail being done by the Remain side and it still loses - the sentiment is clear - more Brits want to leave and not stay in a corrupt union.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

but your happy with a corrupt campaign that cheated it about rule of law here say if remain cheated you think brexiteers would stay quiet no way

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Liam Fox didn't get the memo, he thinks nothing's changed.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44857687
She's just fobbing then off with the amendments, as a leadership challenge had to mounted before tomorrow if its to be done before the summer recess. She's a canny old bird TM, I'll give her that. The EU will throw out these amendments anyway.

Don't you find it scary that it's still only a few months to Brexit, and the 'Governing' party still hasn't haven't agreed with itself let alone the EU ?

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

The Remain camp cheated as well.

Do you think I was happy with the pathetic government leaflet with which Tax payers money was spent advocating to Remain in the EU - that should never have been allowed ?

Do you think I was happy with U.S President Barack Obama at the time, interfering and threatening people to vote remain ?

No I was not - despite ALL this and the other Bullshit going on, on BOTH sides, one side clearly won - you cannot invalidate the result because you feel aggrieved your side did not win when both campaigns centered on the same rules, despite the BS claims today that Leave camp over spent - Remain camp still spent far more and got added bonuses on top of this, the government leaflet and Obama's push, to try push people to vote Remain - but people were smart enough to make up their own minds.

---------- Post added at 14:27 ---------- Previous post was at 14:16 ----------

If the EU reject the amendments it's a no deal Brexit. Suits me. We need to leave that absolutely disgustingly corrupt EU with a certain President Juncker who turns up to important meetings, pissed as a fart.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

I was against that leaflet too yes was wrong for tax payer to pay for that we agree totally

he did that because idiot David Cameron asked him too and that probably made sure leave won in end

parliament will not let that happen no matter what JRM wants as WTO rules mean got to be hard border with Ireland and Northern Ireland then between Spain and Gibraltar DUP will never allow hard border with Ireland and end of peace processes totally

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Ooff have you had a meeting with Juncker Mick ? ;)

Hate to disappoint but 'no deal' is not and never has been an option.
May admitted as much at the weekend when asked what extra staff were being recruited or holding areas in ports had been in case of no deal - there hasn't been any.
Our position becomes weaker all the time because of the Govt's indecision; the EU hold all the cards. We'll have to get a deal, but it's increasingly looking like we'll be forced into a bad one. 'No deal is better than a bad deal' was utter baloney.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

May-may not have the job very shortly ;)

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

I think the most likely scenario is that we provisionally agree to do a deal and then use the transition period to actually work out what that is. The UK isn't set up for a hard Brexit.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Well unless the MPs act by tomorrow they're going to have to wait till the autumn. She's played them very well with her 'concessions'. Gone up in my estimation as a survivor I must admit.
.

---------- Post added at 15:10 ---------- Previous post was at 15:08 ----------

Isn't that a complete oxymoron ? Agree a deal, just work out what it is later :D Seems about right for these negotiations.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

European Union signs its biggest ever trade deal after striking agreement with Japan

https://news.sky.com/story/european-...japan-11439525

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Slowing economy we're best to be rid off apparently.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

aye reality will hit them eventually

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

But is it a red, white and blue trade deal? Common sense states that, as a market of 65 million customers we are going to get a better than a market of 508 million does

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

John Major with some harsh blunt words about the Brexiteers in his party.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...-politics-live

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

general election coming soon Den they more divided than ever and infighting will only get worse

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Changing the words slightly from the great Oliver Hardy famous catch phrase " Well, here's another fine mess we have gotten into"

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

It looks like parliament have voted to stay in the European Medicines Agency. Great news for continued rapid drug access and the pharmaceutical industry (big sigh of relief where I work too!)

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

that is some good new at least, some MPs look to be trying to vote for the right things. Its also great news for my Astra Zeneca shares ;)

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Thankfully - the customs amendment put forward by the Remainer MPs lost. Meaning we will not join any kind of customs union should no meaningful deal not be reached by Jan 2019.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Depends Mick, got to go to the Lords next, where there is a remain majority. Then it'll go back to the Commons for more Govt. torture. Isn't our system wonderful ? :)

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

It will lose as it should - the democratic result of leaving the corrupt EU must be followed.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Wouldn't have changed the result but the Tories broke pairing tonight: https://twitter.com/tnewtondunn/stat...03110794186753

Jo Swinson was paired with Brandon Lewis but, after she was told that, he voted anyway.

Quite a low thing to do.

---------- Post added at 21:21 ---------- Previous post was at 21:14 ----------

TBH Pairing helps out the Government a lot. Sometimes Government ministers cannot be in the chamber, especially the PM and Foreign Secretary, so no reason now Labour can't refuse to honour in those cases. So either the PM and others need to attend every vote or risk losing it.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

A No-Confidence motion in the Government nearly came to fruition earlier nearly because of 12 Remainer Tory MPs no surprises for guessing who they were, but it took 4 Rebel Brexiteer Labour MPs to save May's skin tonight.

Those 12 Tory Remainers were prepared to bring their own government down.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Between Mick’s “corrupt EU” and my “Brussels turds” we seem to have an invincible definition of what we are leaving.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Repeating that people are turds over and over again is "invincible"? Jeez .. :doh: .. Most people left this behaviour behind in the playground ...

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Brandon Lewis later apologised and said it was a Whips' error. In this Coalition of Chaos, it is unfortunately quite possible.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Mmmm, your're too trusting Andrew, 'whips error' my backside ! A desperate act of a desperate 'Government'.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

But there are those who still try to polish that turd ;)

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Today is the day May has to survive. Boris will be delivering his resignation speech before PMQT.
There has been a creeping campaign going on, is this the culmination?
Interesting times ahead today.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Just like some Brexiteers...

8th July 2018
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...eresa-May.html 10 June 2108
https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/pol...-Conservatives April 21 2018
https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk...s-down-customs

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Is this supposed to show the creeping campaign? If so you've omitted the resignations.

Re: Brexit Discussion (New thread-Follow First Post Rules!)
 

Wrong as usual. :rolleyes: