Cable Forum
Page 7 of 56 « First 3456 7 89101117 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)

1andrew1 27-09-2019 13:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Failure to reach a Brexit deal would be the sole responsibility of the UK, the president of the European Commission has said.

Jean-Claude Juncker insisted he and the EU's chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier were doing all they could to secure an agreement because it would be a catastrophe for both Britain and Europe if there was no divorce settlement in place.
He also warned that negotiating a future trade deal would not be easy in the event of a no-deal.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/brexi...cid=spartanntp

Carth 27-09-2019 13:18
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36011957)
We are in a state of "national crisis" is it too much to ask?
You'd have thought that after all the crying and bickering about losing a few days, they'd have been quite willing to work a day or two extra to catch up on the business they (allegedly) needed to urgently discuss.

Perhaps they all find it much easier to go home and use Twitter & Facebook? :rolleyes:

Sephiroth 27-09-2019 13:19
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36011956)
You're wrong, I don't need to look it up

/Response
Boris did nothing illegal. He acted unlawfully which is quite different. Acting illegally is obviously unlawful. Acting unlawfully in the context of the SC ruling means acting against the public interest or social convention; no statute was breached.

papa smurf 27-09-2019 13:49
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36011962)
You'd have thought that after all the crying and bickering about losing a few days, they'd have been quite willing to work a day or two extra to catch up on the business they (allegedly) needed to urgently discuss.

Perhaps they all find it much easier to go home and use Twitter & Facebook? :rolleyes:
Astounding isn't it they come back wednesday at 11-30 and pack up for a long weekend at 5-30 on thursday,perhaps they should be dragged back to court to explain what exactly trumps a "national crisis".

Maggy 27-09-2019 15:14
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Maybe they are heading back to their constituent offices to conduct a surgery and talk to their supporters..

ianch99 27-09-2019 15:57
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36011974)
Maybe they are heading back to their constituent offices to conduct a surgery and talk to their supporters..
Where some of them will need to increase the security measures in case they are attacked by Brexit supporters:

Jess Phillips: MP warned to 'be afraid, be very afraid' in death threats after office attacked

papa smurf 27-09-2019 16:11
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 (Post 36011979)
Where some of them will need to increase the security measures in case they are attacked by Brexit supporters:

Jess Phillips: MP warned to 'be afraid, be very afraid' in death threats after office attacked
The chap who called the window a fascist has been charged.

mrmistoffelees 27-09-2019 16:18
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36011963)
Boris did nothing illegal. He acted unlawfully which is quite different. Acting illegally is obviously unlawful. Acting unlawfully in the context of the SC ruling means acting against the public interest or social convention; no statute was breached.

'What law did Boris Johnson break?
Boris Johnson's prorogation did break the law, but it broke constitutional, not criminal law.

By preventing Parliament's right to hold the government to account, he broke the rules governing how the UK functions.

What he did was "unlawful" - meaning it wasn't permitted or conforming to the law. But it is not "illegal" - which would mean forbidden by law.'

From the Brexiteer red top....

At no point did i say he had done something illegal....

OLD BOY 27-09-2019 17:38
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 36011938)
But the Law Society in their glossary define unlawful as "illegal or contrary to social convention" Not that it matters as however you try and spin it the actions of the Prime Minister (Government??) were found lacking by the highest court in the land.
It does matter, because people are trying to suggest that he committed a criminal offence, which he did not. That isn't spin, it's about stating the facts correctly. Much as you would like to 'lock him up'.

pip08456 27-09-2019 17:39
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36011983)
'What law did Boris Johnson break?
Boris Johnson's prorogation did break the law, but it broke constitutional, not criminal law.

By preventing Parliament's right to hold the government to account, he broke the rules governing how the UK functions.

What he did was "unlawful" - meaning it wasn't permitted or conforming to the law. But it is not "illegal" - which would mean forbidden by law.'

From the Brexiteer red top....

At no point did i say he had done something illegal....
You can keep going as long as you want. You cannot find a law that was broken, otherwise post the statute.

OLD BOY 27-09-2019 17:45
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36011956)
You're wrong, I don't need to look it up

/Response
He did not commit any criminal offence. Does that clarify it for you?

---------- Post added at 17:45 ---------- Previous post was at 17:40 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36011830)
Not my "opinion", it’s a fact (even if you do mix them up sometimes).

If a new law was "invented" on Tuesday, could you please show the legislation that "invented’ this law, as laws can only be created or changed by an Act of Parliament or Secondary legislation through statutory instruments (which can only be raised by the Government).

The Judiciary can’t "invent" laws.

You may find this helpful - https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/
It's called 'case law', isn't it?

pip08456 27-09-2019 18:15
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Interesting times ahead.

https://www.itv.com/news/2019-09-27/...robert-peston/

Carth 27-09-2019 18:30
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Taken from above link . .

Quote:
"Trying to find a compromise candidate, a national unity candidate, is too complicated, especially in the time we have. Whether people like it or not, the temporary prime minister has to be Corbyn."
At the risk of a few facetious replies, just how low can they stoop to get their own way :D :D

jfman 27-09-2019 18:51
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
It's been known to everyone for some time that those who oppose Brexit have to put up a PM.

Hugh 27-09-2019 18:57
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36011996)
He did not commit any criminal offence. Does that clarify it for you?

---------- Post added at 17:45 ---------- Previous post was at 17:40 ----------



It's called 'case law', isn't it?
Not in this case*

https://www.ft.com/content/871bbd5e-...2-9624ec9edc59
Quote:
The Supreme Court did not create a new area of law, as its US counterpart had done in establishing a precedent of judicial review in 1803 with Marbury v Madison. The UK decision is instead a fundamental reassertion of constitutional principles.
*;)

Carth 27-09-2019 19:10
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
The UK decision is instead a fundamental reassertion of constitutional principles.
There you go, no new laws were made or old ones broken during the moving of the goalposts ;)

1andrew1 27-09-2019 19:14
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36011996)
He did not commit any criminal offence. Does that clarify it for you?
I think it's the Jennifer Acuri matter that peple are suggesting is potentially criminal, not the proroguing of Parliament.
Quote:
Police could be called in to investigate how companies operated by Jennifer Arcuri came to be awarded £100,000 of public money during a time when she was close friends with Boris Johnson, deputy Labour leader Tom Watson has suggested.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9123156.html

mrmistoffelees 27-09-2019 20:16
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36011995)
You can keep going as long as you want. You cannot find a law that was broken, otherwise post the statute.

I don’t need to keep going, it’s there in print that he broke constitutional law


Accept it and move on

1andrew1 27-09-2019 20:57
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36011994)
It does matter, because people are trying to suggest that he committed a criminal offence, which he did not. That isn't spin, it's about stating the facts correctly. Much as you would like to 'lock him up'.
Let's leave it to The Independent Office for Police Conduct to investigate, Old Boy.

Quote:
Breaking - Boris Johnson has been referred to a police watchdog to assess whether he should be investigated for the criminal offence of misconduct in public office.
https://news.sky.com/story/boris-joh...laims-11821297

Carth 27-09-2019 21:05
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36012015)
Breaking - Boris Johnson has been referred to a police watchdog to assess whether he should be investigated for the criminal offence of misconduct in public office.

https://news.sky.com/story/boris-joh...laims-11821297
I think that what we're seeing lately will become the norm, whoever is in charge.

Nobody in Parliament is squeaky clean, expect more of this in the months/years to come ;)

Hugh 27-09-2019 21:35
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36012016)
I think that what we're seeing lately will become the norm, whoever is in charge.

Nobody in Parliament is squeaky clean, expect more of this in the months/years to come ;)
i don’t believe that’s true - there are a small number of politicians who believe they are above the law, and that their ambition and self-enrichment is all that matters, but I believe they are in the minority.

They would like you to believe otherwise, because then their excuse is "everyone is doing it, so I’m not real that bad", when in reality, they are the pond **** in the lake of politics.

Damien 27-09-2019 22:22
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Obviously corruption is bad but what law specifically could he be accused of breaking? Is it illegal to give public money to someone you have a relationship with if they do actually do something for it (even if that is just to go on trade trips)? I know it breaks several rules and he may fall foul of what the Mayor is allowed to do but he is already out of that office....

1andrew1 27-09-2019 23:13
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36012018)
Obviously corruption is bad but what law specifically could he be accused of breaking? Is it illegal to give public money to someone you have a relationship with if they do actually do something for it (even if that is just to go on trade trips)? I know it breaks several rules and he may fall foul of what the Mayor is allowed to do but he is already out of that office....
Misconduct. Sky News says "The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) has been asked to assess whether the prime minister should be investigated for the criminal offence of misconduct in public office."

As reported by the BBC
Quote:
In a letter to the PM setting out the referral, the monitoring officer says: "The conduct matter relates to your time as mayor of London between 2008 and 2016.
"During this time it has been brought to my attention that you maintained a friendship with Ms Jennifer Arcuri and as a result of that friendship allowed Ms Arcuri to participate in trade missions and receive sponsorship monies in circumstances when she and her companies could not have expected otherwise to receive those benefits."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49859321

Mick 28-09-2019 07:02
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Politically motivated attack, pretty much like what President Trump is going through with this impeachment inquiry in the U.S.

Damien 28-09-2019 07:17
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36012023)
Politically motivated attack, pretty much like what President Trump is going through with this impeachment inquiry in the U.S.
It was the GLA who referring him: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49859321

Quote:
The Greater London Authority's monitoring officer - whose job it is to monitor the conduct of the mayor and other members - said it had written to the police watchdog, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).

It said it had referred the PM to the IOPC "so it can assess whether or not it is necessary to investigate the former mayor of London for the criminal offence of misconduct in public office".

It added that it has recorded a "conduct matter" against Mr Johnson which happens when there is information that indicates that a criminal offence may have been committed.

But it does not mean that a criminal offence is proved in any way, the GLA's monitoring officer added.
Seems like a standard practise that evidence arose so they refer it over.

Mick 28-09-2019 08:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
You’re not telling me he wasn’t “leaned on”. All these investigations, character assassinations on Boris, are in place for one reason, to stop Brexit.

1andrew1 28-09-2019 08:36
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36012025)
You’re not telling me he wasn’t “leaned on”. All these investigations, character assassinations on Boris, are in place for one reason, to stop Brexit.
A referral is the best way of clearing up the matter. It does not mean guilt. Are you honestly suggesting that the information compiled by The Sunday Times should be ignored? This is a democracy, not North Korea.
And as for the Brexit conspiracy theory - I would suggest that keeping Boris in power is a good way to prevent Brexit as he seems incapable of delivering it. ;)

papa smurf 28-09-2019 08:58
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mick (Post 36012025)
You’re not telling me he wasn’t “leaned on”. All these investigations, character assassinations on Boris, are in place for one reason, to stop Brexit.
It worries me that this whole establishment stitch up will end in riots, the mood in the country is not good, unless your a gloating remainer, which the majority of voters aren't.

1andrew1 28-09-2019 09:10
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36012027)
It worries me that this whole establishment stitch up will end in riots, the mood in the country is not good, unless your a gloating remainer, which the majority of voters aren't.
Boris is the establishment.

Mr K 28-09-2019 09:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
He's a serial law breaker and habitual liar.

How many more skeletons/ladies/unknown offspring in the cupboard?

Hugh 28-09-2019 09:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36012027)
It worries me that this whole establishment stitch up will end in riots, the mood in the country is not good, unless your a gloating remainer, which the majority of voters aren't.
Remainers lose Referendum, don’t get what they want, complain a lot, have marches, take legal action in some cases.

Brexiters don’t get what they want, threaten riots and civil insurrection.

Maggy 28-09-2019 09:51
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Ahem! Could we stop reverting back to the sort of behaviour that gets members fracked please? Debate and discuss please.

Carth 28-09-2019 10:14
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Accusations, allegations, whispers in dark corners, hastily scrawled notes passed under the desk . . been happening since time began.

Anyway, besides all that, will the Tory party conference be a shambles of an affair with many MP's having to travel to and from Manchester/London daily?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ive-conference

Quote:
In normal circumstances, parliament adjourns to allow MPs to attend their party conferences, but opposition parties have argued that “parliamentary democracy and scrutiny during the current constitutional crisis” should take precedence.
Quote:
Jeremy Corbyn said he would vote against any attempt by the government to introduce a new recess. “I don’t see why Boris Johnson and his team should be able to run away from accountability yet again,” he said.
sounds familiar? But mostly it's just been shouting at each other :rolleyes:

1andrew1 28-09-2019 10:23
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36012034)
Accusations, allegations, whispers in dark corners, hastily scrawled notes passed under the desk . . been happening since time began.

Anyway, besides all that, will the Tory party conference be a shambles of an affair with many MP's having to travel to and from Manchester/London daily?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics...ive-conference

sounds familiar? But mostly it's just been shouting at each other :rolleyes:
The Opposition should have allowed a recess but BoJo lost all goodwill by proroguing Parliament. These are not constructive times but if you play with fire, you risk getting burnt, as BoJo has found.

In other news, the Brexit Party is no fighting back with BoJo impaled by his own incompetence and lack of a majority.
Farage: “The reason Brexit party voters aren’t going to go back en masse to the Conservatives is we just don’t trust the Conservative party and we don’t trust Boris Johnson...Is Boris truly a Brexiteer?”

papa smurf 28-09-2019 10:36
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36012031)
Yes, Remainers are nice, and Brexiteers are nasty. Always been the case ;)
Once a riot starts rioters don't really care about a person's political views or their view on the legal system, everyone and everything is a target, the feeling across the country is that the result of the referendum is being ignored this is stoking up anger and sooner or later it will be vented,and it should be noted that rioters don't wave around bits of cardboard with silly slogans on them,as i said it worries me,i'm not making a political statement i'm just saying it's a bit scary.
__________________

Sephiroth 28-09-2019 10:50
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Brexit really is on a knife's edge. Parliament is wreaking revenge on Boris by not allowing a recess for the Tory conference, during which time they'll do more anti-Brexit stuff.

The country is bewildered by all these goings on. From what I've read, it wouldn't surprise me if Parliament passes another law to make it the "Member state" in the context of A50, then sending a letter to request an extension on the basis of an upcoming GE.

The EU will grant that extension and off we go into a new set of unknowns.

Parliament has been a dishonourable disgrace. Boris has been little better.

OLD BOY 28-09-2019 11:06
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36012038)
Brexit really is on a knife's edge. Parliament is wreaking revenge on Boris by not allowing a recess for the Tory conference, during which time they'll do more anti-Brexit stuff.

The country is bewildered by all these goings on. From what I've read, it wouldn't surprise me if Parliament passes another law to make it the "Member state" in the context of A50, then sending a letter to request an extension on the basis of an upcoming GE.

The EU will grant that extension and off we go into a new set of unknowns.

Parliament has been a dishonourable disgrace. Boris has been little better.
As things stand, there is no upcoming General Election.

Sephiroth 28-09-2019 11:11
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012039)
As things stand, there is no upcoming General Election.
Then the EU wouldn't have a reason to grant a short extension to 31-Jan-2020.

Mr K 28-09-2019 11:22
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36012037)
Once a riot starts rioters don't really care about a person's political views or their view on the legal system, everyone and everything is a target, the feeling across the country is that the result of the referendum is being ignored this is stoking up anger and sooner or later it will be vented,and it should be noted that rioters don't wave around bits of cardboard with silly slogans on them,as i said it worries me,i'm not making a political statement i'm just saying it's a bit scary.
__________________
Agree re. the rioting. But does beg the question if this is all worth it if it divides our country forever ? Seemingly it will whichever way this ends up. I still blame Cameron, he only did do try and save his failing career. It's brought out the worst in everyone. Extremists, agitators are loving it, some of them are now in positions of power. This used to be a nice tolerant welcoming country, setting an example to others, and seemingly never will be again.

1andrew1 28-09-2019 11:38
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36012045)
Agree re. the rioting. But does beg the question if this is all worth it if it divides our country forever ? Seemingly it will whichever way this ends up. I still blame Cameron, he only did do try and save his failing career. It's brought out the worst in everyone. Extremists, agitators are loving it, some of them are now in positions of power. This used to be a nice tolerant welcoming country, setting an example to others, and seemingly never will be again.
Both Boris Johnson and David Cameron put career before country. It did not end well for one of them and it's going terribly for the other.

---------- Post added at 11:38 ---------- Previous post was at 11:30 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012039)
As things stand, there is no upcoming General Election.
Once there is either a Brexit agreement or extension, bet your bucks on an election. November is a likely month for an election.

OLD BOY 28-09-2019 16:45
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36012045)
Agree re. the rioting. But does beg the question if this is all worth it if it divides our country forever ? Seemingly it will whichever way this ends up. I still blame Cameron, he only did do try and save his failing career. It's brought out the worst in everyone. Extremists, agitators are loving it, some of them are now in positions of power. This used to be a nice tolerant welcoming country, setting an example to others, and seemingly never will be again.
Cameron called for a referendum because the EU issue was dividing the country. He only requested that small changes be made and the EU rejected them out of hand, which simply stiffened the resolve to do something about it. Had the EU just been a bit more flexible, none of this would have happened.

One thing this whole episode has taught us, surely, is that referendums are not a good idea, because it polarises everyone in a rather dangerous way. It is an alien concept in the UK and I think it would be better if we reverted to party manifestos and general elections to determine policy.

jfman 28-09-2019 16:51
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012059)
Cameron called for a referendum because the EU issue was dividing the country. He only requested that small changes be made and the EU rejected them out of hand, which simply stiffened the resolve to do something about it. Had the EU just been a bit more flexible, none of this would have happened.

One thing this whole episode has taught us, surely, is that referendums are not a good idea, because it polarises everyone in a rather dangerous way. It is an alien concept in the UK and I think it would be better if we reverted to party manifestos and general elections to determine policy.
A laughably poor take. The EU issue wasn’t dividing anyone outside the Conservative party. It ranked low on issues the public cared about at elections, usually less than 10% of the public considering it a major issue.

Had the EU been “just a bit more flexible”, like what? The Eurosceptic wing of the Conservative Party were never going to be placated. It was a matter of principle that they wanted out.

papa smurf 28-09-2019 16:52
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012059)
Cameron called for a referendum because the EU issue was dividing the country. He only requested that small changes be made and the EU rejected them out of hand, which simply stiffened the resolve to do something about it. Had the EU just been a bit more flexible, none of this would have happened.

One thing this whole episode has taught us, surely, is that referendums are not a good idea, because it polarises everyone in a rather dangerous way. It is an alien concept in the UK and I think it would be better if we reverted to party manifestos and general elections to determine policy.
The problem is the day after an election the manifesto is worthless.

jfman 28-09-2019 17:00
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
https://www.theguardian.com/politics...knife-comments

After Brexit what’s the next aspiration? more cuts in Government spending and reducing the size of the state further. Makes it easier to sell everything off to the US I suppose.

denphone 28-09-2019 17:05
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36012061)
The problem is the day after an election the manifesto is worthless.
Manifesto's ain't worth the paper they are written on as go through the main parties last manifesto's and that will tell you why.

Hugh 28-09-2019 17:15
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Reminder - this thread is for new developments about/around Brexit, not to re-hash old argument.

OLD BOY 28-09-2019 18:57
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
I see that the opposition parties are going to attempt to sneek in a vote of no confidence on Wednesday, while the Conservative Party Conference is in full swing. Boris should have prorogued Parliament for a second time after all.

What a nasty, undemocratic bunch we have as an opposition in the Commons at the moment. I suspect they will be severely punished at the polls - the electorate will not take kindly to dirty tricks like this. I think this will vindicate Boris in the Court of Public Opinion! They are playing right into his hands.

Hugh 28-09-2019 19:02
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Link, please?

I can find lots of info on a potential VONC, but nothing about next Wednesday.

pip08456 28-09-2019 19:05
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36012068)
Link, please?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland...itics-49863544

Hugh 28-09-2019 19:06
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36012069)
Nothing in that about Wednesday.

Interesting that OB states
Quote:
the electorate will not take kindly to dirty tricks
when BJ has stated he will a) obey the law, and b) be out by 31st October, which is not obeying the law.

Taf 28-09-2019 19:38
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
1 Attachment(s)
Don't panic!

OLD BOY 28-09-2019 19:44
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36012070)
Nothing in that about Wednesday.

Interesting that OB states when BJ has stated he will a) obey the law, and b) be out by 31st October, which is not obeying the law.
The opposition parties are showing that they are not averse to playing fast and loose themselves. They cannot take the moral high ground if they deliberately try to overturn the government while the Conservatives are having their conference.

It certainly adds to their undemocratic credentials.

Taf 28-09-2019 20:05
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Both the Libs and Lab got their Annual Party Conferences, and tried to deny the Cons theirs. Its going ahead though...

jfman 28-09-2019 20:06
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
If Parliament is in session it’s in session. That’s democracy. The Tories can all come back from Manchester to vote if need be, it’s hardly the other side of the world.

mrmistoffelees 28-09-2019 20:20
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012067)
I see that the opposition parties are going to attempt to sneek in a vote of no confidence on Wednesday, while the Conservative Party Conference is in full swing. Boris should have prorogued Parliament for a second time after all.

What a nasty, undemocratic bunch we have as an opposition in the Commons at the moment. I suspect they will be severely punished at the polls - the electorate will not take kindly to dirty tricks like this. I think this will vindicate Boris in the Court of Public Opinion! They are playing right into his hands.

Do you mean the vote of no confidence that he himself invited ?


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9120531.html

Or are they nasty and undemocratic because the opposition may choose to do it when they think the time is right, rather than when Boris want's them to do so ?

Sephiroth 28-09-2019 21:07
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36012079)
If Parliament is in session it’s in session. That’s democracy. The Tories can all come back from Manchester to vote if need be, it’s hardly the other side of the world.
That's political shenanigans. Parliament getting its revenge on Boris and his miscalculations.

jfman 28-09-2019 21:13
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
He wants a VONC and a General Election. I don’t see the drama.

TheDaddy 28-09-2019 21:25
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36012068)
Link, please?

I can find lots of info on a potential VONC, but nothing about next Wednesday.
Is that what Stewart Hosie was banging on about earlier? If it is je believed it'd be tabled next week but I don't think all the opposition can even agree on that

OLD BOY 28-09-2019 21:50
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36012079)
If Parliament is in session it’s in session. That’s democracy. The Tories can all come back from Manchester to vote if need be, it’s hardly the other side of the world.
What a ridiculous statement! Parliament is normally in recess for the party conferences. To try to put on an important debate and vote on a day that clashes with the CPC is undemocratic and certainly indicates why Boris wanted to prorogue Parliament. He should do it again, given these snide moves.

The opposition are scared witless of the Conservative Party Conference as the public will then see clearly that the Conservative Party are the only party that is fit to take office. With a good majority, we will all be able to put this nonsense behind us. Hung parliaments are not good for the country as you cannot get decisions through with a determined opposition.

---------- Post added at 21:50 ---------- Previous post was at 21:47 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by mrmistoffelees (Post 36012080)
Do you mean the vote of no confidence that he himself invited ?


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a9120531.html

Or are they nasty and undemocratic because the opposition may choose to do it when they think the time is right, rather than when Boris want's them to do so ?
What, the time is right when the Conservatives are absent? Why could they not wait until Thursday? It is very clear the game they are playing. The public will not be impressed.

Sephiroth 28-09-2019 21:56
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012088)
What a ridiculous statement! Parliament is normally in recess for the party conferences. To try to put on an important debate and vote on a day that clashes with the CPC is undemocratic and certainly indicates why Boris wanted to prorogue Parliament. He should do it again, given these snide moves.

<SNIP>
I'm sure others will chime in on your remark. Had there been a normal conference recess period, nothing would have happened to disrupt the CPC. Boris' miscalculated prorogation is the cause of this part of the mess that is Parliament.

And I'm still a Conservative Party member.

mrmistoffelees 28-09-2019 22:16
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012088)
What a ridiculous statement! Parliament is normally in recess for the party conferences. To try to put on an important debate and vote on a day that clashes with the CPC is undemocratic and certainly indicates why Boris wanted to prorogue Parliament. He should do it again, given these snide moves.

The opposition are scared witless of the Conservative Party Conference as the public will then see clearly that the Conservative Party are the only party that is fit to take office. With a good majority, we will all be able to put this nonsense behind us. Hung parliaments are not good for the country as you cannot get decisions through with a determined opposition.

---------- Post added at 21:50 ---------- Previous post was at 21:47 ----------



What, the time is right when the Conservatives are absent? Why could they not wait until Thursday? It is very clear the game they are playing. The public will not be impressed.
Boris is so hard done by.... Boo Hoo

You're clutching at straws with this one. In the grand scheme of things the public wont even give this particular item a 2nd thought when the time comes at the Ballot box.

Boris could have played fair with parliament he chose not too, he can hardly play the victim when the tables have been turned.

jfman 28-09-2019 22:24
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012088)
What a ridiculous statement! Parliament is normally in recess for the party conferences. To try to put on an important debate and vote on a day that clashes with the CPC is undemocratic and certainly indicates why Boris wanted to prorogue Parliament. He should do it again, given these snide moves.

The opposition are scared witless of the Conservative Party Conference as the public will then see clearly that the Conservative Party are the only party that is fit to take office. With a good majority, we will all be able to put this nonsense behind us. Hung parliaments are not good for the country as you cannot get decisions through with a determined opposition.

---------- Post added at 21:50 ---------- Previous post was at 21:47 ----------



What, the time is right when the Conservatives are absent? Why could they not wait until Thursday? It is very clear the game they are playing. The public will not be impressed.
So they couldn’t come back?

Your claim is preposterous and you know it. It’s essentially trolling to know you are in the wrong yet peddle flawed discussion lines continuously.

If there’s a VONC on Wednesday they’ll be told the day before and can make arrangements to attend. Boris wants to lose a VONC. Jeremy asks for an extension and Boris gets his election.

1andrew1 29-09-2019 09:46
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36012090)
I'm sure others will chime in on your remark. Had there been a normal conference recess period, nothing would have happened to disrupt the CPC. Boris' miscalculated prorogation is the cause of this part of the mess that is Parliament.

And I'm still a Conservative Party member.
Spot on. You play with fire, you get burnt.

---------- Post added at 09:46 ---------- Previous post was at 09:40 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36012070)
Nothing in that about Wednesday.
Is the Wednesday vote a possible scenario and no more, then?

Sephiroth 29-09-2019 09:58
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
One of the things that gets to me beyond the arrogance of Parliament in the face of the Referendum, is that Boris was overwhelmingly elected to be Tory leader by the party membership; yet c. 20 Tory rebels can't accept that either, causing Boris to act recklessly with the Constitution.

But now that Boris has withdrawn the whip from 21 MPs, they won't be there when he needs them.

Moving on from that, those Tory traitors (for that's what they are) have supported the aptly named "Surrender Act" which puts our immediate future into the hands of the EU who can determine the extension period if any. "Traitor" is an apt word in both senses.

Hugh 29-09-2019 10:13
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36012111)
One of the things that gets to me beyond the arrogance of Parliament in the face of the Referendum, is that Boris was overwhelmingly elected to be Tory leader by the party membership; yet c. 20 Tory rebels can't accept that either, causing Boris to act recklessly with the Constitution.

But now that Boris has withdrawn the whip from 21 MPs, they won't be there when he needs them.

Moving on from that, those Tory traitors (for that's what they are) have supported the aptly named "Surrender Act" which puts our immediate future into the hands of the EU who can determine the extension period if any. "Traitor" is an apt word in both senses.
Theresa May was elected unopposed in the third ballot (which, I think, also counts as "overwhelming) as Leadsom withdrew, but 39 Tory MPs voted against her (including Patel, Raab, BJ, JRM) - should they be branded ”Tory traitors"?

Using words like "traitor" inflames the easily provoked, and can lead to threats and violence - I believe that phrase is inappropriate. Some colleagues of mine in the RAF worked with Geoffrey Prime - he was a traitor.

Words can have consequences, so I wish people would use them more carefully.

OLD BOY 29-09-2019 10:24
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36012092)
So they couldn’t come back?

Your claim is preposterous and you know it. It’s essentially trolling to know you are in the wrong yet peddle flawed discussion lines continuously.

If there’s a VONC on Wednesday they’ll be told the day before and can make arrangements to attend. Boris wants to lose a VONC. Jeremy asks for an extension and Boris gets his election.
He might want to lose a vote of no confidence, but he wouldn't want to put Corbyn in power. They will need to be in attendance to ensure that does not happen.

Nothing preposterous about it and the point I was making was that the opposition is complaining about Boris's 'dirty tricks' and then they pull a stunt like this.

Mr K 29-09-2019 10:26
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
'surrender' , 'traitors', all words designed to provoke. This isn't going to end well.

Who are those hoping for civil unrest? Those looking to cling onto power is the answer, not some lefty anarchists.

Sephiroth 29-09-2019 10:31
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36012112)
Theresa May was elected unopposed in the third ballot (which, I think, also counts as "overwhelming) as Leadsom withdrew, but 39 Tory MPs voted against her (including Patel, Raab, BJ, JRM) - should they be branded ”Tory traitors"?

Using words like "traitor" inflames the easily provoked, and can lead to threats and violence - I believe that phrase is inappropriate. Some colleagues of mine in the RAF worked with Geoffrey Prime - he was a traitor.

Words can have consequences, so I wish people would use them more carefully.
I understand the point you've made about the word "traitor".
But I feel so strongly about this - notwithstanding that Boris is not my choice of leader; yet I haven't left the Party nor was I a traitor for not supporting his candidacy. The May selection was an internal matter; the "traitorous" actions of the 21 were a whipped Parliamentary matter, a huge difference.

OLD BOY 29-09-2019 10:32
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36012114)
'surrender' , 'traitors', all words designed to provoke. This isn't going to end well.

Who are those hoping for civil unrest? Those looking to cling onto power is the answer, not some lefty anarchists.
These descriptions are no worse than 'poll tax' and 'bedroom tax' used by Labour in the past. They don't like it when the boot is on the other foot and the descriptions are more apt.

No-one in their right minds wants civil unrest and certainly not the government. It is the people who are trying to undermine democracy who are making all the noise out there at the moment, so you might want to re-think.

1andrew1 29-09-2019 10:37
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
For those wanting to know more about the issue that Boris faces from his GLA days, The Sunday Times says three questions need answers from him.
https://twitter.com/BenPBradshaw/sta...123904/photo/1

---------- Post added at 10:34 ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth (Post 36012115)
I understand the point you've made about the word "traitor".
But I feel so strongly about this - notwithstanding that Boris is not my choice of leader; yet I haven't left the Party nor was I a traitor for not supporting his candidacy. The May selection was an internal matter; the "traitorous" actions of the 21 were a whipped Parliamentary matter, a huge difference.
The Conservative Party is a broad church with an until-now noble tradition of disagreement.

---------- Post added at 10:37 ---------- Previous post was at 10:34 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012116)
These descriptions are no worse than 'poll tax' and 'bedroom tax' used by Labour in the past. They don't like it when the boot is on the other foot and the descriptions are more apt.
Stuff and nonsense. Calling something a tax is different from calling someone a traitor.

Pierre 29-09-2019 10:53
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36012070)
and b) be out by 31st October, which is not obeying the law.
That is entirely possible. There is nothing in the bill that says it is illegal to exit the EU by 31st Oct.

jfman 29-09-2019 11:34
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012113)
He might want to lose a vote of no confidence, but he wouldn't want to put Corbyn in power. They will need to be in attendance to ensure that does not happen.

Nothing preposterous about it and the point I was making was that the opposition is complaining about Boris's 'dirty tricks' and then they pull a stunt like this.
No such stunt has been pulled.

If he feels strongly against Corbyn why not ask for the extension himself then call a GE? It’s a total red herring on your part. Boris and his tricks cost Parliamentary time, which they can now claw back.

Poll tax wasn’t a tax? Huge leap there Old Boy.

papa smurf 29-09-2019 11:42
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36012122)
No such stunt has been pulled.

If he feels strongly against Corbyn why not ask for the extension himself then call a GE? It’s a total red herring on your part. Boris and his tricks cost Parliamentary time, which they can now claw back.

Poll tax wasn’t a tax? Huge leap there Old Boy.
it says here that it was.
The Community Charge, commonly known as the poll tax, was a system of taxation introduced in replacement of domestic rates in Scotland from 1989, prior to its introduction in England and Wales from 1990. It provided for a single flat-rate per-capita tax on every adult, at a rate set by the local authority. The charge was replaced by Council Tax in 1993, two years after its abolition was announced.[


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax_(Great_Britain)

1andrew1 29-09-2019 12:07
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36012123)
it says here that it was.
The Community Charge, commonly known as the poll tax, was a system of taxation introduced in replacement of domestic rates in Scotland from 1989, prior to its introduction in England and Wales from 1990. It provided for a single flat-rate per-capita tax on every adult, at a rate set by the local authority. The charge was replaced by Council Tax in 1993, two years after its abolition was announced.[

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax_(Great_Britain)
I don't think Old Boy doubts it was a tax, just that he thinks it unfair to call it a tax on voting. Branding a tax or charge a poll tax is of course not the same as calling a person a traitor.

OLD BOY 29-09-2019 12:33
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36012117)
For those wanting to know more about the issue that Boris faces from his GLA days, The Sunday Times says three questions need answers from him.
https://twitter.com/BenPBradshaw/sta...123904/photo/1

---------- Post added at 10:34 ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 ----------


The Conservative Party is a broad church with an until-now noble tradition of disagreement.

---------- Post added at 10:37 ---------- Previous post was at 10:34 ----------


Stuff and nonsense. Calling something a tax is different from calling someone a traitor.
So you distinguish between an inaccurate description of 'something' with an accurate description of 'someone' and conclude that the accurate description is wrong.

What a strange world you are living in, Andrew. :no:

---------- Post added at 12:33 ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36012122)
No such stunt has been pulled.

If he feels strongly against Corbyn why not ask for the extension himself then call a GE? It’s a total red herring on your part. Boris and his tricks cost Parliamentary time, which they can now claw back.

Poll tax wasn’t a tax? Huge leap there Old Boy.
It was not the poll tax, it was the Community Charge, and then the council tax.

You say that no stunt has been pulled. Are you in denial that this is what is being planned?

Why would Boris ask for an extension when he has pledged to leave by 31 October? You're not really joining up the dots here, jfman.

1andrew1 29-09-2019 12:37
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012126)
So you distinguish between an inaccurate description of 'something' with an accurate description of 'someone' and conclude that the accurate description is wrong.

What a strange world you are living in, Andrew. :no:
The main point is the difference between name-calling a thing and name-calling a human being. That is hugely significant.

jfman 29-09-2019 12:40
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012126)
So you distinguish between an inaccurate description of 'something' with an accurate description of 'someone' and conclude that the accurate description is wrong.

What a strange world you are living in, Andrew. :no:

---------- Post added at 12:33 ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 ----------



It was not the poll tax, it was the Community Charge, and then the council tax.

You say that no stunt has been pulled. Are you in denial that this is what is being planned?

Why would Boris ask for an extension when he has pledged to leave by 31 October? You're not really joining up the dots here, jfman.
It’s a tax. Every day of the week - hence the new name.

No stunt has been pulled. What might happen next isn’t clear.

So Boris isn’t that bothered about losing the VONC, Corbyn and forcing a general election? It’s your joining the dots that’s the problem here. Boris wants an election, the circumstances and if someone else asks for an extension to Brexit is an irrelevance.

If you deny the above it’s confirmation that you’re just a troll.

1andrew1 29-09-2019 12:45
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012126)
Why would Boris ask for an extension when he has pledged to leave by 31 October? You're not really joining up the dots here, jfman.
I don't even think Boris really thinks that's possible but it's in his interests for his loyal followers to continue thinking that it is.
It's his game of brinkmanship and he'll blame everyone but himself when it doesn't happen. After messing with the courts, he now knows that his privileges do not extend to ignoring the law of the United Kingdom.

If he is as popular as you believe then why not:
1) Request an extension to January 2020.
2) Call an election on a promise to leave and win that election.
3) Advise the EU that the UK is leaving.

Hugh 29-09-2019 14:12
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012113)
He might want to lose a vote of no confidence, but he wouldn't want to put Corbyn in power. They will need to be in attendance to ensure that does not happen.

Nothing preposterous about it and the point I was making was that the opposition is complaining about Boris's 'dirty tricks' and then they pull a stunt like this.
Could you clarify how him/they being in attendance when he loses a VONC would stop Corbyn being "in power", please?

Also, any VONC must be put to the Speaker at least a day before to allow it to be put in the following day’s business, so there can’t be a "surprise" VONC.

---------- Post added at 14:09 ---------- Previous post was at 14:06 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36012121)
That is entirely possible. There is nothing in the bill that says it is illegal to exit the EU by 31st Oct.
But...

There is something in the Bill which states, if he hasn’t got a deal, he must ask for an extension.

So , if he hasn’t got a deal, it will be illegal for him to exit the EU on the 31st October.

---------- Post added at 14:12 ---------- Previous post was at 14:09 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012116)
These descriptions are no worse than 'poll tax' and 'bedroom tax' used by Labour in the past. They don't like it when the boot is on the other foot and the descriptions are more apt.

No-one in their right minds wants civil unrest and certainly not the government. It is the people who are trying to undermine democracy who are making all the noise out there at the moment, so you might want to re-think.
I think you will find it’s the Leave supporters, and an unnamed Leave Cabinet Minister, that are making all the comments about riots and civil unrest - your statement is false.

Pierre 29-09-2019 14:25
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36012137)
But...
Indeed but it was an incorrect statement that needed correcting.

Quote:
There is something in the Bill which states, if he hasn’t got a deal, he must ask for an extension.
Correct it requires him to ask for an extension....that is all......and that is also yet to be tested.

Quote:
So , if he hasn’t got a deal, it will be illegal for him to exit the EU on the 31st October.
sorry incorrect.

If he asks for an extension (yet to be tested ) that is all he required to do. If we leave on Oct 31st without a deal and he has fulfilled what is required of him he has done nothing illegal.

Dave42 29-09-2019 14:38
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012116)
These descriptions are no worse than 'poll tax' and 'bedroom tax' used by Labour in the past. They don't like it when the boot is on the other foot and the descriptions are more apt.

No-one in their right minds wants civil unrest and certainly not the government. It is the people who are trying to undermine democracy who are making all the noise out there at the moment, so you might want to re-think.
guess you didn't see Brendan O'Neill interview on bbc other day then that's exactly what he called for OB

1andrew1 29-09-2019 14:46
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36012142)
guess you didn't see Brendan O'Neill interview on bbc other day then that's exactly what he called for OB
Indeed - here is that shocking moment when he says he thinks there should be. Old Boy is entitled to revise his analysis if this interview has eluded him until now.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a9125206.html

OLD BOY 29-09-2019 15:07
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36012128)
The main point is the difference between name-calling a thing and name-calling a human being. That is hugely significant.
In which case, you also need to acknowledge that there is name calling from the other side as well - Nazi, liar, etc.

If you or anyone is calling for language to be moderated, then that must be applied to both sides of the debate.

---------- Post added at 15:07 ---------- Previous post was at 15:03 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36012130)
It’s a tax. Every day of the week - hence the new name.

No stunt has been pulled. What might happen next isn’t clear.

So Boris isn’t that bothered about losing the VONC, Corbyn and forcing a general election? It’s your joining the dots that’s the problem here. Boris wants an election, the circumstances and if someone else asks for an extension to Brexit is an irrelevance.

If you deny the above it’s confirmation that you’re just a troll.
The 'bedroom tax' was not a tax. The 'poll tax' was a tax but it was not a tax on voting. Labour is good at coming up with misleading name-calling itself, but people on that side of the debate get terribly hurt and offended when a word that describes the intent of what they are doing (such as surrender, betrayal, etc).

denphone 29-09-2019 15:07
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36012143)
Indeed - here is that shocking moment when he says he thinks there should be. Old Boy is entitled to revise his analysis if this interview has eluded him until now.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices...-a9125206.html
Whether one believes in Brexit or not there should not be any doubt at all that anyone intent on causing civil disorder should have the book strongly thrown at then as there are no excuses for anybody who supports or participate in riots on the streets of Britain because of Brexit as there were no excuses before for any riots on the streets of Britain and there are no excuses now..

OLD BOY 29-09-2019 15:15
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36012133)
I don't even think Boris really thinks that's possible but it's in his interests for his loyal followers to continue thinking that it is.
It's his game of brinkmanship and he'll blame everyone but himself when it doesn't happen. After messing with the courts, he now knows that his privileges do not extend to ignoring the law of the United Kingdom.

If he is as popular as you believe then why not:
1) Request an extension to January 2020.
2) Call an election on a promise to leave and win that election.
3) Advise the EU that the UK is leaving.
Yes, wouldn't you just like that? This would mean the PM reneging on his promise to get us out by 31 October so the opposition can call him a liar again. He won't renege, and he will get us out when he said he would. As you will see in a month's time.

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

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36012137)
Could you clarify how him/they being in attendance when he loses a VONC would stop Corbyn being "in power", please?

Also, any VONC must be put to the Speaker at least a day before to allow it to be put in the following day’s business, so there can’t be a "surprise" VONC
It would be called on the Tuesday in an effort to prevent Boris from making his speech, which the opposition know will be very damaging to them because it will make him very popular in the country.

The reason the Conservatives need to be there is to prevent Corbyn from forming a government. By declining to give him their support. Obviously.

1andrew1 29-09-2019 15:16
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012147)
Yes, wouldn't you just like that? This would mean the PM reneging on his promise to get us out by 31 October so the opposition can call him a liar again. He won't renege, and he will get us out when he said he would. As you will see in a month's time.
You said this about 29 March and we're still in the EU.

jfman 29-09-2019 15:16
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012144)

The 'bedroom tax' was not a tax. The 'poll tax' was a tax but it was not a tax on voting. Labour is good at coming up with misleading name-calling itself, but people on that side of the debate get terribly hurt and offended when a word that describes the intent of what they are doing (such as surrender, betrayal, etc).
I didn’t refer to the “bedroom tax”.

Nobody is surrendering or betraying anyone. It’s an out and out lie to claim they are. In fact the Labour commitment is to get a deal.

OLD BOY 29-09-2019 15:17
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36012142)
guess you didn't see Brendan O'Neill interview on bbc other day then that's exactly what he called for OB
I stand by what I said, Dave.

Dave42 29-09-2019 15:17
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36012149)
You said this about 29 March and we're still in the EU.
as we will be still in on the 1st of November

OLD BOY 29-09-2019 15:18
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1andrew1 (Post 36012149)
You said this about 29 March and we're still in the EU.
I was quoting what Theresa May had pledged. That is all.

Dave42 29-09-2019 15:19
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012151)
I stand by what I said, Dave.
so if say Corbyn called for riots it be ok or any remain supporter you stay quiet yeah right we would never ever here end of it as you well know OB

OLD BOY 29-09-2019 15:21
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36012150)
I didn’t refer to the “bedroom tax”.

Nobody is surrendering or betraying anyone. It’s an out and out lie to claim they are. In fact the Labour commitment is to get a deal.
Labour is conniving with the EU to prevent Boris from getting a deal, and of course we are surrendering if they get their way. The electorate understand this truth. And the opposition is betraying the electorate, who voted to leave.

Labour is facing in two directions at the same time on Brexit, and everyone knows it.

1andrew1 29-09-2019 15:25
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012144)
In which case, you also need to acknowledge that there is name calling from the other side as well - Nazi, liar, etc.

If you or anyone is calling for language to be moderated, then that must be applied to both sides of the debate.
No one is saying that language should not be moderated on all sides.

If I try and explain to you that calling someone a name is worse than calling a tax or charge a name, I don't have to add a disclaimer condemning everything bad that everyone has said. That would probably confuse people even more.

---------- Post added at 15:25 ---------- Previous post was at 15:21 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012153)
I was quoting what Theresa May had pledged. That is all.
Can you clarify - are you now quoting what Boris has pledged or are you saying it will happen yourself?

jfman 29-09-2019 15:27
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012155)
Labour is conniving with the EU to prevent Boris from getting a deal, and of course we are surrendering if they get their way. The electorate understand this truth. And the opposition is betraying the electorate, who voted to leave.

Labour is facing in two directions at the same time on Brexit, and everyone knows it.
We aren’t surrendering anything. This wartime rhetoric, laughable, is dangerous because of the morons out there’s who will buy into it and do something stupid. The world won’t end if we extend 3 months - if we have a GE in the meantime and 2nd referendum or remain parties win then that’s the will of the people.

Boris doesn’t want a deal, as his donors are in for shorting the pound to the tune of £8bn on the basis of no deal. You are kidding yourself if you think Boris is genuinely interested in a deal.

OLD BOY 29-09-2019 15:29
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave42 (Post 36012154)
so if say Corbyn called for riots it be ok or any remain supporter you stay quiet yeah right we would never ever here end of it as you well know OB
I said no-one in their right mind would want riots on the streets. What are you actually arguing about, Dave?

Pierre 29-09-2019 15:33
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012144)
In which case, you also need to acknowledge that there is name calling from the other side as well - Nazi, liar, etc.

If you or anyone is calling for language to be moderated, then that must be applied to both sides of the debate.
Indeed

Police investigate 'utterly vile' banner calling for Tory deaths condemned by Labour mayor

On sky news, can’t link on my phone for some reason.

Dave42 29-09-2019 15:33
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012159)
I said no-one in their right mind would want riots on the streets. What are you actually arguing about, Dave?
Brendan O.Neill said they should be OB I be mad and very disgusted if a remain supporter said that are you not with him OB

denphone 29-09-2019 15:35
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pierre (Post 36012160)
Indeed

Police investigate 'utterly vile' banner calling for Tory deaths condemned by Labour mayor

On sky news, can’t link on my phone for some reason.
l have the link here.

https://news.sky.com/story/utterly-v...mayor-11822793

OLD BOY 29-09-2019 15:37
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36012158)
We aren’t surrendering anything. This wartime rhetoric, laughable, is dangerous because of the morons out there’s who will buy into it and do something stupid. The world won’t end if we extend 3 months - if we have a GE in the meantime and 2nd referendum or remain parties win then that’s the will of the people.

Boris doesn’t want a deal, as his donors are in for shorting the pound to the tune of £8bn on the basis of no deal. You are kidding yourself if you think Boris is genuinely interested in a deal.
Do come off it, who are you kidding? We are surrendering because we are being forced into a close relationship with the EU and on their terms.

If you don't like wartime rhetoric, and it's arguable as to whether the word 'surrender' is, then maybe you should be equally critical of Labour members who call Conservative members 'Nazis'.

Brexit will not be extended further as Boris has pledged not to do so. You would soon be cackling away if he failed to honour that pledge, which is exactly what you and the opposition want him to do.

Boris may not want a deal, but the reason for that is that not being tied closely to the EU will give us the maximum freedom in trading with the rest of the world.

Substitute your own reasons if you want to, but they are not true although they may give you some comfort in thinking that.

jfman 29-09-2019 15:43
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD BOY (Post 36012163)
Do come off it, who are you kidding? We are surrendering because we are being forced into a close relationship with the EU and on their terms.

If you don't like wartime rhetoric, and it's arguable as to whether the word 'surrender' is, then maybe you should be equally critical of Labour members who call Conservative members 'Nazis'.

Brexit will not be extended further as Boris has pledged not to do so. You would soon be cackling away if he failed to honour that pledge, which is exactly what you and the opposition want him to do.

Boris may not want a deal, but the reason for that is that not being tied closely to the EU will give us the maximum freedom in trading with the rest of the world.

Substitute your own reasons if you want to, but they are not true although they may give you some comfort in thinking that.
I didn’t say I didn’t like the wartime rhetoric - I said it was a matter of time before it had a dangerous effect on a moron. The death of Jo Cox for one being an event someone has clearly bought too much into propaganda. There’s idiots out there, and you know it.

Nobody is “forcing” us into a close relationship with the EU. If we accept a deal it’s because we do so on our own terms. Be that a Johnson, Corbyn or other Government.

If Boris extended for the purposes of a General Election he’d pull the rug from under his opponents, have the possibility of delivering Brexit and a majority Government for five years. If that’s what the public wants. Any cackling would be short lived on that basis, and I think acting in the best interests of the country is worth more than delivering Brexit on an absolutely arbitrary date.

Then again as I said his donors stand to make hundreds of millions of pounds all over again - so why take the risk when you could just crash out.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:19.
Page 7 of 56 « First 3456 7 89101117 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