Cable Forum
Page 94 of 369 « First 448490919293 94 95969798104144194 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)

papa smurf 18-10-2019 09:43
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx (Post 36014282)
Dominic Raab was hailing the deal this morning on the news as a great deal for Northern Ireland as it will keep 'frictionless access to the single market'. If that's so great, can the rest of the UK have this too?
Your starting to sound like a whining scotts nat;)

TheDaddy 18-10-2019 10:36
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonbxx (Post 36014282)
Dominic Raab was hailing the deal this morning on the news as a great deal for Northern Ireland as it will keep 'frictionless access to the single market'. If that's so great, can the rest of the UK have this too?
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36014283)
Your starting to sound like a whining scotts nat;)
Is it not a fair point then? Seems like a cake and eat it situation to me

jfman 18-10-2019 11:16
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
She who pays the piper calls the tune.

Brexit extension unavoidable if MPs reject deal, says Merkel

Carth 18-10-2019 11:19
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfman (Post 36014285)
Well that's that sorted then.

No need to wait for Parliament to vote on the deal, those who want to remain will know that another extension is there for the taking :rolleyes:

papa smurf 18-10-2019 11:23
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36014287)
Well that's that sorted then.

No need to wait for Parliament to vote on the deal, those who want to remain will know that another extension is there for the taking :rolleyes:
It makes a change from sitting in the Scottish courts instead of the HOC.

denphone 18-10-2019 11:28
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
John Mann says more than nine Labour MPs will vote for Johnson's deal.

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

Quote:
The Financial Times vote count quoted earlier had seven Labour MPs voting for the deal, and Boris Johnson losing by three votes. If Mann is right about the number of Labour rebels, and the FT is right about everything else, Johnson would win.

papa smurf 18-10-2019 12:31
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Judges REJECT Remainers' demand for urgent legal challenge against Boris Johnson

COURT OF APPEAL judges have rejected Liberty’s bid for an urgent hearing against Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

The human rights group brought the case before the court in an attempt to ensure the Government complied with the Benn Act, the law that forces Boris Johnson to request an extension if a deal has not been passed by October 19 - tomorrow. Lawyers for the civil rights organisation argued that is legal challenge, brought to ensure Mr Johnson "acts within the law", should be heard immediately. But the judges rejected their application and Lord Burnett said the full reasons for their decision will be given in writing at a later date.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...enn-Act-latest

jfman 18-10-2019 12:52
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Mark Francois on the way into Downing Street. Not sure my sides will be able to take it if the press catch him on the way out.

pip08456 18-10-2019 12:56
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papa smurf (Post 36014295)
Judges REJECT Remainers' demand for urgent legal challenge against Boris Johnson

COURT OF APPEAL judges have rejected Liberty’s bid for an urgent hearing against Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

The human rights group brought the case before the court in an attempt to ensure the Government complied with the Benn Act, the law that forces Boris Johnson to request an extension if a deal has not been passed by October 19 - tomorrow. Lawyers for the civil rights organisation argued that is legal challenge, brought to ensure Mr Johnson "acts within the law", should be heard immediately. But the judges rejected their application and Lord Burnett said the full reasons for their decision will be given in writing at a later date.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/polit...enn-Act-latest
I should hope so. Putting the deal before parliament was part of the Benn act, to try to stop that happening through legal means was doomed to fail.

Damien 18-10-2019 13:00
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36014297)
I should hope so. Putting the deal before parliament was part of the Benn act, to try to stop that happening through legal means was doomed to fail.
That's a different case isn't it?

Either way that case, the one to stop the deal being put to Parliament is a joke. The point of previous successful court actions have been to maintain the power of Parliament either by ensuring they had to pass Article 50 or stopping Johnson suspending it for a long amount of time. No merit at all in trying to use the courts to subvert Parliament.

pip08456 18-10-2019 13:23
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien (Post 36014298)
That's a different case isn't it?

Either way that case, the one to stop the deal being put to Parliament is a joke. The point of previous successful court actions have been to maintain the power of Parliament either by ensuring they had to pass Article 50 or stopping Johnson suspending it for a long amount of time. No merit at all in trying to use the courts to subvert Parliament.
No, that's the case to be submitted today. A letter from Brecow was the nail in the coffin for it.

Quote:
Anti-Brexit legal campaigner Jolyon Maugham QC asked Edinburgh’s Court of Session to suspend the deal and bar the government from entering into arrangements under which Northern Ireland would become part of a separate customs area from the rest of the UK.

But a lawyer for the UK government said the case was constitutionally misconceived. “This is a manifest attempt to interfere with proceedings in parliament,” said Gerry Moynihan QC.

Mr K 18-10-2019 13:32
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Ohh err, 2 Govt ministers on 'resignation watch'.....
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...u-summit-vote/

Not surprising really this deal is going to make us £800 worse off each.
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/upl...-proposals.pdf

denphone 18-10-2019 13:38
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36014300)
Ohh err, 2 Govt ministers on 'resignation watch'.....
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...u-summit-vote/

Not surprising really this deal is going to make us £800 worse off each.
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/upl...-proposals.pdf
If two government ministers did resign and that is a very big if then the numbers more then likely won't add up when it comes to the vote.

pip08456 18-10-2019 13:42
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr K (Post 36014300)
Ohh err, 2 Govt ministers on 'resignation watch'.....
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...u-summit-vote/

Not surprising really this deal is going to make us £800 worse off each.
https://ukandeu.ac.uk/wp-content/upl...-proposals.pdf
Paywall article from the Telegraph. Really?

Experts again failing to realise its just a withdrawl agreement and has nothing to do with any future DEAL we may reach with the EU.

jfman 18-10-2019 13:42
Re: Brexit Development(s) Discussion
 
Those expelled from the party expected to vote against in the “high single figures”.


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:54.
Page 94 of 369 « First 448490919293 94 95969798104144194 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