nauseus

No recession possible for the EU of course. ???? https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/europe-heading-recession-cost-living-crisis-deepens-2022-09-05/

27 countries 5.5x the size of just one - outstanding.

The French? Difficult? Just like the 60's, except that now they have the mini-me Napoleon instead of de Gaulle. The others? Well that only leaves Germany really and they look to be running on empty. Let's see who really needs the suppository but you'd better practise touching your toes. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/german-economic-downturn-deepens-sept-outlook-grim-flash-pmi-2022-09-23/

You mean like of of them colonoscopy things?

All the sins of the world? Bye.

The House and Government are comprised of MPs or Lords, so why differentiate? I am saying that, from their words and proposals, many of them gave the impression they had only basic knowledge of the EU, particularly with respect to the hoped for "orderly withdrawal". Goodnight.

No but no the point / 10% wow / amendments invariably minor effect / EU fault - far too many of them.

Next referendum lol - that would be both silly and difficult.

Yes, I don't care to answer every silly question thrown at me.

I think that you know I was ignoring you. Bye.

Ideological reasons? Four pillars more like. Is there a point to your puzzling second para? Third para...most of the lobbying in the EU is done by big business and large corporations. Most of these "consultations" happen behind closed doors. Laws, directives and regulations are only proposed by the commission, which is accustomed the parliament to pass them easily, which generally happens. Once an EU law is passed it becomes law automatically in EU member states, due to EU law primacy - in theory the UK parliament has to pass the same law into national law UK law but it doesn't effectively make any difference - the backlog was such that the UK was way behind with this transposition process by the time of exit.

Not evading...ignoring.

Been though any floods?

Do you not recall how many UK MPs thought that we could leave the EU but still stay in the SM and CU, even after the vote, and on both sides? To give Cameron his due, he did spell this out but many chose to disbelieve him. Many MPs and MEPs rarely digested all of the rules and directives before passing them - too lengthy and often bundled together in huge batches in the EP for voting on according to a rapid timetable, which was about the only thing the EU ever did quickly. Not a chance of even having enough time to evaluate them nor fully understand them. All to easy to get through with QMV. Some people rightly call it railroading. Magic dust back.

Thanks. If he'd said EFTA I might gave understood.

The UK government should have walked away after 2 years, that's what Article 50 indicates. But of course Article 50 does not highlight all of the the difficulties for any member state trying to extract itself from a maze of conditions and obligations, which have accumulated, altered and amplified so much since joining the EEC in 1973. The succession of treaties and the introduction of the single market, Euro and the customs union resulted in a far more involved commitment than was envisaged and described to the UK public in 1972 and 1975, even though the Treaty of Rome indicated what was to come. Of course the UK could not leave without agreements for financial obligations and the people, at least. After the referendum, it seemed that most MP's (and cabinet ministers) had no clue as to the extent of the level of control that the EU had gained over a, supposedly sovereign UK. The Civil Service kept quiet and had evidently been happy with the status quo for years - the EU saved them a lot of work, so they only started crying after the leave vote - lazy overpaid bums.

And so..... the withdrawal negotiations, such as they were, are done.

Join what?

You may have been hypnotized by buses and strange chants but most weren't.

What are you on about now?

The truth is that the EU was intent on making the exit for the UK difficult and painful, to discourage other members from even thinking about trying to do the same thing.

Maybe.

If you post with proper links, then that might lead to less confusion. Depending on where you look, the viewing numbers vary over a wide range. Your response above is just gibberish. What is Putin doing in there? I am pro monarchy, yes. I think it has acted as a good check on some of the more dubious governments and PM's that have occupied power in the UK system. But to use things like soccer matches sixty years ago, with far less viewing availability and options, in a world with half the population of today is no real comparison and just ridiculous.

Any false expectations promised by elements of some of the pro Brexit campaigns were misleading, I agree. Anyone with a basic knowledge of the EU structure with have ignored such promises. If you mean by 'constant' that the EU is a stubborn, unbending, make the rules up to suit as you go mess, then I also agree with you.

The BBC doesn't like to admit how unpopular it is these days - millions more watched on alternate media - your own perspective is not widely shared.