1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

It would be interesting to do a survey of British TV members, asking which way you voted in the referendum and also whether or not you pay for sex, do you think there would be a correlation?

Do you get salad with that??

1 hour ago, The Renegade said:

And of course, you would not be included in that survey.

 

Which brings me on nicely to '' Why are you all over this thread like a jack in the box '' ?

 

You might ask yourself why you are fantasising about me.

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Which ones  payed attention at school would be more revealing than who paid for their lunch.

What did he just say?

36 minutes ago, Eloquent pilgrim said:

Ha Ha Ha 

A partial inversion. Just like what some remainers want done with the referendum result. Sticky.

5 minutes ago, nauseus said:

A partial inversion. Just like what some remainers want done with the referendum result. Sticky.

 

A dead lion, one of three the Brexiteers are willing sacrifice for their agenda.

At last some honesty from May, there is no Brexit dividend, the NHS funding increase will be put on the taxpayer.

 

Quote

“As a country taxpayers will need to contribute a bit more,” she said. “But we will do that in a fair and balanced way. And we want to listen to people about how we do that, and the chancellor will bring forward the full set of proposals before the spending review.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jun/18/theresa-may-reiterates-proposal-fund-nhs-brexit-savings

2 hours ago, Grouse said:

Or you could ask which ones had free school meals

So you are saying there might be a correlation between those who had free school meals (and therefore most likely left school at 16), and those who voted Leave - right?

Kindly explain.  I know you are not the type to insult people, so there must be another explanation ?

29 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

So you are saying there might be a correlation between those who had free school meals (and therefore most likely left school at 16), and those who voted Leave - right?

Kindly explain.  I know you are not the type to insult people, so there must be another explanation ?

Actually, it's utter codswallop. However, since the thread has been taken over by a couple of kids. I thought I would respond accordingly.

 

Anyway, I've had a few scoops of Grouse and am feeling a little better.

 

Kindly file my earlier post in the usual place 

1 hour ago, vogie said:

Do you still use Nok and Pla the 6ft ladyboys as your minders when visiting Buakaow? ??

Pleased to hear you are on first name terms with the LB fraternity.

16 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Pleased to hear you are on first name terms with the LB fraternity.

Still buy one get one free on a Friday night?

6 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

A dead lion, one of three the Brexiteers are willing sacrifice for their agenda.

You couldn't be more wrong. We stand for their preservation. Just like Harry Kane just did against Tunisia. 

 

 

7 hours ago, CG1 Blue said:

So you are saying there might be a correlation between those who had free school meals (and therefore most likely left school at 16), and those who voted Leave - right?

Kindly explain.  I know you are not the type to insult people, so there must be another explanation ?

It's because they left at 15,at least I did.

17 hours ago, aright said:

Over 50 percent of the UK workforce is employed by SME's and SME's do not want to trade with the rest of the world, if they did they would be doing it already.

 

 

An SME, or a business more generally, can be involved in exporting by selling directly to a foreign consumer or firm, or through supply-chains. That is, an SME might sell its output to another UK-based business that itself exports

 

The proportion of SMEs that export

As the aim is to calculate the number of SMEs involved in supply chains over and above those which export directly it is first necessary to know how many SMEs are directly involved in exporting. For this, data from the ONS Annual Business Survey (ABS) is used. As this data does not include unregistered businesses they are assumed to behave in the same way as the smallest category of registered businesses. This procures an estimate of an average of 9% of small and micro (0-49 employees) and 33% of medium (50-249 employees) firms exporting. 

 

 

Proportion of SMEs which supply other businesses

Of those businesses that do not export, they will either directly supply final consumers in the UK or businesses (or both). The Small Business Survey (SBS) asks SMEs who their main customers are. Among the SME population as a whole, 38% identified other businesses as their main customer. This is a lower bound as it only captures businesses who consider other businesses to be their main customer and so does not count businesses that mainly supply consumers but also supply some businesses. These businesses in turn may or may not be exporters.  

 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524847/bis-16-230-smes-supply-chains-exporters.pdf

 

Interesting that the brexiteers want to ignore this part of the statement "with the rest of the world,", in brexit terms that means countries outside the EU.

The article I referenced analysed the activity of UK SME's and the data indicated that those that did so was predominantly to the EU with the US being the most popular for the rest of the world. Currently SME's do export to countries like Russia and China and generally to most parts of the world, but for various reasons an overwhelming majority choose not to do so.

If SME's choose not to trade with far away places, why would they start rushing to export in the event of any new deals. Brexit will only add to the current barriers to trade, not detract from them.

17 hours ago, The Renegade said:

So what is this ?

 

Why bring Brexit into it ?

 

Very few of them trade with the EU either

 

 

Wriggle wriggle.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt in saying you never read the article, the more cynical would have said you did not comprehend the article.

15 hours ago, billd766 said:

 

IMHO that will not happen, at least in my lifetime.

You may be right Bill, time will tell.

Friend of mine in Belfast tells me that they are so sick of the UK government that a reunification vote would be almost a certainty. It is a question of timing, if it did fail I think they have to wait 7 years.

As far as Gib is concerned there has already been talk of "Joint" control with the UK taking a back seat. Its a question of how you interpret giving it to the Spanish.

In both cases it would be paracetamol for the UK government.

TM has been reminded once again that the UK is a parliamentary democracy. The question now is can she whip the MP's into submission.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-final-deal-vote-lords-peers-theresa-may-defeat-parliament-commons-a8405226.html

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

TM has been reminded once again that the UK is a parliamentary democracy. The question now is can she whip the MP's into submission.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-final-deal-vote-lords-peers-theresa-may-defeat-parliament-commons-a8405226.html

I don't think it's a case of 'whipping them into submission'.

 

Seems more likely that those MPs in leave constituencies are busy working out how much they can get away with - without losing their seat at the next GE?

The latest ploy by the EU to try and keep the UK shackled to the EU

 

Straight from the remainers Bible, so it must be true.

 

Quote

Brussels is seeking to bind the UK to the European court of human rightsafter Brexit in a move likely to infuriate those in the Conservative party championing a break with the Strasbourg court.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/jun/18/brussels-seeks-to-tie-uk-to-european-human-rights-court-after-brexit

 

Can someone tell me what the European Court of Human Rights has got to do with the EU or it's institutions ?

 

1 hour ago, sandyf said:

TM has been reminded once again that the UK is a parliamentary democracy. The question now is can she whip the MP's into submission.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-final-deal-vote-lords-peers-theresa-may-defeat-parliament-commons-a8405226.html

 

Voted on by a completely unelected group of people with no responsibilty to anyone other than to themselves.

 

Many of them are ex-politicians given a courtesy title as a "reward" for serving their political parties faithfully and then kicked out by the electorate as useless and not wanted here anymore.

 

They also have the opportunity to travel first class and pick up £300 per DAY just for turning up and it is not even compulsory to do so. They enjoy fine wining and dining well subsidised at the taxpayers expense and most probably stay in good but not cheap hotels also at the taxpayers expense.

 

A good job if you can get it with no compulsory retirement and 2 days attendance in one month pays more than my (frozen) state pension a month.

I used to think a European Court was a good idea - until they supported the uk govt. in freezing the state pension of those in a few countries!  I'm a few years away from being able to claim the uk state pension - but this to me proved that the European Court was as politically motivated as the uk govt. - and no more interested in genuine justice. ☹️

3 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I used to think a European Court was a good idea - until they supported the uk govt. in freezing the state pension of those in a few countries!  I'm a few years away from being able to claim the uk state pension - but this to me proved that the European Court was as politically motivated as the uk govt. - and no more interested in genuine justice. ☹️

It probably had more to do with the terms of the case brought against the government.

 

No court considers matters not presented by the litigating parties.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

It probably had more to do with the terms of the case brought against the government.

 

No court considers matters not presented by the litigating parties.

So you think the european court (the final arbiter) was right in agreeing with the uk govt. that the pensions of those who had moved to certain countries should be frozen?

 

Where is the genuine justice in that decision??

 

It just proved that the eu court was not trustworthy, or interested in genuine justice - they supported the political 'line'....

33 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

The latest ploy by the EU to try and keep the UK shackled to the EU

 

Straight from the remainers Bible, so it must be true.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2018/jun/18/brussels-seeks-to-tie-uk-to-european-human-rights-court-after-brexit

 

Can someone tell me what the European Court of Human Rights has got to do with the EU or it's institutions ?

 

If you’d read the article you wouldn’t have asked since it clearly states the European Court of Human Rights is separate to EU institutions.

 

You’d also understand, because the article mentions it, that the EU concern is cooperation on matters of policing and security were the regards the UK remaining party to the European Convention on Human Rights (Which includes being subject to the European Court of Human Rights) a key EU court of human rights a key safeguard.

 

This is problematic for Brexit where the U.K. wishes to share police, security or any data, transfer or detain suspects across borders with the EU.

 

A point I made when you were previously ranting about the European Court of Human Rights.

15 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

I used to think a European Court was a good idea - until they supported the uk govt. in freezing the state pension of those in a few countries!  I'm a few years away from being able to claim the uk state pension - but this to me proved that the European Court was as politically motivated as the uk govt. - and no more interested in genuine justice. ☹️

Mind you, I also used to think that the eu politicians were more sensible than uk politicians - insofaras they brought in a few laws to protect workers.  Sensible, as it makes sense for politicians to do the minimum possible to 'protect' workers - if they wish to retain power.

 

As it turns out, eu politicians are equally as obtuse when they fear losing money and power ☹️.

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If you’d read the article you wouldn’t have asked since it clearly states the European Court of Human Rights is separate to EU institutions.

If you could actually read. You would have understood that I asked a question on why the EU is trying to use a Non - EU institution as leverage.

 

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

This is problematic for Brexit where the U.K. wishes to share police, security or any data, transfer or detain suspects across borders with the EU.

The ECHR is not an EU Institution so has nothing to do with the above.

 

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A point I made when you were previously ranting about the European Court of Human Rights.

You mistake me for someone else. So point it out or retract your blatant lie.

 

Not surprising when you already mistook Aaron Banks as the Leader of the Leave campaign.

 

 

 

 

19 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

So you think the european court (the final arbiter) was right in agreeing with the uk govt. that the pensions of those who had moved to certain countries should be frozen?

 

Where is the genuine justice in that decision??

 

It just proved that the eu court was not trustworthy, or interested in genuine justice - they supported the political 'line'....

It’s got nothing to do with what I think and everything to do with the arguments made won/lost in the court.

 

The ‘pensioners’ argued a case of discrimination, the government argued that U.K. pensions are paid in accordance with the law, regulations and rules and that the provisions for pension increases are entirely within the law, regulations and rules.

 

The pensioners failed to prove discrimination so lost.

 

They can of course bring a new case with better arguments.

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

EU concern is cooperation on matters of policing and security were the regards the UK remaining party to the European Convention on Human Rights

I don't understand your use of the English language here, what are you trying to say

 

The same applies to this in the same comment 

"a key EU court of human rights a key safeguard"

 

Thanks

5 minutes ago, dick dasterdly said:

Mind you, I also used to think that the eu politicians were more sensible than uk politicians -

Most, not all,  EU Politicians are failed domestic politicians.

 

Why would you think they were more sensible ?

 

Martin Schulz being a great example

 

Served for 1 year in Germany as a Mayor, was then elected as an MEP, left the European Parliament, returned to Germany and got his @ss kicked.

 

Then their is our own Nigel Farage, done nothing in domestic Politics but manage to carve out a career in the EP.

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

If you’d read the article you wouldn’t have asked since it clearly states the European Court of Human Rights is separate to EU institutions.

 

You’d also understand, because the article mentions it, that the EU concern is cooperation on matters of policing and security were the regards the UK remaining party to the European Convention on Human Rights (Which includes being subject to the European Court of Human Rights) a key EU court of human rights a key safeguard.

 

This is problematic for Brexit where the U.K. wishes to share police, security or any data, transfer or detain suspects across borders with the EU.

 

A point I made when you were previously ranting about the European Court of Human Rights.

"This is problematic for Brexit where the U.K. wishes to share police, security or any data, transfer or detain suspects across borders with the EU."

 

I suspect that as the uk is a 'key player' when it comes to security and data.  The eu are playing 'silly buggers' when trying to pretend that they will exclude the uk from security sharing....

 

It's just another eu public relations game - hoping to influence uk voters against 'leave' - that NOBODY is 'buying' ?

5 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

If you could actually read. You would have understood that I asked a question on why the EU is trying to use a Non - EU institution as leverage.

 

The ECHR is not an EU Institution so has nothing to do with the above.

 

You mistake me for someone else. So point it out or retract your blatant lie.

 

Not surprising when you already mistook Aaron Banks as the Leader of the Leave campaign.

 

 

 

 

OK you didn’t read the article and if you did you did not understand it.

 

To use one of your own phrases: Let me make it simple for you.

 

When an EU nation court approves the extradition of a suspect from the EU nation to the U.K. the court does so by first confirming the rights of the subject shall be protected.

 

The UK and the extraditing EU nation court achieve this by reference to the European Convention on Human Rights and in recognition that the European Court of Human Rights has the jurisdiction to protect the suspects rights in the UK.

 

The same goes for all the personal data exchanges that underpin police and security cooperation.