Britons would now vote to stay in EU, want second referendum: poll

[anon676545345]

14 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

Unfortunately I have to tell you, and it does not need any idiotic Insults, that you have no idea about economics.
That the Uk is an energy self-sufficient country, is currently nonsense.
Since 2004, the UK has been a net importer of Energy.
And sorry, that pineapple example was for 4 graders.
And I'm not sure if you understand that, because you're right on the export side,
but the UK imports more than it exports!
Are you aware of that?

 

Can you not read? I didn't say the UK was energy self sufficient, I said the UK is not resource poor and that we produce most our oil from our North Sea fields which we do 72% of our oil comes from those reserves. We're actually forecast to become an oil exporter. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-26/make-room-opec-the-u-k-is-set-to-become-net-crude-oil-exporter

We've also got huge untapped reserves of the coast of the Falkland Islands, so your claim that we're resource poor is as ludicrous as you waffle about interest rates. Have you noticed the trend, your wrong all the time, every time, so do you not think you could be wrong about Brexit?

[tomacht8]

26 minutes ago, Chartist said:

 

Can you not read? I didn't say the UK was energy self sufficient, I said the UK is not resource poor and that we produce most our oil from our North Sea fields which we do 72% of our oil comes from those reserves. We're actually forecast to become an oil exporter. 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-02-26/make-room-opec-the-u-k-is-set-to-become-net-crude-oil-exporter

We've also got huge untapped reserves of the coast of the Falkland Islands, so your claim that we're resource poor is as ludicrous as you waffle about interest rates. Have you noticed the trend, your wrong all the time, every time, so do you not think you could be wrong about Brexit?

Okay, last good-natured try.
The UK has a trade deficit. It imports more than it exports.
Even if you include the financial services.
Now explain how a loss of purchasing power of the British pound of about 20% should be positive here?
In addition to the fact that all UK land, houses, stocks are worth less in international currency comparison.
Or do you really mean that Brexit will encourage UK exports overgrows the Import with additional trade barriers after Brexit?
Rather, I see that pigs learn to fly.

Edited January 13, 2019 by tomacht8

[anon676545345]

8 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

Okay, last good-natured try.
The UK has a trade deficit. It imports more than it exports.
Even if you include the financial services.
Now explain how a loss of purchasing power of the British pound of about 20% should be positive here?
In addition to the fact that all UK land, houses, stocks are worth less in international currency comparison.
Or do you really mean that Brexit will encourage UK exports overgrows the Import with additional trade barriers after Brexit?
Rather, I see that pigs learn to fly.

 

Again you're showing a lack of understanding you're describing a trade deficit which in the long run is bad for the economy, particularly the manufacturing sector. When a country is importing more goods from foreign companies it drives down prices and domestic companies can't compete which causes job losses, fewer goods are produced and the trade deficit grows. 

 

The decrease in the value of the £ is allowing UK companies to compete again, this increases the number of jobs as shown by the rise in employment since the referendum. 

[tomacht8]

1 minute ago, Chartist said:

 

Again you're showing a lack of understanding you're describing a trade deficit which in the long run is bad for the economy, particularly the manufacturing sector. When a country is importing more goods from foreign companies it drives down prices and domestic companies can't compete which causes job losses, fewer goods are produced and the trade deficit grows. 

 

The decrease in the value of the £ is allowing UK companies to compete again, this increases the number of jobs as shown by the rise in employment since the referendum. 

I can agree.
But the UK Exports will not overgrow the Imports with additional trade barriers after Brexit 
in a 10- 15  year time window frame.
If you just look at the financial services, that's the golden egg the UK is sitting on.
With Brexit, the UK will lose this passport rights. Why should the EU allow a third country to tap off the cream here? Then take a look at how long it will take for the UK to produce products that will become more competitive in international competition. With the outflow of research and development and without the most unbureaucratic access to the biggest, at present, market of the world aka your neighbors. The economic dream that you describe will certainly not arrive in the next 15 years. There are completely different, much more economically powerful countries (USA, China and the resource-rich country Russia) which will spit into your Brexit soup.


[nontabury]

5 hours ago, AlexRich said:

I would have settled on May's deal personally, but since it looks like there are those determined to cause as much destruction as possible with a no deal Brexit I'm now happy with a second vote ... time to smash extreme Brexiteers ... looking forward to parliament taking back control next week. 

As an ardent remoaners,I’m sure you would happlly accept May’s deal. For exactly the same reason that Brexiteers reject it. The so called deal would result in us remaining in the E.u, with no guarantee that we would be able to leave. So not Brexit at all.

[nontabury]

4 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 Ethnic cleansing of English people in London.

 

Yaxley-Lennon being responsible for the exposure and arrest of grooming gangs.

 

Everything you've written about the Second World War (my dad, who volunteered in 1939, would be turning in his grave to read such tosh from someone claiming to be British).

 

Unless you are in your late 80s, your mum seeing Zeppelins over London during the Great War.

 

The list goes on and on!

 

And what % of the population of London is made up by Native Brits. Or should I rephrase that as people who can trace their British ancestry back a mere 70 yrs.

  And did not the Labour Party, in the Blair era, purposely encourage immigration, with the intent to water down the opposition, by encouraging 

those immigrants, who would be more inclined to vote Labour.

 

[anon676545345]

18 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

I can agree.
But the UK Exports will not overgrow the Imports with additional trade barriers after Brexit 
in a 10- 15  year time window frame.
If you just look at the financial services, that's the golden egg the UK is sitting on.
With Brexit, the UK will lose this passport rights. Why should the EU allow a third country to tap off the cream here? Then take a look at how long it will take for the UK to produce products that will become more competitive in international competition. With the outflow of research and development and without the most unbureaucratic access to the biggest, at present, market of the world aka your neighbors. The economic dream that you describe will certainly not arrive in the next 15 years. There are completely different, much more economically powerful countries (USA, China and the resource-rich country Russia) which will spit into your Brexit soup.


 

Financial services though they represent a large portion of UK exports 80% don't provide many jobs outside of London. That aside if we lose our pass porting rites companies will move offices to Europe not their entire business as they benefit from UK regulations and tax havens which aren't easily replaced. As an example EU countries account for 11% of Lloyds business they've relocated some staff to Brussels to enable them to continue operating in the EU, however they're still a UK company. The EU has tariffs on goods but not on services, so these companies won't be affected by tariffs.

 

The EU does have tariffs on goods but you've already answered this question yourself there's a trade deficit they export more goods to us than we do to them. This combined with the fact that services are unaffected by the single market gives the UK a serious negotiating advantage, we will continue to trade with them and they with us. 

 

The EU is protectionist and places high tariffs to protect manufacturing and agriculture, these tariffs mean we're paying 20% over world prices. Without these barriers the UK can source materials cheaper from outside the EU reducing costs for manufacturers and allowing us to increase exports to nations outside the EU which already account for 56% of our exports. 

[AlexRich]

33 minutes ago, nontabury said:

As an ardent remoaners,I’m sure you would happlly accept May’s deal. For exactly the same reason that Brexiteers reject it. The so called deal would result in us remaining in the E.u, with no guarantee that we would be able to leave. So not Brexit at all.

The so-called Backstop debate is the biggest load of tosh ... it doesn't have to be entered into, but if it is we end up with benefits but don't have to pay for them. There's no way the EU would want that forever ... so it's a nonsense argument. Those that want no deal on WTO may end up with zilch ... 

[tomacht8]

1 minute ago, Chartist said:

 

Financial services though they represent a large portion of UK exports 80% don't provide many jobs outside of London. That aside if we lose our pass porting rites companies will move offices to Europe not their entire business as they benefit from UK regulations and tax havens which aren't easily replaced. As an example EU countries account for 11% of Lloyds business they've relocated some staff to Brussels to enable them to continue operating in the EU, however they're still a UK company. The EU has tariffs on goods but not on services, so these companies won't be affected by tariffs.

 

The EU does have tariffs on goods but you've already answered this question yourself there's a trade deficit they export more goods to us than we do to them. This combined with the fact that services are unaffected by the single market gives the UK a serious negotiating advantage, we will continue to trade with them and they with us. 

 

The EU is protectionist and places high tariffs to protect manufacturing and agriculture, these tariffs mean we're paying 20% over world prices. Without these barriers the UK can source materials cheaper from outside the EU reducing costs for manufacturers and allowing us to increase exports to nations outside the EU which already account for 56% of our exports. 

You are wrong.
"The EU has tariffs on goods but not on services, so these companies won't be affected by tariffs."
Post a source here that proves that.

[7by7]

33 minutes ago, nontabury said:

And what % of the population of London is made up by Native Brits. Or should I rephrase that as people who can trace their British ancestry back a mere 70 yrs.

That would exclude @evadgib's favourite Facebook source Pat Condell; an Irish immigrant born in Dublin, and the aforementioned Yaxley-Lennon whose parents were both Irish immigrants.

 

It would also exclude a large slice of NW2, NW10 etc. for the same reason; Irish.

 

But I suspect you only want to exclude those whose skin isn't white.

 

33 minutes ago, nontabury said:

And did not the Labour Party, in the Blair era, purposely encourage immigration, with the intent to water down the opposition, by encouraging 

those immigrants, who would be more inclined to vote Labour.

Yes, under Blair the criteria for work permits and student visas were relaxed somewhat, but these are temporary migrants. Blair made the criteria, and cost, of permanent immigration, especially family immigration, both harder and more expensive.

 

He did allow nationals of the Eastern European states who had recently joined the EU the same rights in the UK as other EEA nationals. But as the only EU nationals who can vote in UK General Elections are the Irish, your assertion he did so to get more Labour voters is rubbish.

 

 

Edited January 13, 2019 by 7by7
Typo

[anon676545345]

9 minutes ago, tomacht8 said:

You are wrong.
"The EU has tariffs on goods but not on services, so these companies won't be affected by tariffs."
Post a source here that proves that.

 

"Looking at service industries, all barriers to trade are NTBs. There are no tariffs on services". 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44291103

[tomacht8]

8 minutes ago, Chartist said:

 

"Looking at service industries, all barriers to trade are NTBs. There are no tariffs on services". 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44291103

Nice, that is from 31 May 2018.

I wonder why so many financial institutions are building their branches in Europe (Paris, Amsterdam, Frankfurt, etc.).
The EU data laws compel companies to keep their EU (rest 27) key datasets in the EU.
The topic is quite tricky, but again the EU will treat the UK as a third country.
Why should we pass on EU financial data to Turkey or Nigeria?

Edited January 13, 2019 by tomacht8

[7by7]

Most farmers are considered to be Brexiteers; but this from the NFU, NFU Scotland, NFU Cymru and the Ulster Farmers Union: Unions warn of ‘catastrophic impacts’ from no-deal Brexit

Quote

What is the downside of a no-deal Brexit?

• Exports – the UK could face a trade embargo on shipments of animals and animal products, as it would not be listed as an EU-approved exporter.
• Import tariffs – the UK government is expected to slash import tariffs on food from the EU and other third countries to contain food inflation.
• Export tariffs – the UK could face tariffs of 27% on chicken, 46% on lamb and 65% on beef destined for EU markets.
• Inputs – supplies of things such as fertilisers, plant protection products, feed and machinery parts could be disrupted by new border controls.
• Organic produce – this would not be recognised by the EU until certifying bodies such as the Soil Association were approved, which could take nine months.

 

Then there's this from the pro Brexit Daily Mail: No-deal Brexit would cause GDP to shrink by up to 8 per cent and put thousands of jobs at risks, CBI boss warns.

Quote

A no-deal Brexit would cause GDP (gross domestic product) to shrink by up to 8 per cent and put thousands of jobs at risk according to the Confederation of British Industry's (CBI) chief Carolyn Fairbairn.

The business body has warned that Brexit would have profound economic consequences on the UK and has urged MPs to back Theresa May's deal.

The group described the deal as a 'solution' businesses can work with as it delivers a transition period and avoids a 'hugely damaging cliff edge'.

It highlighted that if parliament does not agree with Mrs May then it must immediately outline its plan to avert a no deal and secure British jobs.

 

Those here who continuously tout WTO terms as some sort of magic bullet which will solve all  should read this: What trading on WTO terms alone really means for Britain

Quote

Even without the chaos of ‘no deal’, trading only on WTO terms post Brexit would mean substantial disruption to supply chains, with new tariffs, regulatory barriers and customs checks applying on day one of Brexit, explains Richard Barfield. Three sectors with the most jobs at risk are administration and support services, wholesale trade, and legal and accounting services.

I strongly advise also reading this report, which the author links to in the above.

 

Here in the UK the only people who seriously consider a 'No Deal' scenario to be the best option are those whose desire to leave the EU at all costs means they care nothing for the effects on the UK, our economy and our citizens.

[tomacht8]

4 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

Most farmers are considered to be Brexiteers; but this from the NFU, NFU Scotland, NFU Cymru and the Ulster Farmers Union: Unions warn of ‘catastrophic impacts’ from no-deal Brexit

 

Then there's this from the pro Brexit Daily Mail: No-deal Brexit would cause GDP to shrink by up to 8 per cent and put thousands of jobs at risks, CBI boss warns.

 

Those here who continuously tout WTO terms as some sort of magic bullet which will solve all  should read this: What trading on WTO terms alone really means for Britain

I strongly advise also reading this report, which the author links to in the above.

 

Here in the UK the only people who seriously consider a 'No Deal' scenario to be the best option are those whose desire to leave the EU at all costs means they care nothing for the effects on the UK, our economy and our citizens.

Thanks for the links.
But also the UK forget what damage they have done to Europe.
 

[nontabury]

4 hours ago, 7by7 said:

White English people do get social housing in all London boroughs; as several friends of mine can testify! 

 

Immigrants do not go to the top of the list as social housing is one of the many public funds which they are banned from receiving until they have lived here for at least 5 years and have ILR.

 

That may be what you and your mates believe; but go to any Legion or ex Servicemen's club and ask; you'll be given a different story.

 

 Yaxley-Lennon (tell us, why does he need so many aliases?) neither exposed nor brought any grooming scandal to the public attention. Neither did Griffin.

 

It was whistleblowers in various social service departments, such as Jayne Seymour in Rotherham, who are the heroes for exposing this scandal.

 

All the convicted violent thug and fraudster Yaxley-Lennon does is use the suffering of the victims to promote his own agenda. 

 

You may think trading on the suffering of innocents for self promotion to be acceptable; most people find it abhorrent.

 

I do hope as an ardent remainer,that you are not trying to muddy the waters. In that you are not including E.u citizens, as being immigrants. Because I can assure you they can,and do frequently go to the top of the housing list in Lincolnshire.

 

Requirements for social housing.

• Residence in Lincolnshire for the last 6 months; or
• Previous residence within Lincolnshire for 6 out of the last 12 months or 3 out of the last 5 years; or
• Born in Lincolnshire; or
• Permanent employment; or
• A need to move to receive support and this support cannot be provided within the current location; or
• A full homelessness duty has been accepted by a Lincolnshire Housing Authority

You will notice that one of the requirements, is to have been born in Lincolnshire, however I personally know of one such person who was refused social housing on this ground.

 Although I am happy to report that I also know of a local person who recently obtained social housing after being on the list for 16yrs, during which time he has suffered two heart attacks, while witnessing none British citizens jump the so called queue.

 

 You are correct that in stating that Jayne Seymore helped to expose the Muslim grooming gangs in Rotherham, where 1,500 young white girls were sexually abused. This was in spite of all obstacles and threats aimed at her by the P.C. crowd ( authorities) Who preferred to ignore what was taking place. At the moment only 7 have been successfully convicted out of 430 suspects.

The same of course could be said of the Muslim grooming gangs in Huddersfield, Rochdale, Bristol, Oxford, Peterborough, Aylsbury, Etc,etc.etc,

 

Just a few Muslim organizations have come out to acknowledge the problem in the Muslim communities, including the Quilliam Foundation, whose founder and leader Maajid Nawaz was very happy to share a platform with Tommy Robinson. Perhaps that is because he has an open mind and is a none bigot????.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[OneEyedPie]

My wife and I both voted leave and will again vote leave if the need arise.  I'm not in agreement with a second referendum as it's just playing about and wasting valuable time.

[AlexRich]

22 minutes ago, OneEyedPie said:

My wife and I both voted leave and will again vote leave if the need arise.  I'm not in agreement with a second referendum as it's just playing about and wasting valuable time.

If everyone votes as they did before Leave will lose, as too many are now dead. I’m afraid the will of the people is no longer for Brexit, and certainly not for a no deal Brexit, something that no Leave politician campaigned for.

[OneEyedPie]

8 minutes ago, AlexRich said:

I’m afraid the will of the people is no longer for Brexit, and certainly not for a no deal Brexit, something that no Leave politician campaigned for.

Nobody believed the UK would vote for Brexit last time around.  You assume far too much.

[AlexRich]

12 minutes ago, OneEyedPie said:

Nobody believed the UK would vote for Brexit last time around.  You assume far too much.

If there is a second vote the Brexit game is up ... the demographics have changed too much, so even core Brexiteer numbers are not enough.

[OneEyedPie]

Just now, AlexRich said:

If there is a second vote the Brexit game is up ... the demographics have changed too much, so even core Brexiteer numbers are not enough.

100% guesswork.

[AlexRich]

9 minutes ago, OneEyedPie said:

100% guesswork.

 

100% guesswork? Not according to UGOV founder Kellner?

[OneEyedPie]

We had pollsters predicting remain last time and they got it wrong.

[tebee]

3 hours ago, tomacht8 said:

You are wrong.
"The EU has tariffs on goods but not on services, so these companies won't be affected by tariffs."
Post a source here that proves that.

Actually he's right, customs tariffs don't cover services as there is nothing physical to tax. 

 

It's the compliance and licencing that first costs money and secondly restricts your ability to operate in another country.  

 

Interesting fact - about half services trade is transport, not finalanal services as you might expect.

 

To take road transport as an example - post brexit there will be a very limited number of permits for UK drivers to deliver loads in the Eu. Buying those permits will cost money and complying with will have costs. British transport companies will be at a disadvantage in Europe. It will cost more to deliver out exports. 

[7by7]

2 hours ago, nontabury said:

I do hope as an ardent remainer,that you are not trying to muddy the waters. In that you are not including E.u citizens, as being immigrants. Because I can assure you they can,and do frequently go to the top of the housing list in Lincolnshire.

 

Requirements for social housing.

• Residence in Lincolnshire for the last 6 months; or
• Previous residence within Lincolnshire for 6 out of the last 12 months or 3 out of the last 5 years; or
• Born in Lincolnshire; or
• Permanent employment; or
• A need to move to receive support and this support cannot be provided within the current location; or
• A full homelessness duty has been accepted by a Lincolnshire Housing Authority

You will notice that one of the requirements, is to have been born in Lincolnshire, however I personally know of one such person who was refused social housing on this ground.

 Although I am happy to report that I also know of a local person who recently obtained social housing after being on the list for 16yrs, during which time he has suffered two heart attacks, while witnessing none British citizens jump the so called queue.

Not all EU nationals in the UK qualify for social housing; see here for those that do. Of course, no Brexiteer will ever admit that the same or similar help is available to British citizens living in other EU member states!

 

I would be interested to know where you got your list of requirements from; social housing is the responsibilities of boroughs and district councils, not county councils. Here are those for Lincoln City Council.

 

I cannot comment on your friend's experience, but must assume that he was not living on the streets for that 16 years! Like everywhere else, priority in Lincoln is given to those with the greatest need. As a housing officer once said to me and my wife, once we qualified and after we had been on the list for several years; "I accept this is not ideal, but at least you are al together under one roof. I have families separated in bed and breakfasts who come first." 

 

2 hours ago, nontabury said:

 You are correct that in stating that Jayne Seymore helped to expose the Muslim grooming gangs in Rotherham, where 1,500 young white girls were sexually abused. This was in spite of all obstacles and threats aimed at her by the P.C. crowd ( authorities) Who preferred to ignore what was taking place. At the moment only 7 have been successfully convicted out of 430 suspects.

The same of course could be said of the Muslim grooming gangs in Huddersfield, Rochdale, Bristol, Oxford, Peterborough, Aylsbury, Etc,etc.etc,

I am the first to admit the whole scandal is shameful; as are the abuse scandals involving media personalities, politicians, the Anglican church, the Catholic church etc. For example, Child abuse inquiry: School 'reputations put before victims'

 

Of course, people like Yaxley-Lennon and his supporters are not interested in the abuse of children by non Muslims and the many cover ups of same; they can't use it to push their own agendas. As I said earlier; some may think Yaxley-Lennon's trading on the suffering of innocents for self promotion to be acceptable; most people find it abhorrent.

 

By the way, a lot more than 7 of the members of the Muslim gangs have been convicted! In Rotherham so far 13 men have been convicted and the National Crime Agency are seeking 423 more. More have been convicted elsewhere, for example: Huddersfield grooming: Twenty guilty of campaign of rape and abuse.

 

How does that compare with convictions for abuse by Christian priests and staff in Christian run children's homes?

 

2 hours ago, nontabury said:

Just a few Muslim organizations have come out to acknowledge the problem in the Muslim communities, including the Quilliam Foundation, whose founder and leader Maajid Nawaz was very happy to share a platform with Tommy Robinson. Perhaps that is because he has an open mind and is a none bigot????.

Not a few, but many Muslim organisations in the UK have condemned the grooming and rape of young girls by Muslim men. For example, from June 2013: Muslim leaders condemn child sex grooming

 

Nawaz was happy to share a platform with Yaxley-Lennon in 2013 as it suited his purpose at the time. Yaxley-Lennon was happy to do the same because, by his own admission, he was paid a considerable sum of money to do so. Tommy Robinson, Former EDL Leader, Claims Quilliam Paid Him To Quit Far-Right Group

Quote

Tommy Robinson claims he was paid thousands of pounds by the Quilliam Foundation to leave the English Defence League in a deal the anti-extremism think-tank coordinated so they could take "credit" for his resignation.

 Their relationship didn't last long, though: Extremists Storm Quilliam Office

Quote

PRESS RELEASE

02/05/2017

Quilliam was victim to extremist Tommy Robinson and alt-right Rebel media’s George Llewelyn-John trespassing in our office using aggressive and bullying behaviour today, after they barged in to our London address, verbally harassing and physically intimidating our staff.

Tommy proceeded to abuse and bully junior staff, failing to leave the premises when asked, eventually being escorted off-site by the police. Having arrived with a cameraman from the alt-right Rebel Media, George Llewelyn-John, they hounded Quilliam staff and repeatedly refused to have a reasoned discussion

 

Edited January 13, 2019 by 7by7
Typo

[nontabury]

4 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 

 

By the way, a lot more than 7 of the members of Muslim gang have been convicted! One example: Huddersfield grooming: Twenty guilty of campaign of rape and abuse. That's just one case; do some research and you'll find that a lot more of these animals are behind bars. More than the others, Catholic priests etc.

 

 

 

 

 I don’t have the time or inclination to discuss all the points you raise, especially as you have such a closed mind. And more importantly, it’s not directly related to Brexit.

 But you have made one glaring mistake. Those 7 members of a Muslim grooming gang, are those convicted IN Rotherham. Where 1500 cases of white non Muslim girls were groomed by Muslims. Mainly those from a Pakistani background.

[Nigel Garvie]

27 minutes ago, OneEyedPie said:

We had pollsters predicting remain last time and they got it wrong.

Yes the bookies got it wrong also, but in some key surveys Leave were in the lead 2 weeks before the vote. Needless to say the pollsters have analysed what happened in great detail, and one major issue was the disparity between online and phone survey results. I hardly imagine they are making the same mistake again, would you if it was your job? How often we are told no one predicted Trump's victory, but in fact HC "won" by 3 million votes, the polls were right on that. I do detect in the last week's posts that Brexiteers are getting increasingly strident, and at the same time decreasingly confident, I would not wish to deny you any comfort you can find, but it may not be well founded.

[Spidey]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

By the way, a lot more than 7 of the members of the Muslim gangs have been convicted! In Rotherham so far 13 men have been convicted and the National Crime Agency are seeking 423 more. More have been convicted elsewhere, for example: Huddersfield grooming: Twenty guilty of campaign of rape and abuse.

Very true and many more continue unfettered due to the police being PC. Very reluctant to investigate such horrendous crimes when committed by ethnic minorities, the vast majority being of Pakistani decent.

 

I reported such a gang to my local police, their activities were common knowledge, only to be told that my action may be seen as "race hate". The gang continues to abuse teenage white girls to this day.

 

However, I really don't see why people are talking about this in this thread. Completely off topic. Not one of these rapists and abusers came to the UK via the EU. Leaving the EU will not stem the tide of these people entering the UK. Not even by one. A non issue for Brexit.

[Scott]

Please stay on topic.   Enough with the diversions.  

 

[melvinmelvin]

 

Deal

 

for which day/date is decision(s) on May's deal scheduled?

 

 

[Grouse]

Just now, melvinmelvin said:

 

Deal

 

for which day/date is decision(s) on May's deal scheduled?

 

 

Tomorrow U.K. Time ????