Jump to content

Johnson warns EU against any 'Napoleonic' tariffs in no-deal Brexit


snoop1130

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, 7by7 said:

David Cameron was not a Leave supporter nor campaigner.

 

In fact, he was a prominent Remainer, so, as I said, any such warnings from him would have been, and were, dismissed by Leave and it's supporters as Project Fear.

He was speaking as Prime Minister explaining what would happen, he wasnt speaking on behalf of either side 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, baboon said:

There is no 'Our Country' anymore. The UK is far too polarised for that, so neither you or I can speak on its behalf.

And stop misquoting Donald Tusk and trying to gloss over the fact. Why would you do that if convinced your cause is just? It's simply sleazy.

Oh perleeeeaaaase, I am speaking on behalf of our country, should you not chose to do so that is entirely your right, but I am not into dramatics.

I have not misquoted anybody, if you read the FT link, that is how it is written, again if you want to start playing the game of pedantics that is your choice and not mine.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, baboon said:

You are not speaking on behalf of our country.

You deliberately misquoted Donald Tusk. Other posters have pointed this out.

Calling out dishonesty is not pedantry, especially if you choose to continue to double down on your assertions.

 

I have posted the link, what else can I do, oh I know block you. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

 

On the other side, the electorate are tired of 'parliamentary democracy'

 

The electorate being tired does not mean anything, the electorate are not in a position to make decisions and the people that are there to make decisions were put in place by the electorate.

Are you now trying to say the electorate got it wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/6/2019 at 7:22 PM, vogie said:

but what is apparent is that leavers are doing what is best for our country,

And what exactly does that entail?

 

There may have been some credibility had a white paper been published prior to the vote.

In Scotland they published a 650 page white paper prior to the referendum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/7/2019 at 3:17 PM, sanemax said:

It was stated quite clearly by David  Cameroon that leave meant completely leaving and that if the UK wanted to join a common market or free trade deals or whatever, the Uk would have to do that after we had left 

I have to assume you thought it was fact.

Haven't the courts just ruled in favour of Boris on the grounds that for hundreds of years it has been accepted that campaigning politicians can effectively say what people want to hear, fact does not come into it.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sandyf said:

I have to assume you thought it was fact.

Haven't the courts just ruled in favour of Boris on the grounds that for hundreds of years it has been accepted that campaigning politicians can effectively say what people want to hear, fact does not come into it.

I have no idea what the UK Courts have just ruled  , you will have to ask someone else 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Loiner said:

There was never any intention to have two deals - one to Leave, followed by another to make trade arrangements.

Of course there was, Article 50 specifies that a withdrawal agreement should be put in place before membership comes to an end. The withdrawal agreement deals with social and financial matters and has nothing to do with trade.

Theresa May in her usual style tried to circumvent the regulations in an attempt to put it all under one umbrella. When the EU pointed out that was not the Article 50 that the UK had signed up to, the brexiteers as usual blamed the EU.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, sanemax said:

I have no idea what the UK Courts have just ruled  , you will have to ask someone else 

But you are prepared to believe David Cameron.

 

Laying out their reasons for the decision on Wednesday, Lady Justice Rafferty and Mr Justice Supperstone said: “The problem of false statements in the course of political campaigning is not new and has not been overlooked by parliament. For at least the last 120 or so years parliament has legislated to control certain false campaign statements which it considers an illegal practice.”

 

But the laws do not cover arguments used in political campaigns like the 2016 EU referendum, the judges found.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-court-latest-brexit-lies-high-court-end-tory-leadership-contest-a8985876.html

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, nontabury said:

 Yes they did get it wrong, in as much as they were lied to, and mislead by

some politicians who stood on a mandate to respect and honour the People’s Democratic decision to leave this so called union. Who then went on to vote against that same Democratic decion in the HOC.

 

So you accept the electorate got it wrong in the general election but claim there is no chance whatsoever they got it wrong in the referendum through similar lies and misleading politicians.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr Rycroft said there are around “16,000 civil servants whose jobs are dedicated to Brexit-related issues”, in what he calls “an unprecedented situation” and “the biggest exercise across Government we’ve seen over the last few decades”.

 

“The planning I think is in good shape,” he said. “But of course what that doesn’t mean is that there won’t be an impact from Brexit, and particularly a no-deal Brexit, because that is a very major change and it would be a very abrupt change to our major trading relationship.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-no-deal-risk-richard-rycroft-civil-servant-bbc-panorama-a8992256.html

 

The public would rather scrap Brexit or hold a second referendum than face a chaotic no-deal at Halloween if the new prime minister cannot strike a fresh agreement, a poll has found.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-cancel-second-referendum-no-deal-halloween-next-prime-minister-boris-johnson-a8991351.html

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.











×
×
  • Create New...