No-deal Brexit will be stopped, Hammond says

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, vinny41 said:

Dominic Grieve & Phillip Hammond's Lies Exposed Over Claims A WTO Brexit Was Not Discussed In 2016

 

 

Most people I know would have listened to both sides before they  their Voted

Who exactly discussed the WTO with whom, certainly not Boris Johnson, he thought Gatt 24 was a get out of jail card, but hadn't even read it properly.

 

Many had absolutely no idea what leaving meant and did what others suggested. My son openly admits he went along with his mother in law rather than me, now him, his MiL and the rest of the family regret their decision.

[ivor bigun]

Who exactly discussed the WTO with whom, certainly not Boris Johnson, he thought Gatt 24 was a get out of jail card, but hadn't even read it properly.

 

Many had absolutely no idea what leaving meant and did what others suggested. My son openly admits he went along with his mother in law rather than me, now him, his MiL and the rest of the family regret their decision.

My daughter and her husband voted stay ,but now their eyes are open and they would vote leave.

Ps whats a MiL ?

 

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

[Expattaff1308]

Check out the Liars on Change Britain (Google it)

Edited August 18, 2019 by Expattaff1308

[nauseus]

10 hours ago, damascase said:

Ohh, but you wouldn’t recognize it anymore - it is a totally diffeent world now........

Maybe you wouldn’t. 

[nauseus]

7 hours ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

We need properly costed options before executing a plan not hearsay and back of fag packet calculations , pickled with lies and dark manipulations. Now we have a much clearer vision of what Brexit would mean what is wrong with putting it back yo the British people. If all you Leavers think it is a popular as you seem to think then you have nothing to worry about.  

Sounds like a repeat of the reminer favourite "They didn't know what they were voting for" to me.

[nauseus]

4 hours ago, DannyCarlton said:

Promises don't pay the bills. Promises from political parties have no weight in British law. If it did, most British politicians throught history would have been locked up. In America, Trump would now be serving a thousand life sentences. Extremely naive for anyone to expect a politician to keep his promise.

 

By British law the referendum was advisory. GB is a parliamentary democracy, which is why, after the referendum, parliament needed to vote to invoke Article 50. If it had been voted down, that would have been the end of it. Nothing you, or any other howling Brexiteer, could have done about it. Parliament has voted 3 times on May's deal, parliamentary democracy, why not twice on a referendum? Nothing much changed between the votes on May's deal, a great deal has changed since the referendum, 3 years ago.

Parliament approved The European Union Referendum Act 2015. Just once. Passed.

 

Parliament approved the triggering of Article 50 with the. The European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 Just once. Passed.

 

Parliament voted to enable The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. Just once. Passed.

 

Parliament voted against the proposed (draft) Withdrawal Agreement and it FAILED 3 TIMES in 2018/19. Parliament has voted 3 times on May's deal because it is BAD and keeps FAILING.

 

Nothing much has changed in 3 years because we are still in the EU!

 

I hope this helps - you obviously need some assistance.

[nauseus]

44 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Who exactly discussed the WTO with whom, certainly not Boris Johnson, he thought Gatt 24 was a get out of jail card, but hadn't even read it properly.

 

Many had absolutely no idea what leaving meant and did what others suggested. My son openly admits he went along with his mother in law rather than me, now him, his MiL and the rest of the family regret their decision.

One family is not many. But just for balance, many of my extended family have changed their minds too and want the UK to leave now. 

[vogie]

4 minutes ago, nauseus said:

One family is not many. But just for balance, many of my extended family have changed their minds too and want the UK to leave now. 

Maybe they are just telling him that to pacify him, I know I would.????

[transam]

2 hours ago, sandyf said:

More garbage.

In your fantasy democracy, jurors have never voted the wrong way.

True, reminds me of yourself sunbeam....????

[evadgib]

3 hours ago, sandyf said:

More garbage.

In your fantasy democracy, jurors have never voted the wrong way.

If a trial goes the wrong way the jury can hardly be blamed.

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, vogie said:

Maybe they are just telling him that to pacify him, I know I would.????

Of course you would think something like that, reality wouldn't come into it.

The company he works for merged with a company in Dublin and no deal will probably mean the Sheffield operation closing down and relocating to Dublin.

[sandyf]

7 minutes ago, evadgib said:

If a trial goes the wrong way the jury can hardly be blamed.

I don't think anyone is blaming those that voted to leave on the evidence presented.

i think some blame can be attributed to those that refuse to acknowledge that the evidence has changed.

[sandyf]

2 hours ago, ivor bigun said:

My daughter and her husband voted stay ,but now their eyes are open and they would vote leave.

Ps whats a MiL ?

 

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

I wouldn't dispute that in the slightest, many from both sides of the fence will have changed their position on various aspects of the whole situation.

Obviously there is only one way to find out how many and which way.

 

MiL = abbreviation of previous reference to mother in law.

[evadgib]

8 minutes ago, sandyf said:

I don't think anyone is blaming those that voted to leave on the evidence presented.

i think some blame can be attributed to those that refuse to acknowledge that the evidence has changed.

Leaving (full umbilical severance) is the ultimate goal and nothing will change that. Reform would have been welcome but any that come will be too little for the 27 and far too late for UK.

 

It isn't as if we haven't told 'em.

 

Edited August 18, 2019 by evadgib

[DannyCarlton]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Parliament approved The European Union Referendum Act 2015. Just once. Passed.

 

Parliament approved the triggering of Article 50 with the. The European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017 Just once. Passed.

 

Parliament voted to enable The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. Just once. Passed.

 

Parliament voted against the proposed (draft) Withdrawal Agreement and it FAILED 3 TIMES in 2018/19. Parliament has voted 3 times on May's deal because it is BAD and keeps FAILING.

 

Nothing much has changed in 3 years because we are still in the EU!

 

I hope this helps - you obviously need some assistance.

Thanks for making my point, a referendum has no weight unless it is passed by parliament. This is because it is advisory not mandatory. What would have happened if parliament had voted against triggering Article 50?

[ivor bigun]

I wouldn't dispute that in the slightest, many from both sides of the fence will have changed their position on various aspects of the whole situation.
Obviously there is only one way to find out how many and which way.
 
MiL = abbreviation of previous reference to mother in law.

Thanks for letting me know what a mil was,thought perhaps it was some new sort of sex.lol

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[nauseus]

2 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

Thanks for making my point, a referendum has no weight unless it is passed by parliament. This is because it is advisory not mandatory. What would have happened if parliament had voted against triggering Article 50?

The referendum was not widely described as being merely advisory, so the referendum result carried plenty of democratic weight with the voters, at least. I know that, legally and technically, UK referenda are advisory by default but this result put constitutional and moral pressure onto Parliament, which had both allowed the referendum in the first place, and accepted the result of it later, resulting in the series of acts described. If Parliament had ignored the result completely, then there was a high risk and likelihood of a severe public backlash, such has not been seen in recent UK history. The majority of MPs seem to have been aware enough to recognise that, at least.

 

An agreement for an orderly withdrawal is expected of the EU, as well as the UK, in their own Article 50, after negotiations of up to 2 years. But the success of any reasonably fair negotiation may expect some degree of compromise by both sides, not just capitulation by one of them. That is the problem now.     

 

[DannyCarlton]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

The referendum was not widely described as being merely advisory, so the referendum result carried plenty of democratic weight with the voters, at least. I know that, legally and technically, UK referenda are advisory by default but this result put constitutional and moral pressure onto Parliament, which had both allowed the referendum in the first place, and accepted the result of it later, resulting in the series of acts described. If Parliament had ignored the result completely, then there was a high risk and likelihood of a severe public backlash, such has not been seen in recent UK history. The majority of MPs seem to have been aware enough to recognise that, at least.

 

An agreement for an orderly withdrawal is expected of the EU, as well as the UK, in their own Article 50, after negotiations of up to 2 years. But the success of any reasonably fair negotiation may expect some degree of compromise by both sides, not just capitulation by one of them. That is the problem now.     

 

It didn't need to be described a advisory all referendums are. No constitutional pressure on parliament. It has precedent.

 

Severe public backlash? Howling brexiteers over egg this point constantly. Do you remember Nigel rallying the Great British Public for his "Jarrow March"? All I can remember from the march was a sad little bunch of drowned rats stood shivering in a field when Our Lord and Saviour, Nigel turned up in his Range Rover to cheer them on. Severe public backlash indeed!

 

From the point of 2 years of meaningful negotiations with the EU, they did take place. Sensible people, even before the referendum, realised that the EU held all the cards and were prepared to use them. Getting a preferential deal for the UK was never going to happen. Personally, I think that May did OK, given the hand she had to play with. I'm convinced that, no matter who sat at the table on the UK's side, would have come back with the same deal.

 

It will be interesting to see how Boris gets on this week. I am willing to bet that once Cummings' spin on the negotiations is removed the deal essentialy won't change.

[aright]

5 hours ago, sandyf said:

More garbage.

In your fantasy democracy, jurors have never voted the wrong way.

At least in my democracy people get to vote, unlike yours.

Remind me what part I played in the election appointment of the new Head of Commission and how many people were on the ballot paper.

[DannyCarlton]

1 minute ago, aright said:

At least in my democracy people get to vote, unlike yours.

Remind me what part I played in the election appointment of the new Head of Commission and how many people were on the ballot paper.

Did you vote for Boris to become Prime Minister?

[ThaiBunny]

Just now, DannyCarlton said:

Did you vote for Boris to become Prime Minister?

I voted for the local MP. Boris didn't stand in my constituency

[Jip99]

2 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

Did you vote for Boris to become Prime Minister?

 

 

In the UK one never votes for the PM..... the party decides that.

[DannyCarlton]

1 minute ago, ThaiBunny said:

I voted for the local MP. Boris didn't stand in my constituency

You didn't answer the question. Yes or no will do. Boris wasn't the leader of the Conservative party at the last election. By voting tory at the last election you Voted for Theresa May to become PM.

[aright]

4 hours ago, sandyf said:

Who exactly discussed the WTO with whom, certainly not Boris Johnson, he thought Gatt 24 was a get out of jail card, but hadn't even read it properly.

 

Many had absolutely no idea what leaving meant and did what others suggested. My son openly admits he went along with his mother in law rather than me, now him, his MiL and the rest of the family regret their decision.

This is a new one!

We should have a second referendum because your family had problems understanding the first one.

[ThaiBunny]

Just now, DannyCarlton said:

You didn't answer the question. Yes or no will do. Boris wasn't the leader of the Conservative party at the last election. By voting tory at the last election you Voted for Theresa May to become PM.

At the previous election David Cameron was PM. Nobody elected Mother Theresa to be PM either in the sense you mean it ie. by general acclamation at a general election. She subsequently had a general election but she didn't need to, and it came after, what, 12 months? Boris has only been PM for a month

[DannyCarlton]

1 minute ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

In the UK one never votes for the PM..... the party decides that.

The party decides on the leader before the GE. The public then vote for a party, knowing that should they win, that leader will become PM. People vote for a given party at a GE for a variety of reasons, a substantial number vote for the party who's leader they want to vecome PM. Often swings the election.

 

A good example is Corbyn, many people believe that he is unelectable, meaning that the general public wouldn't want him as PM and consequently wouldn't vote Labour. The persona and public perception of the party leaders makes a big difference in a GE. People see themselves as votring for the next PM.

[aright]

5 minutes ago, DannyCarlton said:

Did you vote for Boris to become Prime Minister?

Yes when I voted Conservative and accepted the rules of that party the same rules in the Labour Party which also got Gordon Brown the top job. Over a long period of time this has been normal and acceptable to the British electorate. Can you name me a significant body/group which opposes this arrangement?

[DannyCarlton]

4 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

At the previous election David Cameron was PM. Nobody elected Mother Theresa to be PM either in the sense you mean it ie. by general acclamation at a general election. She subsequently had a general election but she didn't need to, and it came after, what, 12 months? Boris has only been PM for a month

 Very true, don't you think that the people should have had the opportunity of electing her? When she did stand in a GE, she lost her parliamentary majority and came very close to losing her premiership. The people spoke.

[AGareth2]

4 hours ago, ivor bigun said:

My daughter and her husband voted stay ,but now their eyes are open and they would vote leave.

Ps whats a MiL ?

 

Sent from my SM-A720F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

 

a stone around your neck

[DannyCarlton]

8 minutes ago, aright said:

Yes when I voted Conservative and accepted the rules of that party the same rules in the Labour Party which also got Gordon Brown the top job. Over a long period of time this has been normal and acceptable to the British electorate. Can you name me a significant body/group which opposes this arrangement?

The Lib Dems are currently opposing it in nominating Ken Clark or Harriet Harman to take temporary leadership rather than the Leader of the Opposition.

 

Many countries don't have this system. When Merkel steps down as Chancellor, Germany will have a new Chancellor but Merkel will continue to lead her party.

Edited August 18, 2019 by DannyCarlton