5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

No, it's not good to go. 

 

Parliament rejected it 3 times. It's good to go down in history as a poor attempt at a trap that was seen as such and therefore thrown out.

Yeah right. 

 

If the uk cannot honour its negotiated deal then it is entirely upon them to put forward an acceptable solution. 

2 hours ago, Percy P said:

Who is you . Parliament rejected it 3 times as it wasn't in the interest of the British becoming an independent nation . Thank to the ex PM who voted to remain in the EU.  

And now ?  Negociate with a PM, of which the EU also does not havbve the faintest idea, the concluded agreement holds in Parliament ?

Or the next PM ?

Let the HoC come with a complete proposal or at least some alternatives. The EU learnt, with whatever the next PM-Joker with her/his crew comes with.. has close-to no value. Or do you think, there were no British diplomats, government specialists etc also involved in the negociations, only Terisa May ? 

Edited August 27, 20196 yr by puipuitom

Curious who are going to be right in just 9 weeks:

https://www.nutritioninsight.com/news/no-deal-brexit-fears-preventing-the-nations-ill-health-has-been-buried-in-the-dying-days-of-the-government-note-critics.html

and

https://www.nutritioninsight.com/news/safeguarding-school-nutrition-open-letter-calls-for-post-brexit-government-to-protect-free-lunches.html?utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=27+Aug+|+Safeguarding+school+nutrition+post-Brexit+-+Industry+responds+to+WHO+microplastic+review+-+Ginkgo+biloba+extract+for+Type+2+diabetes&utm_campaign=2019-08-27+NI+Daily

 

or Boris the Liar.

52 minutes ago, puipuitom said:

And now ?  Negociate with a PM, of which the EU also does not havbve the faintest idea, the concluded agreement holds in Parliament ?

Or the next PM ?

Let the HoC come with a complete proposal or at least some alternatives. The EU learnt, with whatever the next PM-Joker with her/his crew comes with.. has close-to no value. Or do you think, there were no British diplomats, government specialists etc also involved in the negociations, only Terisa May ? 

As long the H.O.C keep having the same power structures any deal shall be declined by one side or another side , now even more as Nigel Farage is interfering , it start looking like a Syria warlords situation ….lucky only in politic way … too many different interests and strange alliances  .

So in which way to expect a solution ,...sure not from E.U. side 

Edited August 27, 20196 yr by david555

Just leave (if you can) !

13 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Not going to happen until you present an alternative that is acceptable to Eire and the EU. 

 

You still have not produced any coherent, workable, realistic options. 

But they do have clichés - surely enough ?

13 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Hopefully the EU will take it right down to the wire and Johnson pulls the plug at the last minute, leaving us with a clean Brexit on 31st October and 32 Billion of the 39 Billion available for spending on the UK taxpayers instead of propping up a failing EU model.

subtract that 32b from the trade deals you won't be getting and the balance is …….. ?

4 hours ago, Forethat said:

What agreement is not being followed? I'd say the UK have so far followed every signed agreement. To the point.

wow one trick pony or what !!

 

The agreement David Cameron agreed - would it help if it was put in upper case ?

2 hours ago, Forethat said:

There is a deal?

 

Sorry, but I think I'll pass on this debate for now.

I think that's best

1 hour ago, Bluespunk said:

Yeah right. 

 

If the uk cannot honour its negotiated deal then it is entirely upon them to put forward an acceptable solution. 

A deal requires both parties to sign up to it. The UK parliament has to ratify any deal before the UK can sign up to it (thanks to Gina Miller). The UK parliament have overwhelmingly rejected the deal 3 times, so there is no agreed deal.

You can keep on talking about the UK not honouring a deal that's not been signed off by the UK side, but it doesn't make the deal any more valid. 

13 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

A deal requires both parties to sign up to it. The UK parliament has to ratify any deal before the UK can sign up to it (thanks to Gina Miller). The UK parliament have overwhelmingly rejected the deal 3 times, so there is no agreed deal.

You can keep on talking about the UK not honouring a deal that's not been signed off by the UK side, but it doesn't make the deal any more valid. 

Parliament has indeed rejected the deal the uk govt negotiated, so it is up to the uk to come up with a credible, realistic and acceptable (to Eire and the eu) solution that will protect the Good Friday Agreement. 

 

The problem now facing everyone is the result of the uk not honouring the deal their govt negotiated. 

Edited August 27, 20196 yr by Bluespunk

57 minutes ago, Handsome Gardener said:

14 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Not going to happen until you present an alternative that is acceptable to Eire and the EU. 

 

You still have not produced any coherent, workable, realistic options. 

But they do have clichés - surely enough ?

Did you miss the information I posted about the Alternative Arrangements Commission and their proposals? Take a look and you'll see it's not just clichés

 

Just now, CG1 Blue said:

Did you miss the information I posted about the Alternative Arrangements Commission and their proposals? Take a look and you'll see it's not just clichés

 

Why are you quoting me the in that?

 

While I 100% agree with the posters comment, I didn’t make it. 

3 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Parliament has indeed rejected the deal the uk govt negotiated, so it is up to the uk to come up with a credible, realistic and acceptable (to Eire and the eu) solution that will protect the Good Friday Agreement. 

 

The problem now facing everyone is the result of the uk not honouring the deal their govt negotiated. 

The Gina Miller case took away the power of the UK government to ratify a deal without the backing of parliament. It's not possible to honour a deal that hasn't been ratified. I'm sure you understand this really. 

Just now, CG1 Blue said:

The Gina Miller case took away the power of the UK government to ratify a deal without the backing of parliament. It's not possible to honour a deal that hasn't been ratified. I'm sure you understand this really. 

And I’m sure you understand that it is the uk govt that has reneged on the deal it negotiated, so it is up to them to find an acceptable alternative to the only deal currently available. 

4 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Why are you quoting me the in that?

 

While I 100% agree with the posters comment, I didn’t make it. 

I'm quoting Handsome Gardener (who had quoted you). 

2 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

I'm quoting Handsome Gardener (who had quoted you). 

I know. 

 

However their post is not mine. 

Edited August 27, 20196 yr by Bluespunk

4 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

6 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

The Gina Miller case took away the power of the UK government to ratify a deal without the backing of parliament. It's not possible to honour a deal that hasn't been ratified. I'm sure you understand this really. 

And I’m sure you understand that it is the uk govt that has reneged on the deal it negotiated, so it is up to them to find an acceptable alternative to the only deal currently available. 

Ok, your response shows you actually don't understand it. That's fine. Not everyone gets it. 

4 minutes ago, CG1 Blue said:

Ok, your response shows you actually don't understand it. That's fine. Not everyone gets it. 

I understand you I just don’t see why that makes any difference to the point I’m making. 

 

Lets hope corbyn gets his way, stops no deal in parliament and brings about an election where the electorate can vote on which option they prefer. 

And some business advice from the Bag Lady...

3 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

I understand you I just don’t see why that makes any difference to the point I’m making. 

 

Lets hope corbyn gets his way, stops no deal in parliament and brings about an election where the electorate can vote on which option they prefer. 

To be perfectly honest I can't see how the political establishment are going to ward off the Brexit party in case Brexit is avoided.

7 hours ago, david555 said:

As long the H.O.C keep having the same power structures any deal shall be declined by one side or another side , now even more as Nigel Farage is interfering , it start looking like a Syria warlords situation ….lucky only in politic way … too many different interests and strange alliances  .

So in which way to expect a solution ,...sure not from E.U. side 

Therefore… only ONE solution: let the British experience a real hard Brexit… 

After … the EU will reconsider… in due time... a re-entry of the UK ( or the Single Kingdom)  into the EU... 

Charles de Gaule should be laughing in his grave....

Business will really suffer with a no deal Brexit.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/27/business-brexit-directors-companies-no-deal

5 hours ago, Forethat said:

To be perfectly honest I can't see how the political establishment are going to ward off the Brexit party in case Brexit is avoided.

Have to wait and see.

3 hours ago, puipuitom said:

Therefore… only ONE solution: let the British experience a real hard Brexit… 

 

After … the EU will reconsider… in due time... a re-entry of the UK ( or the Single Kingdom)  into the EU... 

 

Charles de Gaule should be laughing in his grave....

I would keep off the funny cigarettes as they are definitely clouding reality.

 

De Gaule is hardly a worthy person that I consider worth quoting.

Reported baiting comment removed.

5 hours ago, bannork said:

Business will really suffer with a no deal Brexit.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/27/business-brexit-directors-companies-no-deal

yeah, this says it all --- Across the country, directors of companies are trying to explain the realities of no deal to ministers. But nobody is listening

15 hours ago, Parsve said:

So what you actually say is that a British PM is never to trust on. Hmm, interesting.

Did you read my post?

 

That is what I actually said and meant so please don't speak for me or try to put words in my mouth that YOU think that I meant.

 

The only way that an agreement is valid is when it is signed off by ALL the parties concerned and delivered.

 

In this case 27 parties agreed to it and the 28th, the UK, rejected it 3 times in parliament.

 

That means that there is NO agreement that was signed, sealed and delivered.

 

 

14 hours ago, billd766 said:

The UK did NOT make an agreement with the EU. Teresa May in her position as PM did, but she failed 3 times to convince parliament that the UK should accept "HER" deal. Hence if parliament did not ratify it then there was NO agreement.

 

So Now Boris has to go back to the EU and try for a different agreement. If they won't budge then the default position is a no deal Brexit.

 

Tusk keeps saying NO, so there you have it.

so Teresa May was not representing the UK but representing herself and making Her deal..... but Boris is representing the UK 555

1 minute ago, Mavideol said:

so Teresa May was not representing the UK but representing herself and making Her deal..... but Boris is representing the UK 555

Now where did I say that? Or are you putting words in my mouth for me, if so, please don't.

 

You are correct and Teresa May was negotiating on behalf of the UK

 

She came back with a draft agreement which she put before parliament 3 times and each time it was rejected and not ratified by the parliament.

 

Therefore there is NO agreement that can be signed sealed and delivered.

 

Can you please either acknowledge if I am correct or not, and if you think I am wrong then tell me why, in your own words and not that of any other poster.