Jump to content

UK ready to quit EU on 'Australia terms' if no Brexit deal, Johnson says


Recommended Posts

Posted
47 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Sure, that is democracy indeed, but shows the utter sham of Brexit - taking back control? What a total con. They just handed it all to a group of shysters. 

Like SNP hope to do with ?????????

Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Well, one of those is supposition - the other is a shameful fact. 

Hmmm You could ask SNP to desist?

 

(Oops! I mentioned ???????????????????????????? again; having "mentioned it once and thought I got away with it!" ????)

Edited by evadgib
Posted
3 hours ago, Rookiescot said:

The people were never asked if they wanted Mays deal.

No cuz even she realised she was doing things wrong and it was time to jump ship. How right she was to confirm it was in the UK's best interest.

 

Quote

She stated, "it is now clear to me that it is in the best interests of the country for a new prime minister to lead that effort [Brexit]."

 

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Xaos said:

Im from EU, applied for UK settled status and got it, but I dont understand what regular Joe gets from brexit? 

Harder to travel, study, work, retire, use hospitals, on top all trade deals, propabely things will become more expensive in UK etc... Whats in it for a common folk? 

 

https://www.what-europe-does-for-me.eu/en/home

less economic migrants from failed economies in the eu coming to  britain via freedom of movement and down grading the employment conditions of the indigenous work force.

Edited by kingdong
  • Thanks 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

In what world does 43% represent a majority? The vast majority of voters do not want this shower of incompetent and corrupt charlatans. No amount of repeating your lie will make you correct.

You are going round in circles with basic voting stuff. You really are making yourself look a bit daft. You tell me, when has voting been any different regarding percentages.... ? 

Posted
2 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

In what world does 43% represent a majority? The vast majority of voters do not want this shower of incompetent and corrupt charlatans. No amount of repeating your lie will make you correct.

But we do and that's what matters. The law of our land brought about a determined government to do the bidding of the majority.

The rag tag and bob tail anti democratic forces are not the vast majority. More of a mixed bunch of also-rans. They could never even agree among themselves on what they wanted regarding Brexit or anything, so are discarded to the embittered sidelines.
I'm correct again.

  • Like 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

In what world does 43% represent a majority? The vast majority of voters do not want this shower of incompetent and corrupt charlatans. No amount of repeating your lie will make you correct.

????? the elected government won the election with a majority of 80 seats,no good whingeing about how a large body of punters who couldn,t be bothered to get off their jacksies and go to the polling booths may or may not have voted,why not hire a big red bus and put 43% on it? similar stunt worked wonders for the brexit campaign.

  • Haha 2
Posted
1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

I would suggest that the corruption in parliament stinks to high heaven at the moment, but there are none so blind as those who refuse to see. The sad thing is that for those enslaved to the cult of Brexit, they are willing to see so much lost, so much stolen and so much destroyed just so they can see their dream of leaving the EU. 

 

Your brexit will very quickly taste like ashes in your mouth as you wake up to the damage YOU have done. One day soon you will be a very much smaller and much more isolated little insignificant country, at the mercy of every venture capitalist friend of Johnson and his cronies. 

OK you win, the remainers have won longest running tantrum in human history, and all because Boris said 'no' ????????

  • Haha 1
Posted
13 minutes ago, transam said:

You are going round in circles with basic voting stuff. You really are making yourself look a bit daft. You tell me, when has voting been any different regarding percentages.... ? 

It hasn't (except, perhaps in the 1979 Scottish referendum).But that does not make it right.

 

PH

  • Like 2
Posted
Just now, RuamRudy said:

Unfortunately there are very few winners, Vogie. The majority of us lost last night when taking back control turned out to mean giving up control completely to the most corrupt, venal government in memory. 

You do have a tendency to overstate and I can only reiterate, how many remainers would jump at the chance of Mays deal now? If you want to blame someone, blame Corbyns Crusaders.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Phulublub said:

The referendum was not "binding" in any legal sense. 

 

ALL of the "remainer MPs" were elected by constituents who knew exactly where they stood on Brexit.  Should these MPs then have ignored the democratic mandate they had been given by the people who voted for them?

 

The "will of the people" is oft quoted by diehards.  A majority of the electorate has NEVER voted for Brexit.  A SMALL majority of those who did vote, voed for it - but some, perhaps many, were misled, mistaken, or believed the lies being spoken by BJ and his team.  How many would still vote yes?  How many of those who, previously did not think it worth their while to turn out would now be motivated enough to do so?   But that is all water under the bridge, unfortunately.

 

I beleived at the tiem, and still believe now, that for such a monumental change, there shoud have been a much greater return than 50% plus 1 to carry the day.  All such a low bar has done is to deepen division and drive many to extreme positions that are not helpful to anyone.  Those who were already there must be happy indeed.

 

It is not up to the UK whether the Country leaves on Australia terms (or Norway or Canada Plus or any of the other ideas that have been touted as the "solution" over the past months).  It is for the EU to agree. 

 

But the more the UK Government spits its dummy and proclaims they are in charge, the less and less likely any deal will be done. Some here will loudly applaud that; but in economic terms it is a disaster for the UK.  Border checks and procedures are likely to cost the UK more than the gross amount we used to send to Brussels; we got a substantial amount back directly, and much, much more indirectly.

 

PH

With all due respects you are 3 years too late with your post, all the points have been addressed.

  • Like 1
Posted
7 minutes ago, Phulublub said:

The referendum was not "binding" in any legal sense. 

 

ALL of the "remainer MPs" were elected by constituents who knew exactly where they stood on Brexit.  Should these MPs then have ignored the democratic mandate they had been given by the people who voted for them?

 

The "will of the people" is oft quoted by diehards.  A majority of the electorate has NEVER voted for Brexit.  A SMALL majority of those who did vote, voed for it - but some, perhaps many, were misled, mistaken, or believed the lies being spoken by BJ and his team.  How many would still vote yes?  How many of those who, previously did not think it worth their while to turn out would now be motivated enough to do so?   But that is all water under the bridge, unfortunately.

 

I beleived at the tiem, and still believe now, that for such a monumental change, there shoud have been a much greater return than 50% plus 1 to carry the day.  All such a low bar has done is to deepen division and drive many to extreme positions that are not helpful to anyone.  Those who were already there must be happy indeed.

 

It is not up to the UK whether the Country leaves on Australia terms (or Norway or Canada Plus or any of the other ideas that have been touted as the "solution" over the past months).  It is for the EU to agree. 

 

But the more the UK Government spits its dummy and proclaims they are in charge, the less and less likely any deal will be done. Some here will loudly applaud that; but in economic terms it is a disaster for the UK.  Border checks and procedures are likely to cost the UK more than the gross amount we used to send to Brussels; we got a substantial amount back directly, and much, much more indirectly.

 

PH

empty vessels we,re leaving.

Posted
Just now, Phulublub said:

Perhaps you could address his major concern.  Are you content that the UK will allow foodstuffs to be imported that are produced using lower standards than UK based producers are subject to?

 

PH

I will address the posts I chose to address and I don't need prompts from other posters, thank you for your understanding.

  • Haha 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Phulublub said:

Would you like to tell kingdong to shut up then, as I was merely replying to his/her post.

 

PH

You quoted me!

  • Like 1

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...