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

[nauseus]

12 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

No, facts based upon hard evidence.

 

No, but I'm sure he's telling, sorry, advising Johnson who to appoint in the next honours.

 

Are you not paying attention? 

 

We know the consequences of no deal, we know the consequences of Cummings' preferred May MkII deal. But I'll grant you that we don't know exactly what will happen. But we do know whatever that is, it wont be the rosy, 'the EU will give us everything we want' deal Vote.Leave promised us in 2016!

 

The Remain side told us the disadvantages of leaving and the Leave side simply labelled those disadvantages 'Project Fear.' Those disadvantages are becoming more and more apparent.

 

I listed some of the things we will lose, the disadvantages of Brexit, before in this topic and asked you for examples of what you called the nasty aspects of membership. But you wont, or more likely cant, answer.

 

Yes, the government did recommend Remain; and said why. Again, the only response Leave had was 'Project Fear!'

 

At least you finally admit that Leave lied and those who believed those lies are gullible!

 

I and others have given plenty of examples of lies from the Leave side; will you give some examples of those from Remain?

 

Example, please, to support that statement.

 

It is you not paying attention. We don't know yet that there won't be deal. 

 

You listed some of the things that you think we will lose. I did answer about the nasty bits that were worth commenting on.

 

Not finally, I have always said that there were lies from both sides. Of course those who believed them are gullible! Doh.

 

Some examples of lies from Remain:

 

1. The idea of an EU army was a "dangerous fantasy" - thank you Sir Nick Clegg. 

 

2. Voting to leave would immediately hit the UK economy - thank you HM Treasury (and George Osborne).

 

3. An emergency budget would follow a leave vote - thanks George (and Alistair).

 

4. Families would be £4,300 worse off if voted leave - thanks again George.

 

5. Cameron said had secured a "special status" in a reformed EU after negotiations - total poppycock - Cameron knew it and so did everyone else with a brain - but thanks all the same, Dave.

 

That's enough.

 

 

Remainers' arguments were almost all about economics. Leave voters were additionally concerned with sovereignty issues and, yes, recently high levels of immigration (yes, I know, not just from the EU). Some remainers say that they voted to keep the status quo but if you take a close (and yes critical) look at the way that the EEC/EU has evolved and mutated, it is quite obviously anything but that... and that was a another prime reason that leave won. 

 

Now time to check the markets.....oops.... and have a drink. 

[nauseus]

37 minutes ago, bannork said:

No, Brexit is the self-inflicted wound. The patient shooting his own kneecaps whilst reeling from corona virus, an illness he had told doctors he would take on the chin, rather than the lungs, (if only!)

Doctors, nurses, fellow patients and visitors, all shook their heads at the patient's madness.

'It's alright doc,' he grimaced, 'its only a flesh wound.'

Maybe you should see a doc?

[3NUMBAS]

the EU cartel would never agree to any terms as they would be losers as they have benefitted from screwing the UK over many decades of inequality to the detriment of the UK but thats about to change come december ..so they have to get used to it and lose the divorce money as well ..72 billion

[3NUMBAS]

3 hours ago, Lormak said:

The Remainers here need to be taken on a trip to France and Belgium.  Take a walk around the graveyards and reflect on the British boys who gave their lives to prevent the German domination of Europe (and beyond) during 20th century. Now it is for Great Britain to halt German hegemony in the 21st century. The EU is nothing more than a Trojan Horse for the Germans.

Thankfully those of us with balls and a backbone outnumber the spineless knee-taker Remainers.

and a trip to a french hyper market where the only wines on sale are french wines and mostly putrid plonk too..no wines from anywhere else around the world are on sale in french hyper markets .you wont find any californian wines on sale or aussie wines

[Pattaya46]

13 minutes ago, 3NUMBAS said:

and a trip to a french hyper market where the only wines on sale are french wines and mostly putrid plonk too..no wines from anywhere else around the world are on sale in french hyper markets .you wont find any californian wines on sale or aussie wines

As a French guy in France right now, I can affirm that what you say is 100% B.S. !

There are a huge variety of foreign wines in the 3 super/hyper markets where I usually go. Wines from Italia mostly, but also many EU countries, north africa countries, USA and even as far as Australian wines !

I don't know why some members often need to write such blatant lies ... 

[Phulublub]

4 minutes ago, Pattaya46 said:

As a French guy in France right now, I can affirm that what you say is 100% B.S. !

There are a huge variety of foreign wines in the 3 super/hyper markets where I usually go. Wines from Italia mostly, but also many EU countries, north africa countries, USA and even as far as Australian wines !

I don't know why some members often need to write such blatant lies ... 

Well said.

 

He probably read it in an august publication like The Sun - well known for making up anti-EU stories as click bait to sell papers.

 

PH

[bannork]

1 hour ago, nauseus said:

Maybe you should see a doc?

I've seen plenty, and they all affirmed Brexit should be avoided at all costs as the decline in food and health standards post USA agreement will damage the health of UK citizens.

[melvinmelvin]

1 hour ago, Pattaya46 said:

As a French guy in France right now, I can affirm that what you say is 100% B.S. !

There are a huge variety of foreign wines in the 3 super/hyper markets where I usually go. Wines from Italia mostly, but also many EU countries, north africa countries, USA and even as far as Australian wines !

I don't know why some members often need to write such blatant lies ... 

without some truth stretching (to be polite) many arguments would fall apart (or lose banging effect)

 

yeah, not surprising that north african stuff would be offered in France (payback time for legion e. escapades)

 

[vinny41]

7 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 Forgetting for a moment that the LibDems said that if they did not form the next government with the majority of seats in the House then they would support calls for a referendum on the final deal; kindly explain how 47% is a majority.

 

The LibDems stood up 600 candidates in the December General Election  they also entered into a pact with the Greens and Plaid Cymru not to stand candidates in certain areas where the Greens and Plaid Cymru had candidates so clearly it was the LibDems plan to win the election and form the next Goverment Where they were let down was that only 11.5 % of the total voters voted for them

I do recall that the LibDems have been calling for a 2nd referendum since June 24th 2016 and have made no progress in getting a 2nd referendum

And I do recall  Jo Swinson stating even if there had been a 2nd referendum she wouldn't accept the result if the majority voted to leave

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1158787/brexit-news-sky-latest-jo-swinson-liberal-democrats-second-referendum-corbyn-video

In British English the term "majority" is also alternatively used to refer to the winning margin, i.e., the number of votes separating the first-place finisher from the second-place finisher. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majority

47% that voted for Brexit Parties is greater than 41.5%  or 11.5% of voters that wanted to cancel Brexit without a vote

[Loiner]

8 hours ago, 7by7 said:

No, I mean Parliament which is the Commons and Lords.

 

The Lords is not 'stacked full of Labour supporters!'

 

Currently, out of 773 members, the largest group are the Conservatives with 242 (31%). Second largest are crossbenchers, who are not affiliated to any party, with 178 members (23%). Labour come in third with 176 (22%). (Source)

 

Those figures will of course change with the next honours list; and I doubt that Johnson will be creating many Labour peers!

 

 

 

No, you just mean the Lords where you would have a chance of the government's proposals being thwarted again.

Fortunately, with his landslide majority Boris does not need to do that. The electorate mandated it at the last GE, so he's Getting Brexit Done without interference.  

[RayC]

6 hours ago, 3NUMBAS said:

the EU cartel would never agree to any terms as they would be losers as they have benefitted from screwing the UK over many decades of inequality to the detriment of the UK but thats about to change come december ..so they have to get used to it and lose the divorce money as well ..72 billion

Given that the "EU cartel" don't want a deal and you infer that the UK are better off without the EU, you will agree that there is no point continuing with the negotiations? No problem, the UK can always fall back on its comprehensive trade agreements with the USA, China, India, Japan, etc.... oh, hold on a sec....

[bartender100]

Its more a case of seeing how the EU will get on without UK money, than the other away around. Not many can argue about that, it's in the EU interest to give a good deal to the UK, but the hard nose Eurocrats that thought they had Mrs May over a barrel have learnt the hard way. They hate the fact the UK will be ok without them. (and some European posters on this thread)

[kingdong]

6 hours ago, bannork said:

5 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

 

yeah, not surprising that north african stuff would be offered in France (payback time for legion e. escapades)

 

 

viva le guerre,viva le <deleted>,viva le sacre mercanaire.

[Phulublub]

1 hour ago, bartender100 said:

Its more a case of seeing how the EU will get on without UK money, than the other away around. Not many can argue about that, it's in the EU interest to give a good deal to the UK, but the hard nose Eurocrats that thought they had Mrs May over a barrel have learnt the hard way. They hate the fact the UK will be ok without them. (and some European posters on this thread)

But it is not in the EU interest to give the UK as good, or better, deal than they give themselves.  That Leavers continualy fail to see this is staggering.   The bombastic "they need us more than we need them" approach is both stupid and dangerous. 

 

We had much the same from many SNP in Scotland (here I was living) during the Independence Referendum. I had respect then for the likes of Jim Sillers and Margo Macdonald who had the integrity and honesty to call for Independence while acknowldeging the negative economic impact such a result would bring.  I saw no-one during Brexit doing the same - it was all magically going to be wonderfully better for the UK no matter whether we concluded the oven ready deal or not.

 

Maybe if you imagine for a moment that you are German or French and look at the situation from that perspective.  The UK is leaving, and taking its net contribution with it.  There is nothing you can do about that.  But the UK wants to continue to enjoy all the benefits of memebrship.  Would you say yes to that?  Be realistic.  Without a good deal (good for both sides) all will be the poorer;  but it is UK that will feel thepain much more than the EU.

 

I see overnight that the Government is now bemoaning not getting a Canada deal.  Thought they now wanted an Australia one?  Can;t even agree among themselves what it is they are expecting.

 

PH

[transam]

16 hours ago, 7by7 said:

 

So please explain the following:

• Cummings often being seen lurking in the background to ensure Boris stays on message;
• Cummings being allowed to summarily sack one of the Chancellor's advisors without any reference to the Chancellor 
• Boris's frantic defence of Cummings when he broke lockdown rules;
• the continued and growing concern among Tory MPs over Cummings' undue influence

Very, very funny assumptions, you should have been a barrister, oh, are you a barrister..????..?  ????

[transam]

14 hours ago, tebee said:

Yes, but they're Conservatives, so they are stupid people to start with.....

So you are a "Lefty", thanks for that bit of info, well done...

[transam]

14 hours ago, Lormak said:

The Remainers here need to be taken on a trip to France and Belgium.  Take a walk around the graveyards and reflect on the British boys who gave their lives to prevent the German domination of Europe (and beyond) during 20th century. Now it is for Great Britain to halt German hegemony in the 21st century. The EU is nothing more than a Trojan Horse for the Germans.

Thankfully those of us with balls and a backbone outnumber the spineless knee-taker Remainers.

You are a chap with vision...

[transam]

14 hours ago, tebee said:

So what Brexit promises are going to be fulfilled ?

Not again...................

[Surelynot]

What happened to the OVEN READY DEAL?

[JonnyF]

16 minutes ago, Surelynot said:

What happened to the OVEN READY DEAL?

Barnier added too much salt.

[7by7]

19 hours ago, nauseus said:

It is you not paying attention. We don't know yet that there won't be deal.

What is it you don't understand about what I actually said?

20 hours ago, 7by7 said:

We know the consequences of no deal, we know the consequences of Cummings' preferred May MkII deal. But I'll grant you that we don't know exactly what will happen.

 

19 hours ago, nauseus said:

You listed some of the things that you think we will lose. I did answer about the nasty bits that were worth commenting on.

Every item on my list is something we have already lost as a result of Brexit or definitely will lose after the transition period.

 

If you did list the bits you consider 'nasty' then I must have missed it amongst the waffle.

 

19 hours ago, nauseus said:

Some examples of lies from Remain:

 

1. The idea of an EU army was a "dangerous fantasy" - thank you Sir Nick Clegg. 

 

2. Voting to leave would immediately hit the UK economy - thank you HM Treasury (and George Osborne).

 

3. An emergency budget would follow a leave vote - thanks George (and Alistair).

 

4. Families would be £4,300 worse off if voted leave - thanks again George.

 

5. Cameron said had secured a "special status" in a reformed EU after negotiations - total poppycock - Cameron knew it and so did everyone else with a brain - but thanks all the same, Dave.

 

1) The idea of a European army has been floating around ever since the days of the European Coal and Steel Community!

 

Hasn't happened yet. It won't either for two reasons.

1. No one in the EU who has any say on this matter is remotely interested in it.
2. If it ever were to be seriously proposed in council then any country against it would veto it. 

This does not mean there could not be an alliance of member states similar to the one we have been in since 1949 called NATO! But maybe you're against that, too!

 

2) Not voting leave; leaving. We haven't fully left yet but the signs are there that he was right!

 

3) OK, he bottled this one and left it to the next government.

 

4) Again, not voting leave; leaving. We're not fully out yet; let's see what happens when we are.

 

5) He did secure that status for us: European Council, 18-19 February 2016

Quote

Following intense negotiations, EU leaders achieved a deal which strengthens Britain's special status in the EU. It is a legally binding and irreversible decision by all 28 leaders. 

Of course, that agreement became meaningless due to the referendum result.

 

[7by7]

13 hours ago, vinny41 said:

<snip>

47% that voted for Brexit Parties is greater than 41.5%  or 11.5% of voters that wanted to cancel Brexit without a vote

 But it is still less than 50%!

 

However you put it, the fact remains that only 47% voted for parties which support Brexit without giving us a final say on the deal.

[7by7]

13 hours ago, Loiner said:

No, you just mean the Lords where you would have a chance of the government's proposals being thwarted again.

If I meant just the Lords, I would not say Parliament!

 

But you obviously know very little about how Parliament works The Lords may delay legislation, but they cannot stop it.

 

13 hours ago, Loiner said:

Fortunately, with his landslide majority Boris does not need to do that. The electorate mandated it at the last GE, so he's Getting Brexit Done without interference.  

Only 43.6% of the electorate voted Conservative in the last election.

 

Only 47% in total voted for parties which want to deny the British people a final say on any deal.

[vinny41]

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

 But it is still less than 50%!

 

However you put it, the fact remains that only 47% voted for parties which support Brexit without giving us a final say on the deal.

And only 41.5% voted for parties that might have supported a final say as previously stated 47% is greater than 41.5% as we both know you lose

[7by7]

7 hours ago, transam said:

Very, very funny assumptions, you should have been a barrister, oh, are you a barrister..????..?  ????

Not assumptions; facts. 

 

But we all know that you routinely ignore and deny any and all facts which prove your opinions to be false.

[Loiner]

2 minutes ago, 7by7 said:

If I meant just the Lords, I would not say Parliament!

 

But you obviously know very little about how Parliament works The Lords may delay legislation, but they cannot stop it.

 

Only 43.6% of the electorate voted Conservative in the last election.

 

Only 47% in total voted for parties which want to deny the British people a final say on any deal.

And we still have a Tory Brexit government, and we are still progressing towards an end to the trick transition period without being sacrificed to the EU.

What about your percentages now old lad?

[7by7]

4 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

And only 41.5% voted for parties that might have supported a final say as previously stated 47% is greater than 41.5% as we both know you lose

 I give up; you cannot argue with someone who believes that 47 is greater than 50!

[transam]

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

Not assumptions; facts. 

 

But we all know that you routinely ignore and deny any and all facts which prove your opinions to be false.

Really, "we all know", who's we.....?

As for the rest, links please...........????

[transam]

1 minute ago, 7by7 said:

 I give up; you cannot argue with someone who believes that 47 is greater than 50!

I wish you would.......Please....

[vinny41]

Just now, 7by7 said:

 I give up; you cannot argue with someone who believes that 47 is greater than 50!

The only person that has stated that is you

I stated that 47% is greater than 41.5%

 

We can look forward to you campaigning to rejoin the eu in 2057 which is 41 years from 2016 and 41 years from 1975