or to join or start a new Discussion

346 Comments
Article Rating 5 Stars

Boris Johnson

How long until he’s sent to jail for lying to her majesty the Queen?

posted 3 weeks, 4 days ago

comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 52 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Gozer the Gozerian (U3126)
posted 55 minutes ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Gozer the Gozerian (U3126)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
We have an eu army...fact.

And building a federal eu empire spreading East.

No need for nation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"We" do not. Please don't peddle lies you've known to be untrue for some time.

From 2011

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/dec/09/david-cameron-blocks-eu-treaty

And more recently:

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-8149

"The UK did not sign the Joint Notification and will, therefore, remain outside of PESCO. "
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pesco...the eu army!

Why have an eu army at all for an eec?
----------------------------------------------------------------------


As usual, not that you're going to bother reading it, here's some info on Pesco.

I recall discussing this with you a number of times before. So its peculiar you've chosen to bring it up yet again.

https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-Homepage/34226/permanent-structured-cooperation-pesco-factsheet_en

Why is defence and security cooperation with our European allies such a problem for you anyway? We're in Nato, the UN. Should we leave those too?

To finalise, just like our own Parliament one single MP cannot legislate for the entire country. Just like one member state, MEP, or Commissioner, cannot dictate what direction the EU should take.

PS the EEC was incorporated into the EU in 1993 and as such no longer exists.
-----
-----------------------------------------------------------------
on the eve of the referendum, remain said talk of an eu army was fantasy.....now reality!


----------------------------------------------------------------------
The Pesco initiative formed part of Lisbon (2009) which the UK vetoed in 2011, and wasn't founded until 2017.

As has been explained to you on numerous occasions on this site.

If Pesco develops into an "army" as some think, why on earth are you so concerned about it as the UK haven't been involved in the programme for 8yrs now?

posted 3 weeks, 3 days ago

The UK army is just a subdivision of the US Army.

comment by Dave (U11711)

posted 3 weeks, 3 days ago

Wowsers!

posted 3 weeks, 3 days ago

Aww...this thread was fun yesterday...gone off now

posted 3 weeks, 3 days ago

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 14 hours, 40 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by What would Stuart Pearce do? Better than Goze... (U3126)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by The Welsh Xavi (U15412)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by kneerash-23 Cara Gold (U6876)
posted 10 minutes ago
Ia also find it odd that leave are so against a second referemdum with no deal, deal or remain on the leaflets.

Like I hear over and over it's the will of the people so they should be confident the people will vote to leave with no deal.

I guess having no deal and deal will split the leave vote.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
All you'd need is a two part question.

1- Leave or remain
2- in the event of a leave win would you rather May's deal, no deal etc.

That way everyone gets a say
----------------------------------------------------------------------

1. We've had this vote !!!

2. May's vote was rejected by Parliament.

Only way for me is an election.

1. Torys - to deliver Brexit, These are our red lines, we will seek to negotiate as close as possible and if we fail to agree these, then No Deal Brexit. This could even allow for a further referendum on the Agreed Terms or No Deal.

2. Lib Dems - We will revoke A.50, say sorry to the EU for wasting their time and all get on with our lives.

3. Labour - In a difficult position. If they put forward a softer exit without any robust fall back, then the likelihood is that the EU will never give them what they want because ultimately the EU dont want us out. Their negotiating position with the EU would be weak if they have remain as the fall back. Their only real option is a 2nd referendum on Stay or Leave, but they need a robust plan for EU reform if we stay, and if we get a leave vote thenit's groundhog day. Whatever their final position it needs to be a credible option that will bring this to a close at the earliest opportunity one way or the other.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've mentioned on a number of times on the politics thread that a no-deal scenario is completely unsustainable.

The UK would be in the same position trying to negotiate with the EU27 but from a position of desperation, and weakness (even more so than now).

It's nearly as if the current executive have learnt nothing since May's 'no deal is better than a bad deal rhetoric' - which of course worked really well with the EU and they ceded to the Govs demands...
----------------------------------------------------------------------

This is one of the big fallacies of the remain argument.

Its the assumption that the EU and EU Members have nothing to lose by the UK leaving. That we are the ones in a position of weakness.

Some of the biggest powers in the EU have a lot to lose if they cannot reach favourable terms with us. We are a net imported from the EU. We have a £70bn trade deficit with the EU.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
In goods. Not services. Shessh. nearly 4yrs on and this nonsense is still being peddled.

Google WTO MNF for info re a no-deal
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In 2018, the UK had a £29bn trade Surplus with the EU in services and a £93bn deficit with the EU in goods.

Net £64bn deficit.

The EU goods & services imports to the UK totalled £353bn.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Please read this independent commentary before commenting further.

One of the foremost experts (he now trains future trade negotiators) on trade policy in the world.

https://twitter.com/DmitryOpines/status/1116684877750046720?s=19

Or from parliament (house of lords):

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201719/ldselect/ldeucom/46/4607.htm#_idTextAnchor097

"A complete ‘no deal’ outcome would be deeply damaging for the UK. It would bring UK-EU cooperation on matters vital to the national interest, such as counter-terrorism, police, justice and security matters, nuclear safeguards, data exchange and aviation, to a sudden halt. It would place the status of UK nationals in the EU, and EU nationals in the UK, in jeopardy, and would necessarily lead to the imposition of controls at the Irish land border. (Paragraph 48)

2.The wider economic impact of an abrupt departure from the EU single market and customs union, and the adoption of WTO conditions for trade, would be felt across a range of sectors, including financial services, the agri-food sector, and aviation. It would have a particularly disruptive impact on cross-border supply chains. The short-term impact on trade in goods would also be grave: the UK’s ports would be overwhelmed by the requirement for customs and other checks. There is simply not enough time to provide the necessary capacity, IT systems, human resource and expertise to deal with such an outcome. (Paragraph 49)"

There are countless other analyses which all concur with the above. But a bit like climate change or flat earthers there are those who misrepresent and make false statements.

Regrettably their voices in regard to Brexit are still falling on deaf ears.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh wow, who knew a No Deal would have some damaging consequences

What many in my opinion fail to grasp is that no deal is a negotiating position, it's almost a bluff.

No one wants it. No one! But if you are negotiating vs an EU who don't want us to leave then you need something to encourage a deal. But take it away as an option what chance do we stand of negotiating anything in our favour.

It is, for example, like someone wanting to buy a car. They walk into a showroom and are asked, do you want to buy a car today. Yes! and then the door is slammed and they are told, fine, you're committed to buying one and you cannot leave until you do. Any deal you try and get will be rejected as you have no option to walk away from negotiations and thus they have no need to agree to any of your offers. If the door remains open, the salesman will be open to a deal because he knows you can leave any minute and that is harmful to both parties.

So yes, no brexit deal is damaging for us (in the short term at least). For balance, you really should put up the considered opinion of some expert on how damaging it is to the EU, and particularly as they import £350bn to us. In addition to the £13bn shortfall in their budgets should we leave

If you fail to understand this you fail to understand how to negotiate anything. There always has to be a stick to beat the other side with. In this instance its the mutually harmful impact of a no deal.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Apologies, I missed this.


The EU have repeatedly said that Brexit will be a disaster for them. But at the same time the eu27 gave the Commission a clear mandate to protect EU unity and it's internal market above all else.


Which has been their steadfast position since the referendum. 


I've mentioned before that if the EU broke up the 4 freedoms, to cede to the UK's demands (outside EU but maintain comparable market access as a Member state) it would completely undermine the integrity of their internal market. 


This is a decent thread from Pete North, a fervent leaver:

https://twitter.com/PeteNorth303/status/1030109349258174464?s=19


And this from Oliver Norgrove who worked for Vote Leave 

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/why-brexiteers-forgot-about-the-border-1.3831635

posted 3 weeks, 3 days ago

Rosso.

German and French troops from the eu pesco army were on joint military operations in Africa this year.

My point was, during the ref Remain guys such as Clegg said talk of any eu army in future or now was ""fantasy" only, yet we see an eu army forming via Pesco.

On Verhifstadt, reports in papers and tv said he was applauded when he said there would be an eu empire to replace individual nations.

If that is wrong, then I have received fake news, bud.

On the court yesterday, I know it was about Boris proroguing parl and not specifically about brexit.....

Other cases in Belfast for example saw remain take "brexit" to court claiming leave to be against the GFA.

This was thrown out.

Perhaps I should hsve used my words more carefully
....remain side with Miller and Lucas took brexit Boris and his plan to get Liz to shut parl to court.

To say yesterday was nothing to do with brexit is pedantic and semantics.

Not saying you said the above.....

posted 3 weeks, 3 days ago

Tbab

If the UK was to remain in the EU, what would your *specific* concern be about Pesco given that the UK opted out eight years ago and would never be obliged to join?

Verhofstadt did not mention the formation of an EU empire once. I have explained what he said above and provided a link to his entire speech (worth watching if you need independent verification because it’s only twelve minutes long). Yes; you have absolutely been a victim of fake news if the newspapers reported him referring to an “EU empire”.

Of course yesterday and this last week was at
least peripherally about Brexit, because we all know the reason why Parliament was prorogued. But the judges did not rule on the reason for prorogation, nor did they (or were they asked to) rule for or against Brexit in any way.

The British judiciary has never been asked to rule on Brexit itself. The GFA case is as close as it got to my knowledge, and that case was thrown out *based on the legal merits of the specific case*.

That case still wasn’t about whether politically or socially Brexit was a good idea or otherwise, or right or wrong, it was about whether one new legal statute was in conflict with an existing legal statute. That’s all the SC can say. At worst (for the defendant) in that case, all the judges could say to Parliament is effectively, “You’ve written a new piece of legislation here that cannot be reconciled with this existing one, sort the mess out.”

But they’d have no power to cancel the legislation leading to the triggering of A50 whatsoever.

Please don’t go down the slippery slope of allowing people to falsely politicize, then criticize, then demonize the judiciary tbab.

It is in itself an inherent lie, and it is a whoppingly dangerous political move. It’s where the piecemeal dismantlement of democracy always starts.

posted 3 weeks, 3 days ago

Cheers Rosso.

I think remain are politicizing the courts by using them to block Boris and brexit.....but the actual court is not political.

I will check the vid out mate.

No doubt I was lied to as it was either Piers Morgan or Daily Telegraph lol

On the eu army, it was more that Remain said such an idea was a fantasy.....

Why not be NATO?

posted 3 weeks, 3 days ago

Rosso

Just to add to the Belfast case, the judge made the call that Brexit (no-deal) was a political matter, not a legal issue. In his judgement he said:

“I consider the characterisation of the subject matter of these proceedings as inherently and unmistakably political to be beyond plausible dispute.”

The GFA (strand two) states:

“The (*joint North South ministerial*) Council to consider the European Union dimension of relevant matters, including the implementation of EU policies and programmes and proposals under consideration in the EU framework. Arrangements to be made to ensure that the views of the Council are taken into account and represented appropriately at relevant EU meetings."

“Wishing to develop still further the unique relationship between their peoples and the close co-operation between their countries as friendly neighbours and as partners in the European Union”

The complainant argued that a no-deal was unlawful but the judge did not agree. The case will now be considered by the court of appeal in Belfast.

posted 3 weeks, 3 days ago

I’ve not read (or don’t remember) what Clegg said. If he said categorically that there’ll never be an EU army, he was a little presumptuous, certainly. He can hold that belief, but he can’t state it as fact, clearly.

I’ve posted on the Politics thread just now (maybe we should mosey on and settle in over there?! ) that I think an EU defence force is a possibility for the future, but it doesn’t bother me because either:

- We’d be in the EU without being a part of it (in which case it’ll exist but we’ll be independent of it)

- We’d be out of the EU (in which case it’ll exist but we’ll be independent of it)

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
1 Vote
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 5 from 1 vote

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article Ranking25/500
Article Views2367
Average Time(mins)1.54
Total Time(mins)3404.67