# High Court Case was won by the 'remoaners'.



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Well the 'remoaners' won the High Court Case against the Government. This means a vote must take place in Parliament before the triggering article 50. It doesn't mean that article 50 shouldn't be triggered it just means a vote needs to take place first as the will of the people must be respected (the 17 million odd that voted to leave the EU) and we will still be leaving the EU.

The Government may appeal to supreme court. This means there may be another court case in December 2016.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

Does anyone know a man with a TARDIS? 

We either need to go back in time or forward a couple of years.

Personally, I prefer to go back, because my life appears to be going by far too quickly as it is.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Downing Street has responded just.
They have said they are appealing the judgement and now it will be appealed to the supreme court to overturn the verdict. The Supreme Court Case will be heard on 7th December 2016 for 2 days.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Zaros said:


> Does anyone know a man with a TARDIS?
> 
> We either need to go back in time or forward a couple of years.
> 
> Personally, I prefer to go back, because my life appears to be going by far too quickly as it is.


I'll borrow your TARDIS go back to the day of the referendum stop Cameron handing his notice in and get him to invoke article 50 the day after the referendum as he promised and then let him quit 
I might even go back and stop Maggie Thatcher signing the UK up to the single market which got us into this EU mess.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

stockwellcat said:


> I'll borrow your TARDIS go back to the day of the referendum stop Cameron handing his notice in and get him to invoke article 50 the day after the referendum as he promised.
> I might even go back and stop Maggie Thatcher signing the UK up to the single market which got us into this EU mess.


What the bloody 'ell are you talking about? 

Woody Wilson has just declared war on Germany and I've been roughly escorted from the building after telling him he's a bit late in the day because it's just about all over bar the shouting. 
.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> It doesn't mean that article 50 shouldn't be triggered it just means a vote needs to take place first as the will of the people must be respected (the 17 million odd that voted to leave the EU) and we will still be leaving the EU.


Shame isn't it when the democratic constitution process of the UK is deemed necessary when it affects over 61million people. Oh wait, what does that make the percentage of the population who voted to leave and damage the UK? Let's put it in perspective.










So much for a "mandate".


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

@stockwellcat I don't really understand this  never mind.

I don't think to continuously delay things will help , the sooner we have certainty , the sooner the rest of the world will have confidence in us.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> Shame isn't it when the democratic constitution process of the UK is deemed necessary when it affects over 61million people. Oh wait, what does that make the percentage of the population who voted to leave and damage the UK? Let's put it in perspective.
> 
> View attachment 289106
> 
> ...


Not over yet. Court hearing in Supreme court on 7th December as the Government is appealing which means this verdict can be over turned.

Your chart misses off the ones that voted incorrectly and had there voted discounted.


----------



## ForestWomble (May 2, 2013)

Lets see if I've got this ........ So we voted to Leave the EU. Those who voted Remain have been trying to get this vote 'un-voted' and saying we should stay. So they have now managed to get it that before we can begin to leave, the government have to hold a vote to say if they agree to leaving?
So theoretically the government could over rule the public choice and we never leave? So this whole mess could be for nothing? 
:Inpain *groans*


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Such a shame when "sovereignty" beats dictatorship. In supreme court they'll have to come up with far better reasons to uphold a non-binding referendum than saying it was binding as politically we want it to be so.



Animallover26 said:


> So theoretically the government could over rule the public choice and we never leave? So this whole mess could be for nothing?


No referendum is binding to the government. Only been one exeption. Referendums do not themselves set policy, only help direct policy. This was known before the referendum. The government wouldn't be overiding public choice (although that phrase is highly debatable), parliament could.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

kimthecat said:


> @stockwellcat I don't really understand this  never mind.
> 
> I don't think to continuously delay things will help , the sooner we have certainty , the sooner the rest of the world will have confidence in us.


I'll try and explain this.
Simply the High Court has ruled in favour of the people's challenge Gina whatever her name is and someone else who decided to take the Government to court saying that a vote must take place before article 50 is triggered. Another words Parliament must trigger Article 50 and not the PM. Brexiters believe this is wrong because most of the MPs in Parliament want to remain in the EU so this will basically quash Brexit all together as Article 50 will be denied. The Government in response to the High Court Ruling are appealing to the Supreme Court and in failing to get the verdict of the High Court quashed they will appeal to the European Courts of Justice. So this is far from over.


----------



## Brrosa (Mar 21, 2016)

Goblin said:


> Shame isn't it when the democratic constitution process of the UK is deemed necessary when it affects over 61million people. Oh wait, what does that make the percentage of the population who voted to leave and damage the UK? Let's put it in perspective.
> 
> View attachment 289106
> 
> ...


18.6m, wow that is a high number - what is the breakdown? as well as people living outside the uk are you also referring to 16/17 year olds.


----------



## ForestWomble (May 2, 2013)

My head hurts. Don't get this.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Animallover26 said:


> My head hurts. Don't get this.


Brexit is delayed 
Hope that makes sense?


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

@Goblin . Interesting chart. I think if people don't vote then I hope they wouldn't complain at the result. 
A high number of people not entitled to vote , why is that?

@stockwellcat oh i get it now. I have a headache today and my brain isnt working.


----------



## ForestWomble (May 2, 2013)

stockwellcat said:


> Brexit is delayed
> Hope that makes sense?


Yep.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

kimthecat said:


> @Goblin . Interesting chart. I think if people don't vote then I hope they wouldn't complain at the result.
> *A high number of people not entitled to vote , why is that*


Because of the status in their UK or they have lived abroad for longer than 15 years I think it was.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Because of the status in their UK or they have lived abroad for longer than 15 years I think it was.


Correct, as well as 16/17 year olds. Interestingly many of those could now vote as voting rules have changed since the referendum. As somone said about people not voting compaining. It was a non-binding referendum, not one dictating policy. They have every right to complain when those in power try to skip the rules of the constitution.

I don't know what this will mean for BREXIT. It's a victory for the constitution and I hope it will allow better, factual discussion of the issues involved. It's that "factual" which is scaring the brexiters.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> Correct, as well as 16/17 year olds. Interestingly many of those could now vote as voting rules have changed since the referendum. As somone said about people not voting compaining. It was a non-binding referendum, not one dictating policy. They have every right to complain when those in power try to skip the rules of the constitution.
> 
> I don't know what this will mean for BREXIT. It's a victory for the constitution and I hope it will allow better, factual discussion of the issues involved. It's that "factual" which is scaring the brexiters.


From What Gena Millar said after she won the court case against the Government was that she was arguing that she wanted Parliament to decide not to quash Brexit. She said the will of the people must be respected, that being those that voted to leave. She was just arguing that the PM alone cannot trigger Article 50 and Parliament should. She said article 50 should still happen but with a vote in Parliament.

The court case wasn't to overturn the Referendum results which will be upheld.


----------



## foxiesummer (Feb 4, 2009)

Animallover26 said:


> My head hurts. Don't get this.


Don't worry It'll all be over by Christmas.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

foxiesummer said:


> Don't worry It'll all be over by Christmas.


It will be over before Christmas if it doesn't get sent to the European Courts of Justice. if it does it will drag on for a while yet.


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

I don't understand it, so if the government votes against Brexit what happens then?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

suewhite said:


> I don't understand it, so if the government votes against Brexit what happens then?


You mean if Parliament vote against article 50 being invoked we remain in the EU and look stupid as a country in front of the EU. The whole referendum is then classed as a complete waste of time, money and resources.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

suewhite said:


> I don't understand it, so if the government votes against Brexit what happens then?


It isn't the government that would vote, it is Parliament. If they vote against then we don't leave.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Satori said:


> It isn't the government that would vote, it is Parliament. If they vote against then we don't leave.


....so, I assume that if the Government lose the Supreme Court appeal, Theresa May will call a general election very quickly. She will not get an article 50 vote through Parliament on a whipped vote with a such a small majority.

Ready for another pf poll on Corbyn vs May for prime minister?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Satori said:


> ....so, I assume that if the Government lose the Supreme Court appeal, Theresa May will call a general election very quickly. She will not get an article 50 vote through Parliament on a whipped vote with a such a small majority.
> 
> Ready for another pf poll on Corbyn vs May for prime minister?


This has been mentioned that downing Street said they are considering this as it will then become mandate and can't be over ruled (Early General Election I am on about).

Go on put the poll up Corbyn vs May.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Guardian comments on what may happen:


How would MPs vote on article 50?

Most MPs supported remain, but most represent constituencies that voted leave. This will go right to the heart of how the British constitution works: whether MPs should vote according to the wishes of their constituents or in their best judgement (leaving the electorate to decide whether to keep them in a job at the next election).

Having said that, leave was the majority view in nearly 70% of Labour seats for example, so it would probably be electoral suicide for the party’s MPs to rebel (or perhaps even abstain). Such a move could open the gates to Ukip.

Does it make an early general election more likely?

Yes, it must. That is one thing that MPs could possibly do to sort out the conflict between what they think is in the national interest and what their voters want. Although it is hard to think of a single Labour MP who would fancy the idea right now - and it would take a two-thirds majority in the Commons to trigger an early election under the Fixed Term Parliaments Act.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

stockwellcat said:


> This has been mentioned that downing Street said they are considering this as it will then become mandate and can't be over ruled (Early General Election I am on about).
> 
> Go on put the poll up Corbyn vs May.


One election at a time is all I can take. Focussed on next week's atm. Can't vote myself but rooting for Donald.

(Runs for cover.......)


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Satori said:


> One election at a time is all I can take. Focussed on next week's atm. Can't vote myself but *rooting for Donald.*
> 
> (Runs for cover.......)


I am to 
Can't vote either in that election.
(I am ducking for cover as well )


----------



## Bisbow (Feb 20, 2012)

It's abut time these "We know better than you" crowd shut up and listened to the people of this country did what was promised

I am getting fed up with them thinking I am not able to think for myself. Strange as it may seem I am not a moron


----------



## Apollo2012 (Jun 10, 2013)

Oh yeah and how stupid are we going to look if the government decide not to invoke article 50. The eu have already basically barred us from their get togethers and are acting like we're already gone (though conveniently still taking our money). All people are doing by delaying is causing more problems. All the uncertainty of will they won't they is what's causing half the bloody problems.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

*Brexiters: "How dare Parliament have a say after a referendum in which we campaigned to give Parliament more of a say*!"

(David Schneider)


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

This isn't about defeating the will of the people -


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

Satori said:


> One election at a time is all I can take. Focussed on next week's atm. Can't vote myself but* rooting for Donald.*
> 
> (Runs for cover.......)


Why? Granted, it's pretty much a bottom-of-the-barrel-scraping election candidate wise full stop, but to have that petulant, sexist, misogynist, egotistical buffoon of a failed businessman with a litigation addiction and a dodgier history that most previous White House occupants combined in charge of the USA would be pretty scary....


----------



## Arnie83 (Dec 6, 2014)

As I understand it Parliament is sovereign - although some complained that its sovereignty was superseded by that of the EU and that's why those people wanted to leave.

The UK government said they could trigger Article 50 without approval from Parliament.

The judges today said that they couldn't, because - agreeing with those people who wanted to leave the EU - Parliament is sovereign.

The people who want to leave the EU then complained that Parliament shouldn't get a say because, although it is sovereign, it might use that sovereignty to make a decision that they don't like.



It may delay the triggering of Article 50, but the majority of MPs currently intend to vote according to the result of the first referendum, so it won't stop it. The MPs do, though, want to make sure that the government isn't going to go into the negotiations with a plan that would destroy the UK economy, which no-one ever voted for.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Personally, now I have digested what happened in court today I have accepted that the 'remoaners' moaned there way through the high court and got a sympathetic judge to there cause. I accept you have temporary glory and celebrations to be had. But don't get carried away as this has now been appealed to the Supreme Court, the head of the supreme court doesn't even think the UK has a constitution so this will be interesting. The Government has to strengthen it's cause before the court case on the 7th December 2016. Theresa May has stated in the last few hours she still intends on invoking article 50 by the end of March 2017 one way or the other. If the supreme court case fails I do believe the governments next move is to approach the European Courts of Justice. So the fight isn't over yet.

But for now congratulations for winning the first hurdle. I may not agree with you winning but would like to pat you on the back. 

I believe TM has the right to use the Royal Prerogative but that is my opinion.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Parliament was elected by " the people"?
Leave/ Remain referendum led to split vote.
Very narrow margin.
Today the result might be a bit different but split.

In other countries unless two third of voters chose one way or other then the matter is decided by parliament.

To avoid split vote.

If the difference is smaller than generally accepted statistical difference then we have really undecided result.
2% is below.

So really split vote.
Now consider that s ok me of Leave promises were lies.
Like 350 mln weekly for NHS.
While prediction which were ridiculed like crashing pound and subsequent price rise are coming true.
Even before Brexit actually happened.

Obviously we cam.have new election, chose UKiP and then parliament will vote for Brexit.
Do not worry @stockwell ..Brexit will happen if people really want it.


----------



## Arnie83 (Dec 6, 2014)

stockwellcat said:


> Personally, now I have digested what happened in court today I have accepted that the 'remoaners' moaned there way through the high court and got a sympathetic judge to there cause. I accept you have temporary glory and celebrations to be had. But don't get carried away as this has now been appealed to the Supreme Court, the head of the supreme court doesn't even think the UK has a constitution so this will be interesting. The Government has to strengthen it's cause before the court case on the 7th December 2016. Theresa May has stated in the last few hours she still intends on invoking article 50 by the end of March 2017 one way or the other. If the supreme court case fails I do believe the governments next move is to approach the European Courts of Justice. So the fight isn't over yet.
> 
> But for now congratulations for winning the first hurdle. I may not agree with you winning but would like to pat you on the back.
> 
> I believe TM has the right to use the Royal Prerogative but that is my opinion.


From my point of view, this is purely about a sovereign Parliament deciding what happens to our country.

The only way the country won't leave the EU is if the electorate change their minds. And obviously no-one could argue with that, could they.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)




----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> Parliament was elected by " the people"?
> Leave/ Remain referendum led to split vote.
> Very narrow margin.
> Today the result might be a bit different but split.
> ...


It was decided when they done the rules on the Referendum that there would be no lower end or majority or super majority results on the outcome. I have posted on previous threads an article in reference to this.

The Leavers are never going to live down the NHS promise are they? Well Cameron promised doom and gloom and the horse men of the apocalypse, a complete collapse in the economy. I am still awaiting this? He made false promises as well and recently even Osborne admitted he over exaggerated things and lied. Both sides lied leave and remain, I think it's about time we moved on from that.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Jesthar said:


> Why? Granted, it's pretty much a bottom-of-the-barrel-scraping election candidate wise full stop, but to have that petulant, sexist, misogynist, egotistical buffoon of a failed businessman with a litigation addiction and a dodgier history that most previous White House occupants combined in charge of the USA would be pretty scary....


I wouldn't say he is a failed business man as his businesses are worth billions or he is.

So you'd rather have a woman who sends national secrets via email and lies as well as President?


----------



## Arnie83 (Dec 6, 2014)

stockwellcat said:


> It was decided when they done the rules on the Referendum that there would be no lower end or majority or super majority results on the outcome. I have posted on previous threads an article in reference to this.
> 
> The Leavers are never going to live down the NHS promise are they? Well Cameron promised doom and gloom and the horse men of the apocalypse, a complete collapse in the economy. I am still awaiting this? He made false promises as well and recently even Osborne admitted he over exaggerated things and lied. Both sides lied leave and remain, I think it's about time we moved on from that.


I'd happily move on from that if it was true, but since I don't want to argue the difference between choosing the upper end of an independently predicted range of outcomes and saying something which you know to be categorically untrue, I'll just say you're wrong and we can move on as fast as you like.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Arnie83 said:


> I'd happily move on from that if it was true, but since I don't want to argue the difference between choosing the upper end of an independently predicted range of outcomes and saying something which you know to be categorically untrue, I'll just say you're wrong and we can move on as fast as you like.





> *The result of the referendum was to be a single majority vote of the United Kingdom and Gibraltar with no super majorities, double majorities of the constituent countries or any minimum turnout threshold required for the vote to pass.* The act did not specify any specific consequences that would follow the result of the referendum.* In the event of a "Leave" vote, the government would decide whether, when, and under what circumstances, the UK would invoke Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union to begin a two-year process of negotiations for Britain to leave the EU.*[10]European Union law would remain enforceable in the United Kingdom unless the European Communities Act 1972 were repealed.[7]


 Source of information : Governments referendum rules which did have royal assent.

So that's where we differ. Moving back to the thread.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> It was decided when they done the rules on the Referendum that there would be no lower end or majority or super majority results on the outcome. I have posted on previous threads an article in reference to this.


Such an expert of the referendum and the rules yet fail to acknowledge the truth.

Non-binding referendum, no requirement for implementation. Only to be used to influence policy not set policy.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> Such an expert of the referendum and the rules yet fail to acknowledge the truth.
> 
> Non-binding referendum, no requirement for implementation. Only to be used to influence policy not set policy.
> 
> View attachment 289135


That piece of information is an extract the actual document was larger than this. Thanks again for the partial information  This was amended in December 2015 and received royal assent. The extract you keep putting up is dated June 2015.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> That piece of information is an extract the actual document was larger than this. Thanks again for the partial information


So show the bits which can be argued go against what is clearly stated.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> So show the bits which can be argued go against what is clearly stated.


Yes but that is dated June 2015 the final bill was amended and published in December 2015 so what you are arguing is outdated information 

Here for your record is the Governments draft bills, amendments and final Referendum bill (and as you can see it was also passed by vote at 6-1 in Parliament):
http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2015-16/europeanunionreferendum.html

You are welcome to carry on publishing outdated information but the Referendum bill was passed in December 2015 not June 2015.


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

Not really up on all this but people on FB are saying if article 50 is not triggered by 1st April 2017 then other EU Countries will have a vote on whether to allow us to leave, is this true?


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> *The result of the referendum was to be a single majority vote of the United Kingdom and Gibraltar with no super majorities, double majorities of the constituent countries or any minimum turnout threshold required for the vote to pass.* The act did not specify any specific consequences that would follow the result of the referendum.* In the event of a "Leave" vote, the government would decide whether, when, and under what circumstances, the UK would invoke Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union to begin a two-year process of negotiations for Britain to leave the EU.*[10]European Union law would remain enforceable in the United Kingdom unless the European Communities Act 1972 were repealed.[7]
> 
> Source of information : Governments referendum rules which did have royal assent.
> 
> So that's where we differ. Moving back to the thread.


So, if I'm reading that correctly, the rules were that if people voted 'Leave', then the government still get to decide IF we leave, WHEN we leave and HOW we leave, right?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Jesthar said:


> So, if I'm reading that correctly, the rules were that if people voted 'Leave', then the government still get to decide IF we leave, WHEN we leave and HOW we leave, right?


That's correct and the Government failed to argue this in the High Court I think. They need to highlight this in the Supreme Court appeal.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> You are welcome to carry on publishing outdated information but the Referendum bill was passed in December 2015 not June 2015.


Still waiting for the updated bit which says otherwise. Referendums in the UK are not binding on parliament. Parliament is sovereign.


----------



## Calvine (Aug 20, 2012)

suewhite said:


> Not really up on all this but people on FB are saying if article 50 is not triggered by 1st April 2017 then other EU Countries will have a vote on whether to allow us to leave, is this true?


I've read that too, @suewhite.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> Still waiting for the updated bit which says otherwise. Referendums in the UK are not binding on parliament. Parliament is sovereign.


Find it yourself as your information is outdated - June 2015. I have provided you with the link to find such information out.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Jesthar said:


> Why? Granted, it's pretty much a bottom-of-the-barrel-scraping election candidate wise full stop, but to have that petulant, sexist, misogynist, egotistical buffoon of a failed businessman with a litigation addiction and a dodgier history that most previous White House occupants combined in charge of the USA would be pretty scary....


Because I believe he would ultimately run a more fiscally responsible administration. The other stuff, I don't really care about. If I could vote, I'd be voting for a President not for a best friend so compretence would come first for me.

Even if I were getting myself in a tangle about which candidate takes the moral high-ground, I'd still choose Trump because he isn't part of the establishment that has consistently screwed up the Middle East and doesn't have the blood of humdreds of thousands of people on his hands. Strange as it might seem, he might have a better foreign policy. I'd love to see who he appoints as Secretary of State. It's time for a change in this regard.

(I doubt he'll win though).


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Calvine said:


> I've read that too, @suewhite.


I have seen this as well. The EU may well decide for us if we don't trigger article 50 by April.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> Find it yourself as your information is outdated - June 2015. I have provided you with the link to find such information out.


Goblin is quite right, the referendum was not legally binding.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

suewhite said:


> Not really up on all this but people on FB are saying if article 50 is not triggered by 1st April 2017 then other EU Countries will have a vote on whether to allow us to leave, is this true?


No


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

noushka05 said:


> Goblin is quite right, the referendum was not legally binding.


This wasn't what was being argued in court though. What was being argued was if Parliament should get a vote on article 50 and when it should be triggered. The referendum has been accepted as final I do believe. It's article 50 that is the issue for the courts.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Any way let's see what happens. I will feel disappointed if this all falls through, but hey life goes on, it's not the end of the world yet....


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> This wasn't what was being argued in court though. What was being argued was if Parliament should get a vote on article 50 and when it should be triggered. The referendum has been accepted as final I do believe. It's article 50 that is the issue for the courts.


Sorry, but weren't you just disagreeing with Goblin about the referendum being non binding? lol


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

noushka05 said:


> Sorry, but weren't you just disagreeing with Goblin about the referendum being non binding? lol


No. I was answering someone elses question and got jumped on. 

The information you and Goblin keep publishing over and over again is pre-referendum bill. Try publishing the final bill as alot of that information got amended and taken out of the final bill. I understand what you are both saying but it looks as if the government and Parliament have moved away from if the referendum was legal or not and if the results should be acted on and are looking at how and when to implement article 50 to move us out of the EU.

The legality of the referendum and it's result seem to no longer be an issue. Even the High Court respect the results.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> No. I was answering someone elses question and got jumped on.
> 
> The information you and Goblin keep publishing over and over again is pre-referendum bill. Try publishing the final bill as alot of that information got amended and taken out of the final bill. I understand what you are both saying but it looks as if the government and Parliament have moved away from if the referendum was legal or not and are looking at how and when to implement article 50 to move us out of the EU.


Have I posted that over & over again? lol I don't think so.

I was just stating fact, the referendum was not legally binding. I'm well aware we the outcome of the vote will not be ignored, but we must secure parliamentary approval first.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

noushka05 said:


> Have I posted that over & over again? lol I don't think so.
> 
> I was just stating fact, the referendum was not legally binding. I'm well aware we the outcome of the vote will not be ignored, but we must secure parliamentary approval first.


Everyone's allowed an opinion. I respect everyone's opinion. Fair does


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

I need a lie down as I am still feeling pretty rotten after my op. So speak later.


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> I wouldn't say he is a failed business man as his businesses are worth billions or he is.
> 
> So you'd rather have a woman who sends national secrets via email and lies as well as President?


I didn't say Clinton was perfect, just a better option than Trump. No one is sure what Trump is really worth, other than it's several times less than he would be worth had he simply put daddys money into a high interest rate savings account.



Satori said:


> Because I believe he would ultimately run a more fiscally responsible administration. The other stuff, I don't really care about. If I could vote, I'd be voting for a President not for a best friend so compretence would come first for me.
> 
> Even if I were getting myself in a tangle about which candidate takes the moral high-ground, I'd still choose Trump because he isn't part of the establishment that has consistently screwed up the Middle East and doesn't have the blood of humdreds of thousands of people on his hands. Strange as it might seem, he might have a better foreign policy. I'd love to see who he appoints as Secretary of State. It's time for a change in this regard.
> 
> (I doubt he'll win though).


Trump doesn't run his businesses in a fiscally responsible fashion, though, does he? Much of the money he does have (which is only a fraction of the money he WOULD have had if he was a decent businessman) comes from having connections that give him large tax breaks and loans, not paying people and companies for work they do, putting his name on other people's buisnesses, defaulting on loans, using bankrupcy as a get-rid-of-debt plan, daddy bail-outs and other underhand tactics. A lot of the time he's been a one-man version of Red Bull branding (putting his name on other peoples stuff), but with the vast majority failures rather than successes. And whilst I appreciate that all businessmen have _some _failures in their career, to have _so many_ of your business deals and investments go down the pan is not an indicator of a competent businessman.

As for screwing up the Middle East - well, he routinely insults most ethnicities and wants to throw all muslims out of the USA, so I can see things being absolutely peachy on that front, can't you?


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> The Government in response to the High Court Ruling are appealing to the Supreme Court and in failing to get the verdict of the High Court quashed they will appeal to the [B[ European Courts of Justice.[/B[ So this is far from over.


:Hilarious :Hilarious :Hilarious

So, Brexiters win the referendum. Parliament take the decision to the Supreme Court. If that fails, they're taking it to .... The European Court of Justice.

That's the funniest joke I've heard in years Bwahahahahahahahaha. :Hilarious :Hilarious.

So it's Ok for the Brexiters to cry over not getting it all their own way, but Remain voters do, and they're dubbed "Remoaners"

Certain Brexiters are looking increasingly like bad winners AND bad losers.

This is brilliant. *wipes tear of laughter from eye*


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> This wasn't what was being argued in court though. What was being argued was if Parliament should get a vote on article 50 and when it should be triggered. The referendum has been accepted as final I do believe. It's article 50 that is the issue for the courts.


One argument the Government used was parliament had already given it's consent as it passed the referendum bill. How can parliament consent be considered given on a non-binding referendum?

It is not article 50 that it is the issue, it's the avoidance of parliamentary sovereignty trying to push something through without going through parliament. Wouldn't matter if it was a bill related to spray painting Boris Johnson's hair bright pink. It would be discussed and voted for by parliament.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> It was decided when they done the rules on the Referendum that there would be no lower end or majority or super majority results on the outcome. I have posted on previous threads an article in reference to this.
> 
> The Leavers are never going to live down the NHS promise are they? Well Cameron promised doom and gloom and the horse men of the apocalypse, a complete collapse in the economy. I am still awaiting this? He made false promises as well and recently even Osborne admitted he over exaggerated things and lied. Both sides lied leave and remain, I think it's about time we moved on from that.


Leave promised 350 mln and they went back on it.
This was not a prediction but a promise.
They said so much would be saved and given to NHS and then decided after referendum that is not to be given.
Lied .
Predictions are different as you cannot ever be sure.
If I promise you one pound if you do me a favour and then afterwards not give it to you then I lied just to get you to do what I wanted for nothing.
Brexit hasn't happened yet. But pound crashed as predicted.
Prices would have to go up. Because of import prices going up so as soon as old stock is sold out...
That will fuel inflation.
But you cannot " promise" inflation or recession..just predict it.
You can promise cash and then you would be held responsible if not pay up.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> *It is not article 50 that it is the issue, it's the avoidance of parliamentary sovereignty trying to push something through without going through parliament.*


Fair does I stand corrected.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> *Wouldn't matter if it was a bill related to spray painting Boris Johnson's hair bright pink*. It would be discussed and voted for by parliament.


Now that would be a sight and a half. Pink hair on Boris's head


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

LinznMilly said:


> :Hilarious :Hilarious :Hilarious
> 
> So, Brexiters win the referendum. Parliament take the decision to the Supreme Court. If that fails, they're taking it to .... The European Court of Justice.
> 
> ...


At least it was funny  or you found it funny :Hilarious
Theresa May was a remainer not a leaver although many now question this. So still 'remoaners'  She was never classed as a Brexiter.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Goblin said:


> It is not article 50 that it is the issue, it's the avoidance of parliamentary sovereignty trying to push something through without going through parliament.


This, this, and thrice this. There's apparently a majority of MPs in favour of Brexit now so why is Teresa May worried?


----------



## stuaz (Sep 22, 2012)

We all knew the referendum was not legally binding so it comes as no surprise.

However, aren't MP's suppose to represent there people? So in theory if the majority in there area voted to leave then that MP should vote leave and vice versa.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

havoc said:


> This, this, and thrice this. There's apparently a majority of MPs in favour of Brexit now so why is Teresa May worried?


I think she just likes the drama and that's why she isn't allowing a vote in Parliament. I agree with you that MPs attitudes have changed and your right she should allow the vote as there are apparently more MPs in favour of brexit. Thinking about this sensibly. I think the longer the saga goes on the more the EU will get wound up with the UK. Although I wouldn't trust the 56 odd SNP MPs to vote in favour of Article 50 being invoked


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Jesthar said:


> I didn't say Clinton was perfect, just a better option than Trump. No one is sure what Trump is really worth, other than it's several times less than he would be worth had he simply put daddys money into a high interest rate savings account.
> 
> Trump doesn't run his businesses in a fiscally responsible fashion, though, does he? Much of the money he does have (which is only a fraction of the money he WOULD have had if he was a decent businessman) comes from having connections that give him large tax breaks and loans, not paying people and companies for work they do, putting his name on other people's buisnesses, defaulting on loans, using bankrupcy as a get-rid-of-debt plan, daddy bail-outs and other underhand tactics. A lot of the time he's been a one-man version of Red Bull branding (putting his name on other peoples stuff), but with the vast majority failures rather than successes. And whilst I appreciate that all businessmen have _some _failures in their career, to have _so many_ of your business deals and investments go down the pan is not an indicator of a competent businessman.
> 
> As for screwing up the Middle East - well, he routinely insults most ethnicities and wants to throw all muslims out of the USA, so I can see things being absolutely peachy on that front, can't you?


Yeah. Again. Don't care about any of that, just who would make the better president.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Jesthar said:


> wants to throw all muslims out of the USA


I concede, that is new information to me. Can you back it up?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> I think she just likes the drama and that's why she isn't allowing a vote in Parliament.


She has given the impression of liking the idea of absolute power without democratic process.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

LinznMilly said:


> :Hilarious :Hilarious :Hilarious
> 
> So, Brexiters win the referendum. Parliament take the decision to the Supreme Court. If that fails, they're taking it to .... The European Court of Justice.
> 
> ...


Hahaaa You couldn't make it up, could you!:Hilarious


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Let's just get on with it! Someone please press the button!


----------



## LinznMilly (Jun 24, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> At least it was funny  or you found it funny :Hilarious
> Theresa May was a remainer not a leaver although many now question this. So still 'remoaners'  She was never classed as a Brexiter.


I find it hilarious, not just funny. Thinking about this walking the dogs made me burst out laughing again - must have looked like a right lunatic, bursting out laughing in the street for no apparent reason. I'm just getting over a pulled muscle in my chest, I'm at risk of giving myself another one!


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

stockwellcat said:


> Downing Street has responded just.
> They have said they are appealing the judgement and now it will be appealed to the supreme court to overturn the verdict. The Supreme Court Case will be heard on 7th December 2016 for 2 days.


And so they should.

The vote was taken - the People voted and Leave won. End of, as far as I'm concerned.

So much for Democracy!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Lurcherlad said:


> So much for Democracy!


So you think democracy is a PM (unelected) deciding the course of the country without parliament having a say? Now take Brexit out of the thinking. How about banning all pets on a whim?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Absolutely ! Reckon some Were hoping it we best of three lol.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Lurcherlad said:


> The vote was taken - the People voted and Leave won. End of, as far as I'm concerned.
> 
> So much for Democracy!


That isn't what's being questioned. Nobody doubts a parliamentary vote would result in 'leave'. What it would do is give parliament a say in what we attempt to end up with having left. Not one person who voted leave voted for a party leader to make unilateral decisions about those negotiations in secret.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> So you think democracy is a PM (unelected) deciding the course of the country without parliament having a say?


She's not unelected. The party was elected last year. In the UK you don't vote for the PM you vote the party you wish to be in power. The PM is the elected head of the party that wins an election and these do change like all jobs the job of being a party leader/PM isn't secure. Theresa May was voted in by her party and party members so she is elected.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

As I said unelected, well as much as the so called "unelected bureaucrats" in the EU leave campaign kept going on about. Same thing or are you also saying the unelected bureaucrats aren't?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Teresa May only had her sights on one prize at the start of this! And that were number 10. Ok she claimed to be a remainer, but we didn't hear much from her did we? She knew damd well what she was doing, she played her cards well! The only advise I would give her is don't make yourself too comfy at number ten luv, because when this all goes tits up, and it will us brexiters have long memories!


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> Theresa May was voted in by her party and party members so she is elected.


She is not elected by the electorate until there's an election. Nobody voted for a conservative party with her as leader.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> As I said unelected, well as much as the so called "unelected bureaucrats" in the EU leave campaign kept going on about. Same thing.


Wrong. But you have your opinion. I will let you stew on that.


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

Goblin said:


> So you think democracy is a PM (unelected) deciding the course of the country without parliament having a say? Now take Brexit out of the thinking. How about banning all pets on a whim?


No I want the result of the referendum to dictate what happens and we leave the EU asap.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

havoc said:


> She is not elected by the electorate until there's an election. Nobody voted for a conservative party with her as leader.


When you have an election in the UK you vote for the party not the party leader eg Labour, UKIp, Conservatives etc. The Conservatives won last year and have a mandate. Theresa May was voted as party leader this year and is following on the party Mandate and because she was voted to become party leader by default she became PM because Cameron stood down as PM.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

It all makes a mockery of the voting system, we vote to leave, some numpty decides it's not legal, why vote in the first place? You couldn't make it up could you?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Sky News done a snap poll and the majority voted that Theresa May should trigger article 50 without a Parliamentary vote:

http://news.sky.com/story/majority-says-pm-should-be-able-to-trigger-brexit-poll-10643413


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

So it doesn't matter who is party leader then because it won't make a blind bit of difference? I'm sure the Labour party will be extremely relieved you've clarified that one


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

havoc said:


> *So it doesn't matter who is party leader then because it won't make a blind bit of difference?* I'm sure the Labour party will be extremely relieved you've clarified that one


Your absolutely correct.

Labour have room to speak, Brown forced Blair out of Number 10 and no one voted for Brown to become PM. Brown was never elected but the Labour party was.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Just like to add one more thing, sick to death of hearing reports that us brexiters now regret voting to leave blah blah blah, if we had this vote again I'd vote exactly the same way!


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

DT said:


> Just like to add one more thing, sick to death of hearing reports that us brexiters now regret voting to leave blah blah blah, if we had this vote again I'd vote exactly the same way!


So would I (I voted for Brexit to).


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Awh brown! You don't mean the brown who sold our gold reserves when it was at the lowest price ever do you?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

DT said:


> Awh brown! You don't mean the brown who sold our gold reserves when it was at the lowest price ever do you?


Yes that brown.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

DT said:


> It all makes a mockery of the voting system, we vote to leave, some numpty decides it's not legal, why vote in the first place? You couldn't make it up could you?


You voted on exactly what was in the Referendum Bill. Nothing more nothing less. If you thought you were voting on something else you were mistaken.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Sounds like a simple solution. Have a binding rather than a non-binding referendum. Problem solved.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

A majority of British citizens disagree with a High Court ruling that Theresa May cannot trigger Brexit without involving Parliament, a Sky Data snap poll has suggested.

People were asked whether the Prime Minister "should or should not have the power to trigger article 50, taking the UK out of the EU, *without the approval of MPs*".

Almost half - 48% - said Mrs May *should be able to make the decision* without referring it to the Commons.

A slightly smaller proportion - 45% - said she should not, while 7% did not know.

Looking at the results on a regional basis, there was a majority in favour of Mrs May in the North, in the Midlands and Wales and in the South - polling 54%, 50%, and 55% respectively.

But in London, only 34% were in favour of Mrs May bypassing parliament.

And in Scotland, it was even less - 28%.

Information from here: http://news.sky.com/story/majority-says-pm-should-be-able-to-trigger-brexit-poll-10643413


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> View attachment 289151
> 
> 
> A majority of British citizens disagree with a High Court ruling that Theresa May cannot trigger Brexit without involving Parliament, a Sky Data snap poll has suggested.
> ...


New referendum?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> New referendum?


Nah. Just concentrate on the current results and invoking article 50. Don't want anymore referendums. Thanks for the offer.


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

IMO, If we leave as quickly as possible as so many seem to want then it will be as, my Dad would say, a bugger's muddle. It can't be anything else because the thing is complicated and will take time to sort out.These people couldn't write a shopping list for a fish and chip supper and get it right. And if we let someone change the law without going through Parliament, a precedent is set. I am not exactly sure what the right legal words to use are but essentially only Parliament can change it back to pre-72, because that's the way our system works, for as long as we remain a parliamentary democracy.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Goblin said:


> Have a binding rather than a non-binding referendum. Problem solved.


I don't think that's necessary - if we're leaving we're leaving and I do think a parliamentary vote would confirm that. What would set a dangerous precedent is for our terms to be set in secret and without parliamentary approval. What would be next - perhaps all those with an internet name beginning with 'S' should be arrested and held without trial because - well because Ms May doesn't want to reveal her reasons in case it gives away her position.

The reality is that we have very little power in the upcoming negotiations and Ms May doesn't want to have to say we'll demand something and then she fails to get good terms. Far better for her to keep it all secret and then put an appropriate spin on the results. She doesn't want to keep her hand secret from the EU - she _needs_ to keep it secret from us.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Hey! Hang on a minute, when tony Blair were elected as PM I didn't agree with that result! We should have had that election again! Joking aside, that is exactly what this is beginning to sound like!


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

DT said:


> Hey! Hang on a minute, when tony Blair were elected as PM I didn't agree with that result


Don't understand your logic at all. Blair was already leader when Labour were voted in wasn't he?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

DT said:


> Hey! Hang on a minute, when tony Blair were elected as PM I didn't agree with that result! We should have had that election again! Joking aside, that is exactly what this is beginning to sound like!


But you are ignoring two facts.

1) parliament is sovereign. The court case had nothing really to do with Brexit. The judges were simply saying that May could not simply push something through without parliament.
2) The referendum was never binding for parliament. It was an opinion poll, nothing more nothing less to be used to influence policy. Any declaration that it was anything more was from politicians much as the claim 350million would go to the the NHS.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

havoc said:


> I don't think that's necessary - if we're leaving we're leaving and I do think a parliamentary vote would confirm that. What would set a dangerous precedent is for our terms to be set in secret and without parliamentary approval. What would be next - perhaps all those with an internet name beginning with 'S' should be arrested and held without trial because - well because Ms May doesn't want to reveal her reasons in case it gives away her position.
> 
> The reality is that we have very little power in the upcoming negotiations and Ms May doesn't want to have to say we'll demand something and then she fails to get good terms. Far better for her to keep it all secret and then put an appropriate spin on the results. She doesn't want to keep her hand secret from the EU - she _needs_ to keep it secret from us.


In some ways I agree. Parliament could very well decide to go ahead. A 2nd referendum which was binding would however make sure nobody could complain about it in future.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Lol havoc, I couldn't have cared less either way, was just making a point, it we don't like the result we just ask for a re election ! 
Tell you what, taking politics out of it I don't agree with the xfactor results last week, reckon we should vote again!


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

Triggering Article 50 too early would be dumb. You've got to know your negotiating position first. Once it's triggered the 2 year clock starts ticking. It took 7 years ? to negotiate the EU Canada trade agreement. You don't want to waste all your time negotiating an extension.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

DT said:


> Lol havoc, I couldn't have cared less either way, was just making a point, it we don't like the result we just ask for a re election !
> Tell you what, taking politics out of it I don't agree with the xfactor results last week, reckon we should vote again!


Nobody disagrees with the result of the referendum. The disagreement is about what it meant. There was no devolution of power to the people ( or to the government it appears ). Neither did it trigger Article 50. When that happens is up to Simon, Sharon and Louis.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I say as some have voted to leave lets get it over and done with and leave, then we'll find out who was right and who was wrong, and we can sort this mess out hopefully for the better, but I doubt it.


----------



## stuaz (Sep 22, 2012)

One thing for sure, all this dithering will do nothing in building confidence in the UK and the economy.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stuaz said:


> One thing for sure, all this dithering will do nothing in building confidence in the UK and the economy.


Well pound has strengthened considerably. Good news for the majority.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> Well pound has strengthened considerably. Good news for the majority.


Now that is good news  but the FTSE dropped 20% after the court case verdict.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Of course a lot is being focused on Gina Miller who doesn't agree with leaving. Not mentioned by most is the case was also pushed by a Brexiter who also disagreed with the idea that parliament should be bypassed by a PM. Ultimately this isn't about BREXIT, this is about parliament and it's sovereignty.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> Of course a lot is being focused on Gina Miller who doesn't agree with leaving. Not mentioned by most is the case was also pushed by a Brexiter who also disagreed with the idea that parliament should be bypassed by a PM. Ultimately this isn't about BREXIT, this is about parliament and it's sovereignty.


Gina Millar went on Channel 4 news this evening and got interviewed along side a Conservative MP, not sure what his name was, and she hesitated alot when being questioned by the MP about what she had done. Don't like the woman. Not because of what she done. Just don't like her, nothing to do with the court case, I just don't like her personality, she admits openly she isn't liked by alot of people as well.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

Goblin said:


> Of course a lot is being focused on Gina Miller who doesn't agree with leaving. Not mentioned by most is the case was also pushed by a Brexiter who also disagreed with the idea that parliament should be bypassed by a PM. Ultimately this isn't about BREXIT, this is about parliament and it's sovereignty.


This is technically correct but I suspect very few see it like that... as is evidenced by the sharp rise in Sterling,


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

Goblin said:


> Well pound has strengthened considerably. Good news for the majority.





stockwellcat said:


> Now that is good news  but the FTSE dropped 20% after the court case verdict.


I've got the Hollies song in my head,

On a carousel, on a carousel

Round and round and round and round and round
And round and round and round with you
Up, down, up, down, up, down too


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Anyhow I hope it will go to EU court to decide...

Britain is already looking funny...
Unless Americans beat is to it and elect Trump.


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

stockwellcat said:


> She's not unelected. The party was elected last year. In the UK you don't vote for the PM you vote the party you wish to be in power. The PM is the elected head of the party that wins an election and these do change like all jobs the job of being a party leader/PM isn't secure. Theresa May was voted in by her party and party members so she is elected.


Fair comment, however many critics of the last Labour government always called Gordon Brown an unelected PM. Of course he was but so is Theresa May!


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

cheekyscrip said:


> Britain is already looking funny...
> Unless Americans beat is to it and elect Trump.


I really hope not.  He's not a joke anymore and the thought of him being President is scaring the sh*t out of me .


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

kimthecat said:


> I really hope not.  He's not a joke anymore and the thought of him being President is scaring the sh*t out of me .


And Nige as PM does not?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> And Nige as PM does not?
> View attachment 289165


Why not? 

Nige would not dither around he'd invoke article 50 and get on with what he started all them years ago, trying to get the UK out of the EU.

I can imagine Junkers face if this goes tits up after all the insults Nige made in the EU Parliament and how silly the UK will look in front of the whole of the EU.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

I thought we knew BEFORE the referendum that it wasn't a 100% legally binding, unchallengeable vote. So I'm not at all surprised that this happened.

Was I mistaken?


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

Satori said:


> Yeah. Again. Don't care about any of that, just who would make the better president.


So, as he's an incompetent, dodgy businessman and a diplomatic disaster, that makes him a better potential president how?



Satori said:


> I concede, that is new information to me. Can you back it up?


Apologies, forgot the word non-citizen


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> Why not?
> 
> Nige would not dither around he'd invoke article 50 and get on with what he started all them years ago, trying to get the UK out of the EU.
> 
> I can imagine Junkers face if this goes tits up after all the insults Nige made in the EU Parliament and how silly the UK will look in front of the whole of the EU.


More silly with that tw*t homophobic xenophobic mysogynist as PM.
What does he know about actually economy?
Or anything at all?
Except unsupported slogans.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> *More silly with that tw*t homophobic xenophobic mysogynist as PM.*
> What does he know about actually economy?
> Or anything at all?
> Except unsupported slogans.


Who's that PM?
Or do you mean Nige or Junker?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DT said:


> Just like to add one more thing, sick to death of hearing reports that us brexiters now regret voting to leave blah blah blah, if we had this vote again I'd vote exactly the same way!


But some are DT lol I know you'd vote the same, but I personally know of some who regret voting leave now - and there's been lots of examples in the media.

The fact remains, the judges haven't overruled 17 million people, they have simply overruled the governments abuse of the royal prerogative. That's alligeon. And wasn't brexit about returning sovereignty to parliament?


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> Who's that PM?
> Or do you mean Nige or Junker?


Oh..Juncker is an old alcoholic and time for him to go.

He has lots to be blamed for.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Hey up noush me old mucker 
And on that note I know of two couples who couldn't be bothered to walk down to the polling centre to vote, both said it would be a waste of time as brexit would never win, now both those couples say that , if, there were to be a second referendum they would make sure they voted. Swings and roundabouts that one, you win some you lose some.
Me personally I wouldn't have missed voting if I'd had to walk through fire and swim oceans to get there, I did in fact reschedule my holiday so that I could make that X in person.
Besides that, the parties we have now, casting asides their policies, (and their isn't a party I can totally agree with on everything). I totally loathe all three leaders, could not actually put an order as to who I despise the most, every time I see their smug faces I just want to slap them.
Anyway, it's not just about that with me, to me it's about walking away from that bent disfunctional club posing as the EU, don't get me wrong a united Europe is not a bad place, I actually happen to like it , but twenty seven other countries telling us how to run this small island of ours is never going to work for us is it? So on that basis I think it's pretty obvious to most where my vote goes. But each to their own eh, and time will tell X


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

juncker the drunker!


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

.


DT said:


> Hey up noush me old mucker
> And on that note I know of two couples who couldn't be bothered to walk down to the polling centre to vote, both said it would be a waste of time as brexit would never win, now both those couples say that , if, there were to be a second referendum they would make sure they voted. Swings and roundabouts that one, you win some you lose some.
> Me personally I wouldn't have missed voting if I'd had to walk through fire and swim oceans to get there, I did in fact reschedule my holiday so that I could make that X in person.
> Besides that, the parties we have now, casting asides their policies, (and their isn't a party I can totally agree with on everything). I totally loathe all three leaders, could not actually put an order as to who I despise the most, every time I see their smug faces I just want to slap them.
> Anyway, it's not just about that with me, to me it's about walking away from that bent disfunctional club posing as the EU, don't get me wrong a united Europe is not a bad place, I actually happen to like it , but twenty seven other countries telling us how to run this small island of ours is never going to work for us is it? So on that basis I think it's pretty obvious to most where my vote goes. But each to their own eh, and time will tell X


My sentiments exactly. I have given up even trying to understand how anybody could support remaining (as you say - each to their own). I just put it down to a mass Stockholm syndrome.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> Oh..Juncker is an old alcoholic and time for him to go.
> 
> He has lots to be blamed for.


Nige likes a drink to...
Here he is on a night out:


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

cheekyscrip said:


> And Nige as PM does not?
> View attachment 289165


Dream team. I wonder if Nige got fast-tracked to citizenship, could he be the Donald's Secretary of State?


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

Wouldn't we have had some say with the other 27 nations as well? Same old right wing press crap of warnings the EU would force us to drive on the right, replace our excellent 3 pin square pin sockets with the German type and, horror of all horrors Metrication.

Cyprus as an example drive on the left with right hand drive cars and use the same square pin plugs and sockets. 

Well Sweden did change over but that was in the '60s long before they joined the EU.

With Putin to the East and possibly Trump to the West it's not the time to become a small vulnerable island on its own.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Nige was doing this whilst Trump was on stage...
That's right giving Trump his full support behind a glass of his favourite ale


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Junkers idea of a night out:








Chat up Merkel over a glass of wine








Sign a few new laws over a glass of wine








Have a few cocktails before going home


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

We are not on our own, we are still part of NATO. And it wasn't me either who mentioned vacuum cleaners, couldn't give a toss about what side the road we drive on, how bent our carrots are or whether we get fined for farting, we don't need 27 others countries telling us how to run this island, and it's naff all to do with us how they run theirs either, and as for the normal crap, I only have to tune into the BBC to get up to date on that.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

KittenKong said:


> Wouldn't we have had some say with the other 27 nations as well? Same old right wing press crap of warnings the EU would force us to drive on the right, replace our excellent 3 pin square pin sockets with the German type and, horror of all horrors Metrication.
> 
> Cyprus as an example drive on the left with right hand drive cars and use the same square pin plugs and sockets.
> 
> ...


Why do you think we will be by ourselves?

We aren't leaving Europe we are leaving the EU, the political body that controls borders, trade, free movement etc.

We aren't leaving NATO either.

I have explained this before in another thread with useful links that you claimed where to right wing newspapers but weren't they where to other sources of information.

We may well be a small country but we have a big voice on the world stage.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DT said:


> Hey up noush me old mucker
> And on that note I know of two couples who couldn't be bothered to walk down to the polling centre to vote, both said it would be a waste of time as brexit would never win, now both those couples say that , if, there were to be a second referendum they would make sure they voted. Swings and roundabouts that one, you win some you lose some.
> Me personally I wouldn't have missed voting if I'd had to walk through fire and swim oceans to get there, I did in fact reschedule my holiday so that I could make that X in person.
> Besides that, the parties we have now, casting asides their policies, (and their isn't a party I can totally agree with on everything). I totally loathe all three leaders, could not actually put an order as to who I despise the most, every time I see their smug faces I just want to slap them.
> Anyway, it's not just about that with me, to me it's about walking away from that bent disfunctional club posing as the EU, don't get me wrong a united Europe is not a bad place, I actually happen to like it , but twenty seven other countries telling us how to run this small island of ours is never going to work for us is it? So on that basis I think it's pretty obvious to most where my vote goes. But each to their own eh, and time will tell X


Eyup Trouble! lol

Then why are you riling against parliamentary sovereignty? 

THIS >>>

Brexiters: "We want Parliamentary sovereignty"

High court: "ok, there you go. Have it"

Brexiters: "no no not like that.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

and talking of crap i see you have provided us with a fine example there with your reference to Putin and Trump. 
Do you honestly believe everything you hear about putin?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Hey up noush xxxx what ever you say chuck xxx. Sorry not learnt to quote yet xx


Opps, you honestly didn't expect me to read it did you? Really! Did you? Xxxxx lol


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

stockwellcat said:


> Why do you think we will be by ourselves?
> 
> We aren't leaving Europe we are leaving the EU, the political body that controls borders, trade, free movement etc.
> 
> ...


How many more times must this be said.

It is impossible to leave Europe geographically, but by completely withdrawing from Europe by ending free trade with them the UK WILL be leaving Europe. Bigots never liked the thought of the UK being part of Europe anyway so they'll be delighted their glorious nation will become a stand alone Empire leader again.

Norway and Switzerland ARE part of Europe yet not in the EU with the EEA association with the former.

Getting back to the subject matter this is the best bit of news in a long time. Apparently at least one Tory leave supporter wanted this too so the "blame" cannot solely be put on the remainers. How May thought she could bypass a parliamentary debate I don't know.

I'm one very happy "remoaner" at the moment . The £ is a lot happier too.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Sorry can't quote but kitten Kong this is in reply to your post

We are European, we have always been part of Europe, we have never been joined by land to the eu, we have always been an island too! Now isn't that odd! The very fact that we are an island has actually played for us rather then against us in the past. Albeit I do acknowledge that being as island now offers little protection from nuclear power! That said I think it's Korea you should be worrying about rather the whether we are part of the EU. As doubt us holding up our pretty red passport and saying hang on we're in the eu Is going to make any difference when whichever nutter presses that button, it ain't going to be bye bye uk if s going to be curtains for us all.


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

DT said:


> That said I think it's Korea you should be worrying about rather the whether we are part of the EU. As doubt us holding up our pretty red passport and saying hang on we're in the eu Is going to make any difference when whichever nutter presses that button, it ain't going to be bye bye uk if s going to be curtains for us all.


Fair comment but it's not just North Korea I would be worried about as to who'll be the first to press that button.......


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

KittenKong said:


> How many more times must this be said.
> 
> It is impossible to leave Europe geographically, but by completely withdrawing from Europe by ending free trade with them the UK WILL be leaving Europe. Bigots never liked the thought of the UK being part of Europe anyway so they'll be delighted their glorious nation will become a stand alone Empire leader again.
> 
> ...


Don't worry @KittenKong I am done. Still feel rotten after my operation on Tuesday. So I'll leave this up to you guys to debate etc  I am giving PF a 24 hour break from now


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

The only thing that has changed with this court case is that the decision as to what happens next has moved from a small group of people to a slightly larger group of people. It's not even ruled on whether that slightly larger group comes from one house or two houses. Or two houses and a palace. Although as far as I can tell the current palace incumbent has never disagreed with the houses.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Satori said:


> .
> 
> My sentiments exactly. I have given up even trying to understand how anybody could support remaining (as you say - each to their own). * I just put it down to a mass Stockholm syndrome.*


I voted to remain and I find your remake very offencive. I just hope we don't live to regret your vote to leave.


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

cheekyscrip said:


> And Nige as PM does not?
> View attachment 289165


Is there any chance Nige will be PM? I don't think so.


----------



## Brrosa (Mar 21, 2016)

DT said:


> Hey up noush xxxx what ever you say chuck xxx. Sorry not learnt to quote yet xx


@DT - Have you tried the "reply" button at the bottom right of the person's post that you want to quote?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

kimthecat said:


> Is there any chance Nige will be PM? I don't think so.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Oh, the rise in sterling never had anything to do with the bank of England dishing plans to fiddle with interest rates again then?


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

DT said:


> Oh, the rise in sterling never had anything to do with the bank of England dishing plans to fiddle with interest rates again then?


The press doesn't seem to think so.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Brrosa said:


> @DT - Have you tried the "reply" button at the bottom right of the person's post that you want to quote?


Thank you,


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Happy Paws said:


> I voted to remain and I find your remake very offencive.


Good.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

diefenbaker said:


> The press doesn't seem to think so.


Awh, the press, well guess if they don't say so then it can't be can it


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Satori said:


> Good.


not at school today.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

DT said:


> Awh, the press, well guess if they don't say so then it can't be can it


If all the press say it then it seems likely. If you'd like to point me to an alternate reference ( other than your post above ) describing the reasons for yesterdays rise in sterling immediately following the outcome of the court case I will read it.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Do those who voted remain believe this ruling is going to stop our leaving the EU? 
Out of 500+ constituencies, 400+ voted to leave with the majority of their MPs having an opposing view. Do you really believe the right honourable (pah!!) ladies & gentlemen are going to put themselves out of their jobs by going against their voters, really I think not! 

If they did get a fit of the vapours and stick by what they supposedly believe and try to stop Article 50 being invoked at all there would be a general election - labour would be annihilated and we would get a hard line tory/UKIP government.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

diefenbaker said:


> If all the press say it then it seems likely. If you'd like to point me to an alternate reference ( other than your post above ) describing the reasons for yesterdays rise in sterling immediately following the outcome of the court case I will read it.


I didn't read anything about the press saying that the rise in sterling was due to the Bank of England dropping there proposals, I read on here that the rise in sterling was down to the court ruling. My remark re the press was tongue in cheek. 
But feel free to post anything relevant to it.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

DT said:


> I didn't read anything about the press saying that the rise in sterling was due to the Bank of England dropping there proposals, I read on here that the rise in sterling was down to the court ruling. My remark re the press was tongue in cheek.
> But feel free to post anything relevant to it.


I'll try to avoid the gutter press. This is Forbes. Explaining why anything which makes Brexit more likely causes Sterling to fall and the FTSE 100 to rise and vice-versa. Interestingly it relates to a similar court case in NI which the Government won.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/timwors...-pound-falls-and-ftse-100-rises/#49a3190d248d


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Happy Paws said:


> not at school today.


Me neither.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Satori said:


> .
> 
> My sentiments exactly. I have given up even trying to understand how anybody could support remaining (as you say - each to their own). I just put it down to a mass Stockholm syndrome.


Everyone has their limitations dear!

Sadly not everyone is keen on certain years of cuts and uncertain ever after.
Some, though it might be difficult for you to envisage, do not have savings or investments to see them through the seven lean years hoping for seven fat ones..

I understand what might the reasons for voting LEAVE. But on the balance it might be better to Remain.
Better for us, for EU, for Europe, for the world.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

How "Daily Fail" could actually call the judges" enemies of the people" printing their photos?
Isn't it pure hatred incitement?

But parliament represents" the 
People" and holds government responsible?

I do worry about Britain.

So now people do not like to question what government's plans are ?
What then? 
North Korea?

Total madness!


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Try not to worry @Satori TM is confident the Government are going to win the Supreme Court appeal and she told Junker and Merkel today she is still planning to trigger article 50 before the end of March 2017 and her plans to do this are still on track:
http://news.sky.com/story/government-confident-of-winning-brexit-court-case-appeal-10644312


----------



## Honeys mum (Jan 11, 2013)

Brexit: May 'confident' of winning Article 50 case appeal - BBC News


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Try not to worry @Satori TM is confident the Government are going to win the Supreme Court appeal and she told Junker and Merkel today she is still planning to trigger article 50 before the end of March 2017 and her plans to do this are still on track:
> http://news.sky.com/story/government-confident-of-winning-brexit-court-case-appeal-10644312


Government would have been confident of winning the high court case too. Otherwise not much point turning up.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

diefenbaker said:


> Government would have been confident of winning the high court case too. Otherwise not much point turning up.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Prime Minister responds to the High court ruling -










:Hilarious

Funny yet scarily accurate


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


>


"But the country's top legal officer, Attorney General Jeremy Wright QC, said parliamentary consent for Article 50 was not required following the clear public referendum vote in favour of Brexit."

That sounds fairly confident to me.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

noushka05 said:


> Prime Minister responds to the High court ruling -
> 
> View attachment 289307
> 
> ...


Sorry I missed the joke.

We are still leaving the EU. It's just Parliament may get a vote on Article 50, but this is up to the Supreme Court now to judge. You are aware that the majority of the MPs are behind Brexit now unlike the minority of the 'Remoaners' who just can't stop moaning.

Sorry I didn't find your joke funny.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Satori said:


> Me neither.


You really are been childish today aren't you.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Happy Paws said:


> You really are been childish today aren't you.


Not just today I hope. Poopy head .


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

cheekyscrip said:


> How "Daily Fail" could actually call the judges" enemies of the people" printing their photos?
> Isn't it pure hatred incitement?


Utterly shocking piece of gutter journalism. Those three people were just doing their jobs to the best of their abilities.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


>


"Downing Street says it is confident that the Supreme Court will overrule the High Court and allow ministers, rather than MPs, to decide when to begin the formal process of leaving the EU.
But there is no evidence that government lawyers have yet amassed new arguments that might persuade the highest court in the land that the three eminent judges reached the wrong conclusion on Thursday."

Perhaps you can provide the information that led you to use rolleyes ?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

diefenbaker said:


> "Downing Street says it is confident that the Supreme Court will overrule the High Court and allow ministers, rather than MPs, to decide when to begin the formal process of leaving the EU.
> But there is no evidence that government lawyers have yet amassed new arguments that might persuade the highest court in the land that the three eminent judges reached the wrong conclusion on Thursday."
> 
> Perhaps you can provide the information that led you to use rolleyes ?



Oops I rolled my eyes again.

Do the Government have to give a running commentary on everything they are doing? No

How do you know the Government lawyers haven't got something new? Do you work for them?

This is getting very tedious, annoying and childish with the remainers wanting a running commentary on everything. Try letting the government get on with there job.

There you go you have my honest opinion on everything about me rolling my eyes earlier and then again now.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Oops I rolled my eyes again.
> 
> Do the Government have to give a running commentary on everything they are doing? No
> 
> ...


You could have simply said you don't have an answer.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

diefenbaker said:


> You could have simply said you don't have an answer.


See what I mean. I gave you my answer and then you say I don't have the answer.

How tedious and annoying.
Anyway I am no longer playing your games


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

It isn't necessary that the conclusion of the High court judges be reversed in order for the government to win the Supreme Court appeal. It all depends upon one's definition of 'win'. The High court ruled as to what the government may not do, not what it what it may do.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Satori said:


> It isn't necessary that the conclusion of the High court judges be reversed in order for the government to win the Supreme Court appeal. It all depends upon one's definition of 'win'. The High court ruled as to what the government may not do, not what it what it may do.


If government does not answer to parliament and judges are bullied by said government then we are finished with democracy . By public demand?

O tempora...o mores...


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> If government does not answer to parliament and judges are bullied by said government then we are finished with democracy . By public demand?
> 
> O tempora...o mores...


Judges bullied? Judging by some of the lenient sentences I have seen dished out recently for appalling crimes, many against animalsthey need bullying! But that said cheeky I do agree with you on this issue, nice to see you too btw. And ps sorry if I've quoted wrong xxxx


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

I am ducking out of any further chatter about Brexit. We'll just have to see what happens next. Enjoy.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

DT said:


> Judges bullied? Judging by some of the lenient sentences I have seen dished out recently for appalling crimes, many against animalsthey need bullying! But that said cheeky I do agree with you on this issue, nice to see you too btw. And ps sorry if I've quoted wrong xxxx


Judges bullied by the likes of "Daily Fail" I meant.

If press (who but who owns the Daily Fail or The Sun!) bullies judges...who only stated the obvious: government answers to parliament. ). 
Soon our favourite " Question time" will run no more.

Remember Russian Duma being told " You not here to argue".
Sorry state of freedom and democracy if government can decide behind closed door.
About Brexit.
Or NHS.
Or education, immigration, budget and everything really?
Is it what Leave were campaigning for?
Ironic.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

cheekyscrip said:


> If government does not answer to parliament and judges are bullied by said government then we are finished with democracy . By public demand?
> 
> O tempora...o mores...


Yes, I tend to agree.

Obviously, I wish that the high court decision had gone the other way. But that is to say, I wish that the proper constitutional interpretation of the scope of royal prerogative, in respect of international treaties, permitted it's legitimate application in the triggering of Article 50.

But apparently it doesn't (the learned judges being far more qualified than I to decide) so that's the law as far as we know it today. No point getting hot under the collar about what is.

May made a complete bollocks of this by not just triggering Article 50 immediately upon her coronation. (It would still have been valid btw). But, again, that's just water under the bridge. The course now should be to trigger it within the new rules and I can think of a couple of ways to do that easily enough should the Supreme Court be amenable..... and should that be what May really wants.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> See what I mean. I gave you my answer and then you say I don't have the answer.
> 
> How tedious and annoying.
> Anyway I am no longer playing your games


You started a thread on the High Court case for Article 50. Then branded a question about how the government would win at the Supreme Court when it lost at the High Court as "tedious, chidish and annoying". Rather than discuss the topic you attempted distraction techniques.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

diefenbaker said:


> You started a thread on the High Court case for Article 50. Then branded a question about how the government would win at the Supreme Court when it lost at the High Court as "tedious, chidish and annoying". Rather than discuss the topic you attempted distraction techniques.


What else is there to be discussed without going around in circles with what has already been discussed. If you want to discuss this feel free but I have ducked out of this thread. We'll just have to see what happens in the Supreme Court in all fairness.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

Does the government have to give a running commentary on everything they do ? Yes. This has already been previously ruled upon.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...uments-article-50-procedure-peoples-challenge

This article gives the opening arguments from the case outlining the government's position led by Attorney General Jeremy Wright ( I don't pretend to understand it all )...

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-case-is-attempt-to-reverse-brexit-court-told

"In their final submissions, government lawyers revealed that parliament is "very likely" to be asked to ratify any future treaty agreement with the European Union."

According to the Government... "Parliament would have to ratify ( exact meaning undicslosed ) any future treaty agreement with the EU"... although you can interpret what "very likely" means many ways coming from a politician. That would reduce the scope of this ruling further in that the only difference would be Parliamentary agreement would be at the beginning rather than the end ( or both ).

Some people are already calling for Jeremy's head...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...emy-wright-under-pressure-to-quit-after-shoc/


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

diefenbaker said:


> Some people are already calling for Jeremy's head...


I've never been interested in politics, because it causes far too many rifts amongst good people.
However, with consideration to your above quote, you can't really blame them can you.

I've never liked Kyle myself and conclude that, if it wasn't for the likes of him, TV screens across britain wouldn't be filled with the unsavoury antics of the scum of the earth types with beery breaths, too many kids, no dress sense, no shame, no money, no future, and no teeth.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Satori said:


> Yes, I tend to agree.
> 
> Obviously, I wish that the high court decision had gone the other way. But that is to say, I wish that the proper constitutional interpretation of the scope of royal prerogative, in respect of international treaties, permitted it's legitimate application in the triggering of Article 50.
> 
> ...


That is a good question.
Do they want Brexit if "the plan" has to be laid for parliament to debate?

What "PLAN"? The Plan that means plan I mean?

Sadly Brexit will happen...after all we did not insult/ ridicule/ annoy EU just for nothing?

We will look like fools...oh..hold on..we are already...


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

Zaros said:


> I've never liked Kyle myself and conclude that,


You're confusing Kyle with Fisher.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

diefenbaker said:


> You're confusing Kyle with Fisher.


He is easily confused..too many concussions...

And summing up:

" Dura lex sed lex".


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

My translation would be "Traitor of the people" rather than enemies of the people but...










So, Uk 2016, government proposing list of immigrants working for companies, calls for judges to be silenced for defending the constitution. Nationalism and xenophobia on the rise.

No matter what side of the Brexit debate, I would hope this is not acceptable.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Goblin said:


> My translation would be "Traitor of the people" rather than enemies of the people but...
> 
> View attachment 289394
> 
> ...


Sadly many analogies.
Even" pogroms".

Problem is: Brexit is bound to disappoint.
Not only because it will not make Britain Great again.
But in case of Remain we know what to expect...we know what we have.
In case of Brexit no one knows really and expectations vary greatly.

Some hope for more schools and better health care
Others for no competition from non British workers...
Or even equal spread of wealth between North and South of England.

And so on.
While the reality is crashing pound with inevitable inflation and prices going up.

And more cuts to come.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

"First they came for the migrants, and I said nothing, for I was not a migrant.

Then they came for the judges, and I said nothing..."


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

You know what my old mum used to say
She,d say don't worry about it it,ll all come out in the wash:Smuggrin
Never did really understand that either
Bit like this really,

But seriously dread to think what the true cost if all this will end up at. Next you be hearing there is an old 16th century rule and that we we taken into the EU illegally,. Will that be challenged too?.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

DT said:


> You know what my old mum used to say
> She,d say don't worry about it it,ll all come out in the wash:Smuggrin
> Never did really understand that either
> Bit like this really,
> ...


The true costs are legion..

The worry is that Brexit will happen, will disappoint and then those disappointed would need scapegoats.
They would accuse Remain of sabotage for Brexit was not hard enough...would accuse anyone not British for still being there!
( Owing homes they paid for, working legally, using infrastructure they paid taxes for!).

So what then?

Judges, company execs, journalists who will not toe official party line would be fired...

Parliament would be muzzled.
That would go down really well in Scotland and NI.

UK would be broken and fractured. On macro and micro scale.
That is very much why I oppose Brexit.

With no EU to blame who is to be burnt next?

Especially if economy takes a blow.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

DT said:


> But seriously dread to think what the true cost if all this will end up at.


A more isolated country having lost a lot of respect around the world.



> Next you be hearing there is an old 16th century rule and that we we taken into the EU illegally,. Will that be challenged too?.


Obviously you don't seem to understand the judgement. The judgement was to confirm parliament is sovereign of the country not a PM. Nothing historical about it.


----------



## MollySmith (May 7, 2012)

Goblin said:


> Correct, as well as 16/17 year olds. Interestingly many of those could now vote as voting rules have changed since the referendum. As somone said about people not voting compaining. It was a non-binding referendum, not one dictating policy. They have every right to complain when those in power try to skip the rules of the constitution.
> 
> I don't know what this will mean for BREXIT. It's a victory for the constitution and I hope it will allow better, factual discussion of the issues involved. It's that "factual" which is scaring the brexiters.


Very well said.

And grow up @stockwellcat. I generally don't mind a bit of debate but I do detest being called a remoaner for merely exising the democratic right to speak as did much the country. Or is your spell check playing up?

I concluded at the time that it was better to sit back and see what happened then get into exchanges on here about mythical events as Brexiters claimed this would be better. I figured, yeah they could be right. But, six months on, I do not see what is better but I'm open to _factual_ evidence.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

MollySmith said:


> Very well said.
> 
> And grow up @stockwellcat. I generally don't mind a bit of debate but I do detest being called a remoaner for merely exising the democratic right to speak as did much the country. Or is your spell check playing up?
> 
> I concluded at the time that it was better to sit back and see what happened then get into exchanges on here about mythical events as Brexiters claimed this would be better. I figured, yeah they could be right. But, six months on, I do not see what is better but I'm open to _factual_ evidence.


Well likewise. Because the Leavers Voted to leave we have been called idiots, thick, stupid, xenophobic etc etc by remainers so the name calling does have to stop yes I agree. I am far from stupid, thick an idiot or xenophobic. It seems we aren't allowed an opinion as well.

I am not entering into this debate again as I refuse to.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> Well likewise. Because the Leavers Voted to leave we have been called idiots, thick, stupid, xenophobic etc etc by remainers so the name calling does have to stop yes I agree. I am far from stupid, thick an idiot or xenophobic. It seems we aren't allowed an opinion as well.
> 
> I am not entering into this debate again as I refuse to.


And I am not a moaner. Or bad loser.
Or benefit seeker. And so n and and on and I do not take any of it personally.
Problem is: Brexit was a vote against. EU. Or benefit system. Or Cameron. Or Osborne. Immigration. Against different things fir different people displeased for many reasons.
Some had nothing to do with EU whatsoever. Like immigrants from Commonwealth or relatively poor areas of North East of England.

It was for "350 millions" for NHS.
What else?

Because there was nothing but " change" it was very speaking because it means everybody's dream.

But now plan" for" is needed and I wish to know before we jump where we are going to land.

To Leave without fair idea what would happen next is very irresponsible towards those who are most vulnerable. 
Who do not have tidy shares invested abroad and good pension pot ready.
The poorer, the young families.

Pound would fall even more and inflation would soar.

So yes. I want to know, because I believe in facts not slogans.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

Come off it! This is getting childish.

I haven't called Brexit voters idiots and I haven't moaned about the referendum result.

I wanted the UK to stay in the EU after making my own decision, and voted accordingly. Yes, I was disappointed with the result (well duh) but I don't expect a second referendum and I am not responsible for this fricking court case happening.

Am I unique amongst remain voters? No.

There are people who have taken the whole thing badly on both sides but can we please stop lumping everyone into simplistic categories like 'idiot' or 'moaner' on the basis of which box they ticked on the ballot paper?


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

And I don't get this winner-loser analogy.

Referendums are not games nor are they competitions. The results are just results in my mind, not victories or losses.

Me preferring Mars Bars to Snickers is not a 'victory' for Mars Bars and a 'loss' for Snickers. Selecting one political/socioeconomic outcome for our country over another isn't really a victory or loss either. It's just a decision, a choice.

Maybe I'm the only one who feels that way, meh. *shrugs shoulders*


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> And I am not a moaner. Or bad loser.
> Or benefit seeker. And so n and and on and I do not take any of it personally.
> Problem is: Brexit was a vote against. EU. Or benefit system. Or Cameron. Or Osborne. Immigration. Against different things fir different people displeased for many reasons.
> Some had nothing to do with EU whatsoever. Like immigrants from Commonwealth or relatively poor areas of North East of England.
> ...


Tempting me to re-enter a debate @cheekyscrip 

Ok here goes. How can we know? How can we guarantee anything? We haven't even entered into discussions with the EU and can't until article 50 is triggered because some jumped up EU bureaucrat called Junker banned us from having any talks with any EU country until article 50 is triggered. So how can we guarantee to stay in the single market when Junker won't let us speak to any other EU country without triggering Article 50 first? How can we guarantee the rights of EU citizens in the UK when the EU won't guarantee the rights of British citizens in the EU? Again Junker won't let us discuss anything until Article 50 is triggered. So it is impossible to guarantee anything at the moment until article 50 is triggered.

I didn't vote leave because of the NHS promise or anything that was said during the campaigning. I voted leave because I said I always would and done my own research and came to my own conclusions. It was a free vote after all so we were all allowed to vote the way we felt was right.

This is as far as I go. I apologise if anyone is or has been offended by anything said on this thread or before on any of my other threads. I have backed right down and even ducked out of this debate and conversation.

I voted my way, you voted yours. I respect that you maybe annoyed that things didn't go the way you wanted it to but I am moving on from this. I took my vote very seriously and was not at all childish about it either.

On my part nothing much else can be said. If theres going to be a vote on Article 50 so be it, if not so be it. Life goes on and I am not falling out with anyone over the way things have turned out.


----------



## Honeys mum (Jan 11, 2013)

stockwellcat said:


> Ok here goes. How can we know? How can we guarantee anything? We haven't even entered into discussions with the EU and can't until article 50 is triggered because some jumped up EU bureaucratic called Junker banned us from having any talks with any EU country until article 50 is triggered. So how can we guarantee to stay in the single market when Junker won't let us speak to any other EU country without triggering Article 50 first? How can we guarantee the rights of EU citizens in the UK when the EU won't guarantee the rights of British citizens in the EU? Again Junker won't let us discuss anything until Article 50 is triggered. So it is impossible to guarantee anything at the moment until article 50 is triggered.
> 
> I didn't vote leave because of the NHS promise or anything that was said during the campaigning. I voted leave because I said I always would and done my own research and came to my own conclusions. It was a free vote after all so we where all allowed to vote the way we felt was right.Which was what we were all entitled to do.


Very well put stockwellcat, Totally agree with everything you have said. Well done.

I too didn't vote leave for any of the promises made. I came to my own conclusions like you .I always said I would, regardless of what anyone said Not because of anything I read in the newspaper or was told..I voted the way I wanted to. Which we were all entitled to do.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

I so wish to know the facts and the research that Leave voters had done?
Maybe will get convinced?
It seems they a bit like TM want to keep it to themselves.
It feels like asking about some embarrassing bout of STD.

I saw Remain quoting different and credible sources to support their choice.

Wish to see the other side.
Not so strange as would affect my family and me and already did.
Prices went up here by 20%.

It is not @Ceiling Kitty just a matter of choosing favourite choc bar.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

I don't see how Juncker is responsible for the UK's delay in starting negotiations. If you want access to the EU single market etc. you need to negotiate with the EU not individual countries. You trigger Article 50 because this is your request to start negotiating your withdrawal terms with the EU. The UK is free to request that negotiations start at any time. If you are unhappy with the way that process works blame Lord Kerr because he wrote it.


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

Ceiling Kitty said:


> Come off it! This is getting childish.
> 
> I haven't called Brexit voters idiots and I haven't moaned about the referendum result.
> 
> ...


Well said!

I am sick and tired of the aggression and abuse that this whole issue has caused - never mind worrying about the future of Britain in or out of the EU, I think we should be far more worried about the future of a country filled with people who think it is acceptable to behave so nastily to anyone who disagrees with them!


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

We decry countries that ignore democratic voting then ignore the results...

this no better


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Was chatting to someone who voted to stay in today who also rates that Scottish woman, after quite a while of telling me her opinions she actually asked how I voted....................I told her how and why, and she said.............I'm the only one that has given her a valid reason and one she can agree with. But then she has an open mind and actually listened


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> How can we guarantee the rights of EU citizens in the UK when the EU won't guarantee the rights of British citizens in the EU?


Like a lot of things, if you ignored media/politicians and did some research you would know the rights of British Citizens who have lived in the EU longer than 5 years are protected. Exceptions are the UK, Ireland and Denmark who each have made their own arrangements. Doesn't cover people like students either.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> How can we know? How can we guarantee anything? We haven't even entered into discussions with the EU and can't until article 50 is triggered because some jumped up EU bureaucrat called Junker banned us from having any talks with any EU country until article 50 is triggered. So how can we guarantee to stay in the single market when Junker won't let us speak to any other EU country without triggering Article 50 first?


So you want to open negotiations without actually leaving? For how long, years, decades? Hand in article 50 and then negotiate with the EU is a lot better for all parties. At the moment nothing is fixed other than a non-binding referendum result which indicated a movement exists to leave the EU. Why should the EU negotiate unless the UK commits to leave? EU has to put the population of the EU first, not the UK and why waste resources on something that may never come about? I'm sure the EU wants article 50 to be handed in and things to start as soon as possible. Ball is in the UK's side (almost said court). If May actually shared a plan with parliament we could have probably already started the process. As it is, she is breaking EU terms visiting India etc. Great start to negotiations when you break treaties.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Goblin said:


> A more isolated country having lost a lot of respect around the world.
> Time will tell!


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Time will tell


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> So you want to open negotiations without actually leaving? For how long, years, decades? Hand in article 50 and then negotiate with the EU is a lot better for all parties. At the moment nothing is fixed other than a non-binding referendum result which indicated a movement exists to leave the EU. Why should the EU negotiate unless the UK commits to leave? EU has to put the population of the EU first, not the UK and why waste resources on something that may never come about? I'm sure the EU wants article 50 to be handed in and things to start as soon as possible. Ball is in the UK's side (almost said court). If May actually shared a plan with parliament we could have probably already started the process. As it is, she is breaking EU terms visiting India etc. Great start to negotiations when you break treaties.


Why is it May's fault there is no plan in place? Cameron should have had this in place but instead the arrogant git thought he would win. Lay off @Goblin and pick on someone else.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

Should it not have been someone from the Leave campaign to create the plan to Leave ?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

diefenbaker said:


> Should it not have been someone from the Leave campaign to create the plan to Leave ?


Your logic makes sense, but you do know May was a remain supporter so technically it still isn't her fault? Plus Cameron was the one who called the Referendum so it was his responsibility to ensure there was a plan for both situations.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Why is it May's fault there is no plan in place? Cameron should have had this in place but instead the arrogant git thought he would win. Lay off @Goblin and pick on someone else.


Awh camoron! The idiot that spent 9 million of tax payers money on his biased leaflet! But when the fat lady sang he was nowhere to be seen!


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

cheekyscrip said:


> It is not @Ceiling Kitty just a matter of choosing favourite choc bar.


I know, it's the only example I could think of at the time since I had a box of Celebrations next to me!

My point was not to compare the two decisions in gravity, just to illustrate that neither choice (in my opinion) had a 'winner' and 'loser' - just two 'outcomes'.

I'm not explaining myself well today at all. :Bag


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Why is it May's fault there is no plan in place?


She's the one who pushed to leave on a non-binding referendum informing the world that we would be leaving stating she had a "clear mandate" when it is anything but. At the same time she ignores parliament preventing any constructive discussions and is fighting against it even now despite evidence and a judgement that she is wrong to do so.

Comment from diefenbaker is apt but nobody from the leave campaign could match the promises they made so it's obvious they didn't have a plan either.

"Brexit is Brexit" should be "Brexit is Chaos".


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> She's the one who pushed to leave on a non-binding referendum informing the world that we would be leaving stating she had a "clear mandate" when it is anything but. At the same time she ignores parliament preventing any constructive discussions and is fighting against it even now despite evidence and a judgement that she is wrong to do so.
> 
> Comment from diefenbaker is apt but nobody from the leave campaign could match the promises they made so it's obvious they didn't have a plan either.
> 
> "Brexit is Brexit" should be "Brexit is Chaos".


Well TM believes there is still an appeal and the Government has a strong case to have the court case overturned because she said the MPs had a vote last year (2015) and the Referendum rules were passed 6-1. She has defended the media regarding the backlash from the court results according to this news source: http://news.sky.com/story/theresa-may-defends-media-after-brexit-judges-attack-10648144


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> She has defended the media according to this news source:


She has defended the Judges right to come to the conclusion they did, while at the same time stating a right to appeal that decision. She has defended the right of a free press and freedom of speech. 
All being firmly linked to democracy


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

As my old mam said
It.ll all come out in the wash!

Fraid this time I don't think it will


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

TM has no clear mandate.
When 80% of voting population actually voted and 99% declared they want to be British like in our referendum in 2002 then you can call it clear mandate.

Call referendum today and we might have 52% for Remain.

Would she have clear mandate then?

Lets say we have split vote.No clear majority then and none today.

Lets see then the Brexit plan.
Let MPs then decide when they and us all see what it means when it is st home.

So far I see Brexit as destructive and potentially most dangerous to what I consider important.

Most damaging to young families and generation 2000.
They would pay the price in years to come not baby boomers.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Your logic makes sense, but you do know May was a remain supporter so technically it still isn't her fault? Plus Cameron was the one who called the Referendum so it was his responsibility to ensure there was a plan for both situations.


There are plenty of Leave campaigners still onboard. The Foreign Secretary for one who given his title I would think should be front and centre here. Whichever side you are on whether it's politics or something else suggesting the opposition should be making your plans seems a bit of stretch. Is there any reference or precedent for this ?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> TM has no clear mandate.
> When 80% of voting population actually voted and 99% declared they want to be British like in our referendum in 2002 then you can call it clear mandate.
> 
> Call referendum today and we might have 52% for Remain.
> ...


But revealing the Governments Brexit plan would give away there negotiating strategies to the EU and then leave the UK open to not getting what we want from this. Wouldn't it be better to reveal the Brexit plans behind closed doors at Downing Street in a private meeting instead of publicly in Parliament were the world can see on TV?


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

cheekyscrip said:


> I so wish to know the facts and the research that Leave voters had done?


I would be surprised if many did any. I certainly didn't. But then neither did remainders. (Research is not leaping on the nearest headline that supports your bias). The referendum was a political vote. Political votes are cast by the overwhelming majority of the electorate based upon beliefs, ideology and political/economic philosophy - not facts. After all, facts are rarely (if ever) available and don't matter much to most voters.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

I am saying no more after this! 
The vote went to the brexiters, translate it how you like, brexit won, we want out, no to the eu , get over it! We won! Translate it how you like, I see you as sore losers!,, yes you....if the cap fits wear it luv, we voted out! What part of OUT exactly don't you understand?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Duh! My ead urts, seriously.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Satori said:


> I would be surprised if many did any. I certainly didn't. But then neither did remainders. (Research is not leaping on the nearest headline that supports your bias). The referendum was a political vote. Political votes are cast by the overwhelming majority of the electorate based upon beliefs, ideology and political/economic philosophy - not facts. After all, facts are rarely (if ever) available and don't matter much to most voters.


I can say facts matter to me.
I try to find best experts I can and ask best questions I can think of.
Whether it is new kitchen or my child's health.
Nothing particularly political about it.
Better choice and worse.
Why Brexit is to be different?
I am nit buying it
This Brexit is uncooked, unstable and unfounded as a project.
If it was science it would not pull any funding.
I am not buying.

When I vote I have no fixed allegiance. 
Go with what I think I better choice.
Call me apolitical.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> TM has no clear mandate.
> When 80% of voting population actually voted and 99% declared they want to be British like in our referendum in 2002 then you can call it clear mandate.
> 
> Call referendum today and we might have 52% for Remain.
> ...


But we might see 52% for leave, what do you want? Best of three!


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> TM has no clear mandate.
> When 80% of voting population actually voted and 99% declared they want to be British like in our referendum in 2002 then you can call it clear mandate.
> 
> Call referendum today and we might have 52% for Remain.
> ...


Call a Referendum round 2 today, tomorrow, next month, six months time it would literally be the same results as the first Referendum held in June. People are frustrated because Cameron did not keep his word and invoke article 50 the next day and instead ran away from his responsibilities. Patience is what is needed at the moment, not people applying pressure on the Government. The results of the referendum were clear and they were to leave the EU.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

cheekyscrip said:


> I can say facts matter to me.
> I try to find best experts I can and ask best questions I can think of.
> Whether it is new kitchen or my child's health.
> Nothing particularly political about it.
> ...


You asked; I answered; you respond with another riddle. Then you wonder why people don't submit to your demands for data. It is because it isn't worth their effort. (See post from @rona on last page.) A little bit of civility and receptivity on your part would help if you are indeed genuine in your claim that you only wish to understand the argument of the brexit voters. But we both know that isn't really the case don't we? You are just venting right?


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> But revealing the Governments Brexit plan would give away there negotiating strategies to the EU and then leave the UK open to not getting what we want from this. Wouldn't it be better to reveal the Brexit plans behind closed doors at Downing Street in a private meeting instead of publicly in Parliament were the world can see on TV?


Parliament wants to know what they will be negotiating for not how they are going to negotiate it. The only certainty is leaving the EU. In theory the Government could negotiate access to the single market and free movement of labour outside of the EU. This is the Norway model.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

I'm going to tell you exactly what happened
Take a seat On June 23rd we , we being the British public had a vote as to whether we should remain a part of the club, the broken eu club
Now on to episode two
The majority , yes that being more then 50% what we term majority voted to leave that club!
Episode three
The other 48% had hissy fits, chucked out their dummies rocked their cradles and blew fuses
Nothing less then the sensible 52% expected!
Just accept it! It's called LOSING and you lost.
Now move on, you are causing an obstruction


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

@cheekyscrip I would spend the time and effort to reply to what you asked earlier but I feel I would be wasting my time because every time I do I get jumped on by @Goblin, yourself etc and to be honest I am feeling very exhausted going around in circles explaining things to people that they don't want to read or listen to what is being explained to them. It is very exhausting and quite frankly I am finding it repetitive and extremely time consuming. So let's just leave things were they are and sit back and wait to see what happens next.

Patience is needed right now, nothing else.

The results are very clear. Here they are incase you missed them and they need to be respected: http://www.electoralcommission.org....u-referendum/electorate-and-count-information

Leave means leave not keep your foot half way in the door on the way out.

I am done.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

rona said:


> She has defended the Judges right to come to the conclusion they did, while at the same time stating a right to appeal that decision. She has defended the right of a free press and freedom of speech.
> All being firmly linked to democracy


Ok if you say so


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Satori said:


> You asked; I answered; you respond with another riddle. Then you wonder why people don't submit to your demands for data. It is because it isn't worth their effort. (See post from @rona on last page.) A little bit of civility and receptivity on your part would help if you are indeed genuine in your claim that you only wish to understand the argument of the brexit voters. But we both know that isn't really the case don't we? You are just venting right?


Wrong.









I see the influence Russian big capital. ( who by the way employ Putin) has in certain circles oc Tories. You know that in possibly more detail.
Brexit would push Tories and so on even deeper in that rut.
Who will take control?
Bruges group, Bow group ..so many and it is not first time I mention the influence Russian or Chinese capital will have over many British key figures.
So it worries me who will #take control.
Because those care very little for things like democracy.
Or human rights. Animal rights. Environment.
They are actually the worst offenders.
Any you know Britain.cut off from EU would welcome this money.
Actually this us the whole purpose: EU with their sanctions keeping dirty money away.
Brexit removes that dam.
Surely some would line their pockets.

While others are happily wearing poppies totally oblivious to it.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

You cannot simply stop trading with the EU. You have to have some kind of trade model. ALL of them require complying with EU regulations to some degree whilst having no say in what those regulations are. Pick one...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36639261


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

diefenbaker said:


> You cannot simply stop trading with the EU. You have to have some kind of trade model. ALL of them require complying with EU regulations to some degree whilst having no say in what those regulations are. Pick one...
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36639261


We aren't stopping trading with the EU. We either get a deal with them or WTO rules kick in if no deal is reached. Even the head of the WTO has explained this. Trading won't stop with the EU and UK.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

diefenbaker said:


> You cannot simply stop trading with the EU. You have to have some kind of trade model. ALL of them require complying with EU regulations to some degree whilst having no say in what those regulations are. Pick one...


We export £150,000,000 worth to the EU

We import £250,000,000 worth from the EU

Do you think BMW, Audi, VW, Citroen, Fiat, Seat, Skoda, Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Peugeot will want to lose our markets?....i doubt that


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

diefenbaker said:


> You cannot simply stop trading with the EU. You have to have some kind of trade model. ALL of them require complying with EU regulations to some degree whilst having no say in what those regulations are. Pick one...
> 
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36639261


Erm! Why not I don't think Germany would be best pleased if we ceased importing their cars. Or the French their wines and cheeses, and please remind me, what do Holland have, Awh, yes tulips,


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Snap collie nice to see you x


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

DT said:


> Erm! Why not I don't think Germany would be best pleased if we ceased importing their cars. Or the French their wines and cheeses, and please remind me, what do Holland have, Awh, yes tulips,


By not answering you default to WTO rules. Generally these are regarded as non-favourable.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

DT said:


> what do Holland have, Awh, yes tulips,


Cheese (Edam, Leerdammer etc)


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Cheese (Edam, Leerdammer etc)


Same to you with bells on!


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> We aren't stopping trading with the EU. We either get a deal with them or WTO rules kick in if no deal is reached. Even the head of the WTO has explained this. Trading won't stop with the EU and UK.


Which model of deal do you want ? They're all listed there. Pick one...


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

Colliebarmy said:


> We export £150,000,000 worth to the EU
> 
> We import £250,000,000 worth from the EU
> 
> Do you think BMW, Audi, VW, Citroen, Fiat, Seat, Skoda, Porsche, Ferrari, Lamborghini, Peugeot will want to lose our markets?....i doubt that


You default to WTO rules too. And you're missing some zeros from your numbers.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

DT said:


> I am saying no more after this!
> The vote went to the brexiters, translate it how you like, brexit won, we want out, no to the eu , get over it! We won! Translate it how you like, I see you as sore losers!,, yes you....if the cap fits wear it luv, we voted out! What part of OUT exactly don't you understand?


Same might have been said to those protested and kept warning about the danger of Hitler and National Socialists in power?
You think they should have shut up?

How many actually left Germany or Austria to continue their protest?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

diefenbaker said:


> Which model of deal do you want ? They're all listed there. Pick one...


Not a Norway deal, Not a Swiss deal, but our own UK deal.

Personally I would prefer a trade deal with the EU but on the UKs terms were we can trade outside of the EU block as well with who ever we wish to trade with.

1) The deal would have to respect what we voted for that being having control of who comes into our country eg skilled workers (not unskilled workers) for example if the UK is unable to find enough people in the UK to fill available positions first for example doctors, nurses, medics etc.
2) If the person trained over here to say become a doctor they would have to spend say 5 years in the UK in that position before being able to use that profession they trained in abroad so the people that trained this person up, like in this case the NHS would get there monies worth for training this person up.
3) Anyone coming to live in the UK wouldn't have automatic entitlement to social security benefits (For the first 5 years and after this period it is means tested. They would have to pay into the system first unlike at the moment), social housing or free health care and would have to pay upon receiving treatment at the GP, Hospital etc like you have to in other countries (The NHS would remain free to UK citizens).
4) Anyone visiting the UK would not be entitled to free NHS health care and would have to pay upon receiving treatment.
5) Students wanting to study in the UK would have to show they can financially support themselves during there studying period or have a job. Students would have to pay the full cost of the course and any course materials and be able to pay for there own accommodation without any subsidies given back to them as UK students have to find this money. After studying students would be required to get a job in there chosen profession and spend 5 years in the UK working in that profession before using that profession abroad. Students from abroad studying in the UK would be required to pay for there health care as well.
6) Anyone wishing to retire in the UK from abroad should be able to show they can financially support themselves without the help from the UKs social security system and be able to afford there health care treatment.
7) Entry into the UK would be by a visa system like all other none EU countries have and these people would have to have a job in the UK to be able to live here or apply for a visitors visa. Everyone wanting a visa should be scrutinised like they are in the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc.

The reason why I mention people that wish to live over here from abroad would have to be able to afford there own health care treatment alot is because abroad you pay for your treatment if you aren't entitled to that countries free treatment on the way out the door of the doctors or hospital. The NHS currently bill you later on and this is why the NHS is in a mess, how about they put in card machines on the reception desks in hospitals and go surgeries? Plus why should people moving over here from abroad be automatically entitled to free benefits without paying in and be automatically entitled to social housing? Both (NHS and Social Security Benefits) of these organisations need to be tougher on people moving to this country.

*This is the kind of deal I would like.*

Failing to get a trade deal with the EU would mean we automatically fall back onto WTO rules by default as we are a member of the WTO and this will never change (The UK was one of the founding members of the WTO and is a member of the WTO along with 164 other countries).

WTO Members list: https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/org6_e.htm

About UKs membership to WTO: https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/united_kingdom_e.htm


----------



## ZoeM (Jul 16, 2015)

I don't understand why people who aren't happy about brexit are being told to leave the country if they don't like it? 

Why didn't the brexiters leave the country if they were so unhappy years ago?


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Those cars and cheeses are imported. They come from eurozone.
Pound fell from above 1.40 to 1.1 euro


Would go even lower.
Those would be much smaller cheses...


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> I would prefer a deal with the EU but on the UKs terms were we can trade outside of the EU block as well. The deal would have to respect what we voted for that being having control of who comes into our country. Failing to get a deal with the EU would mean we automatically fall back onto WTO rules by default as we are a member of the WTO and this will never change (The UK was one of the founding members of the WTO and is a member of the WTO along with 164 other countries).
> 
> WTO Members list: https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/org6_e.htm
> 
> About UKs membership to WTO: https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/united_kingdom_e.htm


I would be surprised if your deal includes access to the Single Market. This sounds a lot like going back to being a member of EFTA. Unless you actually want WTO.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

diefenbaker said:


> I would be surprised if your deal includes access to the Single Market. This sounds a lot like going back to being a member of EFTA. Unless you actually want WTO.


I have expanded a little since your reply explaining the kind of deal I personally would like. Enjoy the read


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

DT said:


> I'm going to tell you exactly what happened
> Take a seat On June 23rd we , we being the British public had a vote as to whether we should remain a part of the club, the broken eu club


Technically it was an opinon poll, but thats been done to death. The EU, though, is far more than just a 'club' - might be worth reading up on history there 


DT said:


> Now on to episode two
> The majority , yes that being more then 50% what we term majority voted to leave that club!


The majority of those who voted at that moment in time, true. 


DT said:


> Episode three
> The other 48% had hissy fits, chucked out their dummies rocked their cradles and blew fuses
> Nothing less then the sensible 52% expected!


And now the namecalling starts. Everyone - yes, everyone - who voted remain is an immature crybaby. How... _mature..._


DT said:


> Just accept it! It's called LOSING and you lost.
> Now move on, you are causing an obstruction


*sigh* That sounds like a school bully talking. "You _lost_ so sit down, shut up and accept whatever we _winners_ decide should happen next"

There is such a thing as being a bad winner you know. Plenty of people have good reason to be worried about what Brexit may bring, for many reasons, and whether you like it or not their opinions as to how things should progress next are still valid and should be considered. Telling them to be silent and accept the consequences is not a mature approach, and will only serve to further increase the polarisation between the two 'sides' that some insist on trying to divide this country into.

If we're going to make the most of the future, everyone is going to have to work together to keep this country heading in a positive direction. Consigning everyone who didn't vote 'leave' to the sidelines and discounting their viewpoints isn't a way to help do that.


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

DT said:


> I am saying no more after this!
> The vote went to the brexiters, translate it how you like, brexit won, we want out, no to the eu , get over it! We won! Translate it how you like, I see you as sore losers!,, yes you....if the cap fits wear it luv, we voted out! What part of OUT exactly don't you understand?


Gosh, you're getting desperate aren't you. I find it hilarious how people like yourself believe they speak for the entire population. 16+ million will disagree.

Rather like in 1987 when the Tories were re-elected with the Poll Tax in their manifesto. Didn't mean the entire UK population accepted that when it was introduced did it!

As for preaching, "What part of OUT exactly don't you understand?" Perhaps you should be asking your government that as they don't seem to understand themselves!


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

It amazing how many people I've spoken to since Brexit who voted out, who have said, if they had to vote again they'd vote to remain as they think they were lied to.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Happy Paws said:


> It amazing how many people I've spoken to since Brexit who voted out, who have said, if they had to vote again they'd vote to remain as they think they were lied to.


So they couldn't make there own mind up when they voted?


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> So they couldn't make there own mind up when they voted?


Get a life and stop trying to start a fight.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> So they couldn't make there own mind up when they voted?


They made up their mi d believing in what BJ or Nige said.
They thought the leafrss if Brexit were honest and trustworthy.
Sadly after that promises went out of the window and even papers/ speeches for " every occasion" were found.

Those people feel they were misled and lied to. Funny..I also know a few of them.

Some have the courage to admit they were wrong.
Takes a lot.

EU is lesser of two evils.

I feel like poor , cursed Cassandra...


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Happy Paws said:


> Get a life and stop trying to start a fight.


I have a life thank you very much 
The people you asked obviously believed everything that was on TV and in the press. Most of us didnt.You must admit it is quite sad people can't make there own minds up.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> I have a life thank you very much
> The people you asked obviously believed everything that was on TV and in the press. Most of us didnt.You must admit it is quite sad people can't make there own minds up.


NO comment. your just been a PR*T


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Happy Paws said:


> NO comment. your just been a PR*T


Ok. Whatever. Moving on....


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

SWC does have a point though. Some I'm afraid to say probably did vote the way their daily newspaper advised them to, or liked the patriotic talk from Farage, Johnson and Gove.

I know at least one person who backed Leave due to what was written on that red bus...


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

But Brexit will happen. Destructive as it is.
Corbyn might say whatever, but Watson already stated Labour MPs will support TM ( or their seats as they are scared to lose snap election).
After all regardless whether Labour supported Remain or not they want their seats.
Politics is not matter of principles for most and they swivel faster than weathervanes.

So though most MPs think Leave is a bad move they are well provided for and do not care , son would benefit and some would keep their cushy job safe.
Have some faith in parliament and self-serving politicians.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> Politics is not matter of principles for most and they swivel faster than weathervanes.
> 
> So though most MPs think Leave is a bad move they are well provided for and do not care , son would benefit and some would keep their cushy job safe.
> Have some faith in parliament and self-serving politicians.


And this is the main reason I voted out


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I just wish the out voters who have won would take it more gracefully and stop slaming everyone else, what is point are they trying to make they did win didn't they can't they be happy with that.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Jesthar said:


> Consigning everyone who didn't vote 'leave' to the sidelines and discounting their viewpoints isn't a way to help do that.


And constantly moaning and complaining isn't bringing the country down?


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

rona said:


> And this is the main reason I voted out


and that was a good reason for voting out


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Happy Paws said:


> and that was a good reason for voting out


If corruption isn't a good reason, pray tell me what would have been?


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

rona said:


> If* corruption* isn't a good reason, pray tell me what would have been?


and the Houses of Parliment maybe worse..


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

I honestly cannot find it in me to say anything either sensible, understandable or even nice on this subject anymore,. It's almost 5 months since the election ok it's going to be in the headlines regarding the negotiations and the deal we will we expect that. Think we should be pulling together and making the best of what some see as a bad situation,. Some being all political parties.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> But Brexit will happen. Destructive as it is.
> Corbyn might say whatever, but Watson already stated Labour MPs will support TM ( or their seats as they are scared to lose snap election).
> After all regardless whether Labour supported Remain or not they want their seats.
> Politics is not matter of principles for most and they swivel faster than weathervanes.
> ...


It will happen,. But will it happen the way 52% voted or will there be compromises.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Happy Paws said:


> and the Houses of Parliment maybe worse..


But they are smaller fish, now in a smaller pond and the man on the street have flexed their muscles and given them a bloody nose.........helped along at a very opportune time by Mr Corbyn. How else could any of us have made such an impact on that corruption?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Happy Paws said:


> I just wish the out voters who have won would take it more gracefully and stop slaming everyone else, what is point are they trying to make they did win didn't they can't they be happy with that.


I think it's both sides that need to stop happy paws,, I am sure there are many on both sides that are sick to the back teeth of the continued arguments. hence, I cannot really be bothered r to even attempt t o put a good agreement forward so have resorted to incoherent drivel, anyway Shall we all concentrate on Christmas?.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

DT said:


> I think it's both sides that need to stop happy paws,, I am sure there are many on both sides that are sick to the back teeth of the continued arguments. hence, I cannot really be bother to put a good agreement forward so have resorted to incoherent drivel, * anyway Shall we all concentrate on Christmas?*.


Don't use swear words to me we have weeks to yet.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

Que Será, Será.

Personally, I don't know why the subject of Brexit should continually be regurgitated in one form or another. Perhaps it's simply to remind people how profoundly divided their nation is.

And the threads all too often generated/authored on PFs prove that very point.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Zaros said:


> Que Será, Será.
> 
> Personally, I don't know why the subject of Brexit should continually be regurgitated in one form or another. Perhaps it's simply to remind people how profoundly divided their nation is.
> 
> And the threads all too often generated/authored on PFs prove that very point.


Exactly!


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Let's draw a line under the subject of Brexit and issues surrounding it.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> Let's *draw a line* *under the subject of Brexit* and issues surrounding it.
> View attachment 289572


I agree and on one can rub it out.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Let's draw a line under the subject of Brexit and issues surrounding it.
> View attachment 289572


 Best post PF have ever seen by a long chalK，


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

DT said:


> Best post PF have ever seen by a long chalK，


That's not chalk, it's a pencil!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

DT said:


> I am saying no more after this!
> The vote went to the brexiters, translate it how you like, brexit won, we want out, no to the eu , get over it! We won! Translate it how you like, I see you as sore losers!,, yes you....if the cap fits wear it luv, we voted out! What part of OUT exactly don't you understand?


Maybe DT you can provide anywhere which shows where parliament agreed to a binding referendum, an exeption to the normal practice. Stockwellcat has been unable to do so.

So, in effect an opinion poll and the wishes of 17 million out of 65 million is driving the country into harming the majority of the population. So much for so called democracy.

I'm sure Farage would have simply gone away, the petition for a second referendum would not exist if the vote had gone the other way.. oh wait, that petition was started by someone who thought the vote would go the other way. It really wouldn't matter as we could always change our minds later and leave if people changed opinion or things didn't work out. That's just a minor difference obviously, once we leave that's it. We are unlikely to be able to rejoin EU. Certainly not without taking up the euro, total free movement, veto capability for a lot of things etc etc.

So how about a binding referendum instead? No, well parliament could always make a decision.. no..

PM apparantly has strong legal arguments for the supreme court which sound exactly like the arguments used last time which they lost.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Goblin said:


> Maybe DT you can provide anywhere which shows where parliament agreed to a binding referendum, an exeption to the normal practice. Stockwellcat has been unable to do so.
> 
> So, in effect an opinion poll and the wishes of 17 million out of 65 million is driving the country into harming the majority of the population. So much for so called democracy.
> 
> ...


I wrote that is preschool language to emphasise how sick to death of the subject I was, I tried unsuccessfully to walk away on more then one occassion, alas my curiosity dragged me screaming back. But to elaborate it's posts such as this that seen to rattle me, irrespective of whether I am Able to provide you with parliment agreeing to a binding referendum nowhere did I see on that ballot paper a disclaimer advising that the ballot was non binding, and I think you will find that 75% of the population believed the same. It is only that the result went the way it did that those opposing the result have dredged every miniscal area they can to have it deemed null and void.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

DT said:


> I wrote that is preschool language to emphasise how sick to death of the subject I was, I tried unsuccessfully to walk away on more then one occassion, alas my curiosity dragged me screaming back. But to elaborate it's posts such as this that seen to rattle me, irrespective of whether I am Able to provide you with parliment agreeing to a binding referendum nowhere did I see on that ballot paper a disclaimer advising that the ballot was non binding, and I think you will find that 75% of the population believed the same. It is only that the result went the way it did that those opposing the result have dredged every miniscal area they can to have it deemed null and void.


So you didn't know. Doesn't make it false. If 75% of the people are wrong about that, surely that means 75% can also easily make the wrong decision as they use false information to determine how they vote?

The one thing I think everyone can agree with is the whole referendum was based on falsehoods.

People who wish to remain don't have to drag up anything. The referendum was really only an opinion poll. Are you telling me you believe for one second that the campaign for leaving the EU would have stopped. Difference is, leaving is final. Not leaving was not going to be. Are you shocked people want to actually have meaningful discussions before jumping off a cliff.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

Goblin said:


> So you didn't know. Doesn't make it false. If 75% of the people are wrong about that, surely that means 75% can also easily make the wrong decision as they use false information to determine how they vote?
> 
> The one thing I think everyone can agree with is the whole referendum was based on falsehoods.
> 
> People who wish to remain don't have to drag up anything. The referendum was really only an opinion poll. Are you telling me you believe for one second that the campaign for leaving the EU would have stopped. Difference is, leaving is final. Not leaving was not going to be. Are you shocked people want to actually have meaningful discussions before jumping off a cliff.


Well all I can say to anyone that would consider the referendum to be nothing more then an opinion poll is wow that was one expensive opinion poll.

And with relation to us even being in the eu to start with was the vote as whether to whether we join the EU when we were already a member of the common market a repective referendum too? ( feel free to correct me anyone who knows the event here, I was too young to care) . But is there not subsidence that we were taken I.legally into the EU to start with? The big difference between this two referendums is that today we have 21st century communications back then we had pen paper and if you were lucky a telephone box at the end of the road .

Yes. I can see why people are making a noise, and I think the way things are going and whatever the outcome in the digging will cease to stop, least not in my lifetime!


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

Did anyone hear one fact come out of a politicians mouth in the run up to the referendum? They took us all for fools and everyone has to deal with the consequences of that.
I still feel I was in the right, but that wasn't based on any facts, I truly wish it was. There were no facts forthcoming on either side, just soundbites and scare tactics.
It's the politicians to blame, not the people and oddly not really the press either, though they are doing their bit to stir the the pot


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

rona said:


> Did anyone hear one fact come out of a politicians mouth in the run up to the referendum? They took us all for fools and everyone has to deal with the consequences of that.
> I still feel I was in the right, but that wasn't based on any facts, I truly wish it was. There were no facts forthcoming on either side, just soundbites and scare tactics.
> It's the politicians to blame, not the people and oddly not really the press either, though they are doing their bit to stir the the pot


Totally one hundred per cent yes!


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

If only we had real activists on the side of democracy...


----------



## samuelsmiles (Dec 29, 2010)

Goblin said:


> Maybe DT you can provide anywhere which shows where parliament agreed to a binding referendum, an exeption to the normal practice. Stockwellcat has been unable to do so.
> 
> *So, in effect an opinion poll and the wishes of 17 million out of 65 million is driving the country into harming the majority of the population.* So much for so called democracy.
> 
> ...


Just for balance, there are 45 million people eligible in the UK to vote. (and plenty of those couldn't be arsed to vote)

Leaving the EU driving the country into harm is an opinion, not a fact - it's all this dithering and legal wrangling that will be doing more harm. We'll be just fine once we are out and getting our business done.

Well, at the very least, I won't be paying my taxes for MEP's pensions and expenses.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Pound crash is a fact. The health of country's currency is one of major indicators of the state of it's economy.

Brexit is destructive.
It will make Britain much mote corrupted @rona when Russian dirty money would flow in unchecked tsunami.
A friend of mine with who is Russian wealthy man.connected to those circles told me he hoped for Brexit for now they would simply biy this country ( meaning the likes of Bow group).
Russia wants their power in Europe and breaking EU gives them that.
They have agreement with Trump who already promised not to bother with Europe so much.

Deals with India? Commonwealth?
Of course. But then Britain would have to accept migration from there as a part of the deal.
Australia already demands free movement in exchange for trade deal.

Surely NZ would follow.

Imagine trade deal with Putin.

India where TM is visiting today already demands many thousands more " work visas".

So you basically would change workers from EU for workers from non- EU.

Reminder: Islamic extremists do not come from Poland.

I for once have no issues with Indian doctors and dentists if they come to replace Polish ones.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> It will make Britain much mote corrupted


I beg to differ

Just because the deals are being done undercover of the secret EU, doesn't mean it's not going on. Far easier to uncover the dirty deals when they are not being protected by that huge back hander that is the EU


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

rona said:


> I beg to differ
> 
> Just because the deals are being done undercover of the secret EU, doesn't mean it's not going on. Far easier to uncover the dirty deals when they are not being protected by that huge back hander that is the EU


Think differently.
It was like four eyes principle..

Do you think EU is more corrupted than India or China?

How many " working visas" those deals would get?

I do not mean Brits backpacking in Asia...

Trade is always both ways.
Unless one side is much more vulnerable


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

@cheekyscrip The Government is now preparing it's first draft bill to put to Parliament to put the coggs in motion to exit the EU. There will be alot of negotiating going on in the background, because the Government has decided this is to be done behind closed doors doesn't mean it isn't going on.. They are pushing ahead with the appeal in the Supreme Court but are also preparing if they get defeated in the Supreme Court that it goes in front of Parliament for a vote one would assume within days after being defeated in the Supreme Court. Theresa May said we will still be triggering article 50 in March 2017. It is in the UKs best interest to make sure we get the best possible deal with the EU to avoid using WTO rules but either way we will get a deal. Just because we don't see things going on doesn't mean they aren't going on because they are.


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> But then Britain would have to accept migration from there as a part of the deal.


We don't mind migration, just controlled migration.



cheekyscrip said:


> Do you think EU is more corrupted


Possibly not but we will not be ruled by those countries, we will just do deals with them,

It's like that saying Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Far to much power and secrecy going on behind those doors at EU. Why weren't people up in arms about that?


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> @cheekyscrip The Government is now preparing it's first draft bill to put to Parliament to put the coggs in motion to exit the EU. There will be alot of negotiating going on in the background, because the Government has decided this is to be done behind closed doors doesn't mean it isn't going on.. They are pushing ahead with the appeal in the Supreme Court but are also preparing if they get defeated in the Supreme Court that it goes in front of Parliament for a vote one would assume within days after being defeated in the Supreme Court. Theresa May said we will still be triggering article 50 in March 2017. It is in the UKs best interest to make sure we get the best possible deal with the EU to avoid using WTO rules but either way we will get a deal. Just because we don't see things going on doesn't mean they aren't going on because they are.


Surely lots is going on...
Ask Nissan.lol.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> Surely lots is going on...
> Ask Nissan.lol.


Nissan is one company.
Give the Government a chance.
Just because you dont know what is going on makes you so cynical. Why?
We have one time to get this right and alot of preparation needs to be done and it is being done behind closed doors so we don't reveal our negotiating hand to the EU. What is wrong with that? Doing things this way will give the UK a strong negotiating hand.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

rona said:


> We don't mind migration, just controlled migration.
> 
> Possibly not but we will not be ruled by those countries, we will just do deals with them,
> 
> It's like that saying Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Far to much power and secrecy going on behind those doors at EU. Why weren't people up in arms about that?


Nissan?

And obviously British political scene does smell of roses...
Such a bunch of trustworthy, honest politicians with versions for any side.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> Nissan is one company.
> Give the Government a chance.
> Just because you dont know what is going on makes you so cynical. Why?
> We have one time to get this right and alot of preparation needs to be done and it is being done behind closed doors so we don't reveal our negotiating hand to the EU. What is wrong with that? Doing things this way will give the UK a strong negotiating hand.


Lol.
Nothing better than closed doors and no questions asked.
Works wonders in Russia.

Best if government works in secret.
Nothing is better for nepotism and corruption than doors closed shut.

You might as well cut costs and dispose of parliament as soon as government is chosen.
Scotland and NI would really appreciate that.

Lived for over 20 years in wonderful place when one party ruled all and parliament was a decorative club of sycophants.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> Lol.
> Nothing better than closed doors and no questions asked.
> Works wonders in Russia.
> 
> ...


No winning with you is there  Even if Parliament gets there vote. I'll let you be so negative and cynical it's ok. When the UK leaves the EU and we have many trade deals in place around the world you maybe apologising for being so panick struck, cynical and negative. As I said before all we can do at this stage is sit back and see what happens next, the motions are still going through court.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> No winning with you is there  Even if Parliament gets there vote. I'll let you be so negative and cynical it's ok. When the UK leaves the EU and we have many trade deals in place around the world you maybe apologising for being so panick struck, cynical and negative. As I said before all we can do at this stage is sit back and see what happens next.


Fine. Lets meet in ten years over nice ale and compare the notes.
Hope we can afford the ale.

Yes. I am very cynical as far as politicians go...BJ, Gove, Corbyn...TM..so.on..
I do not trust politicians and therefore demand they watch each other hands...
You know: you need a thief to catch a thief...

For the sake of our beer I wish you were right...
Sorry if I am sceptical though...


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> Fine. Lets meet in ten years over nice ale and compare the notes.
> Hope we can afford the ale.
> 
> Yes. I am very cynical as far as politicians go...BJ, Gove, Corbyn...TM..so.on..
> ...


Yes but if the Government reveal there hand then it exposes the UK to God knows what during the negotiations with the EU. It is better that the UKs negotiating hand is kept secret until the UK starts negotiating with the EU. Don't you get that bit?


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> Yes but if the Government reveal there hand then it exposes the UK to God knows what during the negotiations with the EU. It is better that the UKs negotiating hand is kept secret until the UK starts negotiating. Don't you get that bit?


It is not a game of poker.
Once it is established that government can do things without questions asked you are in Russia.
It will always find excuses.

Never ever trust those in power.
Always ask questions and watch your back people.

Never trust authorities implicitly.

Never say" just this one time it would be ok."
Never is.

Transparency or " glastnost" is a cornerstone of democracy.
Once is lost democracy is lost.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> It is not a game of poker.
> Once it is established that government can do things without questions asked you ate in Russia


You are correct it isn't a game of poker.

We have lost trade deals in the past by revealing our negotiating hand before hand well before the EU existed. Wouldn't you prefer the UK has a strong negotiating hand or a weak one? We only have one chance to get this right.

Why you comparing the UK to Russia, we are nothing like Russia.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> Yes but if the Government reveal there hand then it exposes the UK to God knows what during the negotiations with the EU. It is better that the UKs negotiating hand is kept secret until the UK starts negotiating. Don't you get that bit?


Oh I get it. I also get that if the hand they don't reveal is utter sh*t in the first place then nobody has had chance to question why they've done what they've done. There are no second chances here. It isn't OK to come out of negotiations claiming they got the best possible deal after the event when they may fail spectacularly and then try and claim it as a success.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> You are correct it isn't a game of poker.
> 
> We have lost trade deals in the past by revealing our negotiating hand before hand well before the EU existed. Wouldn't you prefer the UK has a strong negotiating hand or a weak one? We only have one chance to get this right.
> 
> Why you comparing the UK to Russia, we are nothing like Russia.


In Russia government does not need to answer to parliament.
Cam do anything they want and just tell nation what was decided.
UK obviously differs.
Lol


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

I'll leave you guys to be cynical, sceptical etc as you have nothing else to do. I have other things to do other than explain things simply and you don't want to listen.

I am moving on and not coming back to this thread.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> I'll leave you guys to be cynical, sceptical etc as you have nothing else to do. I have other things to do other than explain things simply and you don't want to listen.
> 
> I am moving on and not coming back to this thread.


I think it is beer time for you and G&T for me...

I lived, worked and drank in both UK and Russia..can tell the difference.
Na zdrovie.


----------



## suewhite (Oct 31, 2009)

stockwellcat said:


> I'll leave you guys to be cynical, sceptical etc as you have nothing else to do. I have other things to do other than explain things simply and you don't want to listen.
> 
> I am moving on and not coming back to this thread.


Bet you


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

rona said:


> Possibly not but we will not be ruled by those countries, we will just do deals with them,


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Goblin said:


>


They do not want to listen. Britain will be anything but Great and we just spread negativity ...
"morituri te salutant" and with big smile.

And it is not about " hidden plan" and " aces up the sleeve"...it is about revealing that there is no plan. No aces. Not even full house. 
I think British people should know before Brexit happens.
No more plan that expressed .
More like a bucket list of wushful thinking.


----------



## diefenbaker (Jan 15, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Not a Norway deal, Not a Swiss deal, but our own UK deal.


In order to be included in the argument what you want/don't want would have to be a direct result of being in/out of the EU.

1. This in my opinion is a problem. Mass competition for low paid jobs drives down wages.

2. You don't need to leave the EU to do this. It's not against EU rules.

3. Non-UK EU nationals do not have access to benefits simply by being here. For social assistance benefits you must be a worker or self-employed person paying in to the taxation system. You have to be in employment for 12 months and then made involuntarily redundant to be out of work and still qualify. If people are getting benefits without meeting these requirements it's not EU law.

4. Anyone visiting the UK from the EU is not entitled to free NHS treatment. EHIC holders are entitled to emergency treatment. Otherwise you have to pass the Habitual Residence test. The NHS may do things differently but that's not EU law.

5. All students in England as far as I am aware pay tuition fees. Favouring non-UK EU students with subsidies would of course break EU law. EU students who go to Scotland do not pay tuition fees. That is EU law. English Students who go to Scotland pay tuition fees. That is not EU law it's UK law.

6. This already exists. Retirees from the EU must be self-sufficient. "A retired person would qualify as self-sufficient if they can demonstrate that they are in receipt of a pension and / or have sufficient funds not to become a burden on the social assistance system."


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

rona said:


> And constantly moaning and complaining isn't bringing the country down?


They did this themselves with their superiority complex over other countries which has made them look foolish to others. In reality the UK is no better nor worse than any other country whatever the newspapers and some politicians preach.

Residing in a country that's proud to be part of the EU has only strengthened my support for it and how proud I was of the UK being part of it.

Brexit has made me a better person though. It has made me appreciate the overseas born friends more knowing I would never have met them had it not been for free movement of European citizens. Remembering of course the UK citizens' right to move within the EU.

I for one will mourn the loss of this.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> Let's draw a line under the subject of Brexit and issues surrounding it.
> View attachment 289572


AS SAID ^^^^^

*This really is getting really silly now, everyone has their own opinion and one is going to change it so lets give it a rest now, I'm sure we have better things to do than keep raking this up all the time.
*
I'm says good bye to this BREXIT THREAD.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

rona said:


> She has defended the Judges right to come to the conclusion they did, while at the same time stating a right to appeal that decision. She has defended the right of a free press and freedom of speech.
> All being firmly linked to democracy


Are people really incapable of distinguishing criticism of a legal decision from incitement of hatred toward the judges?  I'm sure May does differentiate, but as shes in the pocket of the right wing media barons, she's too spineless to criticise their hate fuelling rags.

Even her own MPs are horrified. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...-ruling-backlash_uk_581d9bece4b020461a1c7591?

*Tory MP and former attorney general Grieve **told BBC Newsnight **that he was "horrified" by the way some sections of the media covered the ruling, saying: "The judges did exactly what was asked of them."

He also described attacks the judiciary as "chilling and outrageous" and "smacking of the fascist state", **according to the Press Association.*

*Grieve and other former ministers have warned the Prime Minister she must "make clear" that the independence of the judiciary is a fundamental element of British democracy*

From the Commissioner of Human Rights >>>



__ https://www.facebook.com/CommissionerHR/posts/683530868489493



I am very concerned by the political and media reaction in the United Kingdom to the Divisional Court's ruling last week that Parliament would need to trigger the UK's withdrawal from the European Union. These were blatant attacks on the independence of the judiciary designed to stir up popular hatred, not just against the so-called "enemies of the people" but also those who brought the claim to the courts. One legal campaigner has subsequently received numerous rape and death threats as well as racist abuse online.

A free press must still be a responsible press. Reporting should not contribute to creating an atmosphere of hostility, rejection and hate speech. Four years ago, the Leveson Report found that a significant number of news stories in the UK failed to meet standards of integrity and propriety and reflected a culture of "recklessness in prioritising sensational stories, almost irrespective of the harm these may cause and the rights of those affected". Just last month the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI), in its monitoring report on the UK, regretted the fact that the UK has still not established an independent press regulator and that as a result certain tabloid newspapers continue to publish offensive material. I join ECRI in underlining the importance of responsible reporting, which avoids perpetrating prejudice and biased information and which avoids harm to targeted persons and vulnerable groups. The spike in hate crimes immediately after the UK's referendum on EU membership and the climate of hostility to non-nationals can be linked to the hate speech targeting migrants in some parts of the UK press and by certain leading politicians long before and in the run up to the referendum. Words matter as they are often the first step towards actual violence.

Counter speech and counter-narratives are one way of combatting unacceptable discourse in the media and by some politicians. These send a clear public message that intolerant views, especially when they clearly incite violence, are unacceptable. This is why political leaders have a duty to stand up to those sectors of the media that are stirring up hatred. A stronger message is now needed from the UK government which clearly condemns the personal attacks on the judges and the targeting of those individuals who brought the challenge to the courts.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

DoodlesRule said:


> *Do those who voted remain believe this ruling is going to stop our leaving the EU?*
> Out of 500+ constituencies, 400+ voted to leave with the majority of their MPs having an opposing view. Do you really believe the right honourable (pah!!) ladies & gentlemen are going to put themselves out of their jobs by going against their voters, really I think not!
> 
> If they did get a fit of the vapours and stick by what they supposedly believe and try to stop Article 50 being invoked at all there would be a general election - labour would be annihilated and we would get a hard line tory/UKIP government.


I doubt it. From what I've seen (unlike many brexiters) remainers seem fully aware what this ruling means.



stockwellcat said:


> Sorry I missed the joke.
> 
> We are still leaving the EU. It's just Parliament may get a vote on Article 50, but this is up to the Supreme Court now to judge. You are aware that the majority of the MPs are behind Brexit now unlike the minority of the 'Remoaners' who just can't stop moaning.
> 
> Sorry I didn't find your joke funny.


Did the satire make you face reality for a second?? A sense of humour is all us remoaners have left as we see our country disappearing down the sewer lol.

Another funny here A question from a Brexiter from one of their facebook sites lol












Colliebarmy said:


> We decry countries that ignore democratic voting then ignore the results...
> 
> this no better


You never fact check anything, do you?

Here I've done it for you.

From the judgement --


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Oh dear, how humiliating. So that's knock backs from Norway, Canada & now India.


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

This thread is going no where.


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

Does it have to? Can't people just have a chat and say what they think without it having to reach a destination?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Happy Paws said:


> This thread is going no where.


Did you really expect it to? The title says it all. The referendum has damaged the UK, damage which will take a long time to heal. That damage has nothing to do with any result of Brexit.

The good news is that the legal system is standing up for what it is supposed to, UK democracy. Democracy which cannot be destroyed just as a vocal minority claims it is the only voice to be able to use it.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

BREAKING: Nicola Sturgeon launches legal ambush to stop May overturning High court ruling - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...lenge-supreme-court-appeal-case-a7404591.html

Nice one Nicola.


----------



## samuelsmiles (Dec 29, 2010)

Goblin said:


> Did you really expect it to? The title says it all. *The referendum has damaged the UK*, damage which will take a long time to heal. That damage has nothing to do with any result of Brexit.
> 
> The good news is that the legal system is standing up for what it is supposed to, UK democracy. Democracy which cannot be destroyed just as a vocal minority claims it is the only voice to be able to use it.


Again, this is your _opinion_.

Here are some _facts _for the optimistic.

*Retail sales up in best month since January*
*
Foreign shoppers to fuel pre-Christmas sales boom in central London*

*Reserved! Polish fashion chain moves into BHS flagship store*


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

noushka05 said:


> BREAKING: Nicola Sturgeon launches legal ambush to stop May overturning High court ruling - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...lenge-supreme-court-appeal-case-a7404591.html
> 
> Nice one Nicola.


The Supreme Court have to grant the SNP permission to be at the appeal first as they weren't at the original court hearing. So don't get to excited as they more than likely will say no to her and the SNP.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

samuelsmiles said:


> Again, this is your _opinion_.
> 
> Here are some _facts _for the optimistic.


I deliberately ignored the harm Bexit will cause, I was talking about the damage already done to society.

As for the rest, yep, shame you ignore the bad news isn't it. You know those pesky ones which the DM and the like ignore. How about that little one like basic groceries for everyone will rise after christmas. I know, you can boycott marmite, walkers and the like, what about essentials? How about UK research communities are being hit already. How about foreign recruitment when many existing workers no longer are comfortable staying. How special deals are being done behind closed doors to try to ensure jobs aren't lost.That the brexit minister has declared he'll do whatever it takes to keep the financial services happy, a promise he cannot keep (mostly foreign companies). Spin can sustain for while, not indefinately. Those who believe it will be worse off.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> The Supreme Court have to grant the SNP permission to be at the appeal first as they weren't at the original court hearing. So don't get to excited as they more than likely will say no to her and the SNP.


I love Reserved!!!

That is a silver lining...

Pity BHS closed here...

So we might be poorer and weaker..and even fractured ...but Lo! And behold! Dressed in nice affordable Polish clothes...

Because we are worth it.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> I love Reserved!!!
> 
> That is a silver lining...
> 
> ...


BHS going under was nothing to do with Brexit it was down to Sir Philip Green.

The people buying the flagship store of BHS has nothing to do with Brexit either.

So I am confused with you targeting me over this as I didn't mention it. 

Just looking for an excuse to have ago at me 

How are we poorer and weaker? The economy and FTSE index (the FTSE is at its highest in 5 years) say otherwise.

http://www.londonstockexchange.com/.../summary/summary-indices-chart.html?index=UKX

















The GDP is higher than the same quarter as last year (2015) so there has been growth in the UKs economy. So I beg to differ that the UK is poorer or weaker.


Oh no I have been dragged back into the debate


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> BHS going under was nothing to do with Brexit it was down to Sir Philip Green.
> 
> The people buying the flagship store of BHS has nothing to do with Brexit either.
> 
> ...


Lol!
Now all you have to say" I am Stockwellcat and I am an addict"

And I did not bring BHS to it.
Anyhow it was lame for years.

But! Reserved is good. I used to buy a lot of their things.
Just Google...

When Brexit happens we will look at those charts...


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> Lol!
> Now all you have to say" I am Stockwellcat and I am an addict"
> 
> And I did not bring BHS to it.
> ...


I did Google and couldn't find @cheekyscrip buying from BHS  Google must have removed the links


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

GDP Growth Forecast until 2018


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

stockwellcat said:


> The GDP is higher than the same quarter as last year (2015) so there has been growth in the UKs economy. So I beg to differ that the UK is poorer or weaker.





stockwellcat said:


> GDP Growth Forecast until 2018


What are the forecasts for once we've actually left. Showing great predictions for while we're still in the EU doesn't tell us anything.


----------



## samuelsmiles (Dec 29, 2010)

Goblin said:


> I deliberately ignored the harm Bexit will cause, I was talking about the damage already done to society.
> 
> As for the rest, yep,* shame you ignore the bad news isn't it*. You know those pesky ones which the DM and the like ignore. How about that little one like basic groceries for everyone will rise after christmas. I know, you can boycott marmite, walkers and the like, what about essentials? How about UK research communities are being hit already. How about foreign recruitment when many existing workers no longer are comfortable staying. How special deals are being done behind closed doors to try to ensure jobs aren't lost.That the brexit minister has declared he'll do whatever it takes to keep the financial services happy, a promise he cannot keep (mostly foreign companies). Spin can sustain for while, not indefinately. Those who believe it will be worse off.


Yes, as you ignore any good news.

The links I post are facts, not spin - but whether they turn out to be definitely indefinite we won't know for months and years. 

I'm actually finding the pessimism from you quite depressing now, so I'll leave you to it.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

havoc said:


> What are the forecasts for once we've actually left. Showing great predictions for while we're still in the EU doesn't tell us anything.


There are no forecasts online at the moment for after Brexit. This was the best I could find.








Don't ask me what it means as the other graphs I put up are the ones I understand.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

samuelsmiles said:


> Yes, as you ignore any good news.
> 
> The links I post are facts, not spin - but whether they turn out to be definitely indefinite we won't know for months and years.
> 
> I'm actually finding the pessimism from you quite depressing now, so I'll leave you to it.


Unicorns and rainbows...
@stockwellcat ! Lol!
I am afraid those are part of Dark Web ...the sight of me in BHS lovelies..


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> The GDP is higher than the same quarter as last year (2015) so there has been growth in the UKs economy. So I beg to differ that the UK is poorer or weaker.


How much extra money are you getting to cover cost of living rising? Can you post the GDP predictions if we stay in the EU?

The UK is dependent on heavy flows of investment from abroad to make up for the weaknesses in its own institutions. In 2015 the UK ran a deficit in its external trade in goods and services of 96 billion pounds, or 5.2 percent of GDP, the largest % deficit in postwar Britain and by far the largest of any of the G-7 group. In comparison, the US 2.6%, Germany surplus of 8.3%, Japan a surplus of 3.6%, France broke even.

Of key interest is advanced goods and between 2005 and 2011 South Korea had a massive a 93 percent increase in the value of advanced goods exports, Germany 46%, Italy 35%, Japan 31%, France 24% and the US with 22%. The UK managed 7% even with a depreciation of the pound by 18%. Uk made up the difference by encouraging global corporations into the country, both manufacturing and services. What do you think encouraged them to do so, hint.. has something to do with the EU which will no longer exist as "Brexit is brexit". Which is why back room deals are likely to continue. What is that going to cost where foreign corporations can blackmail the government? Didn't you want sovereignty?



> Oh no I have been dragged back into the debate


Again.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> How much extra money are you getting to cover cost of living rising? Can you post the GDP predictions if we stay in the EU?
> 
> The UK is dependent on heavy flows of investment from abroad to make up for the weaknesses in its own institutions. In 2015 the UK ran a deficit in its external trade in goods and services of 96 billion pounds, or 5.2 percent of GDP, the largest % deficit in postwar Britain and by far the largest of any of the G-7 group. In comparison, the US 2.6%, Germany surplus of 8.3%, Japan a surplus of 3.6%, France broke even.
> 
> ...


:Yawn


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> Unicorns and rainbows...
> @stockwellcat ! Lol!
> I am afraid those are part of Dark Web ...the sight of me in BHS lovelies..


Logging on to dark web now.
Searching....
Searching....
Dark web crashed.
Rebooting...

Only joking I don't know what the dark web is and wouldn't even know were to find it.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> Logging on to dark web now.
> Searching....
> Searching....
> Dark web crashed.
> ...


You don't know the power of Dark Net!

It is right there..behind those closed doors...


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> You don't know the power of Dark Net!
> 
> It is right there..behind those closed doors...


Sounds a bit illegal to me. But have no interest. The only web I know is when I click on my browser and petforums loads up


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> Sounds a bit illegal to me. But have no interest. The only web I know is when I click on my browser and performs loads up
> 
> I don't even know what a bit coin is but know people are making a fortune from them.


This is the problem with those closed doors . Lots of illegal things are going on behind them., you see...

Glad you came to that conclusion.
Took us a while.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Unicorns! 

It reminded me of this brilliant response to that vile Katie Hopkins lol


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

noushka05 said:


> Unicorns!
> 
> It reminded me of this brilliant response to that vile Katie Hopkins lol
> 
> View attachment 289782


Meet the Supreme Court judges that will be hearing the Governments appeal and the head judge doesn't believe the UK has a constitution. Fun times ahead.








Yes that's right there's 11 judges.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

TM


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> View attachment 289786
> TM


Yep it's called Brexit.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> Yep it's called Brexit.


 This what I am afraid of.
This is exactly Brexit.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

cheekyscrip said:


> View attachment 289786
> TM














stockwellcat said:


> Yep it's called Brexit.


...


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

noushka05 said:


> View attachment 289788


That drawing must have took you all afternoon. Which gallery have you done it for? 

How do you know they don't have a plan btw? Do you work for them?


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

samuelsmiles said:


> Yes, as you ignore any good news.
> 
> The links I post are facts, not spin - but whether they turn out to be definitely indefinite we won't know for months and years.
> 
> I'm actually finding the pessimism from you quite depressing now, so I'll leave you to it.


BHS had nothing to do with Brexit so you're suggesting because a sole London branch is to reopen with new owners is due to Brexit?!

Quite frankly Brexit is depressing. I just hope we can still leave the UK when we retire.....


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

KittenKong said:


> BHS had nothing to do with Brexit so you're suggesting because a sole London branch is to reopen with new owners is due to Brexit?!
> 
> Quite frankly Brexit is depressing. * just hope we can still leave the UK when we retire.....*


Of course you will be able to. You'll just need a visa.


----------



## Zaros (Nov 24, 2009)

stockwellcat said:


> Let's draw a line under the subject of Brexit and issues surrounding it.
> View attachment 289572





stockwellcat said:


> Of course you will be able to. You'll just need a visa.


 It's an effin' long line you appear to be drawing here.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Zaros said:


> It's an effin' long line you appear to be drawing here.


Yep. It doesn't fit on PF.


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

stockwellcat said:


> Of course you will be able to. You'll just need a visa.


Won't you need a visa to work in another country? Retirement is something completely different.

We'll see how things stand in 15 years time.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Zaros said:


> It's an effin' long line you appear to be drawing here.











Almost finished drawing my line


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> the head judge doesn't believe the UK has a constitution


We don't 
https://www.bl.uk/magna-carta/articles/britains-unwritten-constitution


----------



## kimthecat (Aug 11, 2009)

it looks something you'd see at the Tate Modern and worth a fortune !


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> Surely lots is





KittenKong said:


> Won't you need a visa to work in another country? Retirement is something completely different.
> 
> We'll see how things stand in 15 years time.


wont apply to me then, as guess I'll be laying, unless that is they start burying us upright


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

DT said:


> wont apply to me then, as guess I'll be laying, unless that is they start burying up upright


Oi! So you dropped us in it on ya way out?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> Oi! So you dropped us in it on ya way out?


Lol only you could think that one up


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

If there's any truth in this, this is excellent news. Just a proposal at the moment so I won't be building my hopes up too much.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...eep-parliament-live-move-abroad-a7405196.html


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

I keep saying I'm going to walk away from all this, it's never going to happen:Spiderman but I'd like to offer another prospective on this!

If, and it's only an if, we had had a stronger government, MEPS, leadership , courts, there would never have been a need for a referendum in the first place!


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

DT said:


> I keep saying I'm going to walk away from all this, it's never going to happen:Spiderman but I'd like to offer another prospective on this!
> 
> If, and it's only an if, we had had a stronger government, MEPS, leadership , courts, there would never have been a need for a referendum in the first place!


I disagree because then it sounds as if you voted leave to defy the establishment that being the British Government and not because you wanted to leave the EU. I voted leave not because of this but because I disagree with free movement and the fact that the EU is failing and to save the UK from being dragged under with the EU are some of the reasons why I voted leave. The Referendum would have happened because if you look back in history since we joined the single market we have many Referendums trying to get out of the single market and EU. This is the first time it has swung in favour of leave.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

DT said:


> I keep saying I'm going to walk away from all this, it's never going to happen:Spiderman but I'd like to offer another prospective on this!
> 
> If, and it's only an if, we had had a stronger government, MEPS, leadership , courts, there would never have been a need for a referendum in the first place!


Oh..and eternal youth. World peace and unicorns.


----------



## Jonescat (Feb 5, 2012)

stockwellcat said:


> The Referendum would have happened because if you look back in history since we joined the single market we have many Referendums trying to get out of the single market and EU.


 Many? When? Am I older than I think and losing my memory completely?


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> I disagree because then it sounds as if you voted leave to defy the establishment that being the British Government and not because you wanted to leave the EU. I voted leave not because of this but because I disagree with free movement and the fact that the EU is failing and to save the UK from being dragged under with the EU are some of the reasons why I voted leave. The Referendum would have happened because if you look back in history since we joined the single market we have many Referendums trying to get out of the single market and EU. This is the first time it has swung in favour of leave.


Wasn't Nige our MEP?
Agree. He is rubbish...bit too harsh though to vote Leave to punish him?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Jonescat said:


> Many? When? Am I older than I think and losing my memory completely?


Sorry I apologise there was this vote:

5 June 1975: UK - Membership of the European Community referendum on whether the UK should stay in the European Community (yes)
This was related to what is now known as the EU.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> :Yawn


I know facts bore you, you prefer spin.



rona said:


> We don't


There's a difference between an unwritten constitution and not having a constitution.



stockwellcat said:


> This is the first time it has swung in favour of leave.


So this is the reason that we have to do it and submit to something we cannot undo...


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> So this is the reason that we have to do it and submit to something we cannot undo...


Yep. I mean YES.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> Wasn't Nige our MEP?
> Agree. He is rubbish...bit too harsh though to vote Leave to punish him?


I actually think Nigel, when he turns up is a brilliant mep! He certainly keeps the other dinosaurs on their toes, without him they'd be asleep!


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> I disagree because then it sounds as if you voted leave to defy the establishment that being the British Government and not because you wanted to leave the EU. I voted leave not because of this but because I disagree with free movement and the fact that the EU is failing and to save the UK from being dragged under with the EU are some of the reasons why I voted leave. The Referendum would have happened because if you look back in history since we joined the single market we have many Referendums trying to get out of the single market and EU. This is the first time it has swung in favour of leave.


Totally not! I am a card carrying member of ukip ( least until 2dec this year), have been for years, it's not about ukip anymore it's now more straightforward, It's 40 odd years since we were dragged into the eu during that time if they couldn't get their act together there was only one option! That was my point! Forty years of failure, there was only ever going to be one alternative!


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

DT said:


> Totally not! I am a card carrying member of ukip ( least until 2dec this year), have been for years, it's not about ukip anymore it's now more straightforward, It's 40 odd years since we were dragged into the eu during that time if they couldn't get their act together there was only one option! That was my point! Forty years of failure, there was only ever going to be one alternative!


I apologise. Didn't mean to upset you. Great you are a UKIP supporter and totally agree with you.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

No need to apologise, all I was trying to emphasise is that 'the club' is broken, in the opinion of the majority beyond repair. Had there have been a firmer stance taken by those in power in the early days things may have been difference. My choice of words is not always dishiponed by some in the way they were meant.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

DT said:


> I actually think Nigel, when he turns up is a brilliant mep! He certainly keeps the other dinosaurs on their toes, without him they'd be asleep!


Never was so embarrassed as during his speech after referendum.
Must admit though..For once Juncker looked sober.

Yet much as I believe Jucker has much to be blamed for there was nit much British Greatness in insulting everyone present bearing that we do not declare war on EU and join Russia, but would have to have a deal with them.

Dinosaurs have poisonous teeth.

The way TM is treated stems from that.

Courtesy for your opponents is being a good sport.
British were known for being gentlemen. 
British impeccable manners were something that was making Britain great.
Farage lacks class.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Sorry I apologise there was this vote:
> 
> 5 June 1975: UK - Membership of the European Community referendum on whether the UK should stay in the European Community (yes)
> This was related to what is now known as the EU.


I read that different to you
I read that as we were already in the common market, but the vote was should we join the EU remember we were already in the common market Or I have I got the wrong one?
Ignore me if I've got this all wrong, I was too young to care then!


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> Never was so embarrassed as during his speech after referendum.
> Must admit though..For once Juncker looked sober.
> 
> Yet much as I believe Jucker has much to be blamed for there was nit much British Greatness in insulting everyone present bearing that we do not declare war on EU and join Russia, but would have to have a deal with them.
> ...


Well British class seems to be letting us down, or maybe it's just working for the British class, I have met Nigel, i find him rather engaging and approachable, would much rather a dinner party with him then your British gentleman with his impeccable manners, least I wouldn't fall Asleep

Obviously class is wasted on me


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> Never was so embarrassed as during his speech after referendum.
> Must admit though..For once Juncker looked sober.
> 
> Yet much as I believe Jucker has much to be blamed for there was nit much British Greatness in insulting everyone present bearing that we do not declare war on EU and join Russia, but would have to have a deal with them.
> ...


With your remark regarding Russia I am a little concerned about who thinks who is declaring war on who here, and surprised that intelligent people believe everything that is written about Putin. I cannot for the life of me see why every wants to antagonise the situation, I know everyone's prespective of this differs but out of interest whom do people think is Putin going to attack first, should he decide to attack? Stupid question I know, just interested what people visualise on this


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

DT said:


> Well British class seems to be letting us down, or maybe it's just working for the British class, I have met Nigel, i find him rather engaging and approachable, would much rather a dinner party with him then your British gentleman with his impeccable manners, least I wouldn't fall Asleep
> 
> Obviously class is wasted on me


You do like making sweeping statements! I've worked for a number of different people in different 'classes' and they are all individuals...some are interesting, some are boring, some are arrogant, some are caring...it's got nothing to do with class and everything to do with the person themselves. A bit like leavers and remainers really...


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

DT said:


> I read that different to you
> I read that as we were already in the common market, but the vote was should we join the EU remember we were already in the common market Or I have I got the wrong one?
> Ignore me if I've got this all wrong, I was too young to care then!


Probably me that has it wrong.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

DT said:


> Well British class seems to be letting us down, or maybe it's just working for the British class, I have met Nigel, i find him rather engaging and approachable, would much rather a dinner party with him then your British gentleman with his impeccable manners, least I wouldn't fall Asleep
> 
> Obviously class is wasted on me


Not talking about dinner party.
Politics is not a ball.

I would love to dine ACDC...or Freddie Merkury...but would not vote for them as MPs!

Surely he is entertaining. That does help if you plan Christmas party not future of your country.

Problem.is that he is incompetent.

Beyond slogans there is no substance.
No knowledge.
No experience.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Probably me that has it wrong.


Sorry no I got it wrong, it was should we remain in the eu when we weren't members of the eu, we were in the common market, think that's how it went


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> Not talking about dinner party.
> Politics is not a ball.
> 
> I would love to dine ACDC...or Freddie Merkury...but would not vote for them as MPs!
> ...


Bit harsh.

This morning on This Morning Farage was told he is a very intelligent man during an interview and he came across very calm and explained himself well as if he knew what he was talking about.

He worked in the heart of the EU and still does as an MEP so to say he has no experience is wrong so is saying he has no knowledge. He has seen how the EU Parliament works and how disorganised it is. Yes he probably has been a thorn in there side but I wonder why?


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> Not talking about dinner party.
> Politics is not a ball.
> 
> I would love to dine ACDC...or Freddie Merkury...but would not vote for them as MPs!
> ...


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

DT said:


> With your remark regarding Russia I am a little concerned about who thinks who is declaring war on who here, and surprised that intelligent people believe everything that is written about Putin. I cannot for the life of me see why every wants to antagonise the situation, I know everyone's prespective of this differs but out of interest whom do people think is Putin going to attack first, should he decide to attack? Stupid question I know, just interested what people visualise on this


I worked in Russia. I still work as interpreter.
Putin just works for Russian establishment .
Just an efficient tool for them.
Russia is ruled by big money and the army.
Check what Bow group stands for; check connections between Russian oligarchy and Tory supporting business groups.
Talking about corruption. Sunday Times wrote about it just last Sunday.

Putin can be replaced. Remember Mediediev?
Russian gangsters/ former KGB like Abramovich love Brexit.

EU was stopping them from.imbedting dirty money in EUROPE


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

DT said:


> Sorry no I got it wrong, it was should we remain in the eu when we weren't members of the eu, we were in the common market, think that's how it went





cheekyscrip said:


> Not talking about dinner party.
> Politics is not a ball.
> 
> I would love to dine ACDC...or Freddie Merkury...but would not vote for them as MPs!
> ...


just did the longest reply and it vanished, so here a shortened version.

Farage may have been incompetent when he resigned his role, but if you want real incompetence that's when the prime minister of this country grants us a referendum and does not have a plan should the vote go in the direction it did, that's incompetence at its finest.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

cheekyscrip said:


> I worked in Russia. I still work as interpreter.
> Putin just works for Russian establishment .
> Just an efficient tool for them.
> Russia is ruled by big money and the army.
> ...


I read it, guess it they don't buy the Saudis/Arabs will .


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> I worked in Russia. I still work as interpreter.
> Putin just works for Russian establishment .
> Just an efficient tool for them.
> Russia is ruled by big money and the army.
> ...


Я говорю на русском, чтобы с помощью переводчика Google. Ничего себе, этот поток должен быть самый длинный я когда-либо имел. Давайте посмотрим, если кто-то, что я сказал.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> Я говорю на русском, чтобы с помощью Google переводчика. Ничего себе этот поток должен быть самый длинный я когда-либо имел. Давайте посмотрим, если кто-то это понял.


Nie ponial. Zalko. Google prosto gluposti gavarit I biez vodki nie rozbieriosh.
Boris polevoi.


----------



## 1290423 (Aug 11, 2011)

OI! I struggle with English! Give a girl a break  seriously good chatting with you guys, ha e fun .


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> Nie ponial. Zalko. Google prosto gluposti gavarit I biez vodki nie rozbieriosh.
> Boris polevoi.


Google Translate ne ponyal, tak chto ya netu poluchil klyuch, chto vy skazali  
nauchi menya za popytku byt' umnym. 
obratno na angliyskiy?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

DT said:


> OI! I struggle with English! Give a girl a break  seriously good chatting with you guys, ha e fun .


Was only joking. Probably didn't make sense anyway.  Was testing @cheekyscrip through Google translate


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

M


stockwellcat said:


> Google Translate ne ponyal, tak chto ya netu poluchil klyuch, chto vy skazali
> nauchi menya za popytku byt' umnym.
> obratno na angliyskiy?


U googla gramarika sovsiem uzjastna.
Davai na anglijski
Mne bez raznicy.
Now imagine how hard it is for me to try to convey any meaning if I have to struggle with English all this time.

Can we use my native tongue or at least meet in neutral territory.

Spanish? Latin?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> M
> U googla gramarika sovsiem uzjastna.
> Davai na anglijski
> Mne bez raznicy.
> ...


sólo a través de traductor Google. No sé una palabra de español.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> sólo a través de traductor Google. No sé una palabra de español. :


Su espaniol es mejor que tu Ruso.
Adelante!


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> Su espaniol es mejor que tu Ruso.
> Adelante!



Estoy feliz de hablar español, holandés o inglés.

Don't want to get into trouble for not speaking English.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

stockwellcat said:


> De nuevo a inglés
> 
> Don't want to get into trouble for not speaking English.


So? I am getting into trouble all the time for speaking English!

Po polsku nie będzie kłopotu i może wreszcie uda mi si do rozumu przemówic zakutym pałom.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

cheekyscrip said:


> So? I am getting into trouble all the time for speaking English!
> 
> Po polsku nie będzie kłopotu i może wreszcie uda mi si do rozumu przemówic zakutym pałom.


My Russian translator don't work. Spanish?


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

No. My native .
And I will show off no more.
Think with some sympathy about poor foreigners..speaking another language is like walking on stilts! you just keep falling flat on your face ...

@DT our monkeys here are approachable and very entertaining...yet so far none of them, despite their charm, got elected here as our Chief minister or even MP.

Again that boring issue of incompetence..


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> This morning on This Morning Farage was told he is a very intelligent man during an interview and he came across very calm and explained himself well as if he knew what he was talking about.


He is intelligent, that's part of the problem. He knows how to appeal to people, how to influence them and how to get what he wants. Doesn't mean that he is doing what is right or that people who support him work out better off in the long run.



> He worked in the heart of the EU and still does as an MEP so to say he has no experience is wrong


You mean never turning up when his responsibility is to represent the people. People who still believe he is working for them not for his own ego.



> He has seen how the EU Parliament works and how disorganised it is.


"I know that virtually none of you have ever done a proper job in your lives, or worked in business, or worked in trade, or indeed ever created a job," Farage says. This by a person whose record as an MEP shows that he his 747th worst out of 751 at doing his so called job. Compare that with person behind him as he was speaking, Vytenis Andriukaitis, a heart surgeon who lived in Siberia now Eu Commissioner for Health and Food Safety., Vytenis was part of the underground movement for a free Lithuania and helped write its constitution when it finally gained independence. Vytenis is qualified in cardiac surgery, trauma surgery and battlefield surgery.

Now remind me again how Farage is qualified?


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Goblin said:


> He is* intelligent,* that's part of the problem. He knows how to* appeal to people,* how to* influence* them and how to get what he *wants*.


You could be talking about Dillon, he has all these qualities.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Happy Paws said:


> You could be talking about Dillon, he has all these qualities.


Dillon would make much better MEP.
At least would not insult anyone.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> View attachment 289880


Spot on. Speaking his mind. I wonder how right he is? He also said it is impossible to get anything done in the EU Parliament, which I can quite well agree with as all 27 countries including all areas in Belgium have to agree on any change.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Spot on. Speaking his mind. I wonder how right he is?


Like most of what you quote as "spot on", he is not. You seem to forget, as did he that MEP's are elected by the people they serve. Maybe that's the problem. He forgets it's democratic.



> He also said it is impossible to get anything done in the EU Parliament, which I can quite well agree with as all 27 countries including all areas in Belgium have to agree on any change.


Not impossible, just harder as it ensures people are represented rather than simply dictated to. It's known as being people having a say. Of course it's even harder to get anything done when you do not even turn up so maybe he should be forgiven as he rarely did.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> Like most of what you quote as "spot on", he is not. You seem to forget, as did he that MEP's are elected by the people they serve. Maybe that's the problem. He forgets it's democratic.
> 
> Not impossible, just harder to ensure that people are well represented rather than dictated to. It's known as being people having a say. Of course it's even harder to get anything done when you do not even turn up.


He won't had to turn up after 2019 so the EU Parliament can breath easy.

The UK is well represented but get ignored in the EU don't you think?

This is the problem the EU talked about treating the UK people like children during our Referendum or words to that effect. Do you know how insulting that is?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> The UK is well represented but get ignored in the EU don't you think?


UK is on the losing side of voting more than any other country. Next country on the list losing the most, Germany. Does that mean Germany is getting ignored? It's called democracy. Doesn't mean the UK is ignored outside of voting either or that it was not in a position to influence. There's a saying, you get out what you put in. Since when did people really take any interest in the EU other than something to blame? Farage's turn out a good if extreme example. How can he influence fishing policies when he doesn't turn up?



> This is the problem the EU talked about treating the UK people like children during our Referendum or words to that effect. Do you know how insulting that is?


Not aware of occurance but do you know how many insults go the other way? Farage's speech should make you cringe, instead you applaud it.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> UK is on the losing side of voting more than any other country. Next country on the list losing the most, Germany. Does that mean Germany is getting ignored? It's called democracy. Doesn't mean the UK is ignored outside of voting either or that it was not in a position to influence. There's a saying, you get out what you put in. Since when did people really take any interest in the EU other than something to blame? Farage's turn out a good if extreme example. How can he influence fishing policies when he doesn't turn up?
> 
> Not aware of occurance but do you know how many insults go the other way? Farage's speech should make you cringe, instead you applaud it.


So in Germany and France its called democracy when they vote for a new leader. When the UK has an election we get put down. We have a democratic right to vote and have referendums as well. This is my watered down version of what I was going to say. Never mind I have other things to do tonight. Nice chatting again


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> So in Germany and France its called democracy when they vote for a new leader. When the UK has an election we get put down. We have a democratic right to vote and have referendums as well. This is my watered down version of what I was going to say. Never mind I have other things to do tonight. Nice chatting again


Think you need to do the long version  I have never said UK, or the US for that matter doesn't have democracy. I have stated in the past I don't believe in the "seating" method is ideal wishing the person who has the most votes overall should be the "winner". I also don't believe in things like party whips as I believe MP's should be allowed to vote as their constituents wish, not what the party wants. Could go on but I don't know any democratic system that is perfect. Even if there was one, my perfect wouldn't be, to someone else.

Of course the EU is also democratic, it's simply not the same as the UK. To many that means it has to be undemocratic.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Lets get the MP vote over with and see what the Remoaners come up with then


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Colliebarmy said:


> Lets get the MP vote over with and see what the Remoaners come up with then


Love it. Sums it all up. I am sat here giggling to myself.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

I wonder just what any MP could come up with to vote against the referendum result, but the SNP and Irish MP's are bound to vote against leaving

so the "stays" already have 70 votes out of the 325 needed to win... only needing 255


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

This must be the longest Brexit related thread ever.

Anyway ladies and gents I am just going to say I am starting to find the whole Brexit issue relentless, every thread about Brexit has more or less the same tittle tattle on on it. I regret starting this thread as it is never ending. I actually have a headache about Brexit now but don't regret the way I voted.

Here's to whatever happens next in the real world.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)




----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Colliebarmy said:


>


The new argument is they didn't know it would mean leaving the single market. I knew this.

I wouldn't bother continuing as you will go around in circles and get a headache.


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

Colliebarmy said:


>


:Yawn

Something less predictable next time please.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> The new argument is they didn't know it would mean leaving the single market. I knew this.


Yet other people knew the referendum was non-binding. Strange how so many people suddenly know everything but not that. We had the Norwegian Option, we had the Swiss option all being referred to. We had everything offered, the UK so powerful it could pick whatever it wanted out of the EU...

We have 2 years of negotiations once article 50 is handed in. Negotiations where people need to have a say in what happens.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Colliebarmy said:


> image


Corrected for you:


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> Yet other people knew the referendum was non-binding. Strange how so many people suddenly know everything but not that. We had the Norwegian Option, we had the Swiss option all being referred to. We had everything offered, the UK so powerful it could pick whatever it wanted out of the EU...
> 
> We have 2 years of negotiations once article 50 is handed in. Negotiations where people need to have a say in what happens.


Why should we have the Swiss option or the Norwegian Option? We aren't in these countries. This is the UK. How about a UK option?

I know this will go around in circles so I am only asking it once and commenting on it once.

Something I have learnt the last few months, mentioned Brexit or anything relating to Brexit it becomes a relentless barrage of tittle tattle and then it goes around in circles. So I am only posting things once from now on or I will sit on my hands and not reply


----------



## rona (Aug 18, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> mentioned Brexit or anything relating to Brexit it becomes a relentless barrage of tittle tattle and then it goes around in circles





stockwellcat said:


> So I am only posting things once from now


^
And this goes on and on in one form or another


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

rona said:


> ^
> And this goes on and on in one form or another


^^


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

the Remoaners neednt worry, leaving the EU was never going to happen, the banks, MP's, peers, wealthy, the investment companies and money dealers had it covered from the start

possibly the biggest con trick the UK has ever seen


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> Why should we have the Swiss option or the Norwegian Option? We aren't in these countries. This is the UK. How about a UK option?


But you have stated that you knew the option and what it contained. It's leave everything. This isn't a unique UK option and not what people were told would happen and agreed to.

Find it ironic, person creating threads complains about the fact there are other people prepared to oppose their viewpoint.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Goblin said:


> But you have stated that you knew the option and what it contained. It's leave everything. This isn't a unique UK option and not what people were told would happen and agreed to.
> 
> Find it ironic, person creating threads complains about the fact there are other people prepared to oppose their viewpoint.


Ok fair does I accept your opposition  and that there are alot of arguments around Brexit and accept that answers are needed. I agree perhaps until now I might have been focused on one thing. I don't have the answers to all your questions, others may have there view points. I maybe wrong on some things and apologise if I am.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

The UK used to trade with Europe pre-EEC....whats the big issue?


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

Colliebarmy said:


> The UK used to trade with Europe pre-EEC....whats the big issue?


That's true. We was one of the largest free trade empires in the world. Obviously the days of empires are over we all know that but the UK can be one of the largest free trade hubs again when we leave the EU. I don't know why this is a problem either with remainers and upsetting for them?


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

Colliebarmy said:


> The UK used to trade with Europe pre-EEC....whats the big issue?


...... In the days of the British Motoring Corporation for example!

Anyway, the big issue: If I wanted to on my EU/UK passport I could travel to France, Spain, Holland and Germany not forgetting the Republic of Ireland with just one currency.

In the past they would have been border controls and having to change currency everytime you entered another country.

Of course not all EU states have the Euro but freedom to enter the Czech Republic and Poland for examples are still possible. No Berlin Wall to negotiate for one thing!


----------



## CuddleMonster (Mar 9, 2016)

@stockwellcat , I don't know about the population at large, but talking to those among my friends who have been most upset by the result, their biggest worry is the uncertainty over the future and how Brexit will work out - it would have been very helpful to have had a plan in place for leaving before the referendum! If you personally will not be greatly affected by Brexit, it's easy not to worry and wait for things to work out. But if someone, for example, has family living in another EU country, or needs to split their time between Britain and another EU country for work, or if their business depends on good trading links with the EU etc, it is obviously going to worry them more.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

KittenKong said:


> ...... In the days of the British Motoring Corporation for example!
> 
> Anyway, the big issue: If I wanted to on my EU/UK passport I could travel to France, Spain, Holland and Germany not forgetting the Republic of Ireland with just one currency.


two actually

you forgot your pounds sterling to start off with

(and have you noticed how dollars and pounds are welcome most places overseas?)

ive always found using a card easier than coinage


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> That's true. We was one of the largest free trade empires in the world. Obviously the days of empires are over we all know that but the UK can be one of the largest free trade hubs again when we leave the EU. I don't know why this is a problem either with remainers and upsetting for them?


Because the idea that this is possible is no mean certain and the majority of experts looking at the facts disagree with the idea. There is no problem actually trading. Problem is the UK has relied for years on access to th EU to attract investment. Only have to look at the protectionism of the government towards the finance sector and companies like Nissan to see that. Given the choice, 65 million or 500 million customers, which you you choose as a company?

The finance sector will not legally be able to actually do some of their work in the EU, denying them access to a large market unless the Eu agrees to let them do so. What is the benefit to the EU to allow them to do so when the alternative is that businesses will move to be within the EU?

http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-city-idUKKCN12K0VJ



> "We have to treat as absolutely central to what we do maintaining the stability of both the City, but also the European financial markets ... we will therefore do anything necessary,"


So does that include free movement? Should it? Regional visas as an option, that assumes people want to move to the UK considering the current atmosphere. TM and the government need to actually push that immigration is welcome, not try to satisfy the right wing by pushing the message that migrants are not. Have you seen any sign of that? I've seen the opposite.

Of course stories like the following do not reach media like the DM, http://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/g...e-to-holland/story-29814816-detail/story.html

Media generally isn't pushing facts like GM has taken a $400 million loss due to the pound crash. How many people does vauxhall employ in the UK?

It's not simply potential tariffs, it's also common standards and what is allowed for things like ingredients and processing methods. Cut down on red tape for business was one of leave's selling points. Do you want pet chews made by potentially poisonous methods? It sure cuts down on business red-tape to have freedom to do so I suppose as does having flexible working rights. Suppose polution control doesn't matter either. Doesn't protect the customer base though. Is that what you want?

I'll ask a simple question. What does the UK offer which other countries in the EU doesn't or couldn't? Bear in mind we are talking about many companies which are not "based" in the UK. Most finance companies are not actually british to start with. Same goes for a lot of existing companies in the UK outside the finance sector.

Perfectly willing to change my opinion if you can provide facts to show otherwise.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

stockwellcat said:


> That's true. We was one of the largest free trade empires in the world. Obviously the days of empires are over we all know that but the UK can be one of the largest free trade hubs again when we leave the EU. I don't know why this is a problem either with remainers and upsetting for them?


Aus, NZ, USA were our allies once...and not just in WW1 or WW2 (when we fought Europe....)


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Colliebarmy said:


> The UK used to trade with Europe pre-EEC....whats the big issue?


Wasn't free movement of goods - an example which will hit people on this forum is buying from places like Zooplus. Unless a special arrangement is put in place buying from EU countries will be subject to the same rules and charges as buying from elsewhere - limited to £15 of goods.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Its seems to be overlooked the the EU needs our market place as much as we might want them...

hands up who owns a:-

BMW
Audi
VW
Skoda (me x 2)
Seat
Merc
Porsche
Ferrari
Lambo
Citroen
Fiat
Peugeot

They are all EU made and sold here


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

havoc said:


> Wasn't free movement of goods - an example which will hit people on this forum is buying from places like Zooplus. Unless a special arrangement is put in place buying from EU countries will be subject to the same rules and charges as buying from elsewhere - limited to £15 of goods.


I import from China with no issues


----------



## KittenKong (Oct 30, 2015)

Colliebarmy said:


> two actually
> 
> you forgot your pounds sterling to start off with
> 
> (and have you noticed how dollars and pounds are welcome most places overseas?)


Yes indeed! At least I wouldn't need Francs, DM, Guilders etc etc.

I've certainly not come across anywhere accepting sterling or US dollars at least within the Eurozone. Cards of course could be used but can turn out to be very expensive.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Colliebarmy said:


> I import from China with no issues


I'm sure you do and much gets through without being checked. It hits people hard when they do get stung for the duty and handling charges though and if those rules apply to everywhere in future then everything will be subject to proper scrutiny. It's a money spinner for both handling companies and government so I suppose it will count as good for the economy. Won't be so good for individuals.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Colliebarmy said:


> Its seems to be overlooked the the EU needs our market place as much as we might want them...
> 
> hands up who owns a:-
> 
> ...


You forget, people who buy BMW, Audi, Merc, Porsche, Ferrari and the like will not be affected by a tariff as they will be able to afford it still. They'll still buy. As for the rest, what % of GDP do they account for within the EU? What % of GDP goes to the EU from the UK? Why should a country without any exports to the UK agree to free trade when it doesn't affect them? Any deal will need to be agreed by all remaining members of the EU. 65million vs 500million potential customers. Who has the negotiating power?

All that's ignoring the fact the EU will look after the EU, as it rightly should. That includes not having the precedent that countries are able to pick and choose what rules they follow. What next, need for democracy shouldn't be required? EU will be prepared, as has been stated that they are prepared to take a minor hit economically to ensure the EU stays the EU and true to it's founding principles. Leaver's have declared the EU is going to fall apart. The idea that any country can simply pick and choose which rules to follow would ensure that would be the case.


----------



## stockwellcat. (Jun 5, 2015)

KittenKong said:


> Yes indeed! At least I wouldn't need Francs, DM, Guilders etc etc.
> 
> I've certainly not come across anywhere accepting sterling or US dollars at least within the Eurozone. Cards of course could be used but can turn out to be very expensive.


I remember having to change to different currencies and we may well have to do it again if the EU project fails or if France decides to have a referendum if Marine le Penn gets in next year and wins the referendum. I have used French Francs, Dutch Guilders and German Deutsche Marks in the 1990's and was paid in Guilders in Holland when I lived there. You had to get a residence permit back then to be able to get a job and housing in Holland.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

stockwellcat said:


> I remember having to change to different currencies


Used to live on the border beween Holland, Belgium and Germany. You'd find shops accepted whatever although exchnage rate may not have been the best. Same with Ireland and NI. This was after free movement was implemented though so you could change countries simply by "crossing a road".

Edit: plenty of places in Germany do not accept cards even now, although slowly changing.


----------

