Brexit?

[Francis Albert]

Anyway, not legally binding now.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-vote-eu-referendum-not-legally-binding-supreme-court-legal-challenge-article-50-a7418706.html

The decision shortly to be made by the Supreme Court is nothing to do with whether or not the referendum is legally binding.

[Space Mackerel]

The decision shortly to be made by the Supreme Court is nothing to do with whether or not the referendum is legally binding.

Excuse me, I heard the news then found a link. Are the MSM lying ?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Francis Albert]

Excuse me, I heard the news then found a link. Are the MSM lying ?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No. You just don't understand the news. The upcoming Supreme Court decision is nothing to do with whether the referendum is legally binding. It is about whether Article 50 can only be triggered with parliamentary approval. Apart perhaps from the scare-mongering Remainers in their pre-referendum propaganda  I don't think anyone has suggested the referendum outcome is legally binding, just morally and democratically binding. One clue - the Government's plan to introduce an Act to transfer EU law to UK law  in advance of repealing it. Parliament can obviously vote down that Act and the subsequent repeal of the transferred EU laws. Whether parliament will or not depends on whether MPs respect the wishes of their constituents and whether they feel safe in not respecting them.

 

Before knee-jerk posting a link to everything you think supports your view and wishes I suggest you read the content and think about it for a few minutes.

[Space Mackerel]

No. You just don't understand the news. The upcoming decision is nothing to do with whether the referendum is legally binding. It is about whether Article 50 can only be triggered with parliamentary approval. Apart perhaps from the scare-mongering Remainers in their pre-referendum propaganda I don't think anyone has suggested the referendum outcome is legally binding. One clue - the Government's plan to introduce an Act to transfer EU law to UK law in advance of repealing it. Parliament can obviously vote down that Act and the repeal of UK laws. Whether it will or not depends on whether MPs respect the wishes of their constituents and whether they feel safe in not doing so.

 

Before knee-jerk posting a link to everything you think supports your view and wishes I suggest reading the content and thinking about it for a few minutes.

I understand the news, i.e. the MSM is slowly undermining the Brexit vote. Which is a pity, as I want it to go ahead so further Scottish independence.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[The Mighty Thor]

And no doubt you'd use Mj?lnir to crack heads and have had it sorted by now.

No need.

 

The halfwits that voted for Brexit on grounds of immigrayshun and taking back our borders will breed themselves out of existence.

It's natural selection at work.

[Seymour M Hersh]

No need.

 

The halfwits that voted for Brexit on grounds of immigrayshun and taking back our borders will breed themselves out of existence.

It's natural selection at work.

 

Wow. That's hobo levels of bumhurt there.

[Don Draper]

Any thoughts on this Scottish workaround plan in the works? Feasible, do you think?

 

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/brexit-scottish-passport-plan-suggested-to-holyrood-1-4287678

[aussieh]

Any thoughts on this Scottish workaround plan in the works? Feasible, do you think?

 

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/brexit-scottish-passport-plan-suggested-to-holyrood-1-4287678

We voted away our say.

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Not happening for years now, Supreme Court member says so tonight.

 

She's expressed her personal opinion on the matter, nothing more.

 

Saw an interview with Iain Duncan Smith last night, now I don't usually listen to or pay much attention to what that man says, however he did make a very good and valid point.

He said that Lady Hale by expressing her opinion publicly has already made her mind up and judgement on the upcoming Supreme Court case before she's heard any evidence and therefore should now be removed from the panel of 11 judges, who it should be said are supposed to be impartial and decide the case on the evidence presented to them in court, not what their personal opinion is, which she has now publicly stated.  There is no way she can be considered impartial now.

 

 

[Space Mackerel]

Here's the memo from yesterday for anyone who hasn't read it.

 

"- The Political Domain

 

The Prime Minister?s over-riding objective has been to keep her party from repeating its history of splitting four times in the past 200 years over global trade - each time being out of power for 15-30 years. The public stance of Government is orientated primarily to its own supporters, with industry in particular being on the radarscreen - yet.

 

The Government?s appeal to the Supreme Court has to be seen in this light - it is about avoiding any more public debate than necessary because it will expose splits within the predominantly ?remain? Conservative MPs and intensify the pressure from predominantly ?leave? constituency parties. A General Election is only a last resort for three reasons - boundary changes (that favour the Conservatives) will not be effective until 2019; the Fixed Term Parliaments Act obstructs Prime Ministerial freedom to call an election at will; and it may suit major decision makers to slowly shift away from more difficult aspects of Brexit on the grounds that Parliament has forced them to do so.

 

The divisions within the Cabinet are between the three Brexiteers on one side and Philip Hammond/Greg Clark on the other side. The Prime Minister is rapidly acquiring the reputation of drawing in decisions and details to settle matters herself - which is unlikely to be sustainable. Overall, it appears best to judge who is winning the debate by assuming that the noisiest individuals have lost the intra-Government debate and are stirring up external supporters.

 

The Supreme Court appears likely to delay its ruling until early January and, assuming it sustains the High Court, a short enabling bill will then be submitted to Parliament, permitting the Government to invoke Article 50 in March as planned. The Government will probably be able to face down wrecking amendments, but the debate in Parliament will certainly shift expectations of what will be achieved/sellable in Brexit negotiations. Remain supporters can be expected to reserve their fire until winners and losers emerge from negotiation and the political atmosphere allows more sophisticated assessment of choices.

 

- The Government Domain

 

Individual Departments have been busily developing their projects to implement Brexit, resulting in well over 500 projects, which are beyond the capacity and capability of Government to execute quickly. One Department estimates that it needs a 40% increase in staff to cope with its Brexit projects. In other words, every Department has developed a ?bottom up? plan of what the impact of Brexit could be - and its plan to cope with the ?worst case?. Although necessary, this falls considerably short of having a ?Government plan for Brexit? because it has no prioritisation and no link to the overall negotiation strategy.

 

However, it may be six months before there is a view on priorities/negotiation strategy as the political situation in the UK and the EU evolves. Despite extended debate among Permanent Secretaries, no common strategy has emerged, in part because the potential scope and negotiating positions have to be curtailed before realistic planning can happen, in part because of the divisions within the Cabinet. It is likely that the senior ranks in the Civil Service will feel compelled to present potential high level plan(s) to avoid further drift.

 

Departments are struggling to come up to speed on the potential Brexit effects on industry. This is due to starting from a relatively low base of insight and also due to fragmentation - Treasury ?owning? financial services, DH-BEIS both covering life sciences, DCMS for telecoms, BEIS most other industries, DIT building parallel capability focused on trade etc.

 

Capability-building is making slow progress, partly through deliberate control by the Cabinet Office and partly from Treasury?s opening negotiating position that Departments will meet Brexit costs from existing settlements - although no one is treating that position as sustainable. Expectations of increased headcount are in the 10-30,000 range. Initiatives to build capability are getting off the ground - the Diplomatic Academy is providing trade training programmes, Cabinet Office is discussing system-wide capability programmes.

 

The Autumn Statement on 23rd November is expected to provide some headlines in terms of infrastructure investment, making the UK fit for growth and the inclusive economy. It will not provide resources for the Civil Service to grow its Brexit capacity and capability. In fact, we are more likely to see a further squeeze on Departmental operating costs to compensate for new spending.

 

:: The Industry Domain

 

Government expects lobbying on three levels to continue:

 

1. Company-specific decisions - the Nissan investment decision is a prime example. These are viewed as major opportunities/threats for Government. Other major players can be expected to, similar to Nissan, point a gun at the Government?s head.

 

2. Industry insights - the major challenge for industry and Government are ?the unknown unknowns? where industry has to educate Government fast on the most important negotiating issues - e.g., they think they know about talent, but know they know little about data.

 

3. Overall business concerns - the province of CBI and largely dealt with as a PR issue.

 

Industry has two unpleasant realisations - first, that the Government?s priority remains its political survival, not the economy - second, that there will be no clear economic-Brexit strategy any time soon because it is being developed on a case-by-case basis as specific decisions are forced on Government."

[Boris]

She's expressed her personal opinion on the matter, nothing more.

 

Saw an interview with Iain Duncan Smith last night, now I don't usually listen to or pay much attention to what that man says, however he did make a very good and valid point.

He said that Lady Hale by expressing her opinion publicly has already made her mind up and judgement on the upcoming Supreme Court case before she's heard any evidence and therefore should now be removed from the panel of 11 judges, who it should be said are supposed to be impartial and decide the case on the evidence presented to them in court, not what their personal opinion is, which she has now publicly stated.  There is no way she can be considered impartial now.

 

Or

 

 

 

A supreme court spokesman said that Hale was simply presenting the arguments from both sides of the article 50 appeal in an impartial way for an audience of law students as part of a wider lecture on constitutional law, and it was proper for judges to set out arguments in high-profile cases to help public understanding of the issues involved in an even-handed way.

?One of the questions raised in these proceedings is what form of legislation would be necessary for parliament to be able to lawfully trigger article 50, if the government loses its appeal,? the spokesman said. ?A number of politicians have raised the same question. Though it was not dealt with explicitly in the high court judgment, it is not a new issue. In no way was Lady Hale offering a view on what the likely outcome might be.?

from https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/supreme-court-judges-views-on-article-50-legislation-anger-leave-campaigners

[Jambo-Jimbo]

Or

 

 

 

from https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/supreme-court-judges-views-on-article-50-legislation-anger-leave-campaigners

 

So if I'm reading this correctly, it was nothing more than a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question which in turn the media has only reported one side of the argument.

 

Media with an agenda, what's the world coming too.

[jake]

Or

from https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/nov/15/supreme-court-judges-views-on-article-50-legislation-anger-leave-campaigners

 

Cmon boris eh?

[Don Dan]

Theresa May wiping the House of Commons floor with Corbyn and the SNP at PMQs just now.

[Dawnrazor]

Theresa May wiping the House of Commons floor with Corbyn and the SNP at PMQs just now.

Watching PMQ'S, labour and the SNP are a shambles, the Tories effectively have NO opposition, Angus Robertson is a clown, Corbyn is worse, the Tories will be in power for the next 3 elections at this rate and the left have no one to blame but themselves.

[i8hibsh]

Watching PMQ'S, labour and the SNP are a shambles, the Tories effectively have NO opposition, Angus Robertson is a clown, Corbyn is worse, the Tories will be in power for the next 3 elections at this rate and the left have no one to blame but themselves.

 

 

Sadly, they will certainly not blame themselves though will they.  They will blame anyone and everyone, hurl insults and do relentless name calling. Everyone will be a racist, a bigot a sexist pig, a fascist, Adolf Hitler lovers, Nazis and misogynists.  It is how they roll.

 

Edit : Oh and create a hell of a lot of hashtags.

[jake]

Sadly, they will certainly not blame themselves though will they. They will blame anyone and everyone, hurl insults and do relentless name calling. Everyone will be a racist, a bigot a sexist pig, a fascist, Adolf Hitler lovers, Nazis and misogynists. It is how they roll.

 

Edit : Oh and create a hell of a lot of hashtags.

 

#latteandcroissantswhilstquotingtheguardian

[Boris]

Theresa May wiping the House of Commons floor with Corbyn and the SNP at PMQs just now.

  

Watching PMQ'S, labour and the SNP are a shambles, the Tories effectively have NO opposition, Angus Robertson is a clown, Corbyn is worse, the Tories will be in power for the next 3 elections at this rate and the left have no one to blame but themselves.

https://www.theguardian.com/global/blog/2016/nov/16/pmqs-verdict-good-day-for-corbyn-with-may-lacking-authority-and-credibility

 

Must admit, I didn't see it, but the report above suggests otherwise.

[Don Dan]

https://www.theguardian.com/global/blog/2016/nov/16/pmqs-verdict-good-day-for-corbyn-with-may-lacking-authority-and-credibility

Must admit, I didn't see it, but the report above suggests otherwise.

I'm sure that paper would. Corbyn's questions centred on transparency of the Governements Brexit plan and demanded to know what it is. Something he and others have been continually told and reminded that it won't be a running commentary. He still persisted and even brought up the Delotties email. The memo/email was shot down in flames just a Corbyn was with Mays reply.

[jake]

The guardian is a bit of a joke lets be honest.

[Dawnrazor]

https://www.theguardian.com/global/blog/2016/nov/16/pmqs-verdict-good-day-for-corbyn-with-may-lacking-authority-and-credibility

Must admit, I didn't see it, but the report above suggests otherwise.

I think the guardian must have been watching a different PMQ's!!!

I never gave that paper any time, no wonder when it's reporting is a biased and misleading as that.

[Boris]

I'm sure that paper would. Corbyn's questions centred on transparency of the Governements Brexit plan and demanded to know what it is. Something he and others have been continually told and reminded that it won't be a running commentary. He still persisted and even brought up the Delotties email. The memo/email was shot down in flames just a Corbyn was with Mays reply.

  

The guardian is a bit of a joke lets be honest.

  

I think the guardian must have been watching a different PMQ's!!!

I never gave that paper any time, no wonder when it's reporting is a biased and misleading as that.

Just like your replies, it is an opinion.

[Dawnrazor]

Just like your replies, it is an opinion.

There are "opinions" and there are "opinions" I'm afraid.

[i8hibsh]

The SNP blaming the 'Brexiteers' for the Toblerone being smaller now.

 

 

Another day and more shame to the nation.

[Space Mackerel]

When's this Article 50 gonna be invoked? How longs it been now?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Dawnrazor]

When's this Article 50 gonna be invoked? How longs it been now?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

What currency will Scotland use if it goes independent!?

When is Nicola Mugabe going to call another indi' referendum?

When will the snp use the tax raising powers they have?

Have you any answers Toryboy??

[Space Mackerel]

What currency will Scotland use if it goes independent!?

When is Nicola Mugabe going to call another indi' referendum?

When will the snp use the tax raising powers they have?

Have you any answers Toryboy??

You don't live in Scotland so it matters not a jot

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Daydream Believer]

I'm sure that paper would. Corbyn's questions centred on transparency of the Governements Brexit plan and demanded to know what it is. Something he and others have been continually told and reminded that it won't be a running commentary. He still persisted and even brought up the Delotties email. The memo/email was shot down in flames just a Corbyn was with Mays reply.

 

Do people honestly think that the leader of the opposition is just going let May and her cabinet chums go away and negotiate the biggest change in a generation without any parliamentary oversight?

 

It feels like a lot of people are a bit blinded by fear that the whole thing will be derailed and are prepared to allow a very small group of people work in effective secrecy.

 

If May comes back in 18 months and says that she's agreed a soft Brexit, the same people who have been terrified by transparency over the deal will suddenly be outraged that a deal got done which they didn't like very much.

[Francis Albert]

I read both the Guardian (have done for nearly 50 years as a lefty, though not sandal wearing or bearded) and the Mail (which my wife reads, though not a fascist who thinks immigrants should all be deported).

 

They are mirror opposites in reporting and in their leaders and most of their op eds and columnists) . Every bit of economic good news is highllghted in the Mail as proof that Brexit is not as predicted damaging the economy,  bad news if not buried at least well hidden. The Guardian is opposite. But the Mail has had it easy because most economic news since the Brexit vote has been good. So the Guardian, initially headlining every straw in the wind (a consumer or business confidence survey showing a negative impact) has now resorted to reluctantly reporting good news but warning for example that long term forecasts say that GDP will be 4% lower by 2022  (from people who haven't made an accurate prediction 6 months out). Both have the occasional piece or reader's letter expressing the opposite view , the Mail slightly more often than the Guardian.

 

It's when you get beyond the news and opinion pages that you see the difference. In the Mail Brexit (and Trump, on which the Mail is relatively neutral or even critical) pretty much disappear from view. But the Guardian is relentless and its political bias is all pervasive. Read the arts, entertainment  and lifestyle content of G2 and you find TV reviews and even the one paragraph TV previews, the film reviews, the columnist answering questions on dress styles, the restaurant critic, the motoring correspondent all referring frequently to the "awful" or "disastrous" or "shameful" Brexit vote. You read an endless stream of luvvies saying how awful it all is and their despair for the country.  In today's G2 there are three anti- Trump pieces taking up half the usually pretty apolitical section.One, under the "Style" heading has the sub-headline "The absurdity of Donald Trump's style isn't as inconsequential as you might think - in fact, his fashion choices indicate one chilling thing : clearly no-one can tell him he is wrong". The article mocks his "Liberace's quiff", his "tanning goggles round the eyes", his "apricot skin tone" and "pale lips". Write about a woman like that and the Guardian would have you down as a misogynist of the first order.

[Don Dan]

Do people honestly think that the leader of the opposition is just going let May and her cabinet chums go away and negotiate the biggest change in a generation without any parliamentary oversight?

 

It feels like a lot of people are a bit blinded by fear that the whole thing will be derailed and are prepared to allow a very small group of people work in effective secrecy.

 

If May comes back in 18 months and says that she's agreed a soft Brexit, the same people who have been terrified by transparency over the deal will suddenly be outraged that a deal got done which they didn't like very much.

If you show your hand then it no longer becomes a negotiation. Anyway the fundamentals of what we want are known, even to Corbyn and the Remainers but that doesn't stop them trying to interfere in the process. Their ultimate goal is not to leave the EU and will do anything to make any exit a soft one. Also negotiations have not yet started and until they do you say nothing. I wonder if anyone's asking what the EU plans for negotiations are? Are they laying bare their strategy for all to see?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Space Mackerel]

Weegingerdug bang on the cash again:

 

We're now over four months into the post-Brexit trauma, and Theresa May's Brexit plans are slowly becoming clear. There's going to be more opportunities to win than in a box load of scratch cards that you got given for free. Everyone is going to win the lottery of life because being Great is what being British means. We've got the baking programmes to prove it, and that's why there's going to be cake and Britain's going to eat it. Britain's going to divorce the EU but will be keeping the house, the car, and all the assets, but the EU gets to keep the kids, at least those ones that haven't had their teeth examined by Amber Rudd. And everyone is going to be happy and patriotic, except for gay Olympic fencing judges.

 

It's going to be grand, because Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage both say so, and just like the Donald Trump whom they're competing to sook up to they'd never lie. Let's get on with cutting all our ties to Europe, they both urge. They're a bit like the chieftains on Easter Island who called on their tribespeople to cut down the last trees on the island in order to move a big and pointless stone statue, provoking a total collapse of the island's civilisation and a descent into human sacrifice and a cannibalistic civil war. The difference of course is that the Easter Islanders at least ended up with some big statues to show for their sacrifices, whereas the only beings who will express any interest in a statue of Nigel Farage will be the doos which crap on it. And anyway no one is proposing to throw Nigel into a volcano as a sacrifice to propitiate Donald Trump, which is a bit disappointing really.

 

I must confess I did get my hopes up slightly when I saw that photie of Nige and the Donald grinning in front of a pair of golden doors which looked like something from an Indiana Jones movie, and was sort of hoping that they'd open the doors and immediately be devoured by giant spiders, and or fall into a tank of ravenous piranhas. But it was not to be. Doors like that are more usually associated with Egyptian pyramids and contain mummies whose brains and hearts have been removed and are stored in jars. Which isn't a bad description of Nigel and Donald, come to think of it.

 

Anyway, this week we've finally achieved a modicum of clarity on the UK's Brexit plans, not due to anything that the government has deigned to tell us, but because of a leaked memo. The leaked cabinet memo has highlighted just how well prepared and organised the UK government is for Brexit, if that is by well prepared and organised you mean running around screaming in a panic with your underwear on your head while blaming everyone else for the disaster that's about to befall us. The reason that Theresa May doesn't want to reveal her hand is because there's no plan. There's no strategy. There's no definition of priorities.

 

Over four months on, there's still no strategy or common plan from the various parts of the British government. They're still far more concerned with fighting one another than they are with developing a strategy that they can all agree on. Quite possibly because no one wants to be the first to admit that they can agree with Liam Fox on anything. According to the memo, the government may need 30,000 extra civil servants in order to deal with planning and preparation for Brexit. Instead the government has decided to embark upon the tried and tested British method of muddling through then insisting that the resultant ****** up was in fact a bold and innovative new jam-like strategy which they had been aiming for all along. And anyway, the mess is all the fault of migrants / Brussels bureaucrats / Jeremy Corbyn /openly gay Olympic fencing judges, delete as appropriate.

 

The memo has revealed that Theresa May is as much of a control freak as Gordie Broon was, and just like Gordie now that she's managed to get to the top of the greasy pole of politics she doesn't have the foggiest idea of what she wants to do next. She's presiding over a cabinet full of squabbling egos, whose ability is in inverse proportion to their sense of importance. Boris hates David Davis, David Davis hates Liam Fox, and everyone hates Philip Hammond.

 

Liam has adopted the gunboat approach to diplomacy in his contacts with our EU neighbours, forgetting that we don't actually have any gunboats. A few days ago he pissed off other EU member states by loftily informing them that they'd have no choice but to allow a post-Brexit UK full access to the single market irrespective of whether Britain rejects free movement or deports Polish people. This is because, said the bold Liam, the EU has negotiated trade treaties with non-EU states who signed up to them on the basis that they'd have access to all the existing member states, and if Britain was outside the single market they'd no longer have access to the UK's market, so the EU could sue them. It was a cunning wheeze of the sort that has seen self-righteous British colonialists bundled up by the irked natives and thrown into the nearest volacano. Then it was gently pointed out to Liam that since it's the UK which is voluntarily leaving the EU, it's the UK which is choosing to withdraw from the single market, and if South Korea is going to sue anyone it's going to be suing the UK. So that was Liam burned.

 

Meanwhile in Scotland there are still voices calling plaintively for some sort of deal that will allow Scotland to retain most of the benefits of EU membership even though the rest of the UK has cut down the last tree and set off a cannibal holocaust even without throwing any Tory cabinet ministers into a volcano. Unfortunately for these people, that would be Wullie Rennie and much of the Labour party in Scotland, the only certainty from the UK government about anything related to Brexit is that Scotland isn't going to get any special treatment. The City of London can get special treatment, Japanese car manufacturers can get special treatment. Parts of the UK which voted heavily to leave will be treated with kid gloves to protect them from the consequences of their Brexit vote, but Scotland will get what it's given and will be expected to shut up. We'll experience the full force of the UK's stupidly selfish incompetence. There's only one way Scotland can avoid being the sacrificial victims who get thrown into the volcano of Brexit.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Dawnrazor]

You don't live in Scotland so it matters not a jot

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Answer the questions.

[Francis Albert]

Who is "Weegingerdug"? I assume it is not Space Mackerel, who seem not to have had an original thought in his life.

[Francis Albert]

You don't live in Scotland so it matters not a jot

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Ah, that great Scottish tolerance and luvviness with Europeans and beyond.

[Space Mackerel]

Who is "Weegingerdug"? I assume it is not Space Mackerel, who seem not have had an original thought in his life.

Paul Kavanagh, he writes for The National and I get emailed his articles direct.

 

Feels good to be free of Murdoch and his right wing nonsense, scrapped Sky TV and spent the money saved on a digital subscription to the above media.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Space Mackerel]

Ah, that great Scottish tolerance and luvviness with Europeans and beyond.

I'm not going to waste my time answering questions I have no idea what the answer is, especially when it's someone asking that really has no direct impact on.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Francis Albert]

Paul Kavanagh, he writes for The National and I get emailed his articles direct.

 

Feels good to be free of Murdoch and his right wing nonsense, scrapped Sky TV and spent the money saved on a digital subscription to the above media.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

So you have replaced one sort of propaganda for another.

 

Ever tried thinking for yourself?

[Space Mackerel]

So you have replaced one sort of propaganda for another.

 

Ever tried thinking for yourself?

It's not really propaganda though is it. He's just ripping up the Yoonatics for arse paper in a good old fashioned working class Scottish way.

 

I made up Yoonatics there btw [emoji41]

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Francis Albert]

It's not really propaganda though is it. He's just ripping up the Yoonatics for arse paper in a good old fashioned working class Scottish way.

 

I made up Yoonatics there btw [emoji41]

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Never heard any good old fashioned working class person speak that way. "Cannibal holocaust"? WTF?

[Daydream Believer]

If you show your hand then it no longer becomes a negotiation. Anyway the fundamentals of what we want are known, even to Corbyn and the Remainers but that doesn't stop them trying to interfere in the process. Their ultimate goal is not to leave the EU and will do anything to make any exit a soft one. Also negotiations have not yet started and until they do you say nothing. I wonder if anyone's asking what the EU plans for negotiations are? Are they laying bare their strategy for all to see?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

I doubt whether most of the EU are bothered their arse yet. When May starts the clock she'll have 2 years to get a deal done and in the end will have to take what she gets. The negotiating position is absolutely awful whatever happens.

 

I suppose a few car manufacturers will be having a quiet word with Merkel and so forth but she'll be more worried about her own future I'd imagine. Europe will be waiting to see what happens in Italy next month.

 

Anyway - "the fundamentals of what we want are known"

 

What are they? And who are "we"?

[Space Mackerel]

Never heard any good old fashioned working class person speak that way. "Cannibal holocaust"? WTF?

You're not familiar with the history of Easter Island?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Francis Albert]

I doubt whether most of the EU are bothered their arse yet. When May starts the clock she'll have 2 years to get a deal done and in the end will have to take what she gets. The negotiating position is absolutely awful whatever happens.

 

I suppose a few car manufacturers will be having a quiet word with Merkel and so forth but she'll be more worried about her own future I'd imagine. Europe will be waiting to see what happens in Italy next month.

 

Anyway - "the fundamentals of what we want are known"

 

What are they? And who are "we"?

The fundamentals seem clear to me. The best access to the "free market" we can get with the most control of immigration we can get. We being the majority of Brexit voters.

 

And Merkel's future may be closely tied to not losing car workers jobs by insisting on erecting significant trade barriers with the UK.

[Francis Albert]

You're not familiar with the history of Easter Island?

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I suspect many if not most of us brought up in working class Scotland are not.

[Space Mackerel]

I suspect many if not most of us brought up in working class Scotland are not.

That's what happens when you read the Record and The Sun daily I suppose.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Daydream Believer]

The fundamentals seem clear to me. The best access to the "free market" we can get with the most control of immigration we can get. We being the majority of Brexit voters.

 

And Merkel's future may be closely tied to not losing car workers jobs by insisting on erecting significant trade barriers with the UK.

 

That's a pretty broad spectrum. Anywhere from no access to the free market and full immigration control to vice versa. 

 

I would agree that the majority of Brexit voters wanted that but I think that they will sit at different points on the scale between trade and immigration.

 

Taking into account the people who wanted to remain then, I would say that a majority of the populace will be unhappy with the final outcome, whatever that is.

 

You might be right about Merkel but I think she's too entrenched now. A deal like that might bring the whole thing down. If Italy vote no and Renzi goes then I think we will get absolutely screwed in any deal regardless of any trade fallout. Just my opinion.

[Francis Albert]

That's what happens when you read the Record and The Sun daily I suppose.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

And most working class Scots while they may speak in Scottish vernacular ("photie"?) they will generally write in English rather than in the style of the Broons and Our Wullie. From that article Kavanaugh strikes me as pretty shallow. 

[Space Mackerel]

And most working class Scots while they may speak in Scottish vernacular ("photie"?) they will generally write in English rather than in the style of the Broons and Our Wullie. From that article Kavanaugh strikes me as pretty shallow.

Well I like him and seeing 50% of the Scottish electorate vote SNP now, that's generally speaking that 50% of the people on here find him "funny"

 

Plus he gets right on the tits of the Brexiteers and Yoonys too lol

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Francis Albert]

That's a pretty broad spectrum. Anywhere from no access to the free market and full immigration control to vice versa. 

 

I would agree that the majority of Brexit voters wanted that but I think that they will sit at different points on the scale between trade and immigration.

 

Taking into account the people who wanted to remain then, I would say that a majority of the populace will be unhappy with the final outcome, whatever that is.

 

You might be right about Merkel but I think she's too entrenched now. A deal like that might bring the whole thing down. If Italy vote no and Renzi goes then I think we will get absolutely screwed in any deal regardless of any trade fallout. Just my opinion.

That is the point of a negotiation, seeing what is in practice achievable between the two opening positions. No-one ever gets exactly what they want and I am sure most will be to some degree disappointed. What is depressing is that some of the losers want either not even to have a negotiation (by not triggering Article 50) or to make the UK's position in that negotiation completely untenable by publicly and firmly defining in advance the UK "bottom lines".

[Francis Albert]

Well I like him and seeing 50% of the Scottish electorate vote SNP now, that's generally speaking that 50% of the people on here find him "funny"

 

Plus he gets right on the tits of the Brexiteers and Yoonys too lol

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I am not sure I can be bothered even to try to understand your first sentence.

[Sraman]

And most working class Scots while they may speak in Scottish vernacular ("photie"?) they will generally write in English rather than in the style of the Broons and Our Wullie. From that article Kavanaugh strikes me as pretty shallow. 

 

Whit ye talkin aboot ya big daftie?