Brexit Deal agreed ( updated )

[redjambo]

32 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

No-one voted for No Deal as such. . A clear majority voted to Leave, of which No Deal was one of the wide range of possible outcomes. I don't really see why, as is so often the message on here, that Leave voters should be blamed for the fact that MPs who voted 85% to hold the referendum and then were elected on the promise to respect that vote, should be unable after nearly three years to come up with a single outcome other than No Deal.

 

Just out of interest, what is the difference between a majority and a clear majority? Is a majority 51%-49% and a clear majority 52%-48%? Or is it just political talk used to reinforce a point?

 

Also, who blames Leave voters for the current issues? I don't see that message on here. They voted how they voted. Blaming the MPs in their place is disingenuous though. The blame for this shenanigans lies squarely at the feet of May and her Government.

 

 

 

 

[redjambo]

3 minutes ago, JAYEL said:

The corrupt and undemocratic EU always has the final say

 

*Sigh*.

[JAYEL]

1 minute ago, redjambo said:

 

Just out of interest, what is the difference between a majority and a clear majority? Is a majority 51%-49% and a clear majority 52%-48%? Or is it just political talk used to reinforce a point?

 

Also, who blames Leave voters for the current issues? I don't see that message on here. They voted how they voted. Blaming the MPs in their place is disingenuous though. The blame for this shenanigans lies squarely at the feet of May and her Government.

 

 

 

 

MP’s for Leave constituencies are solely to blame

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, JAYEL said:

MP’s for Leave constituencies are solely to blame

 

For coming up with Theresa May's crappy deal? How so?

[JAYEL]

1 minute ago, redjambo said:

 

For coming up with Theresa May's crappy deal? How so?

What is so bad about her deal ?

[redjambo]

Just now, JAYEL said:

What is so bad about her deal ?

 

Have you not been following the situation?

[JAYEL]

1 minute ago, redjambo said:

 

Have you not been following the situation?

I have very much. What is wrong with May’s deal ?

[redjambo]

Just now, JAYEL said:

I have very much. What is wrong with May’s deal ?

 

I recommend you search on the web for "what is wrong with May's bad deal" or similar because I'm not indulging your WUMmery.

 

However, I'll lay this one here before you go and do that. During the transition period we will be tied legally to the EU with no influence over its decisions. That sounds like a good deal, definitely, yup. Oh, and backstop.

 

These things have been argued until people are blue in the face. You know that. You're just fecking around. Grow up.

[JAYEL]

So you have come up with nothing against May’s deal

 

It provides for a close relation with Europe , The ability to trade with the rest of the world . An end to Free movement of slaves

 

What else do you want in a deal ?

 

Unless you are a Remoaner ?

[Francis Albert]

4 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

Just out of interest, what is the difference between a majority and a clear majority? Is a majority 51%-49% and a clear majority 52%-48%? Or is it just political talk used to reinforce a point?

 

Also, who blames Leave voters for the current issues? I don't see that message on here. They voted how they voted. Blaming the MPs in their place is disingenuous though. The blame for this shenanigans lies squarely at the feet of May and her Government.

 

 

 

 

A clear majority = one big enough to leave the result in no doubt. Both your examples qualify.

By Leave voters do you mean "thick racists, "Gammons", "old people who will soon be dead", "Little Ingerlanders", "the confused", "the gullible", "fascists", and so on? No-one on here has attached blame to them?

The MPs chose overwhelmingly (not just by a clear majority but by something not far off unanimity)  to hold the referendum (which was nothing to do with May or her Government). The result left the House with a pretty free rein on the  question of what "leave" meant  yet in nearly three years MPs have not been able to agree on any version of Leave.

 

 

[ri Alban]

10 hours ago, Brighton Jambo said:

There is no chance that any government will agree to a second referendum on independence before the next Scottish elections

Scotland doesn't need a WM government to agree. The will of the Scottish people elected the SNP and with a little help from the Greens, the Scottish Parliament passed a motion to run an Indyref2. That is devolution, so we'll have it soon enough.

Edited April 6, 2019 by ri Alban

[ri Alban]

5 hours ago, JAYEL said:

MP’s for Leave constituencies are solely to blame

The people voted them in after the EU ref. They knew who they were and what they stood for. Unless you think they were voted in on party manifesto to leave the EU?.

Edited April 6, 2019 by ri Alban

[Brighton Jambo]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

Scotland doesn't need a WM government to agree. The will of the Scottish people elected the SNP and with a little help from the Greens, the Scottish Parliament passed a motion to run an Indyref2. That is devolution, so we'll have it soon enough.

Without the transfer of powers from Westminister any referendum would not be legally binding.  Nicola Sturgeon has explicitly said she would not run one in those circumstances.

 

Scotland 100% does need the government to agree or it will end up in a Catalonian farce type situation with unofficial referedums being boycotted by half the electorate.

 

you will not get another vote before 2021 elections 

[ri Alban]

27 minutes ago, Brighton Jambo said:

Without the transfer of powers from Westminister any referendum would not be legally binding.  Nicola Sturgeon has explicitly said she would not run one in those circumstances.

 

Scotland 100% does need the government to agree or it will end up in a Catalonian farce type situation with unofficial referedums being boycotted by half the electorate.

 

you will not get another vote before 2021 elections 

We'll see. Option 1, Referendum. If WM says no, they'll be no referendum needed because Option 2. All SNP MPs resign, and if re-elected, we call in the UN to negotiate our UDI.  Which option do you think the PM will chose.

 

 

Anyway, no deal brexit please! I want to watch brexiteers(Sorry, I meant, Unionists) lose everything. Yes, I might too, but hey...

Edited April 6, 2019 by ri Alban

[The Real Maroonblood]

7 hours ago, JAYEL said:

The corrupt and undemocratic EU always has the final say

Just like The House of Lords.

Edited April 6, 2019 by The Real Maroonblood

[ri Alban]

30 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Just like The House of Lords.

Shhh!! Don't spoil his delusions. ?

[JAYEL]

55 minutes ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

Just like The House of Lords.

Indeed

[JAYEL]

3 hours ago, ri Alban said:

The people voted them in after the EU ref. They knew who they were and what they stood for. Unless you think they were voted in on party manifesto to leave the EU?.

During the election they stated they would uphold the decision

[The Mighty Thor]

5 hours ago, Francis Albert said:

A clear majority = one big enough to leave the result in no doubt. Both your examples qualify.

By Leave voters do you mean "thick racists, "Gammons", "old people who will soon be dead", "Little Ingerlanders", "the confused", "the gullible", "fascists", and so on? No-one on here has attached blame to them?

 

 

With every day that passes the more that becomes the dictionary definition of the arseholes that have left this country needing snookers. 

[JamboX2]

9 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

I recommend you search on the web for "what is wrong with May's bad deal" or similar because I'm not indulging your WUMmery.

 

However, I'll lay this one here before you go and do that. During the transition period we will be tied legally to the EU with no influence over its decisions. That sounds like a good deal, definitely, yup. Oh, and backstop.

 

These things have been argued until people are blue in the face. You know that. You're just fecking around. Grow up.

 

To be honest the deal isn't actually that  bad a deal. The Withdrawal Agreement is a managed departure. It establishes the Joint Committee which will oversee relations between the two entities and arbitrate any disputes. Plus given we are committed to alignment we will likely align at all times post departure.

 

The Political Declaration seems to be the major concern as there's no certainty over the next steps. Where are we headed there? Common market 2.0, FTA, Customs Union? Free movement? All this disagreement is over the next stages in the process.  

[JAYEL]

1 hour ago, JamboX2 said:

 

To be honest the deal isn't actually that  bad a deal. The Withdrawal Agreement is a managed departure. It establishes the Joint Committee which will oversee relations between the two entities and arbitrate any disputes. Plus given we are committed to alignment we will likely align at all times post departure.

 

The Political Declaration seems to be the major concern as there's no certainty over the next steps. Where are we headed there? Common market 2.0, FTA, Customs Union? Free movement? All this disagreement is over the next stages in the process.  

Exactly

 

The only reason it has not been voted through is because the ERG want a clean break and Labour are still in the playground playing games

[JamboX2]

46 minutes ago, JAYEL said:

Exactly

 

The only reason it has not been voted through is because the ERG want a clean break and Labour are still in the playground playing games

 

No Labour aren't wanting to write her a blank cheque like they did over Art.50. Or a Tory successor. Same to an extent with the SNP.

[AlphonseCapone]

14 hours ago, JAYEL said:

So you have come up with nothing against May’s deal

 

It provides for a close relation with Europe , The ability to trade with the rest of the world . An end to Free movement of slaves

 

What else do you want in a deal ?

 

Unless you are a Remoaner ?

 

****ing horrendous chat. 

 

[Cade]

The EU's free movement rules are on free movement of WORKERS.

Not PEOPLE.

What this means is that anybody in the EU has the right to WORK in any other EU nation.

 

But morons think it means that anybody in the EU can simply up sticks and move to wherever they want, without a job, and live in any EU state.

It doesn't.

[Unknown user]

7 minutes ago, Cade said:

The EU's free movement rules are on free movement of WORKERS.

Not PEOPLE.

What this means is that anybody in the EU has the right to WORK in any other EU nation.

 

But morons think it means that anybody in the EU can simply up sticks and move to wherever they want, without a job, and live in any EU state.

It doesn't.

Correct, and the fact is that Britain doesn't exercise the right to remove EU citizens who don't find work. The rules are there which allow them to do it, but they don't. 

[redjambo]

34 minutes ago, Cade said:

The EU's free movement rules are on free movement of WORKERS.

Not PEOPLE.

What this means is that anybody in the EU has the right to WORK in any other EU nation.

 

But morons think it means that anybody in the EU can simply up sticks and move to wherever they want, without a job, and live in any EU state.

It doesn't.

 

Really? I have lived in several European countries with no problems whatsoever. Freedom of residence is included in EU citizens' rights since Directive 2004/38/EC. Access to social services is a different matter.

 

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/147/free-movement-of-persons

 

[redjambo]

33 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Correct, and the fact is that Britain doesn't exercise the right to remove EU citizens who don't find work. The rules are there which allow them to do it, but they don't. 

 

"For stays of over three months: EU citizens and their family members — if not working — must have sufficient resources and sickness insurance to ensure that they do not become a burden on the social services of the host Member State during their stay. Union citizens do not need residence permits, although Member States may require them to register with the authorities. Family members of Union citizens who are not nationals of a Member State must apply for a residence permit, valid for the duration of their stay or a five-year period."

 

"Restrictions on the right of entry and the right of residence: Union citizens or members of their family may be expelled from the host Member State on grounds of public policy, public security or public health. Guarantees are provided to ensure that such decisions are not taken on economic grounds, comply with the proportionality principle and are based on personal conduct, among others "

 

In other words, we do not have that right without undue cause.

 

 

 

 

[Justin Z]

Just now, redjambo said:

 

Really? I have lived in several European countries with no problems whatsoever. Freedom of residence is included in EU citizens' rights since Directive 2004/38/EC. Access to social services is a different matter.

 

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/147/free-movement-of-persons

 

 

Read paragraph 16 of the directive. That countries do not choose to deport people who are not working is an economic choice. Obviously people of retirement age and the like, that would make zero sense.

 

Were member countries obligated to provide unlimited benefits, as is required in the United States for example (thanks to the privileges and immunities clause of the Constitution), there might be an argument.

Source: I just took EU Labour Law last semester. Case law and scholars alike agree the practical effect is free movement of workers.

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Justin Z said:

 

Read paragraph 16 of the directive. That countries do not choose to deport people who are not working is an economic choice. Obviously people of retirement age and the like, that would make zero sense.

 

Were member countries obligated to provide unlimited benefits, as is required in the United States for example (thanks to the privileges and immunities clause of the Constitution), there might be an argument.

Source: I just took EU Labour Law last semester. Case law and scholars alike agree the practical effect is free movement of workers.

 

You are obviously advantaged in your education, but see my answer above. According to Directive 2004/38/EC, good cause has to be shown for ejecting an EU citizen from another EU country.

 

[Justin Z]

5 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

You are obviously advantaged in your education, but see my answer above. According to Directive 2004/38/EC, good cause has to be shown for ejecting an EU citizen from another EU country.

 

 

That's absolutely true--but my understanding based on our course discussion of the relevant directives (including 04/38/EC) is that the latitude the ECJ would grant to the government in such a case is quite wide.

[Mikey1874]

5 hours ago, JAYEL said:

Exactly

 

The only reason it has not been voted through is because the ERG want a clean break and Labour are still in the playground playing games

 

If SNP had supported it Deal would have passsd last time.

 

Was that playground politics? 

[redjambo]

Just now, Justin Z said:

 

That's absolutely true--but my understanding based on our course discussion of the relevant directives (including 04/38/EC) is that the latitude the ECJ would grant to the government in such a case is quite wide.

 

Ok. I'll bow to your experience of the subject. On a personal level, I experienced no problems both living and working in several EU countries, so perhaps the practical application of the directive and the other laws has taken on a reality that is more inclined towards the citizens than the governments, probably due to the various governments' unwillingness to press the point if folk are not abusing/draining social security resources. I'm going to miss my rights anyway.

[Justin Z]

Just now, redjambo said:

 

Ok. I'll bow to your experience of the subject. On a personal level, I experienced no problems both living and working in several EU countries, so perhaps the practical application of the directive and the other laws has taken on a reality that is more inclined towards the citizens than the governments, probably due to the various governments' unwillingness to press the point if folk are not abusing/draining social security resources. I'm going to miss my rights anyway.

 

Yeah, I would say the most decisive influence is just that--the governments don't want to meddle because they've rightly predicted it would cost them more taking an active role than they'd ever get anywhere close to saving by doing so. It's just not worth it policy-wise.

[ri Alban]

1 hour ago, redjambo said:

 

Really? I have lived in several European countries with no problems whatsoever. Freedom of residence is included in EU citizens' rights since Directive 2004/38/EC. Access to social services is a different matter.

 

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/en/sheet/147/free-movement-of-persons

 

Are other Europeans as horrible towards Ukers, as we are of them.

[redjambo]

Just now, ri Alban said:

Are other Europeans as horrible towards Ukers, as we are of them.

 

Nope. Not in my experience anyway. Then again, although I was previously happy to be both British and Scottish, I identify primarily as Scottish when I'm abroad (or my kilt identifies it for me), and being Scottish is usually treated favourably. I haven't heard folk criticising the UK though. In fact, most folk I've met have positive opinions of the UK, or at least they did until all this crap blew up.

[ri Alban]

6 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Nope. Not in my experience anyway. Then again, although I was previously happy to be both British and Scottish, I identify primarily as Scottish when I'm abroad (or my kilt identifies it for me), and being Scottish is usually treated favourably. I haven't heard folk criticising the UK though. In fact, most folk I've met have positive opinions of the UK, or at least they did until all this crap blew up.

It used to break ma heart and I'd need to seriously stop masel fae doin folk, the way they used to speak to and about Poles, Latvians and Czechs where I've worked. Horrendous.

I've had to remind a couple of Northern Irishmen and one Englishman. That they too are foreign. God did they no like that. It Shut them the feck up, tho.

Edited April 6, 2019 by ri Alban

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, ri Alban said:

It used to break ma heart and I'd need to seriously stop masel fae doin folk, the way they used to speak to and about Poles, Latvians and Czechs where I've worked. Horrendous.

I've had to remind a couple of Northern Irishmen and one Englishman. That they too are foreign. God did they no like that. It Shut them the feck up, tho.

 

I know. I've travelled extensively throughout Europe and I've met so many wonderful, interesting, caring folk (I hitch-hike so get to meet a lot of locals). It really has driven home to me how we are all Jock Tamson's bairns.

[Mikey1874]

It's finally dawning on them

 

 

[JAYEL]

3 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

If SNP had supported it Deal would have passsd last time.

 

Was that playground politics? 

Indeed but they won’t vote for any deal

[Mikey1874]

39 minutes ago, JAYEL said:

Indeed but they won’t vote for any deal

 

Supported Common Market 2.0 the last time.

 

Could be only alternative to May's Deal or No Deal.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

14 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Scotland doesn't need a WM government to agree. The will of the Scottish people elected the SNP and with a little help from the Greens, the Scottish Parliament passed a motion to run an Indyref2. That is devolution, so we'll have it soon enough.

 

The complication from this, as I understand it, is the EU, and specifically Spain, because of the Catalonia problem. Spain has widely said that *if the UK government agrees to the split*, Scotland can rejoin the EU, no problems, back you are. The setting of precedent is obvious here -- Spain wants a de facto veto on an independent Catalonia getting back into the EU. 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

As to a second Brexit referendum, if Parliament really is stuck (as it certainly seems to be), the solution would seem to be a kind of RCV/approval vote. Offer May's Mess, No Deal, Remain, and CM2.0 as options. Rank your choices, only vote for ones that you approve of. 60% votes required for anything to pass or else you do it all again one month later.

[Francis Albert]

3 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

I know. I've travelled extensively throughout Europe and I've met so many wonderful, interesting, caring folk (I hitch-hike so get to meet a lot of locals). It really has driven home to me how we are all Jock Tamson's bairns.

Did you meet anyone who wasn't wonderful, interesting and caring? 

 

[redjambo]

Just now, Francis Albert said:

Did you meet anyone who wasn't wonderful, interesting and caring? 

 

 

You really are an arse (and a most cynical arse at that). Of course I did. That's why I said "many". Seriously, you ought to find ways of enjoying life more, rather than taking all your frustrations out on others.

[Francis Albert]

15 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

You really are an arse (and a most cynical arse at that). Of course I did. That's why I said "many". Seriously, you ought to find ways of enjoying life more, rather than taking all your frustrations out on others.

 

15 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

Seriously you should try to be less sensitive. When you say we are all jock tamsons bairns am I (for example) included. Or the AFD or Marine le Pen's supporters?

Edited April 6, 2019 by Francis Albert

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

 

Seriously you should try to be less sensitive. When you say we are all jock tamsons bairns am I (for example) included. Or the AFD or Marine le Pen's supporters?

 

Yes we are. What I was alluding to is that it doesn't matter where folk come from - there are good and bad folk everywhere in pretty much similar proportions. We're all trying to survive/be happy/protect our families/combat disease etc. Everyone has a story and I've heard many of them.

 

And on that note, that's me out of JKB for the evening. It's been quite a tough day and the last thing I want to do to finish it off is converse with you, FA. I should have just ignored you. Lesson learned.

[Francis Albert]

1 minute ago, redjambo said:

 

Yes we are. What I was alluding to is that it doesn't matter where folk come from - there are good and bad folk everywhere in pretty much similar proportions. We're all trying to survive/be happy/protect our families/combat disease etc. Everyone has a story and I've heard many of them.

 

And on that note, that's me out of JKB for the evening. It's been quite a tough day and the last thing I want to do to finish it off is converse with you, FA. I should have just ignored you. Lesson learned.

Fair enough. No-one could argue with that. But only the wonderful caring and interesting get a mention.

 

[Justin Z]

12 hours ago, redjambo said:

I should have just ignored you. Lesson learned.

 

By pure serendipity I discovered this internet term this morning . . . Mods take note.

 

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

[The Real Maroonblood]

8 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

By pure serendipity I discovered this internet term this morning . . . Mods take note.

 

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

[XB52]

26 minutes ago, Justin Z said:

 

By pure serendipity I discovered this internet term this morning . . . Mods take note.

 

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

Pretty much sums him up. Please can everyone just ignore him as you just can't argue with someone like that. Ignore him and he will soon find another message board to infect