Discussion:
Brexit: UK public overwhelmingly oppose Theresa May's plan to leave EU with no deal in place
(too old to reply)
MM
2017-03-07 08:56:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The Independent, Monday 6 March 2017:

"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"

"Britons overwhelmingly oppose Theresa May’s plan to quit the EU with
no deal in place if Parliament dares to reject the terms she agrees
with Brussels, an exclusive poll has revealed.

"The BMG Research study showed twice as many people would rather the
UK stay in the EU or try and secure a different deal, if MPs and Lords
do not endorse the agreement the Prime Minister returns from Europe
with.

"The survey for The Independent also showed the public are bracing
themselves for a Brexit hit on the economy over the next two years as
painstaking negotiations over future relations play out.

"It comes ahead of a major stand-off between Ms May’s Government and
the House of Lords, which is demanding Parliament be guaranteed in law
the final say on approving her Brexit deal and given power to send her
back to the negotiating table if it is rejected.

"So far Ms May has only given a verbal assurance Parliament will have
a vote on her deal and has warned that if MPs and peers ditch her
terms, the UK will simply leave the EU without a deal and trade with
the bloc on World Trade Organisation rules -- something many believe
will be hugely damaging to the economy.

"Asked what 'should happen next' if Parliament rejects Ms May’s deal,
just 25 per cent said 'we should leave the EU with no set future
relations in place and revert to trading with the EU on World Trade
Organisation rules.'

"A greater proportion, 27 per cent, said Ms May should try to
renegotiate a deal, 14 per cent said we should stay in the EU on new
terms that Ms May should try to negotiate and 15 per cent said we
should stay in on existing terms -- a total of 56 per cent who
favoured options at odds with the Prime Minister’s plan to quit and
trade on WTO rules.

"Even among Tory voters only 38 per cent backed leaving with no deal,
while 38 per cent supported renegotiating and a further 18 per cent
opting for staying in the EU on existing or new terms.

"Only last week, ex-Tory Prime Minister Sir John Major warned that
quitting with no deal would be 'the worst possible outcome' for
Britain with 'worrying implications for public services such as the
NHS'.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-theresa-may-plan-leave-eu-no-plan-uk-public-oppose-prime-minister-a7614526.html

So, while Brexiters can jeer and sneer at non-Brexiters, the fact
remains that the country as a whole *wants* the government to do a
deal with the EU, making Mrs May sit uncomfortably between a rock and
a hard place. Lord Hague is now calling for a general election, and
we'll see how confident she is by observing her response. My guess is
she'll fight tooth and nail to avoid an election.

MM
tim...
2017-03-07 09:16:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
"Britons overwhelmingly oppose Theresa May's plan to quit the EU with
no deal in place if Parliament dares to reject the terms she agrees
with Brussels, an exclusive poll has revealed.
but that's because they don't understand the concept of a negotiating
position

no-one wants this as the end result, but if you don't tell the other side
that you are prepared to consider it they won't believe that you are serious
in your negotiation and offer you nothing

that was the tactic employed by Call Me Dave, and that what he got -
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

tim
tim...
2017-03-07 09:20:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
"Britons overwhelmingly oppose Theresa May's plan to quit the EU with
no deal in place if Parliament dares to reject the terms she agrees
with Brussels, an exclusive poll has revealed.
"The BMG Research study showed twice as many people would rather the
UK stay in the EU or try and secure a different deal, if MPs and Lords
do not endorse the agreement the Prime Minister returns from Europe
with.
"The survey for The Independent also showed the public are bracing
themselves for a Brexit hit on the economy over the next two years as
painstaking negotiations over future relations play out.
"It comes ahead of a major stand-off between Ms May's Government and
the House of Lords, which is demanding Parliament be guaranteed in law
the final say on approving her Brexit deal and given power to send her
back to the negotiating table if it is rejected.
"So far Ms May has only given a verbal assurance Parliament will have
a vote on her deal and has warned that if MPs and peers ditch her
terms, the UK will simply leave the EU without a deal and trade with
the bloc on World Trade Organisation rules -- something many believe
will be hugely damaging to the economy.
"Asked what 'should happen next' if Parliament rejects Ms May's deal,
just 25 per cent said 'we should leave the EU with no set future
relations in place and revert to trading with the EU on World Trade
Organisation rules.'
"A greater proportion, 27 per cent, said Ms May should try to
renegotiate a deal, 14 per cent said we should stay in the EU on new
terms that Ms May should try to negotiate and 15 per cent said we
should stay in on existing terms
options 1 and 2 will be unlikely to be available to us

I can collect votes to have a fairy at the bottom of my garden

it wont make one magically appear

tim
abelard
2017-03-07 09:49:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
"Britons overwhelmingly oppose Theresa May's plan to quit the EU with
no deal in place if Parliament dares to reject the terms she agrees
with Brussels, an exclusive poll has revealed.
"The BMG Research study showed twice as many people would rather the
UK stay in the EU or try and secure a different deal, if MPs and Lords
do not endorse the agreement the Prime Minister returns from Europe
with.
"The survey for The Independent also showed the public are bracing
themselves for a Brexit hit on the economy over the next two years as
painstaking negotiations over future relations play out.
"It comes ahead of a major stand-off between Ms May's Government and
the House of Lords, which is demanding Parliament be guaranteed in law
the final say on approving her Brexit deal and given power to send her
back to the negotiating table if it is rejected.
"So far Ms May has only given a verbal assurance Parliament will have
a vote on her deal and has warned that if MPs and peers ditch her
terms, the UK will simply leave the EU without a deal and trade with
the bloc on World Trade Organisation rules -- something many believe
will be hugely damaging to the economy.
"Asked what 'should happen next' if Parliament rejects Ms May's deal,
just 25 per cent said 'we should leave the EU with no set future
relations in place and revert to trading with the EU on World Trade
Organisation rules.'
"A greater proportion, 27 per cent, said Ms May should try to
renegotiate a deal, 14 per cent said we should stay in the EU on new
terms that Ms May should try to negotiate and 15 per cent said we
should stay in on existing terms
options 1 and 2 will be unlikely to be available to us
I can collect votes to have a fairy at the bottom of my garden
it wont make one magically appear
it is obvious that you are not combining your votes with wishing
hard enough!
--
www.abelard.org
Yellow
2017-03-07 10:35:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
In article <***@4ax.com>, abelard3
@abelard.org says...
Post by abelard
Post by tim...
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
"Britons overwhelmingly oppose Theresa May's plan to quit the EU with
no deal in place if Parliament dares to reject the terms she agrees
with Brussels, an exclusive poll has revealed.
"The BMG Research study showed twice as many people would rather the
UK stay in the EU or try and secure a different deal, if MPs and Lords
do not endorse the agreement the Prime Minister returns from Europe
with.
"The survey for The Independent also showed the public are bracing
themselves for a Brexit hit on the economy over the next two years as
painstaking negotiations over future relations play out.
"It comes ahead of a major stand-off between Ms May's Government and
the House of Lords, which is demanding Parliament be guaranteed in law
the final say on approving her Brexit deal and given power to send her
back to the negotiating table if it is rejected.
"So far Ms May has only given a verbal assurance Parliament will have
a vote on her deal and has warned that if MPs and peers ditch her
terms, the UK will simply leave the EU without a deal and trade with
the bloc on World Trade Organisation rules -- something many believe
will be hugely damaging to the economy.
"Asked what 'should happen next' if Parliament rejects Ms May's deal,
just 25 per cent said 'we should leave the EU with no set future
relations in place and revert to trading with the EU on World Trade
Organisation rules.'
"A greater proportion, 27 per cent, said Ms May should try to
renegotiate a deal, 14 per cent said we should stay in the EU on new
terms that Ms May should try to negotiate and 15 per cent said we
should stay in on existing terms
options 1 and 2 will be unlikely to be available to us
I can collect votes to have a fairy at the bottom of my garden
it wont make one magically appear
it is obvious that you are not combining your votes with wishing
hard enough!
Maybe we all need to wish together. :-)
Yellow
2017-03-07 10:44:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
"Britons overwhelmingly oppose Theresa May's plan to quit the EU with
no deal in place if Parliament dares to reject the terms she agrees
with Brussels, an exclusive poll has revealed.
"The BMG Research study showed twice as many people would rather the
UK stay in the EU or try and secure a different deal, if MPs and Lords
do not endorse the agreement the Prime Minister returns from Europe
with.
"The survey for The Independent also showed the public are bracing
themselves for a Brexit hit on the economy over the next two years as
painstaking negotiations over future relations play out.
"It comes ahead of a major stand-off between Ms May's Government and
the House of Lords, which is demanding Parliament be guaranteed in law
the final say on approving her Brexit deal and given power to send her
back to the negotiating table if it is rejected.
"So far Ms May has only given a verbal assurance Parliament will have
a vote on her deal and has warned that if MPs and peers ditch her
terms, the UK will simply leave the EU without a deal and trade with
the bloc on World Trade Organisation rules -- something many believe
will be hugely damaging to the economy.
"Asked what 'should happen next' if Parliament rejects Ms May's deal,
just 25 per cent said 'we should leave the EU with no set future
relations in place and revert to trading with the EU on World Trade
Organisation rules.'
"A greater proportion, 27 per cent, said Ms May should try to
renegotiate a deal, 14 per cent said we should stay in the EU on new
terms that Ms May should try to negotiate and 15 per cent said we
should stay in on existing terms
options 1 and 2 will be unlikely to be available to us
I can collect votes to have a fairy at the bottom of my garden
it wont make one magically appear
It is the same as all those weeks that politicians and commentators
spent arguing that the UK "must stay a member of the Single Market" when
that was never ever going to be a possibility.

Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.

It would make more sense for the options under discussion to at least be
possible, practical and useful rather than leading the public
expectation down a path to fairy land.
tim...
2017-03-07 11:04:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by tim...
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
"Britons overwhelmingly oppose Theresa May's plan to quit the EU with
no deal in place if Parliament dares to reject the terms she agrees
with Brussels, an exclusive poll has revealed.
"The BMG Research study showed twice as many people would rather the
UK stay in the EU or try and secure a different deal, if MPs and Lords
do not endorse the agreement the Prime Minister returns from Europe
with.
"The survey for The Independent also showed the public are bracing
themselves for a Brexit hit on the economy over the next two years as
painstaking negotiations over future relations play out.
"It comes ahead of a major stand-off between Ms May's Government and
the House of Lords, which is demanding Parliament be guaranteed in law
the final say on approving her Brexit deal and given power to send her
back to the negotiating table if it is rejected.
"So far Ms May has only given a verbal assurance Parliament will have
a vote on her deal and has warned that if MPs and peers ditch her
terms, the UK will simply leave the EU without a deal and trade with
the bloc on World Trade Organisation rules -- something many believe
will be hugely damaging to the economy.
"Asked what 'should happen next' if Parliament rejects Ms May's deal,
just 25 per cent said 'we should leave the EU with no set future
relations in place and revert to trading with the EU on World Trade
Organisation rules.'
"A greater proportion, 27 per cent, said Ms May should try to
renegotiate a deal, 14 per cent said we should stay in the EU on new
terms that Ms May should try to negotiate and 15 per cent said we
should stay in on existing terms
options 1 and 2 will be unlikely to be available to us
I can collect votes to have a fairy at the bottom of my garden
it wont make one magically appear
It is the same as all those weeks that politicians and commentators
spent arguing that the UK "must stay a member of the Single Market" when
that was never ever going to be a possibility.
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
It would make more sense for the options under discussion to at least be
possible, practical and useful rather than leading the public
expectation down a path to fairy land.
here's another wish from fairyland

"Chuka Umunna says Theresa May should agree EU-wide reform of free movement
rules"

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-chuka-umunna-theresa-may-free-movement-a7614676.html

I wonder how many decades he's expecting us to wait before accepting that
"it ain't gonna happen"

tim
Yellow
2017-03-07 13:34:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by Yellow
It is the same as all those weeks that politicians and commentators
spent arguing that the UK "must stay a member of the Single Market" when
that was never ever going to be a possibility.
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
It would make more sense for the options under discussion to at least be
possible, practical and useful rather than leading the public
expectation down a path to fairy land.
here's another wish from fairyland
"Chuka Umunna says Theresa May should agree EU-wide reform of free movement
rules"
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-chuka-umunna-theresa-may-free-movement-a7614676.html
I wonder how many decades he's expecting us to wait before accepting that
"it ain't gonna happen"
And it is not as if it happening is even a possibility because the
eastern European nations have already said they will never agree to a
weakening of the current arrangements.

So what is the point of all this wasted energy? That is what I do not
understand. Is there an end game to this sort of unachievable suggestion
that could give Chuka Umunna, in this case, what he actually wants to
achieve?

I wish I could figure it out, but I haven't managed to so far.
Sid
2017-03-07 19:42:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Yellow" wrote in message news:***@News.Individual.NET...


And it is not as if it happening is even a possibility because the
eastern European nations have already said they will never agree to a
weakening of the current arrangements.

So what is the point of all this wasted energy? That is what I do not
understand. Is there an end game to this sort of unachievable suggestion
that could give Chuka Umunna, in this case, what he actually wants to
achieve?

I wish I could figure it out, but I haven't managed to so far.

To be the new leader of the Nasty Party.

--
MM
2017-03-08 14:00:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.

MM
Vidcapper
2017-03-08 15:21:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
Untrue - the Commons can reject any Amendment the Lords tries to pass.
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
MM
2017-03-09 11:42:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Vidcapper
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
Untrue - the Commons can reject any Amendment the Lords tries to pass.
Can.

Must not.

MM
Vidcapper
2017-03-09 15:50:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Vidcapper
Untrue - the Commons can reject any Amendment the Lords tries to pass.
Can.
Must not.
I'm sure the Commons would be quite happy to accept Lords amendments, as
long as they don't hinder our negotiating position.
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
tim...
2017-03-09 11:19:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no

and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable

where do we end up then?

tim
R. Mark Clayton
2017-03-09 16:42:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up **** creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
tim...
2017-03-09 17:22:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up ****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position

tim
R. Mark Clayton
2017-03-10 10:19:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up ****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a position of weakness?
tim...
2017-03-10 11:03:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up ****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a position of weakness?
the democratic process - that process that the LDs seem to think is only
valid if it returns the result that they want.

(assuming you mean "why are we having to negotiate at all")

tim
R. Mark Clayton
2017-03-10 11:06:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up ****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a
position of weakness?
the democratic process - that process that the LDs seem to think is only
valid if it returns the result that they want.
(assuming you mean "why are we having to negotiate at all")
tim
Right so it was the Leave vote that put is in this position, not anything else.
tim...
2017-03-10 11:13:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play.
The
PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up ****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a
position of weakness?
the democratic process - that process that the LDs seem to think is only
valid if it returns the result that they want.
(assuming you mean "why are we having to negotiate at all")
tim
Right so it was the Leave vote that put is in this position, not anything else.
no

the leave vote put us in the position of having to negotiate

it didn't put us into the position of having to negotiate with both hands
tied behind our backs, that is being forced (attempted) on us by Remoaners

tim
R. Mark Clayton
2017-03-10 15:14:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
SNIP
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up ****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a
position of weakness?
the democratic process - that process that the LDs seem to think is only
valid if it returns the result that they want.
(assuming you mean "why are we having to negotiate at all")
tim
Right so it was the Leave vote that put is in this position, not anything else.
no
the leave vote put us in the position of having to negotiate
from a position of weakness.
Post by tim...
it didn't put us into the position of having to negotiate with both hands
tied behind our backs, that is being forced (attempted) on us by Remoaners
Brexit believers seem to think the negotiations are like poker - you hold your cards to your chest and just keep betting until one side blinks first and folds.

Actually it is more like bridge where the two team have laid out their basic positions before commencing actual play.
Post by tim...
tim
Yellow
2017-03-10 15:53:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up
****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a
position of weakness?
the democratic process - that process that the LDs seem to think is only
valid if it returns the result that they want.
(assuming you mean "why are we having to negotiate at all")
tim
Right so it was the Leave vote that put is in this position, not anything else.
no
the leave vote put us in the position of having to negotiate
from a position of weakness.
Post by tim...
it didn't put us into the position of having to negotiate with both hands
tied behind our backs, that is being forced (attempted) on us by Remoaners
Brexit believers seem to think the negotiations are like poker - you hold your cards to your chest and just keep betting until one side blinks first and folds.
Actually it is more like bridge where the two team have laid out their basic positions before commencing actual play.
You "seem to think" other people "seem to think" a lot of bizarre things
but then you "seem to think" a lot of bizarre things yourself.

Tell me - do you have any A levels?
Ophelia
2017-03-10 15:59:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Brexit believers seem to think the negotiations are like poker - you hold
your cards to your chest and just keep betting until one side blinks first
and folds.
Actually it is more like bridge where the two team have laid out their
basic positions before commencing actual play.
You "seem to think" other people "seem to think" a lot of bizarre things
but then you "seem to think" a lot of bizarre things yourself.

Tell me - do you have any A levels?

===

rofl but but surely you are forgetting ... WE are the uneducated ones <g>
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
R. Mark Clayton
2017-03-10 16:44:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up
****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a
position of weakness?
the democratic process - that process that the LDs seem to think is only
valid if it returns the result that they want.
(assuming you mean "why are we having to negotiate at all")
tim
Right so it was the Leave vote that put is in this position, not anything else.
no
the leave vote put us in the position of having to negotiate
from a position of weakness.
Post by tim...
it didn't put us into the position of having to negotiate with both hands
tied behind our backs, that is being forced (attempted) on us by Remoaners
Brexit believers seem to think the negotiations are like poker - you hold your cards to your chest and just keep betting until one side blinks first and folds.
Actually it is more like bridge where the two team have laid out their basic positions before commencing actual play.
You "seem to think" other people "seem to think" a lot of bizarre things
but then you "seem to think" a lot of bizarre things yourself.
Tell me - do you have any A levels?
Yes - got them under-age though...
tim...
2017-03-10 17:43:27 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up -
up
****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a
position of weakness?
the democratic process - that process that the LDs seem to think is only
valid if it returns the result that they want.
(assuming you mean "why are we having to negotiate at all")
tim
Right so it was the Leave vote that put is in this position, not
anything
else.
no
the leave vote put us in the position of having to negotiate
from a position of weakness.
That's democracy

The question was asked and the decision made

you lost - tough titties

tim
MM
2017-03-11 11:30:07 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up -
up
****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a
position of weakness?
the democratic process - that process that the LDs seem to think is only
valid if it returns the result that they want.
(assuming you mean "why are we having to negotiate at all")
tim
Right so it was the Leave vote that put is in this position, not
anything
else.
no
the leave vote put us in the position of having to negotiate
from a position of weakness.
That's democracy
The question was asked and the decision made
you lost - tough titties
But how, then, are Remainers tying the government's hands?

MM
tim...
2017-03-11 11:41:59 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up -
up
****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a
position of weakness?
the democratic process - that process that the LDs seem to think is only
valid if it returns the result that they want.
(assuming you mean "why are we having to negotiate at all")
tim
Right so it was the Leave vote that put is in this position, not
anything
else.
no
the leave vote put us in the position of having to negotiate
from a position of weakness.
That's democracy
The question was asked and the decision made
you lost - tough titties
But how, then, are Remainers tying the government's hands?
with all of these amendments that give away what few cards we have before we
even enter negotiation

tim
MM
2017-03-11 11:29:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play.
The
PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up ****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
tim
Sorry - just who put us in a position of having to negotiate from a
position of weakness?
the democratic process - that process that the LDs seem to think is only
valid if it returns the result that they want.
(assuming you mean "why are we having to negotiate at all")
tim
Right so it was the Leave vote that put is in this position, not anything else.
no
the leave vote put us in the position of having to negotiate
So, cause and effect. You got it!
Post by tim...
it didn't put us into the position of having to negotiate with both hands
tied behind our backs, that is being forced (attempted) on us by Remoaners
How is it being forced? What precisely have Remainers done that ties
the hands of the government's negotiators? You come out with these
glib statements that are meaningless under analysis.

MM
MM
2017-03-11 11:26:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up ****
creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
but the point is that ****ed up state will be worse for the Remoaners
putting us into that position
How come? The government is *carrying out the wishes of the people*.
That's what it keeps intoning. Remainers do not figure at all in the
equation. They are being completely ignored. This will so come back to
bite Brexiters on the bum that they'll have to stand for the rest of
their sorry lives. Still, let's hope their penitence will be
short-lived.

MM
Vidcapper
2017-03-10 07:52:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up **** creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
It seems to be an article of faith amongst remoaners that Brexit will be
a disaster - but on what timescale should that assessment be made?

ISTM that at least a decade needs to elapse before the consequences,
good or bad, can be reasonably determined.
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
R. Mark Clayton
2017-03-10 10:24:54 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up **** creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
It seems to be an article of faith amongst remoaners that Brexit will be
a disaster - but on what timescale should that assessment be made?
ISTM that at least a decade needs to elapse before the consequences,
good or bad, can be reasonably determined.
Think back - when did the pound drop 10%?

In the ten minutes after the referendum result became clear - NOT ten years.

Nobody has said the UK will sink without trace after Brexit, just that it will be ~6% poorer - equivalent to a pretty harsh recession. It will also be politically and socially isolated.

At the moment the economy is buoyed up a bit by the most drastic intervention measures ever taken by the Bank of England to stave off a slump back in July.
Post by Vidcapper
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
tim...
2017-03-10 11:04:51 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
tim
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up - up
**** creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
It seems to be an article of faith amongst remoaners that Brexit will be
a disaster - but on what timescale should that assessment be made?
ISTM that at least a decade needs to elapse before the consequences,
good or bad, can be reasonably determined.
Think back - when did the pound drop 10%?
In the ten minutes after the referendum result became clear - NOT ten years.
Nobody has said the UK will sink without trace after Brexit, just that it
will be ~6% poorer
"over a 15 year period" - almost unnoticeable
Post by R. Mark Clayton
- equivalent to a pretty harsh recession.
It will also be politically and socially isolated.
what a load of bollocks

tim
R. Mark Clayton
2017-03-10 15:17:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
SNIP
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Nobody has said the UK will sink without trace after Brexit, just that it
will be ~6% poorer
"over a 15 year period" - almost unnoticeable
If we leave the single market and customs union Will tariffs to export to the EU (half our trade) be introduced that gradually?
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
- equivalent to a pretty harsh recession.
It will also be politically and socially isolated.
what a load of bollocks
No sadly that is what the Leavers wanted all along :-(
Post by tim...
tim
Vidcapper
2017-03-10 16:48:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
SNIP
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Nobody has said the UK will sink without trace after Brexit, just
that it will be ~6% poorer
"over a 15 year period" - almost unnoticeable
If we leave the single market and customs union Will tariffs to
export to the EU (half our trade) be introduced that gradually?
No swifter than our retaliation if they resort to such a childish &
vengeful move!
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
MM
2017-03-11 11:31:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
what a load of bollocks
A typical Brexiter response when they realise they've painted
themselves into a corner yet again and can go nowhere.

MM
tim...
2017-03-11 11:43:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by tim...
what a load of bollocks
A typical Brexiter response when they realise they've painted
themselves into a corner yet again and can go nowhere.
wherever we end up on trade

the idea that we will cease to have cultural exchanges with the rest of
Europe is absolute twaddle

tim
Vidcapper
2017-03-10 15:25:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Where the New Luddites (Brexit Believers) would have us end up -
up **** creek without a paddle and a lot poorer.
It seems to be an article of faith amongst remoaners that Brexit
will be a disaster - but on what timescale should that assessment
be made?
ISTM that at least a decade needs to elapse before the
consequences, good or bad, can be reasonably determined.
Think back - when did the pound drop 10%?
In the ten minutes after the referendum result became clear - NOT ten years.
But nobody nut the most ardent remoaners would claim that was a
'disaster' - and certainly it is not an irreversible consequence.
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Nobody has said the UK will sink without trace after Brexit, just
that it will be ~6% poorer - equivalent to a pretty harsh recession.
It will also be politically and socially isolated.
Where does that 6% figure come from? And the idea well will become some
sort of political pariah is just laughable!
Post by R. Mark Clayton
At the moment the economy is buoyed up a bit by the most drastic
intervention measures ever taken by the Bank of England to stave off
a slump back in July.
Then why were growth forecasts upgraded in the budget?
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
MM
2017-03-11 11:24:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
WTO or we stay in.

Did YOU vote for WTO rules?

I'll bet that most Brexit voters had even never heard of WTO.

MM
tim...
2017-03-11 11:40:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
WTO or we stay in.
Did YOU vote for WTO rules?
it's an acceptable default position, yes

I voted to come out

that trumps everything else

WTO may not be my preferred final position, but it's better than staying in
by a mile
Post by MM
I'll bet that most Brexit voters had even never heard of WTO.
the name of the rules are irrelevant

but only an absolute idiot believes that there is no mechanism for trading
with the EU outside of the club rules, it's what the rest of the world does
quite successfully (FSVO)

tim
Yellow
2017-03-11 14:23:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
WTO or we stay in.
Did YOU vote for WTO rules?
I voted to leave the EU.
Post by MM
I'll bet that most Brexit voters had even never heard of WTO.
If you have heard of them, why wouldn't other people have heard of them
also?
MM
2017-03-12 08:18:28 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yellow
Post by MM
Post by tim...
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Now the focus has moved on to "crashing out of the EU without a trade
deal" to use the BBC's words.
At which point the Lords' amendment yesterday comes into play. The PM
will be forced to go back to the EU and renegotiate, not just accept
no deal as a done deal.
and if the EU say no
and the ECJ rules that A50 once triggered is unstoppable
where do we end up then?
WTO or we stay in.
Did YOU vote for WTO rules?
I voted to leave the EU.
Maybe you, like most Brexiters, had never heard of the WTO.
Post by Yellow
Post by MM
I'll bet that most Brexit voters had even never heard of WTO.
If you have heard of them, why wouldn't other people have heard of them
also?
Because I am more politically aware than most Brexiters.

Your "railway station bench" example of the dreadful Brussels
bureaucrats imposing safety regs amply demonstrates your
narrow-mindedness.

MM
Yellow
2017-03-12 14:07:58 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by Yellow
Post by MM
I'll bet that most Brexit voters had even never heard of WTO.
If you have heard of them, why wouldn't other people have heard of them
also?
Because I am more politically aware than most Brexiters.
From what you post here, you actually spend most of your life with your
head up your arse.
harry
2017-03-07 10:09:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
"Britons overwhelmingly oppose Theresa May’s plan to quit the EU with
no deal in place if Parliament dares to reject the terms she agrees
with Brussels, an exclusive poll has revealed.
"The BMG Research study showed twice as many people would rather the
UK stay in the EU or try and secure a different deal, if MPs and Lords
do not endorse the agreement the Prime Minister returns from Europe
with.
"The survey for The Independent also showed the public are bracing
themselves for a Brexit hit on the economy over the next two years as
painstaking negotiations over future relations play out.
"It comes ahead of a major stand-off between Ms May’s Government and
the House of Lords, which is demanding Parliament be guaranteed in law
the final say on approving her Brexit deal and given power to send her
back to the negotiating table if it is rejected.
"So far Ms May has only given a verbal assurance Parliament will have
a vote on her deal and has warned that if MPs and peers ditch her
terms, the UK will simply leave the EU without a deal and trade with
the bloc on World Trade Organisation rules -- something many believe
will be hugely damaging to the economy.
"Asked what 'should happen next' if Parliament rejects Ms May’s deal,
just 25 per cent said 'we should leave the EU with no set future
relations in place and revert to trading with the EU on World Trade
Organisation rules.'
"A greater proportion, 27 per cent, said Ms May should try to
renegotiate a deal, 14 per cent said we should stay in the EU on new
terms that Ms May should try to negotiate and 15 per cent said we
should stay in on existing terms -- a total of 56 per cent who
favoured options at odds with the Prime Minister’s plan to quit and
trade on WTO rules.
"Even among Tory voters only 38 per cent backed leaving with no deal,
while 38 per cent supported renegotiating and a further 18 per cent
opting for staying in the EU on existing or new terms.
"Only last week, ex-Tory Prime Minister Sir John Major warned that
quitting with no deal would be 'the worst possible outcome' for
Britain with 'worrying implications for public services such as the
NHS'.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-theresa-may-plan-leave-eu-no-plan-uk-public-oppose-prime-minister-a7614526.html
So, while Brexiters can jeer and sneer at non-Brexiters, the fact
remains that the country as a whole *wants* the government to do a
deal with the EU, making Mrs May sit uncomfortably between a rock and
a hard place. Lord Hague is now calling for a general election, and
we'll see how confident she is by observing her response. My guess is
she'll fight tooth and nail to avoid an election.
MM
You're so thick that even now you believe polls?????
You have a habit of always being wrong.
James Hammerton
2017-03-07 23:03:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
Thing is, it's not up to us whether we stay in the EU in such
circumstances or whether we get a chance to try and negotiate a better deal.

It's not even up to our Parliament or the UK population voting in a
referendum on the terms of a deal.

It's up to the EU.

The most that Parliament (or a second referendum) can force the
government to do therefore is to ask to remain in the EU and/or try to
to negotiate a new deal?

Will the EU be willing to make time for further negotations, that might
then too be rejected? I guess they'd have to judge whether Britain
exiting without a deal is more costly than continuing to negotiate
without any certainty that even if a deal is agreed by the government it
would be accepted! I wouldn't want to bet they'd judge in favour of more
negotiations...

Will they want us to remain a member as if nothing happened? I very much
doubt it - if we decided we didn't want to leave after all, I'd expect
them to exact a price to be allowed to stay, e.g. no more opt outs, no
more rebate, required to join the Euro.

But, maybe we can revoke Article 50 and stay stubbornly in place as an
EU member, opt outs and all nevertheless?

I suspect we'll find that the EU will interpret its own treaties to suit
their own interests here and, unless they feel they really need us at
this point, decide that Article 50 isn't revokable, at which point what
can we do? Take the case to the ECJ? What happens to our membership in
the meantime?

Regards,

James
--
James Hammerton,
http://jhammerton.wordpress.org/
http://www.magnacartaplus.org/news/
Follow on twitter: @JamesAHammerton
MM
2017-03-08 14:02:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 23:03:15 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
Thing is, it's not up to us whether we stay in the EU in such
circumstances or whether we get a chance to try and negotiate a better deal.
It's not even up to our Parliament or the UK population voting in a
referendum on the terms of a deal.
It's up to the EU.
The most that Parliament (or a second referendum) can force the
government to do therefore is to ask to remain in the EU and/or try to
to negotiate a new deal?
Will the EU be willing to make time for further negotations, that might
then too be rejected? I guess they'd have to judge whether Britain
exiting without a deal is more costly than continuing to negotiate
without any certainty that even if a deal is agreed by the government it
would be accepted! I wouldn't want to bet they'd judge in favour of more
negotiations...
Will they want us to remain a member as if nothing happened? I very much
doubt it - if we decided we didn't want to leave after all, I'd expect
them to exact a price to be allowed to stay, e.g. no more opt outs, no
more rebate, required to join the Euro.
But, maybe we can revoke Article 50 and stay stubbornly in place as an
EU member, opt outs and all nevertheless?
I suspect we'll find that the EU will interpret its own treaties to suit
their own interests here and, unless they feel they really need us at
this point, decide that Article 50 isn't revokable, at which point what
can we do? Take the case to the ECJ? What happens to our membership in
the meantime?
You're absolutely right. Britain is fucked.

MM
tim...
2017-03-09 11:21:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 23:03:15 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
Thing is, it's not up to us whether we stay in the EU in such
circumstances or whether we get a chance to try and negotiate a better deal.
It's not even up to our Parliament or the UK population voting in a
referendum on the terms of a deal.
It's up to the EU.
The most that Parliament (or a second referendum) can force the
government to do therefore is to ask to remain in the EU and/or try to
to negotiate a new deal?
Will the EU be willing to make time for further negotations, that might
then too be rejected? I guess they'd have to judge whether Britain
exiting without a deal is more costly than continuing to negotiate
without any certainty that even if a deal is agreed by the government it
would be accepted! I wouldn't want to bet they'd judge in favour of more
negotiations...
Will they want us to remain a member as if nothing happened? I very much
doubt it - if we decided we didn't want to leave after all, I'd expect
them to exact a price to be allowed to stay, e.g. no more opt outs, no
more rebate, required to join the Euro.
But, maybe we can revoke Article 50 and stay stubbornly in place as an
EU member, opt outs and all nevertheless?
I suspect we'll find that the EU will interpret its own treaties to suit
their own interests here and, unless they feel they really need us at
this point, decide that Article 50 isn't revokable, at which point what
can we do? Take the case to the ECJ? What happens to our membership in
the meantime?
You're absolutely right. Britain is fucked.
only if the Remoaners tie both our hands behind our backs during
negotiations

tim
Post by MM
MM
R. Mark Clayton
2017-03-09 16:45:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by MM
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 23:03:15 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
Thing is, it's not up to us whether we stay in the EU in such
circumstances or whether we get a chance to try and negotiate a better deal.
It's not even up to our Parliament or the UK population voting in a
referendum on the terms of a deal.
It's up to the EU.
The most that Parliament (or a second referendum) can force the
government to do therefore is to ask to remain in the EU and/or try to
to negotiate a new deal?
Will the EU be willing to make time for further negotations, that might
then too be rejected? I guess they'd have to judge whether Britain
exiting without a deal is more costly than continuing to negotiate
without any certainty that even if a deal is agreed by the government it
would be accepted! I wouldn't want to bet they'd judge in favour of more
negotiations...
Will they want us to remain a member as if nothing happened? I very much
doubt it - if we decided we didn't want to leave after all, I'd expect
them to exact a price to be allowed to stay, e.g. no more opt outs, no
more rebate, required to join the Euro.
But, maybe we can revoke Article 50 and stay stubbornly in place as an
EU member, opt outs and all nevertheless?
I suspect we'll find that the EU will interpret its own treaties to suit
their own interests here and, unless they feel they really need us at
this point, decide that Article 50 isn't revokable, at which point what
can we do? Take the case to the ECJ? What happens to our membership in
the meantime?
You're absolutely right. Britain is fucked.
only if the Remoaners tie both our hands behind our backs during
negotiations
But negotiating a deal was going to be easy, we hold all the cards / upper hand, it will hurt the EU more than it will hurt the UK...

and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens (already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Post by tim...
tim
Post by MM
MM
tim...
2017-03-09 17:25:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by MM
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 23:03:15 +0000, James Hammerton
Post by James Hammerton
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
Thing is, it's not up to us whether we stay in the EU in such
circumstances or whether we get a chance to try and negotiate a better deal.
It's not even up to our Parliament or the UK population voting in a
referendum on the terms of a deal.
It's up to the EU.
The most that Parliament (or a second referendum) can force the
government to do therefore is to ask to remain in the EU and/or try to
to negotiate a new deal?
Will the EU be willing to make time for further negotations, that might
then too be rejected? I guess they'd have to judge whether Britain
exiting without a deal is more costly than continuing to negotiate
without any certainty that even if a deal is agreed by the government it
would be accepted! I wouldn't want to bet they'd judge in favour of more
negotiations...
Will they want us to remain a member as if nothing happened? I very much
doubt it - if we decided we didn't want to leave after all, I'd expect
them to exact a price to be allowed to stay, e.g. no more opt outs, no
more rebate, required to join the Euro.
But, maybe we can revoke Article 50 and stay stubbornly in place as an
EU member, opt outs and all nevertheless?
I suspect we'll find that the EU will interpret its own treaties to suit
their own interests here and, unless they feel they really need us at
this point, decide that Article 50 isn't revokable, at which point what
can we do? Take the case to the ECJ? What happens to our membership in
the meantime?
You're absolutely right. Britain is fucked.
only if the Remoaners tie both our hands behind our backs during
negotiations
But negotiating a deal was going to be easy,
negotiating nothing with the EU is easy

not even how to spilt the milk bill
Post by R. Mark Clayton
we hold all the cards / upper hand,
we hold sufficient cards - provided the Remoaners don't insist that we throw
them away beforehand
Post by R. Mark Clayton
it will hurt the EU more than it will hurt the UK...
As much as
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to threatening
mass deportations of the other countries' citizens (already legitimately
here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
well it's what the other side are doing - so equally shameful

tim
Vidcapper
2017-03-10 07:47:13 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
R. Mark Clayton
2017-03-10 10:27:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-living-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union

plenty more like that, just Google it up.
Post by Vidcapper
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
tim...
2017-03-10 11:01:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-living-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want it
to happen, not even close!

tim
Handsome Jack
2017-03-10 12:39:19 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-liv
ing-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want
it to happen, not even close!
And of course that article does *not* say, or quote anyone else as
saying, that anyone is threatening mass deportations. Quite the reverse,
in fact: "A Home Office spokesperson said: “The home secretary has
been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already
living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn’t be
possible is if British citizens’ rights in European member states were
not protected in return.""

It's merely a propaganda piece by a lobbying group.
--
Jack
Ophelia
2017-03-10 13:49:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-liv
ing-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want it
to happen, not even close!
And of course that article does *not* say, or quote anyone else as
saying, that anyone is threatening mass deportations. Quite the reverse,
in fact: "A Home Office spokesperson said: “The home secretary has
been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already
living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn’t be
possible is if British citizens’ rights in European member states were
not protected in return.""

It's merely a propaganda piece by a lobbying group.

Jack

===

The usual remainers tactics.
--
http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk
pensive hamster
2017-03-11 14:53:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
tim... posted
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-liv
ing-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want
it to happen, not even close!
And of course that article does *not* say, or quote anyone else as
saying, that anyone is threatening mass deportations. Quite the reverse,
in fact: "A Home Office spokesperson said: “The home secretary has
been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already
living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn’t be
possible is if British citizens’ rights in European member states were
not protected in return.""
It's merely a propaganda piece by a lobbying group.
I interpret the meaning of that Home Office spokesperson quote in
more-or-less the opposite way to you. It is essentially strongly
implying that mass deportations are on the cards if British citizens’
rights in European member states are not protected. The
spokesperson is asking for quid pro quo, in other words.

This is what the Home Office spokesperson quote seems to actually
mean:

“The home secretary has been clear that she wants to protect the
status of EU nationals already living here, and the only circumstances
in which that wouldn’t be possible [and we would have to resort to
deportation of EU nationals already living here] is if British citizens’
rights in European member states were not protected in return."

Bearing in mind also that the Home Office has been sending letters
to EU citizens saying they should make arrangements to leave the
country:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/28/dutch-woman-with-two-british-children-told-to-leave-uk-after-24-years
28 December 2016
A Dutch woman who has lived in the UK for 24 years, and has
two children with her British husband, has been told by the
Home Office that she should make arrangements to leave the
country after she applied for citizenship after the EU referendum.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/01/26/no-longer-welcome-the-eu-academics-in-britain-told-to-make-arrangements-to-leave/

Having lived and worked here for more than two decades
(they’re a national of another EU country) they decided to play it
safe after the Brexit vote and apply for leave to remain. Big mistake.

They received a threatening letter from the Home Office saying
they had no right to be here and they should “now make
arrangements to leave”. The letter was obviously wrong
– they had every right to be here under existing UK law –
but that didn’t lessen the emotional impact for my colleague,
whose whole future was suddenly thrown into uncertainty.
Yellow
2017-03-11 15:19:37 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pensive hamster
tim... posted
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-liv
ing-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want
it to happen, not even close!
And of course that article does *not* say, or quote anyone else as
saying, that anyone is threatening mass deportations. Quite the reverse,
in fact: "A Home Office spokesperson said: ?The home secretary has
been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already
living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn?t be
possible is if British citizens? rights in European member states were
not protected in return.""
It's merely a propaganda piece by a lobbying group.
I interpret the meaning of that Home Office spokesperson quote in
more-or-less the opposite way to you.
Then you are being perverse.
Post by pensive hamster
It is essentially strongly
implying that mass deportations are on the cards if British citizens?
rights in European member states are not protected. The
spokesperson is asking for quid pro quo, in other words.
This is what the Home Office spokesperson quote seems to actually
?The home secretary has been clear that she wants to protect the
status of EU nationals already living here, and the only circumstances
in which that wouldn?t be possible [and we would have to resort to
deportation of EU nationals already living here] is if British citizens?
rights in European member states were not protected in return."
Bearing in mind also that the Home Office has been sending letters
to EU citizens saying they should make arrangements to leave the
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/28/dutch-woman-with-two-british-children-told-to-leave-uk-after-24-years
28 December 2016
A Dutch woman who has lived in the UK for 24 years, and has
two children with her British husband, has been told by the
Home Office that she should make arrangements to leave the
country after she applied for citizenship after the EU referendum.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/01/26/no-longer-welcome-the-eu-academics-in-britain-told-to-make-arrangements-to-leave/
Having lived and worked here for more than two decades
(they?re a national of another EU country) they decided to play it
safe after the Brexit vote and apply for leave to remain. Big mistake.
They received a threatening letter from the Home Office saying
they had no right to be here and they should ?now make
arrangements to leave?. The letter was obviously wrong
? they had every right to be here under existing UK law ?
but that didn?t lessen the emotional impact for my colleague,
whose whole future was suddenly thrown into uncertainty.
pensive hamster
2017-03-14 14:01:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
pensive_hamster says...
Post by pensive hamster
tim... posted
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-liv
ing-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want
it to happen, not even close!
And of course that article does *not* say, or quote anyone else as
saying, that anyone is threatening mass deportations. Quite the reverse,
in fact: "A Home Office spokesperson said: ?The home secretary has
been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already
living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn?t be
possible is if British citizens? rights in European member states were
not protected in return.""
It's merely a propaganda piece by a lobbying group.
I interpret the meaning of that Home Office spokesperson quote in
more-or-less the opposite way to you.
Then you are being perverse.
Why am I being perverse? Because I've dared to disagree
with someone, in a discussion forum?
Post by pensive hamster
It is essentially strongly
implying that mass deportations are on the cards if British citizens?
rights in European member states are not protected. The
spokesperson is asking for quid pro quo, in other words.
This is what the Home Office spokesperson quote seems to actually
?The home secretary has been clear that she wants to protect the
status of EU nationals already living here, and the only circumstances
in which that wouldn?t be possible [and we would have to resort to
deportation of EU nationals already living here] is if British citizens?
rights in European member states were not protected in return."
Bearing in mind also that the Home Office has been sending letters
to EU citizens saying they should make arrangements to leave the
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/28/dutch-woman-with-two-british-children-told-to-leave-uk-after-24-years
28 December 2016
A Dutch woman who has lived in the UK for 24 years, and has
two children with her British husband, has been told by the
Home Office that she should make arrangements to leave the
country after she applied for citizenship after the EU referendum.
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/01/26/no-longer-welcome-the-eu-academics-in-britain-told-to-make-arrangements-to-leave/
Having lived and worked here for more than two decades
(they?re a national of another EU country) they decided to play it
safe after the Brexit vote and apply for leave to remain. Big mistake.
They received a threatening letter from the Home Office saying
they had no right to be here and they should ?now make
arrangements to leave?. The letter was obviously wrong
? they had every right to be here under existing UK law ?
but that didn?t lessen the emotional impact for my colleague,
whose whole future was suddenly thrown into uncertainty.
Yellow
2017-03-14 14:53:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pensive hamster
pensive_hamster says...
Post by pensive hamster
tim... posted
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-liv
ing-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want
it to happen, not even close!
And of course that article does *not* say, or quote anyone else as
saying, that anyone is threatening mass deportations. Quite the reverse,
in fact: "A Home Office spokesperson said: ?The home secretary has
been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already
living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn?t be
possible is if British citizens? rights in European member states were
not protected in return.""
It's merely a propaganda piece by a lobbying group.
I interpret the meaning of that Home Office spokesperson quote in
more-or-less the opposite way to you.
Then you are being perverse.
Why am I being perverse?
Because you are claiming black is white.
pensive hamster
2017-03-14 15:28:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
pensive_hamster says...
Post by pensive hamster
pensive_hamster says...
Post by pensive hamster
tim... posted
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-liv
ing-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want
it to happen, not even close!
And of course that article does *not* say, or quote anyone else as
saying, that anyone is threatening mass deportations. Quite the reverse,
in fact: "A Home Office spokesperson said: ?The home secretary has
been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already
living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn?t be
possible is if British citizens? rights in European member states were
not protected in return.""
It's merely a propaganda piece by a lobbying group.
I interpret the meaning of that Home Office spokesperson quote in
more-or-less the opposite way to you.
Then you are being perverse.
Why am I being perverse?
Because you are claiming black is white.
You do like to put words in my mouth.

No I'm not claiming black is white, I'm saying the Home Office
spokesperson's statement is couched in "Yes Minister" terms,
and you have to carefully read between the lines.
Yellow
2017-03-14 17:55:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pensive hamster
pensive_hamster says...
Post by pensive hamster
pensive_hamster says...
Post by pensive hamster
tim... posted
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-liv
ing-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want
it to happen, not even close!
And of course that article does *not* say, or quote anyone else as
saying, that anyone is threatening mass deportations. Quite the reverse,
in fact: "A Home Office spokesperson said: ?The home secretary has
been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already
living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn?t be
possible is if British citizens? rights in European member states were
not protected in return.""
It's merely a propaganda piece by a lobbying group.
I interpret the meaning of that Home Office spokesperson quote in
more-or-less the opposite way to you.
Then you are being perverse.
Why am I being perverse?
Because you are claiming black is white.
You do like to put words in my mouth.
No I'm not claiming black is white,
Yes you are.
Post by pensive hamster
I'm saying the Home Office
spokesperson's statement is couched in "Yes Minister" terms,
and you have to carefully read between the lines.
No - you are twisted what is being said on its head in an attempt to
make it appear to support your position.

But whatever - if it helps you sleep at night, it is no skin off my
nose.

Handsome Jack
2017-03-11 18:52:30 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by pensive hamster
Post by Handsome Jack
And of course that article does *not* say, or quote anyone else as
saying, that anyone is threatening mass deportations. Quite the reverse,
in fact: "A Home Office spokesperson said: “The home secretary has
been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already
living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn’t be
possible is if British citizens’ rights in European member states were
not protected in return.""
It's merely a propaganda piece by a lobbying group.
I interpret the meaning of that Home Office spokesperson quote in
more-or-less the opposite way to you. It is essentially strongly
implying that mass deportations are on the cards if British citizens’
rights in European member states are not protected. The
spokesperson is asking for quid pro quo, in other words.
You mean that if EU member states threaten mass deportations of UK
citizens, then it would be wrong for us to threaten mass deportations of
EU citizens? Then you're a stupid cunt.

[snip]
Post by pensive hamster
Bearing in mind also that the Home Office has been sending letters
to EU citizens saying they should make arrangements to leave the
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/28/dutch-woman-with-two-br
itish-children-told-to-leave-uk-after-24-years
28 December 2016
A Dutch woman who has lived in the UK for 24 years, and has
two children with her British husband, has been told by the
Home Office that she should make arrangements to leave the
country after she applied for citizenship after the EU referendum.
Ah yes. We've seen that one. It's a threat of a mass deportation of one
person.

Moreover, it's an obvious bureaucratic mistake by HO, whose employee
obviously didn't realise that the applicant was an EU citizen with an
automatic legal right to live in the UK.
Post by pensive hamster
http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/01/26/no-longer-welcome-the-eu-academ
ics-in-britain-told-to-make-arrangements-to-leave/
Having lived and worked here for more than two decades
(they’re a national of another EU country) they decided to play it
safe after the Brexit vote and apply for leave to remain. Big mistake.
They received a threatening letter from the Home Office saying
they had no right to be here and they should “now make
arrangements to leave”. The letter was obviously wrong
– they had every right to be here under existing UK law –
but that didn’t lessen the emotional impact for my colleague,
whose whole future was suddenly thrown into uncertainty.
Even the author of that piece admits it is a bureaucratic mistake. ("The
letter was obviously wrong – they had every right to be here under
existing UK law"). So it's totally irrelevant.
--
Jack
pensive hamster
2017-03-14 14:14:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
pensive hamster posted
Post by pensive hamster
Post by Handsome Jack
And of course that article does *not* say, or quote anyone else as
saying, that anyone is threatening mass deportations. Quite the reverse,
in fact: "A Home Office spokesperson said: “The home secretary has
been clear that she wants to protect the status of EU nationals already
living here, and the only circumstances in which that wouldn’t be
possible is if British citizens’ rights in European member states were
not protected in return.""
It's merely a propaganda piece by a lobbying group.
I interpret the meaning of that Home Office spokesperson quote in
more-or-less the opposite way to you. It is essentially strongly
implying that mass deportations are on the cards if British citizens’
rights in European member states are not protected. The
spokesperson is asking for quid pro quo, in other words.
You mean that if EU member states threaten mass deportations of UK
citizens, then it would be wrong for us to threaten mass deportations of
EU citizens?
No, that's not what I said, nor what I mean. You snipped
what I actually said, which was:

---------------------------------
This is what the Home Office spokesperson quote seems to actually
mean:

“The home secretary has been clear that she wants to protect the
status of EU nationals already living here, and the only circumstances
in which that wouldn’t be possible [and we would have to resort to
deportation of EU nationals already living here] is if British citizens’
rights in European member states were not protected in return."
---------------------------------

It may be that EU member states have threatened mass deportations
of UK citizens, but I am not aware of any such threats, and none
have been cited here, so far as I am aware.

*If* any such threats have been made, then yes, I would consider
the above Home Office spokesperson quote to be a reasonable
response.
Then you're a stupid cunt.
Was that really necessary?
[snip]
R. Mark Clayton
2017-03-10 15:18:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-living-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want it
to happen, not even close!
tim
it IS "threatening mass deportations", which is what I said.
tim...
2017-03-10 17:44:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by tim...
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-living-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
stating that there's a "risk" is not the same as saying that *you* want it
to happen, not even close!
tim
it IS "threatening mass deportations", which is what I said.
but it NOT a person saying that. It's just newspaper spin

tim
Vidcapper
2017-03-10 15:18:21 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by R. Mark Clayton
Post by Vidcapper
Post by R. Mark Clayton
and now the New Luddites (Brexit believers) want to resort to
threatening mass deportations of the other countries' citizens
(already legitimately here) as a bargaining position - shameful...
Can you site *one* person who has actually gone on record as saying that?
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/01/brexit-eu-citizens-living-britain-risk-deportation-3-million-campaign-european-union
plenty more like that, just Google it up.
So, that would be a 'no' to my original question then.
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
MM
2017-03-11 11:33:12 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by tim...
only if the Remoaners tie both our hands behind our backs during
negotiations
Oh, so now it's just "if"?

Earlier you were saying that it's already happening. So tell me, how
ARE Remainers tying the government's hands?

MM
Vidcapper
2017-03-11 15:05:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
Post by tim...
only if the Remoaners tie both our hands behind our backs during
negotiations
Oh, so now it's just "if"?
Earlier you were saying that it's already happening. So tell me, how
ARE Remainers tying the government's hands?
Stop changing the subject.
--
Paul Hyett, Cheltenham
harry
2017-03-08 16:51:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by MM
"Exclusive: Even Tory voters do not give majority support to leave the
EU with no deal if Parliament rejects the terms Ms May agrees with
Brussels"
"Britons overwhelmingly oppose Theresa May’s plan to quit the EU with
no deal in place if Parliament dares to reject the terms she agrees
with Brussels, an exclusive poll has revealed.
"The BMG Research study showed twice as many people would rather the
UK stay in the EU or try and secure a different deal, if MPs and Lords
do not endorse the agreement the Prime Minister returns from Europe
with.
"The survey for The Independent also showed the public are bracing
themselves for a Brexit hit on the economy over the next two years as
painstaking negotiations over future relations play out.
"It comes ahead of a major stand-off between Ms May’s Government and
the House of Lords, which is demanding Parliament be guaranteed in law
the final say on approving her Brexit deal and given power to send her
back to the negotiating table if it is rejected.
"So far Ms May has only given a verbal assurance Parliament will have
a vote on her deal and has warned that if MPs and peers ditch her
terms, the UK will simply leave the EU without a deal and trade with
the bloc on World Trade Organisation rules -- something many believe
will be hugely damaging to the economy.
"Asked what 'should happen next' if Parliament rejects Ms May’s deal,
just 25 per cent said 'we should leave the EU with no set future
relations in place and revert to trading with the EU on World Trade
Organisation rules.'
"A greater proportion, 27 per cent, said Ms May should try to
renegotiate a deal, 14 per cent said we should stay in the EU on new
terms that Ms May should try to negotiate and 15 per cent said we
should stay in on existing terms -- a total of 56 per cent who
favoured options at odds with the Prime Minister’s plan to quit and
trade on WTO rules.
"Even among Tory voters only 38 per cent backed leaving with no deal,
while 38 per cent supported renegotiating and a further 18 per cent
opting for staying in the EU on existing or new terms.
"Only last week, ex-Tory Prime Minister Sir John Major warned that
quitting with no deal would be 'the worst possible outcome' for
Britain with 'worrying implications for public services such as the
NHS'.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-news-theresa-may-plan-leave-eu-no-plan-uk-public-oppose-prime-minister-a7614526.html
So, while Brexiters can jeer and sneer at non-Brexiters, the fact
remains that the country as a whole *wants* the government to do a
deal with the EU, making Mrs May sit uncomfortably between a rock and
a hard place. Lord Hague is now calling for a general election, and
we'll see how confident she is by observing her response. My guess is
she'll fight tooth and nail to avoid an election.
MM
More conjecture founded on absolutely no evidence.
Loading...