Getting A Better Wifi/Ethernet Signal.
Technology1 min ago
Pm 'must Listen' To Other Parties Over Brexit Says Cameron
http://
What are the chances May will listen ? After all, not listening is part of the reason that she is in the mess that she is in today.
Do bloody difficult women ( and men ) ever listen ?
What are the chances May will listen ? After all, not listening is part of the reason that she is in the mess that she is in today.
Do bloody difficult women ( and men ) ever listen ?
Answers
//Mrs May also said “Brexit means Brexit”// That doesn't mean anything.
08:56 Wed 14th Jun 2017
I certainly voted to get out and wanted, and still do, Exit in its Entirety.
Being freed from all the EU Shackles will give to the UK, 'the World as its Oyster'. Trading with all countries, and that can include Europe, but under UK terms. Furthermore ,UK would regain complete control over its borders and everyone in the UK subject to its laws.
Hans.
Being freed from all the EU Shackles will give to the UK, 'the World as its Oyster'. Trading with all countries, and that can include Europe, but under UK terms. Furthermore ,UK would regain complete control over its borders and everyone in the UK subject to its laws.
Hans.
There is no "most extreme". Leave means out. Negotiations are primarily about what occurs afterwards. Those negotiations must not replicate being in, in practice, but not on paper. It is clearly remainer noise, jumping on the poor showing of the government in the recent election, to make fantastic claims and try to avoid the result of the referendum. The UK public had the courage to bite the bullet and vote out, they should not be betrayed and ignored by pushing so called soft options.
Jim, history proves that what began fundamentally as a trading agreement didn’t stop there. Since then our relationship with Europe has changed in ways that were unforeseen and unimagined at that time so, should we ‘Remain’, it’s quite impossible to say what a future in Europe will present to us. An ‘In’ vote is an agreement to further changes should Europe deem them appropriate – whether we want those changes or not. In those circumstances the likelihood or otherwise of our abandoning – or even being required to abandon - our opt-outs, is an unknown. On the other hand a leave vote means letting go of the apron strings completely and having the terms of our relationship with Europe freely decided and agreed by our own elected representatives rather than imposed upon us by faceless, foreign, unelected bureaucrats. I know which I prefer. There’s a big world out there.
A soft option is far far worse than staying in.
The only two options are
1) Stay in and integrate all EU countries into 1 big melting pot with one taaxation, one set of laws,one currency etc etc or
2) Leave.
The UK chose option 2. Trying to sit as a halfway house will be very detrimental to the UK and will do no favours long term to the EU. I doubt very much the EU will negotiate anything other than out or in, which is why Macron is saying the door is still open to stay, and no doubt that is what Traitor May will do.
The only two options are
1) Stay in and integrate all EU countries into 1 big melting pot with one taaxation, one set of laws,one currency etc etc or
2) Leave.
The UK chose option 2. Trying to sit as a halfway house will be very detrimental to the UK and will do no favours long term to the EU. I doubt very much the EU will negotiate anything other than out or in, which is why Macron is saying the door is still open to stay, and no doubt that is what Traitor May will do.
Naomi. Although I rarely agree with your politics, I think you are spot on. EFTA was the basically a good idea, but the creeping federaliastion of Europe by the largely unelected was the reason I voted out. I now fear as many have said that we could be sold down the river. We are being conned. So much for democracy.
...should we ‘Remain’, it’s quite impossible to say what a future in Europe will present to us."
This is true, but I'm also fairly sure that this is the point I'm trying to make. If it's not possible to say what the future would have held following a "Remain" vote, then it follows that voters for Remain could have had very different ideas for what that future should be. Likewise for "Leave" voters. As has been pointed out, even the official "Leave" campaigns were divided on the issue. Daniel Hannan has been one of the chief campaigners for Brexit in his time as an MEP, yet when I posted a video of his at some point soon after the referendum last year I think many Leave voters on this site disagreed with his suggestions (or didn't even realise that he was a Leave voter).
But at any rate I'm not trying to rehash the argument over whether Leaving or Remaining was the better choice. What I'm trying to argue is that both Leaving and Remaining carried many different interpretations as to the question: "what next?"
This is true, but I'm also fairly sure that this is the point I'm trying to make. If it's not possible to say what the future would have held following a "Remain" vote, then it follows that voters for Remain could have had very different ideas for what that future should be. Likewise for "Leave" voters. As has been pointed out, even the official "Leave" campaigns were divided on the issue. Daniel Hannan has been one of the chief campaigners for Brexit in his time as an MEP, yet when I posted a video of his at some point soon after the referendum last year I think many Leave voters on this site disagreed with his suggestions (or didn't even realise that he was a Leave voter).
But at any rate I'm not trying to rehash the argument over whether Leaving or Remaining was the better choice. What I'm trying to argue is that both Leaving and Remaining carried many different interpretations as to the question: "what next?"
I can't understand why we have to go to the EU and ask them to agree terms with us. (UK)
Why can't we just say, "We've had enough and if you are Not happy with our decision to leave the EU then you put forward proposals and request our agreement, without any issue of payments for us to leave".
Can anyone tell me under what legislation must we agree any terms with the EU, if we have said that we are finished with the 'set-up'.
Also, why is it necessary to take two years or more to cast off the yoke around our necks.? Is it because there is money to be made by those involved. ?
Hans.
Why can't we just say, "We've had enough and if you are Not happy with our decision to leave the EU then you put forward proposals and request our agreement, without any issue of payments for us to leave".
Can anyone tell me under what legislation must we agree any terms with the EU, if we have said that we are finished with the 'set-up'.
Also, why is it necessary to take two years or more to cast off the yoke around our necks.? Is it because there is money to be made by those involved. ?
Hans.
Jim, the difficulty is not in joining the free wide world outside Europe, but in extracting ourselves from the EU's grasping claws – such is the hold we’ve allowed that body to wield over us – and that made even more difficult by people determined to thwart the result of the referendum simply because they mistakenly believe that this country cannot survive without its master and are, hence, afraid to let go.
You know I have been grappling with one thing.
On the one hand there is ' no deal is better than a bad deal' and on the other seems to be 'we must have a deal whatever the cost because a no deal is worse'
That last one doesn't make sense. The deal we make with the EU should be better than a no deal if it isn't then I think it is simply a bad deal and isn't worth it.
In what way is a bad deal better?
As for cliff edge leave, well that is bunkum. At the moment all EU laws, even the stupid, moronic ones are UK law. Just because we ware leaving doesn't mean they suddenly are redundant and we don't use them.
On the one hand there is ' no deal is better than a bad deal' and on the other seems to be 'we must have a deal whatever the cost because a no deal is worse'
That last one doesn't make sense. The deal we make with the EU should be better than a no deal if it isn't then I think it is simply a bad deal and isn't worth it.
In what way is a bad deal better?
As for cliff edge leave, well that is bunkum. At the moment all EU laws, even the stupid, moronic ones are UK law. Just because we ware leaving doesn't mean they suddenly are redundant and we don't use them.
I am open to being proved completely wrong... It is my belief that all the UK Government had to do after the referendum for Brexit was to forget about Article 50 and for Parliament to have simply repealed the European Communities Act 1972.
Come on, let's have a few Legal Eagles in this thread.
Hans.
Come on, let's have a few Legal Eagles in this thread.
Hans.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.