Assisted Dying, Here's Where It...
News3 mins ago
Another Waste Of Time....
156 Answers
https:/
Can we just get out with no deal now?
Can we just get out with no deal now?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It is worth pointing out that that leading proponents of so called No Deal do not actually support just leaving.
In fact there are various versions of it according to who you listen to: Boris Johnson wants a one year transition period, the former head of the Bank of England a 6 month period, there was a plan (now buried) to ask for a three year no deal transition. So I wonder what would be the various approaches once the EU spelled out, yet again, that it would not do any “mini deals” or indeed anything at all without the framework of a withdrawal agreement.
It will be interesting to see if the cabinet emerges from its meeting intact :-)
The Conservative party is dangerously close to splitting. The cabinet even more so.
In fact there are various versions of it according to who you listen to: Boris Johnson wants a one year transition period, the former head of the Bank of England a 6 month period, there was a plan (now buried) to ask for a three year no deal transition. So I wonder what would be the various approaches once the EU spelled out, yet again, that it would not do any “mini deals” or indeed anything at all without the framework of a withdrawal agreement.
It will be interesting to see if the cabinet emerges from its meeting intact :-)
The Conservative party is dangerously close to splitting. The cabinet even more so.
I don't think anyone expected the no deal we now are talking about but we botched the negotiations wholesale by tipping our hand. Day 1 we should have laid out our terms and said we are prepared to leave with no deal if necessary, then go home and wait as YMB says. But no, we went in subjugating ourselves from the start and bleating that we don't want no deal. Once the EU knew that they could impose what they like.
I am not reinterpreting it. Those are promises about what leaving would look like that come from the official campaign. They are not consistent with no deal. I haven't insulted your intelligence, I haven't called anyone stupid. I don't think I've called anyone on this thread dishonest. I just think that it doesn't make any sense to use the referendum result to support no-deal three years later because it clearly was not what was being voted on.
Once again, you are attacking the motives and character of someone you disagree with rather than what they are saying. It's beneath you.
Once again, you are attacking the motives and character of someone you disagree with rather than what they are saying. It's beneath you.
Krom, I am attacking what you're saying, which is why I say you are reinterpreting what was said.... and you are. We have Jim bleating on about our misunderstanding of democracy, how it doesn't mean what we think it means, etc., - and so it goes on. I repeat, the people who voted Leave are not stupid. Your spin doesn't wash.
What my post was supposed to show is that Parliament has had plenty of opportunity, for quite some time, to legitimately not go ahead with Brexit based on the fact that rules were broken. It is ploughing on anyway, much to the chagrin some staunch Remainers. Staunch Leavers seem to think that Parliament has it in for them and is doing everything in its power to stop them having the Brexit they voted for, and it's true that neither Parliament nor the country as a whole wants the Brexit that staunch Leavers voted for, but Parliament is trying to see through a Brexit of some sorts even though it doesn't have to. Once Parliament realised that the rules had been broken, it was well within its rights to stop Brexit completely, but it didn't.
Krom, //If you think I am wrong about what VL said, then it's up to you to substantiate that.//
What do you want me to substantiate?
//I am not 'reinterpreting' it, though. //
Yes, you are.
//This information is all available in the public domain. I haven't said that leave voters were stupid.//
Of course it's in the public domain – the scaremongerers and the spinners who want to overturn the result of the referendum make sure of that on a daily basis. You haven’t said Leave voters are stupid but since you clearly feel it necessary to explain to Leavers what, in your estimation, they ought to have been aware of, by implication that’s precisely what you’re saying.
What do you want me to substantiate?
//I am not 'reinterpreting' it, though. //
Yes, you are.
//This information is all available in the public domain. I haven't said that leave voters were stupid.//
Of course it's in the public domain – the scaremongerers and the spinners who want to overturn the result of the referendum make sure of that on a daily basis. You haven’t said Leave voters are stupid but since you clearly feel it necessary to explain to Leavers what, in your estimation, they ought to have been aware of, by implication that’s precisely what you’re saying.
Naomi, explaining why I think something does not mean I think you (or any other leaver) is stupid. It's the point of this website, or at least this section of it. If you think I'm wrong, maybe try to demonstrate why you think I'm wrong rather than just asserting that I'm dishonest or lying or whatever.
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
|
|