Vince Green Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 27 minutes ago, Aled said: Vince Green: I'd be really interested, if you could point me to the evidence, I'd like to read it. Thanks Aled I can't post links on this device but if you google GINA MILLER + SOROS you will get pages of it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aled Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 39 minutes ago, oowee said: I thought that was the vote to leave the EU? The vote to leave was a betrayal of the people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aled Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 2 hours ago, Vince Green said: There is strong evidence that he was deliberately and systematically undermined, left off circulation lists and not told of meetings that were taking place etc. That has not been forgotten, we will be coming back to that one later. Wrong one Vince looking for this one. Cheers. Aled Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, Scully said: The vote to leave was a betrayal of the people? No more that the three competing propositions that the PM is trying to wrestle are a reflection of the vote to leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 1 minute ago, oowee said: No more that the three competing propositions that the PM is trying to wrestle are a reflection of the vote to leave. How so ? She is trying to compromise, she is failing, because a large element of parliament dont want to leave, they could back her deal, but they wont , because they are trying to frustrate the majority for their own personal reasons. Lets be honest, if you were her , right now , what would you do ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 2 minutes ago, Rewulf said: How so ? She is trying to compromise, she is failing, because a large element of parliament dont want to leave, they could back her deal, but they wont , because they are trying to frustrate the majority for their own personal reasons. Lets be honest, if you were her , right now , what would you do ? Border with no deal. No border customs union. Why would they back a deal that leaves the country worse off? Do you back the deal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 3 minutes ago, oowee said: Border with no deal. No border customs union. Why would they back a deal that leaves the country worse off? Do you back the deal? How and why would the country be worse off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 Just now, oowee said: Border with no deal. No border customs union. Why would they back a deal that leaves the country worse off? Do you back the deal? Her deal is bad, it also doesnt guarantee a good trade arrangement , they could easily turn round and refuse to give us a tariff free deal, in fact I find this highly likely, so no ,I would prefer to not back her deal. However, we need to keep stability, I dont fear 'no deal' but others might, and it could likely hurt, maybe a lot in the short term. I find giving them £39 bn particularly grating, they havnt earned it, and its a bribe, no explanation of what its for, and a bullying intimidation of 'You HAVE to pay' its the sort of thing criminals do, its called extortion, and its illegal. This is your EU. Canada ++ needs exploring, and that COULD be done from within a WTO framework, this would be MY position. I would (have) stated emphatically early on, that without a favorable , mutually beneficial trade deal, our default position is no deal/WTO rules, and prepare accordingly, from that position you negotiate a better deal....or not. Are we prepared for no deal ? I dont know, maybe not. Very soon we might find out. But are they prepared for no deal ? No I dont think they are. They cannot hurt us , without hurting themselves, and if those idiots in Brussels want to push the issue, they most certainly are NOT going to end up popular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 We will have a significantly poorer trade deal with the EU. Even if we have a no tariff trade arrangement the same as now we will have lost the regulatory framework that underpins trade in services. The EU will be able to discriminate against the UK on the grounds of nationality in favour of its own member states. As we loose services we loose tax and The trade deal that we agree with the EU will impact on subsequent trade deals reducing flexibility. Trade deals we do world wide are unlikely to make up for the trading loss and will incur other less palatable trades particularly farm produce and immigration. We will reduce labour safeguards in exchange for competitive edge. We will be a small nation less able to set global standards. large scale scientific colaboration's are more likely in Europe and less likely to involve the UK. Seamless travel within Europe will be lost (health and pensions). How and why would we be better off? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oowee Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 8 minutes ago, Rewulf said: Her deal is bad, it also doesnt guarantee a good trade arrangement , they could easily turn round and refuse to give us a tariff free deal, in fact I find this highly likely, so no ,I would prefer to not back her deal. However, we need to keep stability, I dont fear 'no deal' but others might, and it could likely hurt, maybe a lot in the short term. I find giving them £39 bn particularly grating, they havnt earned it, and its a bribe, no explanation of what its for, and a bullying intimidation of 'You HAVE to pay' its the sort of thing criminals do, its called extortion, and its illegal. This is your EU. Canada ++ needs exploring, and that COULD be done from within a WTO framework, this would be MY position. I would (have) stated emphatically early on, that without a favorable , mutually beneficial trade deal, our default position is no deal/WTO rules, and prepare accordingly, from that position you negotiate a better deal....or not. Are we prepared for no deal ? I dont know, maybe not. Very soon we might find out. But are they prepared for no deal ? No I dont think they are. They cannot hurt us , without hurting themselves, and if those idiots in Brussels want to push the issue, they most certainly are NOT going to end up popular. So are you backing the deal or not? I would agree with all of this except the Canada ++. The Canada deal has so many exemptions that it would be unworkable and no one has set out (as far as I know) what the ++ is. Setting out early on a no deal course would certainly have strengthened our hand but it would have also resulted in an early services exodus, collapse of the £, run on the markets all of which has either been reduced or spread over a longer time frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walker570 Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 In the words of my grandfather there have been a huge number of people sucking off the front mammary gland in this European Union bizz. Just look at the number of people sitting around the Chamber alone never mind all the supporting staff. I am guessing but I believe at least half if not more are actually failed politicians in their own countries ...Kinnock was a good example. What are they doing that we cannot do within our own Parliaments without the terrible waste of the publics money. Just look at that silly move every month or so to Strasborg at collosal expense. Is it no wonder their accounts have never been audited ? Anyone who supports all that must live in cloud cookoo land OR they are sucking off the same location or look forward to in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie to this Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 Not sure if this has been posted before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinfireman Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 Mark Carney’s latest gloomy predictions for the British economy have elicited all the usual told-you-so responses from Remainers with very short memories. The Bank of England has predicted 1.2% growth for 2019. Before the referendum Remainers said we would be deep in recession now… There was in fact another set of 2019 forecasts also released this morning – by the European Commission. The EU actually upgraded Britain’s 2019 forecast to 1.3% – the same as France, Belgium, Sweden and the Eurozone as a whole. Struggling Germany is lagging behind on 1.1% while Italy is down on 0.2%. Despite… Brexit? 4 hours ago, Scully said: I sincerely hope you're correct. I was going to ask how the hell we got ourselves into this mess, but it isn't us; it's those who are supposed to represent us. We were given an in out referendum by a PM who wanted to stay, so when the result didn't go his way he left, so to replace him was put in charge yet another politician who wants to stay! It would be hilarious if it weren't for the fact she is in charge of negotiations to leave! 😂 You really couldn't make this up! It's like a Monty Python sketch. JUST LEAVE! How hard can it be for crying out loud! Correct! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinfireman Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 4 hours ago, oowee said: That's interesting I do not remember any plans put on the table sketch or otherwise at the point of the referendum. Would that be the same Canada deal that virtually excludes our most profitable business, services. The one that allows discrimination on the grounds of nationality? Yep that's true. One would be looking for unicorns the other dealing with reality. 🙂 Was it the civil servant looking for unicorns? 4 hours ago, Vince Green said: The evidence appears to suggest she is a paid agitator, if so, that should be investigated fully. Was the (alleged) money paid to her campaign accounted for in the remain returns? Soros probably gave her a brown envelope! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave-G Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 As a point of interest, one of the things the EU DO do well is the members in their house shut up and listen to what is being said instead of acting like a bunch of spoiled louts trying to drown out the person who is speaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinfireman Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 52 minutes ago, oowee said: So are you backing the deal or not? I would agree with all of this except the Canada ++. The Canada deal has so many exemptions that it would be unworkable and no one has set out (as far as I know) what the ++ is. Setting out early on a no deal course would certainly have strengthened our hand but it would have also resulted in an early services exodus, collapse of the £, run on the markets all of which has either been reduced or spread over a longer time frame. or has not happened? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpringDon Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 59 minutes ago, oowee said: We will have a significantly poorer trade deal with the EU. Even if we have a no tariff trade arrangement the same as now we will have lost the regulatory framework that underpins trade in services. The EU will be able to discriminate against the UK on the grounds of nationality in favour of its own member states. As we loose services we loose tax and The trade deal that we agree with the EU will impact on subsequent trade deals reducing flexibility. Trade deals we do world wide are unlikely to make up for the trading loss and will incur other less palatable trades particularly farm produce and immigration. We will reduce labour safeguards in exchange for competitive edge. We will be a small nation less able to set global standards. large scale scientific colaboration's are more likely in Europe and less likely to involve the UK. Seamless travel within Europe will be lost (health and pensions). How and why would we be better off? Don’t really understand this. What is tariff free about billions of up front contributions, trapped in a market where prices are protected by high tariffs and in which we run a trade deficit? Surely trade deals are easier if there aren’t 27 overlapping markets to consider? i do concede the point about services. But before the financial companies were the pit props of our economy, weren’t they the casino bank baddies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinfireman Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 The predictable response from Remainers to Tusk’s hell comments yesterday was naturally to agree with him, while again peddling the myth that Brexit campaigners didn’t have a plan. They did… While it is correct to say that Vote Leave made the strategic decision not to publish a full-on white paper-style plan to avoid getting it filleted Salmond-style, Vote Leave did nonetheless publish considerable detail on what Brexit should look like*, including leaving the single market, regaining an independent trade policy and immediately guaranteeing EU citizens’ rights unilaterally. Also central to their plan was a three-phase framework for how to approach the negotiations, including multiple warnings against triggering Article 50. Ivan Rogers fans eat your heart out… One prominent former Leave campaigner has penned a pithy response to Tusk which more or less sums up the UK’s current predicament: Dear Tusk, Lucky for you the MPs did every single thing the opposite to what Vote Leave said. You were celebrating when Number 10 triggered Article 50 without a plan or a clue. If they’d followed the Vote Leave plan and started making preparations to leave without triggering Article 50, you would have been stuffed. Negotiating with Vote Leave would have been like running into a mincing machine, they’d have kicked you down the street like they did Cameron and Blair. Then Gove backstabbed Boris, and the rest is history… *Not to mention the thousand-page magnum opus Change or Go published by Vote Leave’s predecessor Business for Britain… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 1 hour ago, oowee said: We will have a significantly poorer trade deal with the EU. Even if we have a no tariff trade arrangement the same as now we will have lost the regulatory framework that underpins trade in services. The EU will be able to discriminate against the UK on the grounds of nationality in favour of its own member states. As we loose services we loose tax and The trade deal that we agree with the EU will impact on subsequent trade deals reducing flexibility. Trade deals we do world wide are unlikely to make up for the trading loss and will incur other less palatable trades particularly farm produce and immigration. We will reduce labour safeguards in exchange for competitive edge. We will be a small nation less able to set global standards. large scale scientific colaboration's are more likely in Europe and less likely to involve the UK. Seamless travel within Europe will be lost (health and pensions). How and why would we be better off? But most of that you don’t know for certain, it’s all conjecture! A sister of my OH, who was head hunted by Oxford Uni’ but chose the London School of Economics instead, and works for a multi national asset management company in Leeds says that no one knows what the outcome will be; they can claim and guess all they want to, but no one knows. I’ve never asked her which way she voted. I’m not claiming we would be better off financially, or worse off. The fact is I don’t know, just like you, and the other fact is I don’t care. As I’ve said, there is more at stake here than personal finance and more to life than money. Personally I think that whatever happens, we’ll get through it and life will continue....what else COULD happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hambone Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 6 hours ago, oowee said: That's interesting I do not remember any plans put on the table sketch or otherwise at the point of the referendum. Would that be the same Canada deal that virtually excludes our most profitable business, services. The one that allows discrimination on the grounds of nationality? Yep that's true. One would be looking for unicorns the other dealing with reality. 🙂 Possibly dealing with reality as he see's it in a way that fulfils his remain agenda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 3 hours ago, oowee said: So are you backing the deal or not 3 hours ago, Rewulf said: so no ,I would prefer to not back her deal. 3 hours ago, oowee said: I would agree with all of this except the Canada ++. The Canada deal has so many exemptions that it would be unworkable and no one has set out (as far as I know) what the ++ is. The ++ is the tailoring needed to make it viable for the UK, something that for whatever reason has not been explored. 3 hours ago, oowee said: Setting out early on a no deal course would certainly have strengthened our hand but it would have also resulted in an early services exodus, collapse of the £, run on the markets all of which has either been reduced or spread over a longer time frame You can't possibly know this. It was supposed to happen as soon as we voted out, it didn't, and now we are in a far better position because of it. Project fear got its teeth pulled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 (edited) I see both Tusk and Verhofstadt are 'backing the Corbyn plan' which would have us stay in the customs union and 'very closely aligned' to the single market. Brexit In Name Only. Of course they want that; they get £39 billion; keep us 'very closely aligned' to their system; we get no say on future policy or decisions; we cannot make our own trade deals elsewhere. Edited February 7, 2019 by JohnfromUK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinfireman Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 7 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: I see both Tusk and Verhofstadt are 'backing the Corbyn plan' which would have us stay in the customs union and 'very closely aligned' to the single market. Brexit In Name Only. Of course they want that; they get £39 billion; keep us 'very closely aligned' to their system; we get no say on future policy or decisions; we cannot make our own trade deals elsewhere. Corbyn is deluded, like his Shadow Home Secretary....................neither one of them got past their two times table at school. Corbyn,s academic record is laughable...check it out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
12gauge82 Posted February 7, 2019 Report Share Posted February 7, 2019 20 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: I see both Tusk and Verhofstadt are 'backing the Corbyn plan' which would have us stay in the customs union and 'very closely aligned' to the single market. Brexit In Name Only. Of course they want that; they get £39 billion; keep us 'very closely aligned' to their system; we get no say on future policy or decisions; we cannot make our own trade deals elsewhere. I wouldn't trust corbyn to run a bath, let alone the country, I just hope May has some sense and rejects it out of hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts