Its only lost because the Government specifically said they would obey the law.summitclaret wrote:Cherry case lost. However another case tomorrow on asking the Scottish Court to send the letter if BJ doesn't. That's a BJ win either way really.
And if it's "do or die" how is he going to explain why he's not dead yet?Spijed wrote:If there is a substantial delay how is he going to stop.losing votes to Nigel Farage?
He’ll come on tv and explain that he is in fact dead. His supporters will believe it and the Tory media will print obituaries and anyone who says ‘but hang on, he’s not dead. Look he’s still PM’ will be labelled a democracy’s denying remoaner traitor.AndrewJB wrote:And if it's "do or die" how is he going to explain why he's not dead yet?
They had said many times that they would. This was a stupid case as I said the other day. Course it's about an election.Lancasterclaret wrote:Its only lost because the Government specifically said they would obey the law.
You really need to start to see the difference between what they are saying, and what they are actually doing.
Its all talk for the election.
A lot easier than Corbyn.Spijed wrote:If there is a substantial delay how is he going to stop.losing votes to Nigel Farage?
What I have consistently said is that there will be no shortage of essentials eg. medicine, because there is no obligation to stop every lorry and if there are vital shortages, the medicine lorries can be waved straight through.Lancasterclaret wrote:No
Certainly coming off the ships with correct paperwork, then what is it, 10% will be stopped (I think that is it at the moment) then it will be as normal as possible.
And with all the will in the world, when you said they would be "waved through", that isn't what you meant!
The backlogs/hold ups will be at the export end of both Calais and Dover I suspect, but hopefully we will never have to find out.
If people think that Johnson is moving heaven and earth to get Brexit through, then they will be less inclined to vote for Farage. If Brexiters believe that the main reason we haven't left yet is because Corbyn and friends are blocking it, and it's not Johnson's fault, then Johnson will get many of their votes.Spijed wrote:If there is a substantial delay how is he going to stop.losing votes to Nigel Farage?
French authorities estimated a 2 minute delay at the Calais border could lead to 27,000 vehicles queuing on both sides of the channel. If the roads are completely gridlocked for miles how do you propose we get those wagons from the back of the queue to the front of the queue to even make the decision to wave them throughdsr wrote:What I have consistently said is that there will be no shortage of essentials eg. medicine, because there is no obligation to stop every lorry and if there are vital shortages, the medicine lorries can be waved straight through.
You tell me 90% of wagons are waved straight through now; so does that not mean it's possible to wave through the vital supplies?
My point has always been that it is up to Customs & Excise to decide how much of the imports to check. If they want minimum disruption, they check nothing; if they want maximum accuracy, they check everything. It's a matter of finding the happy medium. That is how it is now, and that is how it will be in future. If they need to get medicines in quickly, they will check them less.
Leave have done a good job in convincing people that No Deal will somehow bring things to a close rather than the reality of it just being the first step. The way that they've convinced people that after No Deal the EU will somehow forget about the divorce bill, Irish border, etc when they're negotiating a deal with the UK has been impressive.dsr wrote:If people think that Johnson is moving heaven and earth to get Brexit through, then they will be less inclined to vote for Farage. If Brexiters believe that the main reason we haven't left yet is because Corbyn and friends are blocking it, and it's not Johnson's fault, then Johnson will get many of their votes.
Don't underestimate the "I'm sick of this, let's get it over with" lobby. There must be a lot of people in the middle with either no strong views at all, or mixed views seeing equal advantages both ways, but who want it all to be over. Which way are they going to vote? Conservative, who have a plan to try and end it? Or Labour, who want it to carry on? They won't vote Farage, but they might well vote for Johnson.
No idea. Probably we'll all die just like we all did the last umpteen times the French ports were on strike and the Kent motorways were turned into lorry parks. Except we didn't die, did we?Devils_Advocate wrote:French authorities estimated a 2 minute delay at the Calais border could lead to 27,000 vehicles queuing on both sides of the channel. If the roads are completely gridlocked for miles how do you propose we get those wagons from the back of the queue to the front of the queue to even make the decision to wave them through
Even if it was "only the first step", you still get closer to the finish by taking the first step than you do by sitting at the start line complaining that it's too hard.aggi wrote:Leave have done a good job in convincing people that No Deal will somehow bring things to a close rather than the reality of it just being the first step. The way that they've convinced people that after No Deal the EU will somehow forget about the divorce bill, Irish border, etc when they're negotiating a deal with the UK has been impressive.
You made the claim certain lorry's could be easily waived through. I have highlighted your ignorance around this claim. You have then gone a bit loopy and started going on about people dying.dsr wrote:No idea. Probably we'll all die just like we all did the last umpteen times the French ports were on strike and the Kent motorways were turned into lorry parks. Except we didn't die, did we?
Thank you.Devils_Advocate wrote:You made the claim certain lorry's could be easily waived through. I have highlighted your ignorance around this claim. You have then gone a bit loopy and started going on about people dying.
Well argued Sir!!
It won't be gridlocked as we won't be trading with each other according to the pessimistic remainers.Devils_Advocate wrote:You made the claim certain lorry's could be easily waived through. I have highlighted your ignorance around this claim. You have then gone a bit loopy and started going on about people dying.
Well argued Sir!!
Leave have done a good job of convincing some very gullible people from Day One of this whole farce.aggi wrote:Leave have done a good job in convincing people that No Deal will somehow bring things to a close rather than the reality of it just being the first step. The way that they've convinced people that after No Deal the EU will somehow forget about the divorce bill, Irish border, etc when they're negotiating a deal with the UK has been impressive.
Quickenthetempo wrote:It won't be gridlocked as we won't be trading with each other according to the pessimistic remainers.
Can you find any source anywhere for anyone having ever said this?Quickenthetempo wrote:It won't be gridlocked as we won't be trading with each other according to the pessimistic remainers.
But taking the first step isn't the same as having a plan to try and end it. (Also, cheers for another crap brexit analogy, I reckon we must be in three figures with these now.)dsr wrote:Even if it was "only the first step", you still get closer to the finish by taking the first step than you do by sitting at the start line complaining that it's too hard.
It's bizarre, isn't it? Really, really strange.dsr wrote:Thank you.
I suppose it is possible that the roads are so gridlocked that not a vehicle can get through. Let's hope no police or ambulances are needed either. The doomsayers may of course be right, it may be that there will be medicines thirty miles from the British coast and no-one can think of any way to get them to Britain. All ports closed, all helicopters out of action, all freight planes shot down, the Army unable to help. But I doubt it.
Or it may even be that things carry on as they are now in accordance with that government briefing. I'm sure things have changed in the past without it being a new apocalypse. Perhaps we'll apply the Dunkirk spirit and send a few hundred small boats.
Every time remain bring a court case, or some other such thing, three days later Tory poll ratings go up. I can't therefore fathom why remain keep doing this.summitclaret wrote:They had said many times that they would. This was a stupid case as I said the other day. Course it's about an election.
You really want me to trawl through millions of posts on here to find it? Hahanil_desperandum wrote:Can you find any source anywhere for anyone having ever said this?
But even if you could find any evidence for this statement, we wouldn't necessarily need to be trading with France. Goods would still have to cross Europe and the channel in order to get here.
I'm sure half the people on this board believe it's a plan that will fail. But nonetheless, the Tories' plan is trying to end the Brexit chaos and uncertainty.aggi wrote:But taking the first step isn't the same as having a plan to try and end it. (Also, cheers for another crap brexit analogy, I reckon we must be in three figures with these now.)
That doesn't take into account any hold ups on the French side though.dsr wrote:What I have consistently said is that there will be no shortage of essentials eg. medicine, because there is no obligation to stop every lorry and if there are vital shortages, the medicine lorries can be waved straight through.
You tell me 90% of wagons are waved straight through now; so does that not mean it's possible to wave through the vital supplies?
My point has always been that it is up to Customs & Excise to decide how much of the imports to check. If they want minimum disruption, they check nothing; if they want maximum accuracy, they check everything. It's a matter of finding the happy medium. That is how it is now, and that is how it will be in future. If they need to get medicines in quickly, they will check them less.
Depends which direction the first step is.dsr wrote:Even if it was "only the first step", you still get closer to the finish by taking the first step than you do by sitting at the start line complaining that it's too hard.
It isn't though is it?dsr wrote:I'm sure half the people on this board believe it's a plan that will fail. But nonetheless, the Tories' plan is trying to end the Brexit chaos and uncertainty.
The leave rhetoric now seems to be just this, "well it won't be the disaster everyone thinks it's going to be" or "I'm tired of it let's just leave".dsr wrote:No idea. Probably we'll all die just like we all did the last umpteen times the French ports were on strike and the Kent motorways were turned into lorry parks. Except we didn't die, did we?
If you like the idea of political unionism and hate the idea of self governing nation states then there is nothing that will make you like Brexit and all its "positives" will be lost on you.willsclarets wrote:The leave rhetoric now seems to be just this, "well it won't be the disaster everyone thinks it's going to be" or "I'm tired of it let's just leave".
I'm still waiting for a viable explanation of how leaving the EU will actually be a positive. I still haven't heard one good argument, but now it's reduced to "it won't be THAT bad"
That's because your mind is closed.willsclarets wrote:The leave rhetoric now seems to be just this, "well it won't be the disaster everyone thinks it's going to be" or "I'm tired of it let's just leave".
I'm still waiting for a viable explanation of how leaving the EU will actually be a positive. I still haven't heard one good argument, but now it's reduced to "it won't be THAT bad"
Perfectly summed up by the Ireland question that people don't seem to understand is what is, to brexiters, the EU "refusing to negotiate".Lancasterclaret wrote:It isn't though is it?
Its three years of trying to fit the perfect circle of Brexit into the square of reality and they are arguably no closer to understanding that now then they were in 2016.
Its delusion on an epic scale, which they only get away with because enough people in the country are equally deluded.
ClaretMoffitt wrote:If you like the idea of political unionism and hate the idea of self governing nation states then there is nothing that will make you like Brexit and all its "positives" will be lost on you.
who pretended to be in the FLA? I don't remember thatLancasterclaret wrote:Three years and perfectly sensible people (well, apart from pretending to be in the FLA) still think this is actually true.
No wonder we are in a world of trouble.
No, it really isn't. I'm just not blinded by misguided optimism based on no evidence whatsoever, and a willingness to make the biggest political decision in our lifetime that was based on vague notions of outdated nationalism, lies and now a dogged determination to see it through regardless of the cost. Not to mention a massive arrogance by British government to dismiss Northern Ireland in it's botched job of executing brexit.summitclaret wrote:That's because your mind is closed.
Oh so, you don't remember pretending to be in it, or are you in it, but don't remember telling everyone that you weren't in it?ClaretMoffitt wrote:who pretended to be in the FLA? I don't remember that
what is it you fail to understand, negotiation, 2 or more groups/people trying to come up with a mutually agreeable solution, for you it is EU have stated this therefore the UK must agree, that is categorically not a solution. If the UK say well we are not agreeing to your backstop and therefore we are leaving, will the EU and Ireland get exactly what they want?willsclarets wrote:Perfectly summed up by the Ireland question that people don't seem to understand is what is, to brexiters, the EU "refusing to negotiate".
But the refusal of the UK to admit that the Irish border issue makes its Brexit options pretty narrow hasn't helped Kate.KateR wrote:what is it you fail to understand, negotiation, 2 or more groups/people trying to come up with a mutually agreeable solution, for you it is EU have stated this therefore the UK must agree, that is categorically not a solution. If the UK say well we are not agreeing to your backstop and therefore we are leaving, will the EU and Ireland get exactly what they want?
It really is not difficult to understand
The EU's withdrawal agreement has been rejected by parliament THREE times. The latest Johnson proposals seem to have a majority support in parliament and offer the opportunity for a negotiated compromise deal. If the EU don't attempt to negotiate seriously and in good faith then THEY will be responsible for a no-deal Brexit.willsclarets wrote:Perfectly summed up by the Ireland question that people don't seem to understand is what is, to brexiters, the EU "refusing to negotiate".
You are trying to blame Boris for remainer May's promises.Lancasterclaret wrote:But the refusal of the UK to admit that the Irish border issue makes its Brexit options pretty narrow hasn't helped Kate.
In 2017, the UK Government guaranteed to the EU that it wouldn't put infrastructure in NI.
In 2019, it broke that promise to please 10 DUP MPs and about 30 ERG members.
Its not a good look at all
Its screams out "we are not serious" to everyone else. Only Brexiteers swallow the guff that the government is coming out with.
Mala591 wrote:The EU's withdrawal agreement has been rejected by parliament THREE times. The latest Johnson proposals seem to have a majority support in parliament and offer the opportunity for a negotiated compromise deal. If the EU don't attempt to negotiate seriously and in good faith then THEY will be responsible for a no-deal Brexit.
AndyClaret wrote:You are trying to blame Boris for remainer May's promises.
I completely agree that the Irish Border issue is the most complicated and the issue is around both sides of the argument wanting there own way, well unfortunately neither side will get it's own way. To me, and it's just me looking on, the EU have held firm and as it was in May's deal which we know 100% got blocked 3 times in parliament so no one should think it will be acceptable again.Lancasterclaret wrote:But the refusal of the UK to admit that the Irish border issue makes its Brexit options pretty narrow hasn't helped Kate.
In 2017, the UK Government guaranteed to the EU that it wouldn't put infrastructure in NI.
In 2019, it broke that promise to please 10 DUP MPs and about 30 ERG members.
Its not a good look at all
Its screams out "we are not serious" to everyone else. Only Brexiteers swallow the guff that the government is coming out with.
"Remainer May" - If this is what she is, that makes Johnson the most gullible idiot in the world for serving in her cabinet for as long as he did. No wonder he's unable to negotiate his way out of a paper bag, as we've seen over the last few months.AndyClaret wrote:You are trying to blame Boris for remainer May's promises.
The Irish border can only be sorted if we accept that the customs border is in the Irish Sea. Even I know that is impossible for a Unionist and Conservative Party to accept, which is why May came up with the whole of the UK being in it.KateR wrote:I completely agree that the Irish Border issue is the most complicated and the issue is around both sides of the argument wanting there own way, well unfortunately neither side will get it's own way. To me, and it's just me looking on, the EU have held firm and as it was in May's deal which we know 100% got blocked 3 times in parliament so no one should think it will be acceptable again.
BJ has not got what he asked for when he recently took office, since then he has modified, has presented something that was a line that would never be crossed in the last years. It's a change to help bring a deal, EU have 3 choices, if they just say no how does that help them of the UK? If they say yes, then you can logically assume we move to a deal and 2 years of negotiation, highly unlikely I agree. Finally they can say well ok we can accept this but not that and offer some constructive dialogue in try to get the what is not acceptable to something acceptable to both parties.
The EU stance whether you like it or not is irrelevant, but for me there stance is what is today stopping the deal everyone says they want and if it continues then it will result in a no deal. That bit is simple, well at least for me
I explained that in previous posts pal. It wasnt in layman's terms, so ill have another go for you...martin_p wrote:Where did I mention Brexit news?
I struggling to comprehend what the relevance of your big 'he's got a German wife' reveal was. You don't seem to know yourself anymore.
So I said;CombatClaret wrote:People have accepted there will be negatives only after the result. The campaign was fought on the pretense that
"There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside" - Former Brexit Secretary
So it is right we continue on even though what some people likely voted for has turned out to be untrue?
The reductive nature of this argument, essentially based on a numbers game, is just perfect. You just want to leave, and you don't care how. And I dare say you don't know why.Mala591 wrote:The EU's withdrawal agreement has been rejected by parliament THREE times. The latest Johnson proposals seem to have a majority support in parliament and offer the opportunity for a negotiated compromise deal. If the EU don't attempt to negotiate seriously and in good faith then THEY will be responsible for a no-deal Brexit.