Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Paul Waine]

I may be misreading this, but you appear to be claiming to have more expertise in what is best for farmers than the National Farmers’ Union - a body which exists to decide and promote what is best for farmers - on the basis of having once been a finance manager for a small farm in Carrington.

I mean, I know we’ve had enough of experts but don’t you think that’s a tiny bit hubristic?

Hi Greenmile, no, I'm not claiming to be better at representing farmers (and, I make no claims for my very limited farming finance experience). However, I am claiming to have sufficient understanding of economics to make the argument that the interest group "does protest too much." As a country, rather than as a special interest group (NFU), I believe we can be pleased that the gov't is cutting tariffs on food imports from around the world - and maintaining the same zero tariff on imports of food from EU.

I was very surprised to read the production stats for UK wheat - and that the country grows a surplus of grains, over and above the UK's own requirements. Is there something that favours growing wheat in the UK, climate, land, skilled workforce or something else? I doubt the UK has an advantage in any one of these areas, but the farmers are currently subsidised and protected by external tariff barriers. Q.E.D. the grain farmers are receiving too much subsidy, they are getting too wealthy at the expense of the rest of the population - and, in the way of these things, it is always the poorest who spend the larger proportion of their budget on food, so it is the poorest in our society that is paying the highest (relative) price for subsidising UK grain farmers.

And, it's not just bread that will be cheaper. Maybe the grains we consume in our beer will also be lower in price.

Taking the "social good" argument a little further, it may be - though not necessarily - that the grains were are now able to import will be grow by some of the poorer, developing nations of the world. Maybe that will spread a little of the western worlds wealth. That can't be a bad thing, can it?

[Burnley Ace]

Now that is a good attempt to clarify, thank you.

None of what you purport improved as a direct of joining the EU, sorry they are all part of the slow evolution of virtually every country.

When I worked on the continent pre EU I had free healthcare, so after we joined nothing changed. Is it that when you go on a holiday to Spain/Italy etc I never have to have insurance because of health, that I can as a Brit get free healthcare and doctors now? Let me give you a hint, had to go to the doc's this July while on holiday in Spain, cost for 5 minutes, 100 euro!

I’m sorry but would have to disagree with your assumption that it’s part of the slow evolution of a country, it’s an assumption that a country could possibly have chosen that route, but taking quality of water, for example, the U.K. were forced to make improvements to meet EU standards, there is no evidence to assume they would have chosen to do that.

If you have an E111 card you should have got free health care. Did you make enquiries before you agreed to pay? Which country did you work in, before we joined the EU in 1973 did you get free healthcare?

[Mala591]

If the EU and ROI dig their heals in, I can't immediately see a way around this, with the exception of a customs border down the Irish Sea and leave NI in the CU and SM. But even if the UK agreed to do that, it would surely, from a moral perspective, require NI's consent in the form of a referendum. The only other route is the one Portillo suggests: simply don't put up customs checks and see if smuggling becomes a serious issue. It might not.

You seem to have reached the same conclusion (the only workable answer?) that Lancs and I have arrived at. NI to stay in the CU and SM with a confirmation referendum.

[Burnley Ace]

Aggi,
sorry I was obviously not clear

I replied on your healthcare point.

Regarding visa's yes it is very helpful to those very few working in EU countries, nice to have but not essentially changing the face of the UK after joining is it? I worked in some present EU countries before we joined the EU, it was hardly a chore or difficult for my company to get me a visa and it is not, excuse me, in my opinion a good argument that says we the people of the UK should stay in the EU because if you want to work there or even live you don't need a visa, is it?

Are you referring to the 1960s or pre 92? Your company may have had to apply for a visa, in a specific country, for you to do a specific job and perhaps have to include in that application why you specifically qualify. That is so far away from being able to go to any EU country and apply for any job with the same opportunity as a national.

[If it be your will]

You seem to have reached the same conclusion (the only workable answer?) that Lancs and I have arrived at. NI to stay in the CU and SM with a confirmation referendum.

That'd be fine. I'm not sure the Conservatives are ready to do this, but it would work if we get the 'right' result in a referendum. What do we do if NI votes to stay within the UK framework, and therefore outside the SM and CU, though?

[willsclarets]

You seem to have reached the same conclusion (the only workable answer?) that Lancs and I have arrived at. NI to stay in the CU and SM with a confirmation referendum.

I really don't see how a referendum of that nature, logistically and politically, would fly. But I do think for any sort of deal to happen something drastic would have to occur in terms of a workable solution to the backstop. My main concern with a solution like this is the integrity of the Union.

[Paul Waine]

He's lost the plot quite frankly

Apparently all farmers know is how to farm, they nothing about exporting or selling their stuff.

I've let the EU and UK governments know you've solved the border issue Paul.

The world owes you a great service.

(huge smiley, don't take it seriously as I'm being flippant as its too depressing to take seriously)

Its profoundly depressing.

Hi Lancs, can I ask - why all the personal insults? I know you can read and comprehend just as well as I can. Where do I make a claim that I've "solved the border issue?" All I've done is quote Dr Katy Hayward, one of your experts who contributed to the EU/GFA paper you linked.

As for farmers, I'm sure there are many farmers who know how to export and all of them, I believe, know how to sell their stuff. I'm sure that there are also many farmers who understand economics. That doesn't make the NFU the "sole source of truth" about the situation if the gov't grants zero tariffs on agri imports.

I'm sorry you don't get that and I'm more sorry you feel the need to colour your posts with personal insults.

Now, who's got that mask?

[Paul Waine]

Are you referring to the 1960s or pre 92? Your company may have had to apply for a visa, in a specific country, for you to do a specific job and perhaps have to include in that application why you specifically qualify. That is so far away from being able to go to any EU country and apply for any job with the same opportunity as a national.

I required a visa to live and work in Holland in 1992. I also required a visa to work in New York in 1993.

Agree, in both cases I was sponsored by my UK employer.

I've also interviewed for jobs in Switzerland and US on other occasions, when neither occasions would have been with my then UK employer.

Agree, it's nice to have the right alongside all other EU applicants. I've got a number of European national colleagues working with me now in London on that basis.

[Lancasterclaret]

Hi Lancs, can I ask - why all the personal insults? I know you can read and comprehend just as well as I can. Where do I make a claim that I've "solved the border issue?" All I've done is quote Dr Katy Hayward, one of your experts who contributed to the EU/GFA paper you linked.

As for farmers, I'm sure there are many farmers who know how to export and all of them, I believe, know how to sell their stuff. I'm sure that there are also many farmers who understand economics. That doesn't make the NFU the "sole source of truth" about the situation if the gov't grants zero tariffs on agri imports.

I'm sorry you don't get that and I'm more sorry you feel the need to colour your posts with personal insults.

Now, who's got that mask?

I told you I wasn't being serious.

I value your input, but I think you are taking yourself a bit too seriously.

I freely admit to doing the same, but all I do on here essentially is make sure Brexiteer lies are pointed out.

I think you are underestimating the dangers that the NFU are highlighting, but you are not alone in that.

[willsclarets]

I don't want to offend or speak for someone else, but I think he's probably just got tired of conjecture over hard facts perhaps.

[Jakubclaret]

Worth pointing out that the only reason I back a deal is that I don't like the idea of the vote being ignored.

I still think its a huge mistake and will cost us short, medium and long term.

Somewhere in between the short & medium & long term, acceptance & embracing reality needs to be acknowledged, it’s all good & well stating a popular notion if the deal being proposed subjected to critical scrutiny falls short.

[Lancasterclaret]

Somewhere in between the short & medium & long term, acceptance & embracing reality needs to be acknowledged, it’s all good & well stating a popular notion if the deal being proposed subjected to critical scrutiny falls short.

Let me know when you are willing to acknowledge reality eh?

[Lancasterclaret]

I don't want to offend or speak for someone else, but I think he's probably just got tired of conjecture over hard facts perhaps.

Only so much "why don't you just believe a little more" I can take in one day.

I'm past worrying about the economic side of things now to be honest, I'm absolutely **** scared of just how far Johnson and the Brexiteers will go to avoid obeying parliament.

If they continue to do what they are doing (with their 100% failure rate don't forget, which is some going), then they are going to end up facing a couple of years of a unity government under Corbyn, and it will be 100% their own fault.

[KateR]

I’m sorry but would have to disagree with your assumption that it’s part of the slow evolution of a country, it’s an assumption that a country could possibly have chosen that route, but taking quality of water, for example, the U.K. were forced to make improvements to meet EU standards, there is no evidence to assume they would have chosen to do that.

If you have an E111 card you should have got free health care. Did you make enquiries before you agreed to pay? Which country did you work in, before we joined the EU in 1973 did you get free healthcare?

Never had an E111, the doctor told me before hand I would have to pay, on completion of a 5 min tops examination he confirmed what I knew and presented his bill, which I paid, got a prescription and went to the pharmacy where I paid again.

Sorry if I confused you regarding free healthcare previously, both at that time and also in Spain 2019 I was covered by company insurance for health and dental. I am still covered under husbands health (medical dental care) worldwide. In some places there is a deductible to be paid/managed, over the years this has changed slightly, US medical being the highest deductible with the UK being 100% covered. However it is a pain and involves filling in lot's of forms and usually ensuring being in network of there approved providers, therefore with incidents such as Spain this year I just paid and did not try to claim the money back.

[KateR]

Are you referring to the 1960s or pre 92? Your company may have had to apply for a visa, in a specific country, for you to do a specific job and perhaps have to include in that application why you specifically qualify. That is so far away from being able to go to any EU country and apply for any job with the same opportunity as a national.

Pre 92 and yes I understand it is different, my point was twofold, if your company sent you to work you needed visas, if you went alone to try and go somewhere and start applying much more difficult if not impossible. I did agree that point and stated it was much easier being in the EU, however I was also pointing out that it is a very small proportion of the population that would have this advantage and therefore in my opinion not a strong point in terms of informing others why we would be better off in the EU than leaving.

Maybe I am missing something and that would be easy, but when I look back, and it is a very long time ago and certainly different circumstances but I am personally failing to see a major benefit to the UK as a whole except the collective bargaining. Yet I concede my thoughts of how life was then may be rosier in my mind only.

Also as an aside, did we have a referendum to join, regardless, was everyone happy to join, just out of interest only.

[android]

The vote would be respected if the uber Brexiteers stop insisting on the harshest of all Brexits.

It really is that simple.

I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again

People pushing for the harshest of Brexits are risking it all and might end up with nothing at all.

From my point of view, its completely mental.

Disagree. A remain parliament (and other people of influence) have never accepted the result. It really is that simple.

Interesting that neither you nor any of the Supreme Court champions on here have answered any of my points. Maybe it has been lost in the farming & border debates or maybe not.

I see in the other exchanges you are still banging on about Brexiteer lies, as if that is one sided. Obviously the duplicity / lies, call it what you will, applies to both sides and it reminded me of a revealing recent interview with Gina Miller. She mentioned that on 24th June 2016, in response to her distress, her son had asked her to do something because "you always do something Mummy". Presumably mummy had expressed her concern on the morning of 24th June 2016 that the Cameron government were not properly involving parliament in the Brexit process or, just possibly, the "reality" was she was just hacked off with the result - what do you reckon? I'm sure Johnny Major's involvement in the Supreme Court ruling was equally entirely down to his distress at any long prorogations (oops). Lol.

[willsclarets]

Disagree. A remain parliament (and other people of influence) have never accepted the result. It really is that simple.

Interesting that neither you nor any of the Supreme Court champions on here have answered any of my points. Maybe it has been lost in the farming & border debates or maybe not.

I see in the other exchanges you are still banging on about Brexiteer lies, as if that is one sided. Obviously the duplicity / lies, call it what you will, applies to both sides and it reminded me of a revealing recent interview with Gina Miller. She mentioned that on 24th June 2016, in response to her distress, her son had asked her to do something because "you always do something Mummy". Presumably mummy had expressed her concern on the morning of 24th June 2016 that the Cameron government were not properly involving parliament in the Brexit process or, just possibly, the "reality" was she was just hacked off with the result - what do you reckon? I'm sure Johnny Major's involvement in the Supreme Court ruling was equally entirely down to his distress at any long prorogations (oops). Lol.

What a load of dross.

[android]

What a load of dross.

Ha ha ha - take it up with Gina!

[If it be your will]

Disagree. A remain parliament (and other people of influence) have never accepted the result. It really is that simple.

Interesting that neither you nor any of the Supreme Court champions on here have answered any of my points. Maybe it has been lost in the farming & border debates or maybe not.

I see in the other exchanges you are still banging on about Brexiteer lies, as if that is one sided. Obviously the duplicity / lies, call it what you will, applies to both sides and it reminded me of a revealing recent interview with Gina Miller. She mentioned that on 24th June 2016, in response to her distress, her son had asked her to do something because "you always do something Mummy". Presumably mummy had expressed her concern on the morning of 24th June 2016 that the Cameron government were not properly involving parliament in the Brexit process or, just possibly, the "reality" was she was just hacked off with the result - what do you reckon? I'm sure Johnny Major's involvement in the Supreme Court ruling was equally entirely down to his distress at any long prorogations (oops). Lol.

Oh, just ignore them. Come on, do something constructive with us leavers instead. I don't suppose you have a workable solution to the NI border problem? We think we're nearly there, but we're still scratching our heads a bit, so any input would be welcome.

Summary: We can have customs checks on the NI/RoI border and stay within the spirit and letter of the GFA. But not "security installations" to protect them.

Or, we can have a full customs border in the Irish Sea, and let NI stay in the SM/CU, so long as NI agrees in a referendum (Problems - it weakens the Union and what do we do if NI votes to stay within the rules of the UK and therefore outside the CU/SM?)

[android]

Oh, just ignore them. Come on, do something constructive with us leavers instead. I don't suppose you have a workable solution to the NI border problem? We think we're nearly there, but we're still scratching our heads a bit, so any input would be welcome.

I hear you but I have nothing useful to add on NI sadly. I appreciate your posts as among the more insightful, open and honest (and ok because I agree with a lot of what you say). You also actually seem willing to see the other side of the argument and occasionally admit when you are wrong, which is a rarity on here! I will try to make my next contribution more constructive!

[Burnley Ace]

Never had an E111, the doctor told me before hand I would have to pay, on completion of a 5 min tops examination he confirmed what I knew and presented his bill, which I paid, got a prescription and went to the pharmacy where I paid again.

Sorry if I confused you regarding free healthcare previously, both at that time and also in Spain 2019 I was covered by company insurance for health and dental. I am still covered under husbands health (medical dental care) worldwide. In some places there is a deductible to be paid/managed, over the years this has changed slightly, US medical being the highest deductible with the UK being 100% covered. However it is a pain and involves filling in lot's of forms and usually ensuring being in network of there approved providers, therefore with incidents such as Spain this year I just paid and did not try to claim the money back.

You asked for examples of how we have benefited from EU membership, I gave you, off the top of my head, half a dozen examples that you disputed. Now it transpires that you chose to pay to see a doctor. Everyone has the opportunity or advantage of working in any EU country, not a very small proportion of the population. If you mean that very few utilise that opportunity that’s a different discussion.

Clean water and sewage treatment is also, IMO, a big plus.

[dsr]

You asked for examples of how we have benefited from EU membership, I gave you, off the top of my head, half a dozen examples that you disputed. Now it transpires that you chose to pay to see a doctor. Everyone has the opportunity or advantage of working in any EU country, not a very small proportion of the population. If you mean that very few utilise that opportunity that’s a different discussion.

Clean water and sewage treatment is also, IMO, a big plus.

I was always told as a child that the water in Spain wasn't safe to drink. But I don't know where you get this idea that the water in the UK wasn't. We've had clean water since before we joined the EU.

[aggi]

I was always told as a child that the water in Spain wasn't safe to drink. But I don't know where you get this idea that the water in the UK wasn't. We've had clean water since before we joined the EU.

Sewage treatment used to be pretty shoddy before EU standards. Lots of untreated sewage was just pumped out into the ocean until we were forced to do otherwise (I guess this is maybe one of those laws that people complain the EU forced upon the UK).

[dsr]

Sewage treatment used to be pretty shoddy before EU standards. Lots of untreated sewage was just pumped out into the ocean until we were forced to do otherwise (I guess this is maybe one of those laws that people complain the EU forced upon the UK).

I don't think that the River Boards Act 1948 was forced on us by the EU, nor yet the Rivers (Prevention of Pollution) Act 1951, or even the Water Act 1973.

I reckon that cleaning up the environment has become the thing to do, and the thing that has been done, both inside and outside the EU. For example, Norway in the seventies was polluted - the fjord at Oslo had similarities with the Thames - but it has since been cleaned up. Were they forced into it by the EU, or was it something that all European counties have been dong anyway?

[aggi]

I don't think that the River Boards Act 1948 was forced on us by the EU, nor yet the Rivers (Prevention of Pollution) Act 1951, or even the Water Act 1973.

I reckon that cleaning up the environment has become the thing to do, and the thing that has been done, both inside and outside the EU. For example, Norway in the seventies was polluted - the fjord at Oslo had similarities with the Thames - but it has since been cleaned up. Were they forced into it by the EU, or was it something that all European counties have been dong anyway?

Well given that the UK tried to claim that a number of beaches such as Blackpool weren't actually beaches for bathing and the EU ended up taking the UK to court to enforce the clean beaches standards it does look quite a bit like it wasn't something that the UK was doing anyway.

[Burnley Ace]

I was always told as a child that the water in Spain wasn't safe to drink. But I don't know where you get this idea that the water in the UK wasn't. We've had clean water since before we joined the EU.

I’m sure you were told many things as a child, like they don’t have tea bags and baked beans in Spain!You were probably right about Spanish water, but they are in the EU to. 1976 EU Bathing Water Directive was the start, the Urban Waste Treatment and Nitrates Directive and the Industral Emmission Directive - all these pesky laws passed by foreigners! The UK has had to be taken to Court to stop pumping raw sewage into the Sea, even this year. We still have some of the worst water in Europe - https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ague-table" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Remember when you couldn’t swim off the Fylde coast? That’s where I get the idea from? Where do you get the idea that Water in the uk (not just drinking water!!) has been clean?

[Lancasterclaret]

Going to stick to football threads for a while as nothing is going to happen till Oct 19th (unless we get a deal)

But there is nothing wrong with Brexit as a concept under realistic aspirations.

But we are not there with this. We can't be under the current situations.

[AndrewJB]

Pre 92 and yes I understand it is different, my point was twofold, if your company sent you to work you needed visas, if you went alone to try and go somewhere and start applying much more difficult if not impossible. I did agree that point and stated it was much easier being in the EU, however I was also pointing out that it is a very small proportion of the population that would have this advantage and therefore in my opinion not a strong point in terms of informing others why we would be better off in the EU than leaving.

Maybe I am missing something and that would be easy, but when I look back, and it is a very long time ago and certainly different circumstances but I am personally failing to see a major benefit to the UK as a whole except the collective bargaining. Yet I concede my thoughts of how life was then may be rosier in my mind only.

Also as an aside, did we have a referendum to join, regardless, was everyone happy to join, just out of interest only.

While in the EU every U.K. citizen has the advantage of being able to live and work in the EU. You might mean that only a small number of people take advantage of this (though that is contestable as over a million do, and when you add those who do so part time, with property out there, and plan to retire there, that number increases).

The rights conferred by EU citizenship are a big plus to belonging

[Murger]

How can anybody want to be under the rule of people like this? He's a deranged fanatic.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 49316.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[willsclarets]

How can anybody want to be under the rule of people like this? He's a deranged fanatic.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/p ... 49316.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Well first of all, we are not "under the rule" of him or the EU. It's a complete fallacy. Looking at the core of what he said below, I don't have many problems with it, either. I would just add "corrupt liar" to the traitor accusation. A traitor to everyone of course, except his buddies set to make billions from shorting the pound in the event of a no deal brexit. Now, that's someone I don't want to be under the rule of.


"The real reason why this is happening is very simply: it's a blame game against everybody. A blame game against the European Union, against Ireland, against Mrs Merkel, against the British judicial system, against Labour, against the Lib Dems, even against Mrs May," he said.
"The only one who is not to be blamed is Mr Johnson himself, apparently. But all the rest are the source of our problems. That is what is happening today. All those who are not playing his game are 'traitors' or a 'collaborator', or 'surrenderers'.
"Well in my opinion, dear colleagues the real traitor is he or she who risks bringing disaster upon his country, its economy, and its citizens, by pushing Britain out of the European Union. That is in my opinion, a traitor."

[kentonclaret]

The simple fact is that Britain is never going to be able to sign enough lucrative trade deals to replace the frictionless free trade that we enjoy with the EU.

Those relying on Donald Trump and the US to come and bail us out, given that Trump has shown that his word simply cannot be trusted and is quite willing to weaponise trade to punish other trading partners, really are willing to jump from the frying pan into the fire.

[AndrewJB]

Well first of all, we are not "under the rule" of him or the EU. It's a complete fallacy. Looking at the core of what he said below, I don't have many problems with it, either. I would just add "corrupt liar" to the traitor accusation. A traitor to everyone of course, except his buddies set to make billions from shorting the pound in the event of a no deal brexit. Now, that's someone I don't want to be under the rule of.


"The real reason why this is happening is very simply: it's a blame game against everybody. A blame game against the European Union, against Ireland, against Mrs Merkel, against the British judicial system, against Labour, against the Lib Dems, even against Mrs May," he said.
"The only one who is not to be blamed is Mr Johnson himself, apparently. But all the rest are the source of our problems. That is what is happening today. All those who are not playing his game are 'traitors' or a 'collaborator', or 'surrenderers'.
"Well in my opinion, dear colleagues the real traitor is he or she who risks bringing disaster upon his country, its economy, and its citizens, by pushing Britain out of the European Union. That is in my opinion, a traitor."

I can’t understand how Murger and other fans of leave won’t admit to how poorly Johnson and the government come out in all of this.

[Jakubclaret]

Going to stick to football threads for a while as nothing is going to happen till Oct 19th (unless we get a deal)

But there is nothing wrong with Brexit as a concept under realistic aspirations.

But we are not there with this. We can't be under the current situations.

That's not a bad idea taking into consideration politics not being your strongest suit

[dsr]

If using the term "Surrender Act" is inflammatory, how does using the term "Traitor" stand?

[Lancasterclaret]

That's not a bad idea taking into consideration politics not being your strongest suit

Well, dealing with reality and facts is quite hard work.

Saying stuff without backing any of it up is on the other hand is really easy.

[Spijed]

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
No.10 source: "Boris won’t resign even if he loses a no confidence vote and it is not within the sovereigns constitutional powers to make him. The PM will advise the Queen of that and she must follow her Prime Minister’s advice". There is a lunatic at large in Downing Street.

Wonder if there will be a rendition of "We shall not be moved"?

[dsr]

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
No.10 source: "Boris won’t resign even if he loses a no confidence vote and it is not within the sovereigns constitutional powers to make him. The PM will advise the Queen of that and she must follow her Prime Minister’s advice". There is a lunatic at large in Downing Street.

Wonder if there will be a rendition of "We shall not be moved"?

I take it the "lunatic" is the anonymous source telling this stuff to Dan Hodges? Or is Hodges himself the lunatic for believing it?

[AndrewJB]

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
No.10 source: "Boris won’t resign even if he loses a no confidence vote and it is not within the sovereigns constitutional powers to make him. The PM will advise the Queen of that and she must follow her Prime Minister’s advice". There is a lunatic at large in Downing Street.

Wonder if there will be a rendition of "We shall not be moved"?

Apparently she’s already taken advice on how to sack him, but I’d prefer to think most of these things out of Downing St are just expressions of impotent rage rather than anything meaningful.

[AndrewJB]

The simple fact is that Britain is never going to be able to sign enough lucrative trade deals to replace the frictionless free trade that we enjoy with the EU.

Those relying on Donald Trump and the US to come and bail us out, given that Trump has shown that his word simply cannot be trusted and is quite willing to weaponise trade to punish other trading partners, really are willing to jump from the frying pan into the fire.

On a Burnley Facebook page someone even suggested the. Commonwealth would come to our aid. Reality is absent from this debate.

[dsr]

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
No.10 source: "Boris won’t resign even if he loses a no confidence vote and it is not within the sovereigns constitutional powers to make him. The PM will advise the Queen of that and she must follow her Prime Minister’s advice". There is a lunatic at large in Downing Street.

Wonder if there will be a rendition of "We shall not be moved"?

Parliament has two easy options to replace the PM. 1 - pass a vote in support of a new one. 2 - call a general election.

[willsclarets]

On a Burnley Facebook page someone even suggested the. Commonwealth would come to our aid. Reality is absent from this debate.

Despite the ridiculousness of that statement, there's a common theme with most Brexiteers since all hope of something better than what we had disappeared - the answer is always "we'll just get through it somehow" rather than "we fu*ked up"

[mapinchina]

I am so very happy that I left England / U.K. / Europe....whatever it's called now !

[summitclaret]

If using the term "Surrender Act" is inflammatory, how does using the term "Traitor" stand?

Anyone that thinks Surrender Act is inflammatory is a snowflake. After all it's an accurate description.

[summitclaret]

I see that the DT reporting that the EP President gas met wirh Bercow to discuss matters. I find that disgraceful. It's about time the Gov challenged Bercow's behaviour.

[elwaclaret]

Throughout this thread have been facts from remain... and lies from Brexit supporters. Yet some people still want too leave aN EU heading to further federalism.... go figure.

If any remainers are interested I have some Millennium bug repair kits still in their packaging, now half price.

[AndrewJB]

Anyone that thinks Surrender Act is inflammatory is a snowflake. After all it's an accurate description.

It’s entirely dishonest. The PM is being told to address his failure to reach agreement, by extending A50. I say his failure because we’ve known for years what the EU position is, and that the terms he’s looking for simply don’t exist. The most sensible way forward would be to negotiate a withdrawal agreement that keeps the U.K. in a customs union (which we could leave further in the future when real technology allows us to), and he’d get the support he needs to pass it through Parliament, EU agreement, not screw up the GFA, and actually get it done. Where he is right now is going precisely nowhere, and won’t go anywhere, because it doesn’t have the support, and the EU won’t move either. When a solution is staring you in the face you have to be particularly stupid to continue trying what doesn’t work.

[AndrewJB]

I see that the DT reporting that the EP President gas met wirh Bercow to discuss matters. I find that disgraceful. It's about time the Gov challenged Bercow's behaviour.

Anyone who has a problem with Bercow’s behaviour, without being appalled at Johnson’s has zero balance.

[Mala591]

Does anyone think that May's withdrawal agreement might get passed by parliament if it was brought for the fourth time?

Ok I agree that we COULD be trapped in the EU's CU and SM indefinitely BUT we might have an excellent free trade deal negotiated in a couple of years which would MINIMISE trade barriers between the EU and the UK.

This option might be Johnson's last throw of the dice on the 19th October (decision day).

[AndrewJB]

Despite the ridiculousness of that statement, there's a common theme with most Brexiteers since all hope of something better than what we had disappeared - the answer is always "we'll just get through it somehow" rather than "we fu*ked up"

It’s gone from being “things will be so much better - you’ll see” to “okay, I realise it won’t be so good, but shut up because we’re doing it anyway” And those who froth at the mouth about us pooling our sovereignty with other like minded countries for a common good, will say nothing when the US tells us to change our laws to allow their chlorinated chicken to be sold here.

[Devils_Advocate]

I see that the DT reporting that the EP President gas met wirh Bercow to discuss matters. I find that disgraceful. It's about time the Gov challenged Bercow's behaviour.

You might want to look beyond the headlines and scaremongering bias of the newspapers and get a bit of perspective

First of all the term President is misleading as I believe the EU has multiple presidents. David Sassoli is the Speaker for the EU Parliament so is directly Bercow's counterpart in the EU.

Sassoli was already in London and met up with Bercow and primarily discussed the importance their roles play in both the EU and UK parliament with respect to Brexit and in general. It is completely natural for the EU speaker to meet up with his domestic equivalents when he is in their country

There is no evidence in the article whatsoever that Bercow agreed to prevent a clean break exit and the video of Sassoli's remarks dont support this claim either. All opinions quoted in the piece about a clean break brexit are Sassoli's own opinions and nothing to do with Bercow.

The Telegraph has basically jumped on the fact these two met and the opinions Sassoli has and misrepresented it so people like yourelf will be outraged. In effect the article is n more than a Brexit Party press release repackaged as news.

Now if you want to be outraged by stuff like this what do you make of the reports that a Govt minister met with Hungarian ministers to try and get them to prevent an extension or on the same subject reports showing the Hungarian foreign minister just happened to be in the same Govt building as Johnson when a cabinet meeting was in session?