Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[RingoMcCartney]

Labour so desperate to scrutinise the WA, last night, with time left, couldn't even manage to find any more MPs that were keen enough to carry on the debate !

You couldn't make it up!

[AndyClaret]

Labour so desperate to scrutinise the WA, last night, with time left, couldn't even manage to find any more MPs that were keen enough to carry on the debate !

You couldn't make it up!

It's almost as if they are massive liars.

[RingoMcCartney]

It’s genuinely all it deserves Wrongo. You’ve admit to lying to get onto a radio show because it’s what they want to hear. The trouble is you’ve so many ‘personas’ you’re getting them mixed up and are forgetting which one believes in what. If you came on here as just yourself (whoever you are) you’d probably get a lot more respect.

I only have the one persona Marty , and as you well know.

It gets the better of you on a daily basis!




By the way, with the tragic news of 38 bodies being found dead in a container lorry.

I was of the opinion that leaving the EU and ending free movement of People would help in the fight against people trafficking, modern day slavery and human exploitation.

You claimed that while I only had an opinion( (which I agree with). You had evidence.

I remember where I was when you made this claim, and it's been 2 years since you made it, yet you're still to provide this mythical evidence!

As an anniversary present could I have some of that evidence please!?

Happy anniversary, darling!




X x x

[Lancasterclaret]

I don't know for sure, but once the government had decided to postpone the process, what is the point?

I only flicked in and out, but it seemed to be full of ERG types demanding Oct 31st but without understanding (or more likely ignoring) the realities of what the procedural defeat meant.

[RingoMcCartney]

Fascinating insight into your mind there Ringo

Quick question if you don't mind

Why is Farage against this deal? (genuine question as I can't see why he would be)

TWO POINTS

1 The deal is , probably, not a clean enough brexit for Farage.





2 My mind reflects -


given this weeks ComRes poll , (majority want to leave)


the 2016 People's Vote, (majority voted leave)


the 2017 genera election result (where 84% of the People voted for referendum respecting parties)


and the 2019 EU parliamentary election (brexit party won)


What the majority think. (Bad news for Remainiacs)

[RingoMcCartney]

Now you asked me a question. I answered it .

My turn Lancasterclaret.

You said, youd be willing to vote for the libdems.

You said youd accept that they , were they to form a government, unlikely as it may be, tear up Article 50 without a referendum.

You also said that if elected on a manifesto pledge, if any party wins an election or forms a government, they can implement whatever they had in their manifesto.

As we could be heading to a general election, this question has become increasingly pertinent.

How would you feel if a future government is formed after including it in their manifesto, they take us out of the European union, without a referendum?


I answered you genuine question.


Please answer my genuine question

[RingoMcCartney]

When you ask a question to Lancasterclaret if it puts him on the spot, he will point blank refuse to answer it.

Other posters should be aware of this when engaging with the poster who wants people to be "polite" to him

[RingoMcCartney]

It's almost as if they are massive liars.

It's almost as if they're more than happy not being the government with any responsibility. Its almost as if they're quite content sitting back and being a party of protest.

[martin_p]

I only have the one persona Marty , and as you well know.

It gets the better of you on a daily basis!




By the way, with the tragic news of 38 bodies being found dead in a container lorry.

I was of the opinion that leaving the EU and ending free movement of People would help in the fight against people trafficking, modern day slavery and human exploitation.

You claimed that while I only had an opinion( (which I agree with). You had evidence.

I remember where I was when you made this claim, and it's been 2 years since you made it, yet you're still to provide this mythical evidence!

As an anniversary present could I have some of that evidence please!?

Happy anniversary, darling!




X x x

Wow, you’ve used the death of 39 people to try and score a point on a messageboard. Wow.

[RingoMcCartney]

Wow, you’ve used the death of 39 people to try and score a point on a messageboard. Wow.

No, you're desperate enough to try and portray it that way!



Evidence Marty?

[Devils_Advocate]

Pretty low even for a berk like Ringo

[RingoMcCartney]

Corbyn- "We're deeply concerned about this withdrawal agreement and its effects on workers rights and the NHS"

Boris - "Have an election and any new Labour government could do what they wish"


Corbyn- "Bugger off"

[elwaclaret]

Wow, you’ve used the death of 39 people to try and score a point on a messageboard. Wow.

For once in our lives I am in full agreement with you Matin. I think the post misjudged at best. There are a lot more than those who died, who have had their lives changed by today’s discovery. Just imagine being one of the poor sods sent to investigate it, for example. Horrrific.

[Tall Paul]

For someone who doesn't like to repeat themselves, I seem to read a lot of identical (or almost identical) posts from Ringo.

[tiger76]

Boris flondering in PMQ'S,is it any wonder he doesn't want the WA subject to intense scrutiny.

Corbyn rightly questioning the 'special' arrangements for NI,and Boris just responds with insults,and doesn't even attempt to engage with the question.

"One year ago the PM said any custom controls between Great Britain and Northern Ireland would damage fabric of the union," says Mr Corbyn.

"Given that this deal does the damages fabric of the Union - does he still agree with himself," he asks.

"The union is preserved and we are able to go forward together as one UK," replies Mr Johnson.

He then adds: "It is a bit rich to hear from him about his sentimental attachment to the union between Great Britain and Northern Ireland when he has spent most of his political life supporting the IRA and those who would support it through violence."

The SNP with some validity feel Scotland is being ignored,it's actions like this which could ultimately lead to the break-up of the union.

[Imploding Turtle]

Friendly reminder that for 63 YouGov polls in a row now, the UK public has said that voting to leave the EU was the wrong decision.

This isn't the will of the people anymore.

[elwaclaret]

Boris flondering in PMQ'S,is it any wonder he doesn't want the WA subject to intense scrutiny.

Corbyn rightly questioning the 'special' arrangements for NI,and Boris just responds with insults,and doesn't even attempt to engage with the question.

"One year ago the PM said any custom controls between Great Britain and Northern Ireland would damage fabric of the union," says Mr Corbyn.

"Given that this deal does the damages fabric of the Union - does he still agree with himself," he asks.

"The union is preserved and we are able to go forward together as one UK," replies Mr Johnson.

He then adds: "It is a bit rich to hear from him about his sentimental attachment to the union between Great Britain and Northern Ireland when he has spent most of his political life supporting the IRA and those who would support it through violence."

The SNP with some validity feel Scotland is being ignored,it's actions like this which could ultimately lead to the break-up of the union.

I really do not think it matters what Johnson says re-Scotland. The SNP have been courted by Labour and the Liberals over Brexit, to get both to agree another referendum... they just love a referendum. They get to have another vote, waste another few million and can still reject any findings if the don’t like it ... SNP heaven.

[Elizabeth]

To be fair tiger, the SNP want the break up of the union, brexit or no brexit, Boris Johnson or no Boris Johnson

[Lancasterclaret]

Don't understand why Johnston is telling people there are no checks on goods between UK-NI.

Its such a silly lie because its very obviously ********.

if he seriously doesn't believe that is the case, then you have to wonder if he actually understands what he's signed us up for.

Thank goodness we've got more time to scrutinise this properly.

[Imploding Turtle]

Don't understand why Johnston is telling people there are no checks on goods between UK-NI.

Its such a silly lie.

Because it placates those who don't mind that it's a lie. We call them Brexiters.

[Lancasterclaret]

Because it placates those who don't mind that it's a lie. We call them Brexiters.

There is a way to tell the truth and to avoid looking like its a lie.

Johnston isn't even bothering to do even that now.

[CombatClaret]

Don't understand why Johnston is telling people there are no checks on goods between UK-NI.

Its such a silly lie because its very obviously ********.

Also that his deal got through the house.

Barefaced lies from the PM at the dispatch box. Says what ever he thinks his base want to hear knowing full well the press will print it too.

[Imploding Turtle]

There is a way to tell the truth and to avoid looking like its a lie.

Johnston isn't even bothering to do even that now.

Because he doesn't need to. He's got Steve Bannon teaching him that he can win elections by lying to people who want to be lied to. Politics isn't about telling the best version of the truth any more. It's about having enough people loyal to you who will knowingly share your lies.

We used to hate politicians for lying. Now some of us are OK with it, as long as it means they can beat the enemy.

[Tall Paul]

Friendly reminder that for 63 YouGov polls in a row now, the UK public has said that voting to leave the EU was the wrong decision.

This isn't the will of the people anymore.

Yeah but yougov stop asking people if they say they voted leave or for the Brexit Party, Lowbank said so.

And Lancs, please stop calling him Johnston.

[android]

No, why would it?

Interestingly Laura Kuenssberg is asking on the BBC website ‘why did Boris Johnson pause the Brexit Bill?’. You need to tell her it wasn’t him it was parliament.

Crikey Martin, I don't follow your spats with Ringo too closely but I think I see where he is coming from now.

I don't need to tell Laura anything thanks but I imagine she was speculating on if and when the govt will seek to present a new timetable for consideration of the bill now that parliament has put it in limbo. But as I explained to you, as parliament has decided that we cannot leave with a deal on 31 October, we are now in the hands of the EU. What would be the point of setting out a new timetable until we know: a) whether the EU will grant an extension (virtually certain) and b) if so for how long (unknown). If it was a short extension then the bill would have to be timetabled to meet that new deadline. If it's 31 Jan then obviously there should be a general election (although incredibly Labour could potentially back track on that, which would just about top all the incredible Brexity things that have happened and not happened).

But if it makes you happy here you go: John Bercow, who has been completely impartial throughout this process, inexplicably lied (**) to parliament last night when he said that the vote by parliament put the bill into limbo.

** I don't really think he lied but I know you like that word. I just think he must have been mistaken cos his knowledge of parliamentary rules is not quite at your level!

You make some good points Martin but imo your influence would be strengthened if you occasionally admitted when you were wrong.

[RingoMcCartney]

For someone who doesn't like to repeat themselves, I seem to read a lot of identical (or almost identical) posts from Ringo.

If Lancasterclaret would return the favour of answering my question thered be no need to show him up for being so cowardly he repeatedly refuses to answer a genuine and honest question.

Perhaps the question shines a light on the suspicion that he only likes the outcomes of referenda or elections if he agrees with the result?

Till he has the common decency to answer, we'll never know.....

[martin_p]

Crikey Martin, I don't follow your spats with Ringo too closely but I think I see where he is coming from now.

I don't need to tell Laura anything thanks but I imagine she was speculating on if and when the govt will seek to present a new timetable for consideration of the bill now that parliament has put it in limbo. But as I explained to you, as parliament has decided that we cannot leave with a deal on 31 October, we are now in the hands of the EU. What would be the point of setting out a new timetable until we know: a) whether the EU will grant an extension (virtually certain) and b) if so for how long (unknown). If it was a short extension then the bill would have to be timetabled to meet that new deadline. If it's 31 Jan then obviously there should be a general election (although incredibly Labour could potentially back track on that, which would just about top all the incredible Brexity things that have happened and not happened).

But if it makes you happy here you go: John Bercow, who has been completely impartial throughout this process, inexplicably lied (**) to parliament last night when he said that the vote by parliament put the bill into limbo.

** I don't really think he lied but I know you like that word. I just think he must have been mistaken cos his knowledge of parliamentary rules is not quite at your level!

You make some good points Martin but imo your influence would be strengthened if you occasionally admitted when you were wrong.

I’ve admitted I’m wrong twice in the last 24 hours, I don’t have a problem with it.

[Tall Paul]

But if it makes you happy here you go: John Bercow, who has been completely impartial throughout this process, inexplicably lied (**) to parliament last night when he said that the vote by parliament put the bill into limbo.

I'm pretty sure that isn't what Bercow said.

[Devils_Advocate]

Crikey Martin, I don't follow your spats with Ringo too closely but I think I see where he is coming from now.

I don't need to tell Laura anything thanks but I imagine she was speculating on if and when the govt will seek to present a new timetable for consideration of the bill now that parliament has put it in limbo. But as I explained to you, as parliament has decided that we cannot leave with a deal on 31 October, we are now in the hands of the EU. What would be the point of setting out a new timetable until we know: a) whether the EU will grant an extension (virtually certain) and b) if so for how long (unknown). If it was a short extension then the bill would have to be timetabled to meet that new deadline. If it's 31 Jan then obviously there should be a general election (although incredibly Labour could potentially back track on that, which would just about top all the incredible Brexity things that have happened and not happened).

But if it makes you happy here you go: John Bercow, who has been completely impartial throughout this process, inexplicably lied (**) to parliament last night when he said that the vote by parliament put the bill into limbo.

** I don't really think he lied but I know you like that word. I just think he must have been mistaken cos his knowledge of parliamentary rules is not quite at your level!

You make some good points Martin but imo your influence would be strengthened if you occasionally admitted when you were wrong.

Didn't Bercow refer to the deal being in limbo after Johnson and Rees-Mogg confirmed they would not be continuing to debate the bill until they had a response from the EU about the extension.

It was basically Johnsons decision and not Bercow and Parliament and Bercow was just commentating on how things stand following the path Johnson and Rees-Mogg had laid out with business of the house timetable over the coming days

Had Johnson decided to continue debating the bill and progressing forward then Bercow would not have referred to the bill in limbo

[android]

I’ve admitted I’m wrong twice in the last 24 hours, I don’t have a problem with it.

Fair enough - I don't read everything on here. It's just that your last post to me still seemed to suggest that I was the one who had got it wrong.

[RingoMcCartney]

For once in our lives I am in full agreement with you Matin. I think the post misjudged at best. There are a lot more than those who died, who have had their lives changed by today’s discovery. Just imagine being one of the poor sods sent to investigate it, for example. Horrrific.

I stand by what I said.

The background to mine and Marty's argument goes back to october 2017, I remember it as I spent some time in a hospital waiting room , as a close family member was ill and coming on here was a respite from the worry.

Around that time a similar scenario, where scores of people , still alive thank god, had been discovered , after a smuggling operation had been busted.

I said that one of the benefits of leaving the EU could be that ending free movement of People could help in the fight against people trafficking, slave trade and human exploitation.

But Marty with his usual, sneering, attitude decided that on either side of the arguement was myself with just an opinion (which I actually agreed , it was just that) On the other side was Marty with evidence that, leaving
the EU would not help in the fight against people trafficking, slave trade and human exploitation.

I asked him to present his evidence.

He didn't.

This time last year I asked him again. Still no evidence.

So with today's horrors, current and relevant, I asked him again.

You could argue that if we'd left on Boris Johnsons WA , with checks in the irish sea, this tragedy may never have happened. Or at least made life more difficult for the evil **** that make a living out of human exploitation and misery.

But that's just my opinion

[martin_p]

Didn't Bercow refer to the deal being in limbo after Johnson and Rees-Mogg confirmed they would not be continuing to debate the bill until they had a response from the EU about the extension.

It was basically Johnsons decision and not Bercow and Parliament and Bercow was just commentating on how things stand following the path Johnson and Rees-Mogg had laid out with business of the house timetable over the coming days

Had Johnson decided to continue debating the bill and progressing forward then Bercow would not have referred to the bill in limbo

That’s my understanding.

[martin_p]

Fair enough - I don't read everything on here. It's just that your last post to me still seemed to suggest that I was the one who had got it wrong.

As I understand what happened, you are.

[android]

Didn't Bercow refer to the deal being in limbo after Johnson and Rees-Mogg confirmed they would not be continuing to debate the bill until they had a response from the EU about the extension.

It was basically Johnsons decision and not Bercow and Parliament and Bercow was just commentating on how things stand following the path Johnson and Rees-Mogg had laid out with business of the house timetable over the coming days

Had Johnson decided to continue debating the bill and progressing forward then Bercow would not have referred to the bill in limbo

No. Some MPs wanted to continue debating the bill after the vote but Bercow said they could not as the bill was in limbo.

[RingoMcCartney]

Pretty low even for a berk like Ringo

Back in 2017, and again today, was the one who felt that ending free movement of People and increased border controls , wound help prevent what had happened back then and what has happened today.

And I still firmly believe that. We hear about the potentisl economic threats often enough from remoaners. I'm pointing out the potential positives on a humanitarian level.


If Marty wants to bring an abrupt end to what he , wants to pretend is point scoring, then all he, as a remoaner, has to do provide the evidence that it wont.

[android]

No. Some MPs wanted to continue debating the bill after the vote but Bercow said they could not as the bill was in limbo.

The event that put it in limbo was the vote.

[martin_p]

Back in 2017, and again today, was the one who felt that ending free movement of People and increased border controls , wound help prevent what had happened back then and what has happened today.

And I still firmly believe that. We hear about the potentisl economic threats often enough from remoaners. I'm pointing out the potential positives on a humanitarian level.


If Marty wants to bring an abrupt end to what he , wants to pretend is point scoring, then all he, as a remoaner, has to do provide the evidence that it wont.

I’m certainly not going to get into a political discussion about the deaths of 39 people less than 24 hours after they were found. Have some respect.

[Devils_Advocate]

Back in 2017, and again today, was the one who felt that ending free movement of People and increased border controls , wound help prevent what had happened back then and what has happened today.

And I still firmly believe that. We hear about the potentisl economic threats often enough from remoaners. I'm pointing out the potential positives on a humanitarian level.


If Marty wants to bring an abrupt end to what he , wants to pretend is point scoring, then all he, as a remoaner, has to do provide the evidence that it wont.

Give it a rest. You've shown yourself up (again) with your comments on here today. Now go back to chasing your crush around the messageboard whilst desperately trying to get him to notice you

[martin_p]

No. Some MPs wanted to continue debating the bill after the vote but Bercow said they could not as the bill was in limbo.

Because the government put it there! We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Tall Paul]

No. Some MPs wanted to continue debating the bill after the vote but Bercow said they could not as the bill was in limbo.

That was after Johnson said that the government would pause the bill.

[Lancasterclaret]

I'm not ignoring you btw Ringo, i've already answered your question on this thread.

[Imploding Turtle]

Yeah but yougov stop asking people if they say they voted leave or for the Brexit Party, Lowbank said so.

And Lancs, please stop calling him Johnston.

Then Lowbank is wrong.

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/c ... pdf#page=3" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Devils_Advocate]

The event that put it in limbo was the vote.

No it wasn't. The Govt is in control of the houses business and Rees-Mogg had already indicated to Bercow should the timetable bill be defeated he would want to address the house to change the business from discussing the WAB to discussing the Queens Speech. Johnson made the decision straight away that he wanted to put the WAB on hold until a decision was reached by the EU on the extension

At that point Bercow had no choice but to support the Govts decision and advise the bill could no longer be debated. He used the terminology 'in limbo' to describe how it had been left by the vote and the subsequent Govt decision.

Im sorry but you've misunderstood the order of proceedings for this one and who made the critical decisions

[martin_p]

Then Lowbank is wrong.

No, no, no. His Brexit Party mates said so, it’s happened to some of them as well. Must be true!

[HarryPottsDesk]

What are all you stupid right-wing people doing on here? Don't you know there's a thread about hanging?

[martin_p]

What are all you stupid right-wing people doing on here? Don't you know there's a thread about hanging?

That thread makes this one look lighthearted! Interesting to note the strong correlation between wanting to leave the EU and wanting to hang people though.

[android]

No it wasn't. The Govt is in control of the houses business and Rees-Mogg had already indicated to Bercow should the timetable bill be defeated he would want to address the house to change the business from discussing the WAB to discussing the Queens Speech. Johnson made the decision straight away that he wanted to put the WAB on hold until a decision was reached by the EU on the extension

At that point Bercow had no choice but to support the Govts decision and advise the bill could no longer be debated. He used the terminology 'in limbo' to describe how it had been left by the vote and the subsequent Govt decision.

Im sorry but you've misunderstood the order of proceedings for this one and who made the critical decisions

The bill might be in limbo but the debate on how it got there is alive and kicking!

It's pretty academic really, as the substantive point is that parliament obviously pressed pause not Johnson. Having got this far though, I would like to confirm the academic answer if someone can be bothered. Surely the answer is indicated in your own line - it was in limbo because this is "how it had been left by the vote". The government could have chosen to bring it out of limbo tomorrow with a new proposed timetable but surely the event that put it there was the vote and not the government speculating on what it would do in response to a lost vote. In response to a request to carry on debating the bill last night Rees Mogg said he would love to but he could not because the bill was in limbo and Bercow backed him up.

[Imploding Turtle]

That thread makes this one look lighthearted! Interesting to note the strong correlation between wanting to leave the EU and wanting to hang people though.

And wanting to remove the right to a fair trial.

[summitclaret]

The bill could not move to the next stage because the the programme motion fell.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

Honda have moved their timetable forward and are going to stop building petrol/diesel cars in Europe by 2022.

All hybrid models will be built in Japan/Asia.