Today's Brexit vote

[Colburn_Claret]

all of them?

unfortunately, thats not true.

I haven't met anyone who voted leave, who had a stipulation of certain criteria being met.
They voted leave regardless of the consequences. I haven't met any yet who voted leave who has regretted that vote. In the eyes of most Brexiters nothing has changed, but people still want to move the goalposts.

[quoonbeatz]

ah, so its changed to most now has it?

i know people who voted to leave regardless of the consequences. i also know people who voted leave based on issues like immigration and funding the nhs but who also believed we can still have free access to the single market. i also know other people who voted to leave and have changed their mind.

it goes back to my earlier point that the whole problem i have with the referendum was that both sides were pumping out so much bullsh1t, people struggled to make a truly informed decision.

[Lancasterclaret]

PMQs sums it up for me

May has "alway been in favour of a white paper on Brexit"

Despite spending millions to fight two court cases to stop it.

Thats treating every single one of us as complete spackers.

[claretdom]

Spacker is a glorious word that isn't used half as much as it should be

[SammyBoy]

If only it was as simple as that Ringo.

Anyone who compares a game of football to a generation changing decision for 67 million people doesn't really get it.

You might as well debate with your garden fence, Lancaster. I get the feeling Ringo views the entire Brexit debate with the same partisan tribalism that you see at a football match. If it was up to him he'd send the UK negotiating team over to Brussels kitted out in Stone Island and Lacoste singing 'We're the Brexit boys, making all the noise, everywhere we go!'

[RingoMcCartney]

If only it was as simple as that Ringo.

Anyone who compares a game of football to a generation changing decision for 67 million people doesn't really get it.

Some it's a "no" from you is it?

Regardless of the result of the biggest expression of democracy Britain as seen. You refuse to get over it?

Perhaps accepting results is not your thing then eh?

Maybe you should stick to what you're best at then. Disgracefully describing older people who simply want their government to enact the result of a democratic referendum as "geriatric"?

[JohnMcGreal]

PMQs sums it up for me

May has "alway been in favour of a white paper on Brexit"

Despite spending millions to fight two court cases to stop it.

Thats treating every single one of us as complete spackers.

The age of alternative facts is upon us.

[Lancasterclaret]

Like I said Ringo, you don't understand it.

And we are leaving the EU, as that is been decided. I think this is the fifth time I've mentioned this on this thread, but I'll put it out there again.

That doesn't mean IN A DEMOCRACY (thats the first term you should read btw) that I'm not allowed to protest about it, talk about alternatives or wait for a chance to change the decision. Thats all part of living in a democratic society.

And some of the stuff you've put on this forum about immigrants is far, far, far worse than anything I could ever post.

[nil_desperandum]

Some it's a "no" from you is it?

Regardless of the result of the biggest expression of democracy Britain as seen. You refuse to get over it?

Perhaps accepting results is not your thing then eh?

I don't think that reflects Lancaster's position at all.
Maybe you should read his posts. He frequently acknowledges that we are leaving the EU, but unlike a minority he understands the complexities of trying to do so and the serious consequences if we don't / can't get a good deal.
He also understands - like the majority - that the Gina Miller case has virtually nothing to do with Brexit, although Brexit has brought it to the fore.
It's all about the sovereignty of Parliament. Something that Brexit was supposed to be defending.

[Lancasterclaret]

I'm perfectly happy out of the EU, as long as our country

1) Stays together

2) isn't totally economically screwed

1) and 2) don't look too good at the moment, so I'm bound to sound like I want to stay in it.

And, and this is the bit that I've being going on about on this since Day 1, anybody who thinks a very right wing Tory govt with no opposition is going to give a **** about the north then this is going to be one hell of a shock for you.

[RingoMcCartney]

If that is the case Colburn, lets hope that court case in Ireland about Article 50 being reversible goes in our favour then. No deal sounds like a total disaster for everybody, even Brexiteers.

Desparately hoping some back door attempt to scupper the Will of the People doesn't sound like anybody accepting the democratic result to me!?

What effect do you think a brexit that's is reversible will have on the negotiating position of the EU.

You know what it'll be!

To try to agree an appealing deal with the UK (that's your country by the way!) And when it goes back to parliament, the likes of Tiny Tim the white flag waving eurochimp will be rubbing their hands with anti democratic glee, screaming "look look what a terrible deal May has secured let's call the whole thing off"

You know it. I know it. Stop the pretence. Despite your feelings, You don't have the right not to be disappointed!

[Lancasterclaret]

Yes, Ringo its my country, and I like my country the way it is.

That means I get to share my country with other people, who have different ideas and beliefs to me. And i'm fine with that. Are you?

I hope that we have an exit from the EU that suits all parties, enables us to avoid any hassales and we can crack on.

But if we can't, then we need a back up plan.

[ngsobob]

I continue not to accept the referendum as 'the will of the people', do not respect the result nor do I accept it. It was based on lies, xenophobia and ignorance, this latter inevitable as it is far too complex an issue to put to a binary referendum. I'm a political anorak and even I didn't know the half of it. Those interested, and ready to be appalled/dismayed should have a look at Ian Dunt's book 'Brexit: What the Hell Happens Now'. A copy has been sent to every MP. It might be in your library, if they can afford £7.99.

I don't know any Leavers, unless they're too frit to admit it............ It's all madness.

[RingoMcCartney]

Yes, Ringo its my country, and I like my country the way it is.

That means I get to share my country with other people, who have different ideas and beliefs to me. And i'm fine with that. Are you?

I hope that we have an exit from the EU that suits all parties, enables us to avoid any hassales and we can crack on.

But if we can't, then we need a back up plan.

The older brexiteers that were on 5live, had "different ideas and beliefs " to you.


You sneeringly called them "geriatric"


You're obviously not fine with THEM.

[Darthlaw]

I continue not to accept the referendum as 'the will of the people', do not respect the result nor do I accept it. It was based on lies, xenophobia and ignorance, this latter inevitable as it is far too complex an issue to put to a binary referendum. I'm a political anorak and even I didn't know the half of it. Those interested, and ready to be appalled/dismayed should have a look at Ian Dunt's book 'Brexit: What the Hell Happens Now'. A copy has been sent to every MP. It might be in your library, if they can afford £7.99.

I don't know any Leavers, unless they're too frit to admit it............ It's all madness.

Maybe those you know don't want to inform you they are leavers for fear of being called xenophobic or ignorant? Just a thought.

[RingoMcCartney]

I continue not to accept the referendum as 'the will of the people', do not respect the result nor do I accept it. It was based on lies, xenophobia and ignorance, this latter inevitable as it is far too complex an issue to put to a binary referendum. I'm a political anorak and even I didn't know the half of it. Those interested, and ready to be appalled/dismayed should have a look at Ian Dunt's book 'Brexit: What the Hell Happens Now'. A copy has been sent to every MP. It might be in your library, if they can afford £7.99.

I don't know any Leavers, unless they're too frit to admit it............ It's all madness.

Ian Dunt.

As he obviously talks like one.

Is that Cockney Rhyming slang?

[quoonbeatz]

i'm amazed anyone can not know people from both sides given the result was practically a 50-50 split.

[Lancasterclaret]

I'm fine with them

Would it be easier for you if I switched to another language?

I'm not sure how many times I can tell you that we leaving the EU, and that isn't going to be stopped. We'll have to deal with whatever happens.

I'm pretty sure that its something that I'm allowed to be slightly miffed about as well.

[RingoMcCartney]

i'm amazed anyone can not know people from both sides given the result was practically a 50-50 split.

Having more than a million extra votes than the losers is not 50 50 mate

[Darthlaw]

That means I get to share my country with other people, who have different ideas and beliefs to me. And i'm fine with that. Are you?

The above is probably more aimed at Ringo but it does gall me when some Remainer's try and insinuate leave voters somehow wanted to close our borders altogether. Not you Lancaster but a perfect example of this being the post under yours mentioning xenophobia.

Personally, I love the multiculturalism and welcome those from outside the UK to contribute to our society, particularly in areas where have low numbers of skilled workers. Herein lies the issue though - I welcome all those, not those from countries who are members of a particular club. I wan't everyone to be treated the same and the opportunities to be prioritised to those who can contribute the most.

To give an example, good friends of mine moved here from South Africa, started their own business and now employ over 50 people. They nevertheless had to apply and jump through the hoops for two years to finally be allowed to stay permanently.

My best friend's wife, who he met in the states, is an American national and trained teacher. Again, she had to jump through hoops and wait around two years to stay permanently.

Finally, one of my in-laws shacked up with an Italian chef who has been charged numerous times with drugs offences and has spent the last 18 months mostly out of employment. He has never needed any kind of application.

Now, forgetting the stories behind each, why do we welcome in to the UK the last example but the first two have to apply for permission?
It's leveled that Leavers are xenophobic but Remainers endorse a scheme which in its simplest terms says:

Where are you from? - South Africa. Wait in line.
Where are you from? - Italy. Welcome in.
Where are you from? - America. Wait in line.

Surely to treat an individual differently, purely due to their country of origin, is discrimination in its purest form? Surely it should be looked as:

What are you bringing to the UK? - I'm starting a business and bringing employment. Welcome in.
What are you bringing to the UK? - I'm a chef. Wait in line
What are you bringing to the UK? - I'm a qualified teacher and you need teachers. - Welcome in.

Folks can call me xenophobic, racist or whatever they like but control over immigration has to be a red line in the negotiations for me for this very reason.

[Lancasterclaret]

It is and you won't find me arguing against that ever.

All I'll say is that a substantial amount of people in this country don't share your or my beliefs on that.

[Darthlaw]

Granted. There's no doubt that the far right have jumped on the opportunity to exploit an irrational fear of immigrants, the shame lies in the fact the left don't seem to wish to address the simple concerns as above to easily address these fears.

Both sides are equally to blame as far as I'm concerned.

[Lancasterclaret]

As recent events have proved, even if you tell the truth, it just gets buried by what people want to believe.

[RingoMcCartney]

I'm fine with them

Would it be easier for you if I switched to another language?

I'm not sure how many times I can tell you that we leaving the EU, and that isn't going to be stopped. We'll have to deal with whatever happens.

I'm pretty sure that its something that I'm allowed to be slightly miffed about as well.

So you call people your "fine" with "geriatrics" !?
Different!

But please clarify what you hope can be achieved if the spurious case in Dublin (they don't have the balls to bring it in the UK !) means that brexit and , therefore , the result of the biggest expression of democracy Britain as seen.

What do you, in your words , "hope for" and again , I ask you what effect do you think it will have on the negotiating position of the EU. And how will Nick "tuition fees" and "an EU army is a dangerous fantasy" Clegg will react.

So what do you "hope" for and what effect do you hope it has?

[Lancasterclaret]

that "spurious case" is whether it is possible to reverse Article 50.

To do that would require a second referendum (NOT that I'm calling for one btw)

Something that I think we'd both agree should have been sorted long before this. But it needs to be clarified.

The rest?

You seem to be under the impression that the negotiating position of the UK is something to do with me. It isn't.

Having the option to change our minds if the deal we get isn't what we want and would damage the country is a good thing

But it would have to be put to the population again in another referendum.

Which is something that I don't want. I'd rather we got a good deal.

I just think we won't get what we need.

[Burnley Ace]

Some it's a "no" from you is it?

Regardless of the result of the biggest expression of democracy Britain as seen. You refuse to get over it?

Perhaps accepting results is not your thing then eh?

Maybe you should stick to what you're best at then. Disgracefully describing older people who simply want their government to enact the result of a democratic referendum as "geriatric"?

It wasn't the biggest expression of democracy that Nritain has seen. Using a phrase like Will of the People is both childish and misleading and if someone doesn't have the right to be disappointed does that mean that that they can be?

You are just a cliche.

[RingoMcCartney]

Why do you think this case has been brought? For sovereignty or to further scupper, upset and frustrate the process.

I don't think the negotiating position has anything gets to do with you .


You said "hope it goes in our favour"

Please clarify.

And again what effect on the negotiating position of the EU, given that they don't want us to leave and therefore incentivises them to actually negotiaye to a terrible deal, do you think this case will have.

[Lancasterclaret]

I said hope what goes in our favour?

Again, its about clarification of what Article 50 means

Everyone is telling me that the EU have to give us a good deal Ringo. By everyone, I mean everyone who voted for Brexit.

I trust them about as much as I'd trust the Juke to spearhead our premier league strikeforce.

[RingoMcCartney]

If that is the case Colburn, lets hope that court case in Ireland about Article 50 being reversible goes in our favour then. No deal sounds like a total disaster for everybody, even Brexiteers.

If you accept the result why do you "hope that court case in Ireland "" That's attempting to reverse the result, goes in our favour?

Let me just get this straight. You accept somethings going ahead. But hope it's reversed!?

And again what effect will having something that can be reversed have on the negotiating position of the EU?

You're wriggling here Lancaster.

You can't kid a Kidder mate .

Come on

[Imploding Turtle]

She said this yesterday:

""Only parliament can grant rights to the British people and only parliament can take them away." It was a prepared statement, not an off-the-cuff remark. "Supremacy of parliament" means over the king/queen, not over the people it claims to represent.

I would say she has got it the wrong way round. I would say, or at least I would have hoped to say, ""Only the British people can grant rights to parliament and only the British people can take them away."

So you're just going to pretend to not understand that she's talking about the supremacy of parliament over the Prime Minister?

[nil_desperandum]

Having more than a million extra votes than the losers is not 50 50 mate

Correct of course, but when that 1 million votes is recognised and accepted as being less than a 1% swing, then I don't think it's unreasonable to describe it as 50 /50.
Saying that 1 million is a lot in an electorate of around 50 million is like saying that a majority of 10 is tiny when you only have 12 on a jury.
In any case it depends on whether we're talking about June 2016 or now. The electoral roll will have changed by around a million in that time, and whilst no one can say how that would affect any vote held tomorrow, I think it's very important to recognise and accept that here and now the country is split right down the middle on this.
Obviously May and her team won't be able to come up with a deal that satisfies everyone, but the big challenge is to reach some kind of deal that a majority approve of, and at least a significant majority can get along with.

[RingoMcCartney]

Don't want to get into pedantry here but when the result is 48 52 keep saying the country is split, which is a tactic of the bbc, over and over again doesn't reflect the truth or the result.

It's simply down to maths or perhaps more accurately if you accept the result.

Burnley beating Southampton by a single goal was a win by a narrow margin. It wasn't a draw.

The result of the referendum was a win for Leave voters

[SammyBoy]

Don't want to get into pedantry here but when the result is 48 52 keep saying the country is split, which is a tactic of the bbc, over and over again doesn't reflect the truth or the result.

It's simply down to maths or perhaps more accurately if you accept the result.

Burnley beating Southampton by a single goal was a win by a narrow margin. It wasn't a draw.

The result of the referendum was a win for Leave voters

If it's a matter of semantics for you, would you prefer it if the BBC said the country was 'largely divided' on the issue, rather than using the word 'split'?

[Lancasterclaret]

Ah, with you now Ringo, apologies

"By goes in our favour" that is OUR as in the UK. Ie that it is reversible should such a thing happen.

[Paul Waine]

The older brexiteers that were on 5live, had "different ideas and beliefs " to you.


You sneeringly called them "geriatric"


You're obviously not fine with THEM.

Hi RingoMcC,

I'm OK with Lancs' views. He's a good guy. We are a democracy - and we should cherish the expression of a range of views.

Intellectually I'm confident Brexit is the right decision both for the UK and for the rest of the EU. Emotionally, I wish the EU hadn't gone "off track" - adopted the euro (not a clever idea either in economic terms or political terms), trying to force through a "united states of Europe" - and the common agricultural policy has always been a "fraud."

I like people from all nations. I like the idea of many people with many different cultures wanting to come and live with us in the UK. But, we need to have the capacity to welcome the new immigrants, rather than experience squeezes in areas that aren't prepared....

The issues around the Brexit deal, as you know, are all about the negotiation with the EU. UK can only play it's side in the negotiations. As we've heard from some in the EU, there are expressions that whatever deal we agree it has to be "worse than being a member." This is an odd argument in my mind. The deal that is agreed will be about economic/trading relationships. It seems that the EU members don't place any value of membership of the EU beyond economics and trading - otherwise they'd be comfortable that an economics/trading deal which is equal to the existing EU membership deal will still be worse that the deal the UK has as a member, because we will no longer have all the other non-economic/non-trade benefits of membership.

Make sense, or am I losing it?

[Paul Waine]

If it's a matter of semantics for you, would you prefer it if the BBC said the country was 'largely divided' on the issue, rather than using the word 'split'?

Hi Sammy, I'd prefer that the BBC (and maybe others) aren't always keen on highlighting the differences. What unites us is more important that what divides us - and focusing more on the former will help heal the anxieties and "splits" that exist.

[quoonbeatz]

Having more than a million extra votes than the losers is not 50 50 mate

yes, we know you don't understand anything.

[quoonbeatz]

Don't want to get into pedantry here but when the result is 48 52 keep saying the country is split, which is a tactic of the bbc, over and over again doesn't reflect the truth or the result.

that could be one of the daftest statements i've read on here from you, which takes some doing.

its not pedantry you're peddling, ringo, its bellendery.

its simple counting, you don't even need to do any working out - 48 and 52 are both very close to 50. once you've understood that, you might start to be able to provide something of worth to these threads.

[Imploding Turtle]

Don't hold your breath, quoon. He thinks that if you hold opposing political beliefs to him you are a traitor. At least, i'm assuming that's why he called Nick Clegg one. He isn't someone you're going to get rationality from.

Even Blue Labrador posts with more rationality than Ringo.

[nil_desperandum]

Don't want to get into pedantry here but when the result is 48 52 keep saying the country is split, which is a tactic of the bbc, over and over again doesn't reflect the truth or the result.

It's simply down to maths or perhaps more accurately if you accept the result.

Burnley beating Southampton by a single goal was a win by a narrow margin. It wasn't a draw.

The result of the referendum was a win for Leave voters

As an earlier poster pointed out- there's nothing analogous with a football result here.
Fact 1. In an advisory referendum, leave won by getting more votes, and the Brexit process has begun.
Fact 2. By any statistical analysis it was by a narrow margin, but under the system in place it was an outright win and fair result.
Fact 3. Although it was an advisory referendum, it was accepted by just about everyone that Article 50 would be triggered, and nothing has changed.
Fact 4.The High Court Ruling really has no bearing on Brexit, it's to do with due process and preserving our long established democratic system and to protect us from tyranny.
Fact 5. Despite the Leave win, the margin of victory was so small that the country is divided - broadly speaking - down the middle. This doesn't mean that the result changes, it just means that we have a very divided nation at present, and one that could possibly result in the break-up of the UK as we know it.
Fact 6. Surveys and analysis suggest that it is the younger generation, by and large, who are against leaving the EU. This is quite a worrying fact, since they are the ones who will have to live with it, and if you are going to use terms such as "Remoaner", it is unfortunate that we are dismissing their views in such a way.
This doesn't mean of course that we change course, but it should perhaps suggest that the future prospects of our younger generation should be paramount in our negotiations. In other words we should be persuading this generation that Brexit can work, that it will be good for their long term prospects and that there may be transitional help to ensure that they don't miss out on the opportunities that we have taken for granted. This is surely better than the sneering "we won, you lost, live with" attitude that a minority have adopted, and which is currently causing such division.
Fact 6. No one, (despite what they may say), has the slightest idea what sort of deal the UK negotiators will be able to make. Oddly enough it appears to be the Remainers - like myself, who are the most keen to get the best deal possible, even if it delays the process, and it seems to be a small group of "Leavers" who don't really seem to care what sort of deal we get - so long as "we're out!"

There is a long road ahead, and all to play for, but anyone who thinks that we hold all the cards is deluded. This doesn't mean to say that a deal is impossible, but the bottom line is that we can only have the deal that all EU states agree to. We have to hope that there is sufficient will throughout Europe to give us what we want, but it will all come at a price. It is inconceivable that we will get something for nothing. If we get a better deal than that enjoyed by member states then the EU may as well call it a day now.

[Imploding Turtle]

"Yeah, well, you can't even count to seven so why should i listen to your otherwise prefectly good post!" - Ringo, probably.

[RingoMcCartney]

that could be one of the daftest statements i've read on here from you, which takes some doing.

its not pedantry you're peddling, ringo, its bellendery.

its simple counting, you don't even need to do any working out - 48 and 52 are both very close to 50. once you've understood that, you might start to be able to provide something of worth to these threads.

48 and 52 are very close to 50.!!!

How desparate do you sound.

Hahaha


And you accuse me of bellendery!?

At least bellends are useful mate! Where as......

Listen.

I'll try my best with you. Having over 1 million more votes than the losers is NOT 50 50. Can you count!! Haha

Do you believe that the result on Sunday at the Emirates was a score draw where arsenal got more goals!?

[RingoMcCartney]

Hi RingoMcC,

I'm OK with Lancs' views. He's a good guy. We are a democracy - and we should cherish the expression of a range of views.

Intellectually I'm confident Brexit is the right decision both for the UK and for the rest of the EU. Emotionally, I wish the EU hadn't gone "off track" - adopted the euro (not a clever idea either in economic terms or political terms), trying to force through a "united states of Europe" - and the common agricultural policy has always been a "fraud."

I like people from all nations. I like the idea of many people with many different cultures wanting to come and live with us in the UK. But, we need to have the capacity to welcome the new immigrants, rather than experience squeezes in areas that aren't prepared....

The issues around the Brexit deal, as you know, are all about the negotiation with the EU. UK can only play it's side in the negotiations. As we've heard from some in the EU, there are expressions that whatever deal we agree it has to be "worse than being a member." This is an odd argument in my mind. The deal that is agreed will be about economic/trading relationships. It seems that the EU members don't place any value of membership of the EU beyond economics and trading - otherwise they'd be comfortable that an economics/trading deal which is equal to the existing EU membership deal will still be worse that the deal the UK has as a member, because we will no longer have all the other non-economic/non-trade benefits of membership.

Make sense, or am I losing it?

When someone claims to accept the result then why do they hope a court case that can reverse the result, goes "our way"?

It's contradictory....

[RingoMcCartney]

yes, we know you don't understand anything.

You don't understand that 48 and 52 are not the number 50!!!

Come on mate you're not showering yourself on intellectual glory here!

I'd try and help but you appear to be suffering from Dyscalculia!?

Have you sought professional one to one help or coaching?

[Lancasterclaret]

When someone claims to accept the result then why do they hope a court case that can reverse the result, goes "our way"?

Ringo, I'm telling you again. You don't understand how this works. You are just rattling off whatever comes into your head.

It does not reverse the result, it is (as far as I know) a legal check to see if you can reverse Article 50 if circumstances change*

*ie if the deal from Europe is terrible and we'd rather stay in on reflection**

**hypothetically!

[Paul Waine]

When someone claims to accept the result then why do they hope a court case that can reverse the result, goes "our way"?

It's contradictory....

Was that me? Sorry if it was.

As posted above, I believe Brexit was the right decision by the UK electorate (I wish we'd been asked about other key EU related decisions a lot earlier. UK and EU wouldn't be where we are today if that had been the case).

I'm not bothered by the court case. It's good that High Court and Supreme Court had considered the situation according to British constitution. (I'm not keen that it took a wealthy person to initiate the court case). The outcome doesn't create any insurmountable situations for UK gov't (I hope the Lords does the sensible thing, though personally I'd abolish the Lords and replace with a new second chamber: "The House of Knowledgeable Persons." No more "retirement home" for "failed" politicians and "political donors and other friends of politicians").

Again, as posted above, I hope the court case is a reminder to our MPs (legislature) and the executive to be more thoughtful when they draw up laws - including the law for the referendum. The court case would have been redundant if they'd done their jobs properly in the first place - which I think requires them to think a bit more deeply about the laws they enact.

I believe Tim Farron has got confused by wanting a 2nd referendum - or as he has put it "a first referendum on the exit deal." What if TM can't negotiate an exit deal that everyone likes? It will be because the EU hasn't agreed that deal. They are hardly going to say "welcome back" with all that "water under the bridge" so to speak.

Everyone should now get on the same side and pull together for the best deal for the UK - and the best deal for EU with the UK. No one wins with all this division and the rest.

[Paul Waine]

Ringo, I'm telling you again. You don't understand how this works. You are just rattling off whatever comes into your head.

It does not reverse the result, it is (as far as I know) a legal check to see if you can reverse Article 50 if circumstances change*

*ie if the deal from Europe is terrible and we'd rather stay in on reflection**

**hypothetically!

What, is there a new court case I've missed?

Are we not still discussing Gina Miller's court case and gov't appeal of this to Supreme Court?

I must find time to read the Supreme Court judgement.

Have we already posted a link?

[Lancasterclaret]

Yeah, there is a court case in Dublin about the possibility of reversing Article 50*

*but only legally ie is it possible to stop the process of leaving if there is a change of mind.

[Spijed]

One thing that seems to have been swept under the carpet by those who want to leave the EU is that we shouldn't be made to lay all our cards on the table in case it damages possible negotiations.

Seems that's all rubbish now we have the white paper and won't have any effect on any trade deals.

[Imploding Turtle]

Yeah, there is a court case in Dublin about the possibility of reversing Article 50*

*but only legally ie is it possible to stop the process of leaving if there is a change of mind.

I bet if it was the other way around and the judges rules in favour of the government then Ringo's ilk would be telling everyone else to get over it.