CHEMNITZ, Germany (Reuters) - With Brexit less than two months away, and no divorce deal in sight, some German companies are taking matters into their own hands to limit any damage to their businesses.
The small and mid-sized firms - albeit a small minority - say they can’t wait any longer to see what agreement, if any, will emerge between London and Brussels. They are taking steps to protect themselves should a chaotic British withdrawal lead to traffic tailbacks, heavier customs bureaucracy and rising delivery costs after March 29, the planned break-up date.
Kieselstein International, a maker of metalworking machines, has for example successfully introduced a clause into a contract to deliver goods to British Steel that puts the onus on the UK firm to bear the costs of any extra red tape linked to Brexit.
To be fair, the opposition's no help. If she'd been facing a Foot, Healy, Blair or Cook she'd have been in a lot more trouble. Or even a Jeremy Thorpe or Charlie Kennedy.
May is following in the footsteps of her recent predecessors as Tory leader - the interests of the party are paramount and everything else, including the country, are secondary. The Tories have not really had a truly national leader since Thatcher, though Major tried his best. But his successors have been spineless mediocrities to a man, or woman in this case.
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
Owen Paterson, Oct 11 2015, "Only a madman would leave the market". (I'd concede not during the campaign itself, but instructive how far we've come)
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
Feeling a little silly now you have seen those videos Philip Thompson? I think you were the one asleep mate. The people that advocated Leave have lied and lied and lied again to the British people, not just before the referendum but after it.
I think it’s worse than that. All you say is true. But I think some of the Brexiteers always wanted a No Deal exit but deliberately lied about wanting a deal, easiest trade deal in history, blah blah and having won the referendum have since then done everything possible to achieve what they wanted all along. There were Leninists in the Leave campaign, even if they didn’t show their hand at the time.
I don't think that is right, actually. I'm very sure that they believed the 'easiest trade deal in history' garbage.
I am inclined to agree with Cyclefree. I think the hardliners knew that their version of Brexit could not win a referendum so I think there was a deliberate strategy by the No Dealers to keep quiet and pretend to be all things to all people until the vote was won and out of the way.
Having done that the strategy became to wreck everything else until a no deal Brexit happened by default. I think that has been the plan all along. There was never a realistic deal that Mogg and co wouldn't have found a reason to oppose. If the backstop is miraculously removed they will find something else to oppose.
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
Dan Hannon said we would stay in the single market, didnt he? I thought it was daft for May to make her red lines because it excludes immediately the easiest and smoothest move to leaving the EU. And said so here.
The only reason ever given as to why the UK should sign up to the backstop is because we are weak and more desperate than they are. To refuse that isn't perfidiousness, it is brave.
That's not true. People (who you don't agree with) have argued that we should sign up to the backstop (or the Northern Ireland Peace Agreement Guarantee as they've suggested it should be known) so that we have a guarantee that the EU will not use the threat of a hard border in Northern Ireland to force us to sign a trade deal that we don't want.
I don't see it as a concession on our part. It's in what I perceive as our national interest too.
And if there is no deal due to the unacceptability of the backstop, then how does that protect the Good Friday Agreement?
Don't forget in the no deal scenario there is of course no backstop.
I'm arguing that the backstop is in our interests which you said no-one was. So your question doesn't arise.
So in a discussion about Brexit, the shadow Brexit secretary is excluded.
If Keir Starmer had any self-respect he’d resign this afternoon.
Tells you all you need to know about how Corbyn will govern if, God forbid, he ever becomes PM.
It's Corbyn's Labour May can deal with. As much as I respect Starmer, more division is not what we need right now. If anything he should back Corbyn and get the deal from May as advantageous to Labour as possible (which is softer than May, so at least in the right direction from his perspective).
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
Dan Hannon said we would stay in the single market, didnt he? I thought it was daft for May to make her red lines because it excludes immediately the easiest and smoothest move to leaving the EU. And said so here.
No he didn't that's a lie spread by dishonest Remainers.
If you honestly think he did say it during the referendum then please provide a date and source to when he said it.
I think the hardliners knew that their version of Brexit could not win a referendum so I think there was a deliberate strategy by the No Dealers to keep quiet and pretend to be all things to all people until the vote was won and out of the way.
Dan Hannan followed the same plan.
The day after the vote he condemned the focus on immigration...
To be fair, the opposition's no help. If she'd been facing a Foot, Healy, Blair or Cook she'd have been in a lot more trouble. Or even a Jeremy Thorpe or Charlie Kennedy.
May is following in the footsteps of her recent predecessors as Tory leader - the interests of the party are paramount and everything else, including the country, are secondary. The Tories have not really had a truly national leader since Thatcher, though Major tried his best. But his successors have been spineless mediocrities to a man, or woman in this case.
Two fucking years we've been doing this and he still hasn't realised that this *isn't* the trade negotiations.
The Irish border is a trade issue.
The issue would not have arisen had the Withdrawal Agreement been negotiated in parallel with the Free Trade Deal.
That option was not available.
It's not legally possible. The EU doesn't have legal authority to negotiate an FTA with a member state, only with a third country. The UK has to leave first, legally, politically and practically.
That's why Article 50 gives the EU a two year window for the EU to trap the departing state in an impotent WA first. Departing member states would be in too powerful a position otherwise. Article 50 empowers the EU to first weaken the departing state via the WA process, and then only once they're trapped in a WA and legally bound to align with the EU's every demand will EU countenance the start of trade talks, having an enormous and insurmountable inbuilt advantage to shaft the departing state even harder.
The people who drafted Article 50 were geniuses.
No. They weren't explicit enough in ruling out unilateral revocation, it seems.
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
Owen Paterson, Oct 11 2015, "Only a madman would leave the market". (I'd concede not during the campaign itself, but instructive how far we've come)
Ah, yet another out-of-context quote. Notice the word “market” not being prefixed with “single” there. I’ve seen some occasions online where this quote has been deliberately modified to include the word single without the telling square brackets to make clear it’s a clarifier — which is disingenuous misinformation. In the interview, he was specifically talking about “leaving the market” as in rejecting all trade with members of the EU. Nobody — at all — was suggesting this be the case. The full interview can be found here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhb-DLqelN8 and after the quote mentioned, he specifically says we will “carry on trading with the market” — not carry on trading AS MEMBERS of the market — and that we will come to a “trading arrangement”. This is only seconds after the quote is mentioned.
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
Owen Paterson, Oct 11 2015, "Only a madman would leave the market". (I'd concede not during the campaign itself, but instructive how far we've come)
Ah, yet another out-of-context quote. Notice the word “market” not being prefixed with “single” there. I’ve seen some occasions online where this quote has been deliberately modified to include the word single without the telling square brackets to make clear it’s a clarifier — which is disingenuous misinformation. In the interview, he was specifically talking about “leaving the market” as in rejecting all trade with members of the EU. Nobody — at all — was suggesting this be the case. The full interview can be found here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhb-DLqelN8 and after the quote mentioned, he specifically says we will “carry on trading with the market” — not carry on trading AS MEMBERS of the market — and that we will come to a “trading arrangement”. This is only seconds after the quote is mentioned.
This one explicit calls for membership of the EEA and was after the Conservatives won a majority so was in the context of the upcoming referendum.
No that video is a pack of lies. I said specifically provide dates for when it was said. That dishonest video is full of quotes taken out of context to twist their meaning and NOT ONE of which was filmed during the referendum.
Try again, provide a name and date for ANYONE who said DURING the referendum we would remain in the Single Market afterwards.
So in a discussion about Brexit, the shadow Brexit secretary is excluded.
If Keir Starmer had any self-respect he’d resign this afternoon.
Tells you all you need to know about how Corbyn will govern if, God forbid, he ever becomes PM.
He'll govern depressingly similar to the current one. It's fine to storm ahead if you are a giant in a cabinet of pygmies like Thatcher or Blair (with Brown). But both him and her are not the strongest in their party.
No that video is a pack of lies. I said specifically provide dates for when it was said. That dishonest video is full of quotes taken out of context to twist their meaning and NOT ONE of which was filmed during the referendum.
Try again, provide a name and date for ANYONE who said DURING the referendum we would remain in the Single Market afterwards.
No that video is a pack of lies. I said specifically provide dates for when it was said. That dishonest video is full of quotes taken out of context to twist their meaning and NOT ONE of which was filmed during the referendum.
Try again, provide a name and date for ANYONE who said DURING the referendum we would remain in the Single Market afterwards.
You are delusional. Hannon has written an article for ConHome where he said there is no mandate for a hard Brexit as the vote was so close and has called for an EEA type deal. Look it up yourself for the date, but I expect you don't want to find evidence that you have been lied to by the high priests of your religion. You are like someone from Waco, or the Moonies.
So in a discussion about Brexit, the shadow Brexit secretary is excluded.
If Keir Starmer had any self-respect he’d resign this afternoon.
Tells you all you need to know about how Corbyn will govern if, God forbid, he ever becomes PM.
He'll govern depressingly similar to the current one. It's fine to storm ahead if you are a giant in a cabinet of pygmies like Thatcher or Blair (with Brown). But both him and her are not the strongest in their party.
Thatcher and Blair actually had pretty strong cabinets, particularly to begin with.
The current Tory cabinet is not particularly strong but there aren't too many lightweights even if there aren't too many heavyweights either. By contrast, Starmer is the *only* member of Labour's shadow cabinet I would have any confidence in not buggering up a department (granted that I don't know much about the more minor members).
To be fair, the opposition's no help. If she'd been facing a Foot, Healy, Blair or Cook she'd have been in a lot more trouble. Or even a Jeremy Thorpe or Charlie Kennedy.
May is following in the footsteps of her recent predecessors as Tory leader - the interests of the party are paramount and everything else, including the country, are secondary. The Tories have not really had a truly national leader since Thatcher, though Major tried his best. But his successors have been spineless mediocrities to a man, or woman in this case.
An entirety objective Labour voter writes.
Well, I'm not a dyed in the wool Labour voter and I rather agree. Whatever you say about Thatcher she had a vision (or got one from Keith Joseph). Cameron 'thought he'd be rather good at it' (being PM). The LibDems, as it turned out, were unlucky in having a choice between Clegg (too nice for his own good) and Huhne (dodgy backstory) as leadership contenders before the Coalition years.
No that video is a pack of lies. I said specifically provide dates for when it was said. That dishonest video is full of quotes taken out of context to twist their meaning and NOT ONE of which was filmed during the referendum.
Try again, provide a name and date for ANYONE who said DURING the referendum we would remain in the Single Market afterwards.
Everyone lauding the fact that the Cons Party has “come together” behind the deal as May must now go back to the EU to renegotiate the backstop.
WTAF??? The deal is and only ever was the backstop.
Depressing isn't it? And orgasmic headlines from the usual sources. As if successfully whipping your own Party to oppose your own negotiation to buy a couple of weeks of unity is a stroke of political genius.
No that video is a pack of lies. I said specifically provide dates for when it was said. That dishonest video is full of quotes taken out of context to twist their meaning and NOT ONE of which was filmed during the referendum.
Try again, provide a name and date for ANYONE who said DURING the referendum we would remain in the Single Market afterwards.
A pack of lies? Are these actors then? You really are a nut job. You could get a job working for North Korea. Did you used to work for Saddam? You are Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf.
No that video is a pack of lies. I said specifically provide dates for when it was said. That dishonest video is full of quotes taken out of context to twist their meaning and NOT ONE of which was filmed during the referendum.
Try again, provide a name and date for ANYONE who said DURING the referendum we would remain in the Single Market afterwards.
A pack of lies? Are these actors then? You really are a nut job. You could get a job working for North Korea. Did you used to work for Saddam? You are Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf.
Any other leavers think these numpties and liars didn't say these things?
May is seeking to maximise her chances of eventually getting her deal through parliament. For now that means just keeping it alive. Why would we expect her to do otherwise? She's worked for years on this deal and she knows that no better one is available or ever will be. Doing her utmost to get it through - that's acting in the national interest right there that is.
Everyone lauding the fact that the Cons Party has “come together” behind the deal as May must now go back to the EU to renegotiate the backstop.
WTAF??? The deal is and only ever was the backstop.
Depressing isn't it? And orgasmic headlines from the usual sources. As if successfully whipping your own Party to oppose your own negotiation to buy a couple of weeks of unity is a stroke of political genius.
It is the living epitome of fog in channel continent cut off.
No that video is a pack of lies. I said specifically provide dates for when it was said. That dishonest video is full of quotes taken out of context to twist their meaning and NOT ONE of which was filmed during the referendum.
Try again, provide a name and date for ANYONE who said DURING the referendum we would remain in the Single Market afterwards.
....a source of potential danger and conflict. They are testing Rockets (last week) and more, and are coming very close to the edge. There economy is now crashing, which is the only thing holding them back. Be careful of Iran. Perhaps Intelligence should go back to school!
No intention of engaging with that collection of Lexit No Dealers.
Corbyn thinks "No deal" has been ruled out with the Spelman amendment !
Well we know that Corbyn is thick.
I may be being unfair on Nick Brown. Is he a Lexiteer? Often Whips keep opinions very close to their chest, but I imagine he's not, as a good ole Gordon Brown lad.
No that video is a pack of lies. I said specifically provide dates for when it was said. That dishonest video is full of quotes taken out of context to twist their meaning and NOT ONE of which was filmed during the referendum.
Try again, provide a name and date for ANYONE who said DURING the referendum we would remain in the Single Market afterwards.
A pack of lies? Are these actors then? You really are a nut job. You could get a job working for North Korea. Did you used to work for Saddam? You are Mohammed Saeed al-Sahhaf.
If it's not a pack of lies please provide a source to the original unadulterated quotes in full. Including dates.
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
"Take it from a Vote Leave staffer - there is no mandate to quit the single market" https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/08/take-it-vote-leave-staffer-there-no-mandate-quit-single-market Around early May 2016, the Remain campaign started to go hard on the fact that leaving would mean leaving the single market. But there was absolutely no official scope for them to say this at all. It was perhaps their most deceptive lie during the entire campaign. James McGrory and his colleagues on Cannon Street sat in their office and forced this issue on to the agenda. It was something they conjured up out of thin air because it aided one of their primary arguments for remaining: Leave doesn't have a plan for Brexit, it'll therefore be a step into the dark (the horrendous catchphrases are piling back into my brain as I type).
Some Leavers, it is true, did want an exit from the single market. But they are not as numerous as certain people would have you believe. And if we took all of these people into a room, and showed them how the EEA Agreement can ease their concerns, many would be quickly converted. To them Brexit may mean a single market exit, but to me, Brexit means leaving the European Union and is part of a much bigger plan, both for democracy and the future of European trade. ...
Looking at the speeches by Barnier and Junker. How are the seating arrangements sorted out in the European Parliament. Are they assigned in advance or is it just turn up and grab a seat? Is it pure luck that Farage ends up sat right next to Barnier at these events?
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
EEA: putting the power back where we can see it http://peterjnorth.blogspot.com/2017/08/eea-putting-power-back-where-we-can-see.html That is where the EEA option is the superior model. It really is about "taking back control". When the EU brings a new piece of legislation into being (likely adopted global standards), it is not automatically adopted by Norway. There is a constitutional process whereby the Norwegian parliament debates and decides whether or not to adopt a measure. We know that there is a penalty if they do not adhere to single market rules, but ultimately it is their decision to consider the balance of trade-offs according to their own strategic trade goals and domestic values.
Mr. P, if it's the only agreement possible that also makes it the worst, as well as the best.
It's curious the EU is able to open the negotiations again if we agree to permanent customs union, but no change whatsoever in any way is possible to a backstop they assert they never want to come into force.
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
"Take it from a Vote Leave staffer - there is no mandate to quit the single market" https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/08/take-it-vote-leave-staffer-there-no-mandate-quit-single-market Around early May 2016, the Remain campaign started to go hard on the fact that leaving would mean leaving the single market. But there was absolutely no official scope for them to say this at all. It was perhaps their most deceptive lie during the entire campaign. James McGrory and his colleagues on Cannon Street sat in their office and forced this issue on to the agenda. It was something they conjured up out of thin air because it aided one of their primary arguments for remaining: Leave doesn't have a plan for Brexit, it'll therefore be a step into the dark (the horrendous catchphrases are piling back into my brain as I type).
Some Leavers, it is true, did want an exit from the single market. But they are not as numerous as certain people would have you believe. And if we took all of these people into a room, and showed them how the EEA Agreement can ease their concerns, many would be quickly converted. To them Brexit may mean a single market exit, but to me, Brexit means leaving the European Union and is part of a much bigger plan, both for democracy and the future of European trade. ...
That's typical of the Referendum 'discussions'; confused, no-one knew what anyone meant.
"In particular, Richard Neal, the Massachusetts Congressman who was centrally involved in the Good Friday Agreement and is the co-chairman of the Friends of Ireland caucus on Capitol Hill, has recently been appointed as head of the powerful Ways and Means committee. This committee will play a key role in overseeing any future trade agreement between Britain and the United States after Britain leaves the European Union."
Mr. P, if it's the only agreement possible that also makes it the worst, as well as the best.
It's curious the EU is able to open the negotiations again if we agree to permanent customs union, but no change whatsoever in any way is possible to a backstop they assert they never want to come into force.
Precisely it is dishonest. Repeating a lie doesn't make it true.
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
June 26 2016... https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-boris-idUKKCN0ZC13W LONDON (Reuters) - Britain will continue to have access to the European Union’s single market despite voting to leave the bloc, leading Brexit campaigner and favorite to become the country’s next prime minister Boris Johnson said in a newspaper article on Sunday...
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
EEA: putting the power back where we can see it http://peterjnorth.blogspot.com/2017/08/eea-putting-power-back-where-we-can-see.html That is where the EEA option is the superior model. It really is about "taking back control". When the EU brings a new piece of legislation into being (likely adopted global standards), it is not automatically adopted by Norway. There is a constitutional process whereby the Norwegian parliament debates and decides whether or not to adopt a measure. We know that there is a penalty if they do not adhere to single market rules, but ultimately it is their decision to consider the balance of trade-offs according to their own strategic trade goals and domestic values.
Yep. This idea that there was no one campaigning for an EEA Brexit is ridiculous. It was something that many of us campaigned on from the very start. Richard and Peter North have been cheerleaders for it for many years and I still think they are absolutely right. Dan Hannan regularly claimed it was the best solution. To be fair the rest less so because of immigration but to say it was not an option that was being promote strongly is rewriting history.
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
June 26 2016... https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-boris-idUKKCN0ZC13W LONDON (Reuters) - Britain will continue to have access to the European Union’s single market despite voting to leave the bloc, leading Brexit campaigner and favorite to become the country’s next prime minister Boris Johnson said in a newspaper article on Sunday...
Well done. If you read the link he explicitly says free movement will end (thus leaving the Single Market) and that we will come to a new free trade arrangement.
Mr. P, there was a vote yesterday to renegotiate the backstop.
Fair enough if they don't want to, but the intention is clear. A specific solution could include a long term time limit, a unilateral but lengthy notice period, or something else.
It's disingenuous of the EU to pretend the UK hasn't asked for something.
Of course, it's entirely understandable they're frustrated by May's cackhanded and shortsighted ineptitude.
Osborne spent five years in a government and several years before that in an opposition party that frequently made its disdain for the EU and EU immigrants absolutely plain. His crocodile tears now are a bit puke-making to be honest.
No that video is a pack of lies. I said specifically provide dates for when it was said. That dishonest video is full of quotes taken out of context to twist their meaning and NOT ONE of which was filmed during the referendum.
Try again, provide a name and date for ANYONE who said DURING the referendum we would remain in the Single Market afterwards.
No the leave argument used to be far more honest ten years or so ago when focusing on sovereignty and democracy in the face of EU integration, whilst conceding the hit in pocket. Fact is the arguments for joining in the seventies are alive and well today, the old reasons for not being in having grown in recent decades, but in 2016 the leave argument was written by unicorns with a magic money tree, and the suspicion is the lies told got them narrowly over the line.
Osborne spent five years in a government and several years before that in an opposition party that frequently made its disdain for the EU and EU immigrants absolutely plain. His crocodile tears now are a bit puke-making to be honest.
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
June 26 2016... https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-boris-idUKKCN0ZC13W LONDON (Reuters) - Britain will continue to have access to the European Union’s single market despite voting to leave the bloc, leading Brexit campaigner and favorite to become the country’s next prime minister Boris Johnson said in a newspaper article on Sunday...
Well done. If you read the link he explicitly says free movement will end (thus leaving the Single Market) and that we will come to a new free trade arrangement.
It would be idiotic to switch up the negotiating team at the stage. You can only deploy someone who’s been involved but not ‘in the room’ at this point
Only in the mind of headbangers like you. So your's is the bovine excrement. Norway and Switzerland are not "in" the EU. Such an arrangement would easily meet the vagueness of the referendum question. Nut jobs, and Mrs May in her haste to please them, have tried to say that the referendum said things it did not. There was no supplementary question about the single market or CU. It was Leave or Remain, in the EU. That was all. Perhaps you should advocate another referendum to see if people also want out of the other things that the liars and charlatans have said that the question included.
Only if you slept through the referendum.
All parties in the referendum (Leavers and Remainers) unanimously made the argument that we would leave the Single Market if we left the EU. Remainers said we should remain in the EU to stay in the Single Market as Leaving meant leaving the SM. Leavers said we should leave the EU to control immigration and our laws which meant leaving the SM. The debate was had.
Name a single person and a single day from either side of the debate during the referendum who said otherwise. Please include a date.
"Take it from a Vote Leave staffer - there is no mandate to quit the single market" https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/08/take-it-vote-leave-staffer-there-no-mandate-quit-single-market Around early May 2016, the Remain campaign started to go hard on the fact that leaving would mean leaving the single market. But there was absolutely no official scope for them to say this at all. It was perhaps their most deceptive lie during the entire campaign. James McGrory and his colleagues on Cannon Street sat in their office and forced this issue on to the agenda. It was something they conjured up out of thin air because it aided one of their primary arguments for remaining: Leave doesn't have a plan for Brexit, it'll therefore be a step into the dark (the horrendous catchphrases are piling back into my brain as I type).
Some Leavers, it is true, did want an exit from the single market. But they are not as numerous as certain people would have you believe. And if we took all of these people into a room, and showed them how the EEA Agreement can ease their concerns, many would be quickly converted. To them Brexit may mean a single market exit, but to me, Brexit means leaving the European Union and is part of a much bigger plan, both for democracy and the future of European trade. ...
That's typical of the Referendum 'discussions'; confused, no-one knew what anyone meant.
No, it's a Vote Leave staffer arguing bluntly that Remain lied when they said leaving would mean leaving the single market.
Osborne spent five years in a government and several years before that in an opposition party that frequently made its disdain for the EU and EU immigrants absolutely plain. His crocodile tears now are a bit puke-making to be honest.
Osborne spent five years in a government and several years before that in an opposition party that frequently made its disdain for the EU and EU immigrants absolutely plain. His crocodile tears now are a bit puke-making to be honest.
Osborne spent five years in a government and several years before that in an opposition party that frequently made its disdain for the EU and EU immigrants absolutely plain. His crocodile tears now are a bit puke-making to be honest.
Comments
https://twitter.com/bbclaurak/status/1090626368923201536
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5UhCDIwvUc
"I've delayed the vote because I'm going to get heavily defeated. We need to renegotiate the backstop."
"No"
January:
"I've just been heavily defeated. We need to renegotiate the backstop."
"No"
February:
"Parliament has voted that we need to renegotiate the backstop."
"Of course - would you like a chocolate hobnob with your tea?"
NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!!!!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhb-DLqelN8&feature=youtu.be&t=86
If Keir Starmer had any self-respect he’d resign this afternoon.
Tells you all you need to know about how Corbyn will govern if, God forbid, he ever becomes PM.
Having done that the strategy became to wreck everything else until a no deal Brexit happened by default. I think that has been the plan all along. There was never a realistic deal that Mogg and co wouldn't have found a reason to oppose. If the backstop is miraculously removed they will find something else to oppose.
Since all I am likely to get is ad-hom attacks for pointing it out, I will let the Leavers enjoy their tussle with reality and bow out for a while.
If you honestly think he did say it during the referendum then please provide a date and source to when he said it.
The day after the vote he condemned the focus on immigration...
https://medium.com/@jamesforward/a-rebuttal-to-open-britain-vote-leave-never-promised-to-remain-in-the-single-market-85a0778c75a9
Ah, yet another out-of-context quote. Notice the word “market” not being prefixed with “single” there. I’ve seen some occasions online where this quote has been deliberately modified to include the word single without the telling square brackets to make clear it’s a clarifier — which is disingenuous misinformation. In the interview, he was specifically talking about “leaving the market” as in rejecting all trade with members of the EU. Nobody — at all — was suggesting this be the case. The full interview can be found here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhb-DLqelN8 and after the quote mentioned, he specifically says we will “carry on trading with the market” — not carry on trading AS MEMBERS of the market — and that we will come to a “trading arrangement”. This is only seconds after the quote is mentioned.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzykce4oxII
https://youtu.be/cbQBIbP4XZg
Try again, provide a name and date for ANYONE who said DURING the referendum we would remain in the Single Market afterwards.
Everyone lauding the fact that the Cons Party has “come together” behind the deal as May must now go back to the EU to renegotiate the backstop.
WTAF??? The deal is and only ever was the backstop.
The current Tory cabinet is not particularly strong but there aren't too many lightweights even if there aren't too many heavyweights either. By contrast, Starmer is the *only* member of Labour's shadow cabinet I would have any confidence in not buggering up a department (granted that I don't know much about the more minor members).
So that answers the Starmer question it appears.
No intention of engaging with that collection of Lexit No Dealers.
https://twitter.com/BBCkatyaadler/status/1090632496243490823
Those words seem very familiar to me. Somebody else kept saying over and over again that "my deal is the best deal and only deal possible".
Now who was it? Can't quite put my finger on it... No, it's gone.
Or his buddy in North Korea
People are treating this deal like it's some religious artifact, the divine and immutable word of God.
It's a political agreement. Politics can change.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2017/08/take-it-vote-leave-staffer-there-no-mandate-quit-single-market
Around early May 2016, the Remain campaign started to go hard on the fact that leaving would mean leaving the single market. But there was absolutely no official scope for them to say this at all. It was perhaps their most deceptive lie during the entire campaign. James McGrory and his colleagues on Cannon Street sat in their office and forced this issue on to the agenda. It was something they conjured up out of thin air because it aided one of their primary arguments for remaining: Leave doesn't have a plan for Brexit, it'll therefore be a step into the dark (the horrendous catchphrases are piling back into my brain as I type).
Some Leavers, it is true, did want an exit from the single market. But they are not as numerous as certain people would have you believe. And if we took all of these people into a room, and showed them how the EEA Agreement can ease their concerns, many would be quickly converted. To them Brexit may mean a single market exit, but to me, Brexit means leaving the European Union and is part of a much bigger plan, both for democracy and the future of European trade.
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzykce4oxII
Looking at the speeches by Barnier and Junker. How are the seating arrangements sorted out in the European Parliament. Are they assigned in advance or is it just turn up and grab a seat? Is it pure luck that Farage ends up sat right next to Barnier at these events?
It is only NI and the backstop that is real life.
http://peterjnorth.blogspot.com/2017/08/eea-putting-power-back-where-we-can-see.html
That is where the EEA option is the superior model. It really is about "taking back control". When the EU brings a new piece of legislation into being (likely adopted global standards), it is not automatically adopted by Norway. There is a constitutional process whereby the Norwegian parliament debates and decides whether or not to adopt a measure. We know that there is a penalty if they do not adhere to single market rules, but ultimately it is their decision to consider the balance of trade-offs according to their own strategic trade goals and domestic values.
I don't think May should waste a Eurostar ticket heading out there.
It's curious the EU is able to open the negotiations again if we agree to permanent customs union, but no change whatsoever in any way is possible to a backstop they assert they never want to come into force.
"In particular, Richard Neal, the Massachusetts Congressman who was centrally involved in the Good Friday Agreement and is the co-chairman of the Friends of Ireland caucus on Capitol Hill, has recently been appointed as head of the powerful Ways and Means committee. This committee will play a key role in overseeing any future trade agreement between Britain and the United States after Britain leaves the European Union."
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/resolution-opposing-hard-irish-border-introduced-in-us-congress-1.3775295
https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-britain-eu-boris-idUKKCN0ZC13W
LONDON (Reuters) - Britain will continue to have access to the European Union’s single market despite voting to leave the bloc, leading Brexit campaigner and favorite to become the country’s next prime minister Boris Johnson said in a newspaper article on Sunday...
Fair enough if they don't want to, but the intention is clear. A specific solution could include a long term time limit, a unilateral but lengthy notice period, or something else.
It's disingenuous of the EU to pretend the UK hasn't asked for something.
Of course, it's entirely understandable they're frustrated by May's cackhanded and shortsighted ineptitude.
So is yours.
No its not.
Yes, it is.
I had a song at Glastonbury.
I'm still the PM though.
[exit stage left]
the bloke currently under investigation for lining his pockets and who has been deselected by his own party ?
There is no confusion there.