I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon is Owen Patterson. So amiable. So vacuous. So stubborn. It's a remarkable mix.
On TV recently:
"I'm not voting for it because it's not Brexit." "But it takes us out of the EU." "It's not Brexit." "But we leave and then have a transition to negotiate the future relationship." "It's not Brexit."
You just had to substitute "It's not Brexit" with "It goes to 11" and you had classic Spinal Tap.
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
Aaargh: why can't BBC journalists get anything right?
The news at one just announces that the UK's biggest fraud trial is starting today. Really, I think. I wonder which one that is.
Oh no - it turns out that it is not a trial at all but the civil case between Autonomy (Mike Lynch) and HP.
How difficult it is for a journalist to understand the difference between a criminal trial and a civil case? This is basic stuff.
(This complaint is completely unconnected with the fact that the UK's biggest fraud trial was the one I handled.)
A civil trial is a trial.
A civil case is not a trial. People listening to that report would have assumed that this was a trial of an individual resulting in a conviction for fraud or not. A civil case is a different beast (different parties/standard and burden of proof / no jury etc etc) and the report should have said that. It may be a pedantic point but an important one. IMO.
Anyway, it will be No Deal on April 12th. Why? Our MPs and government are numpties and are not using the time granted by the EU to do something useful.
A further long can kick I think, with a very angry EU.
No-one wants No Deal.
I would like to think so as the last thing I want is No Deal.
But I think that we are in danger of believing what we want to be true.
The UK is taking no steps to avoid a No Deal exit. So it will happen. All that happened last week was that the date was pushed back. May is as unable as ever to get agreement; not enough MPs appear to have shifted their votes; the ERG see their prize in sight; and MPs are busy debating possible alternatives as if (a) the EU had agreed these; and (b) we had months and months to come to a decision. They are in La-La-Land, I'm afraid.
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
You write this Alan as though this is somehow a told you so, gotcha moment whereas it is (or would be) a profoundly tragic, potentially deadly and certainly hugely disruptive consequence of Brexit.
Which of course is why there won't be no deal, that said.
Yes, bonkers but then I have a touching faith in my fellow person.
I think it will go through. I can't see the Boles/Letwin thing passing and that really leaves sane MPs with one option after that. I think there must be 320 sane MPs, mustn't there?
You'd think so - but then up pops Mark Francois or some other loon again on the radio.
320 sane MPs leaves 310 profoundly stupid ones!
Who with talent becomes an MP now?
It’s a career choice now for those who are quite interested in politics at university and want to stay “in the business” thereafter.
There are quite a number of very talented individuals. Many of whom are individually minded so therefore are not on the frontbenches of either of the two main parties. Our party political system is broken. The cream no longer rises to the top, it is homogenised so as to become indistinguishable from the sour old curds that are favoured by the party faithful. Corbyn and May are the end result of this, and the Brexit fiasco the concomitant allergic reaction.
Such as?
Many if not most are conscientious, smart, capable. Politics is messy and each MP can only do so much to unmessify the current situation.
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
I thought Leavers would not be in favour of frowning on such adjectives. Would that not be "political correctness gone mad"? Mad? Can we not use that now either? Nope sorry! Ozzy Osbourn has just brought out a new album called "diary of a Leaver (who has no issues-honestly!)"
Yes, bonkers but then I have a touching faith in my fellow person.
I think it will go through. I can't see the Boles/Letwin thing passing and that really leaves sane MPs with one option after that. I think there must be 320 sane MPs, mustn't there?
You'd think so - but then up pops Mark Francois or some other loon again on the radio.
320 sane MPs leaves 310 profoundly stupid ones!
Who with talent becomes an MP now?
It’s a career choice now for those who are quite interested in politics at university and want to stay “in the business” thereafter.
There are quite a number of very talented individuals. Many of whom are individually minded so therefore are not on the frontbenches of either of the two main parties. Our party political system is broken. The cream no longer rises to the top, it is homogenised so as to become indistinguishable from the sour old curds that are favoured by the party faithful. Corbyn and May are the end result of this, and the Brexit fiasco the concomitant allergic reaction.
Aaargh: why can't BBC journalists get anything right?
The news at one just announces that the UK's biggest fraud trial is starting today. Really, I think. I wonder which one that is.
Oh no - it turns out that it is not a trial at all but the civil case between Autonomy (Mike Lynch) and HP.
How difficult it is for a journalist to understand the difference between a criminal trial and a civil case? This is basic stuff.
(This complaint is completely unconnected with the fact that the UK's biggest fraud trial was the one I handled.)
A civil trial is a trial.
A civil case is not a trial. People listening to that report would have assumed that this was a trial of an individual resulting in a conviction for fraud or not. A civil case is a different beast (different parties/standard and burden of proof / no jury etc etc )and the report should have said that. It may be a pedantic point but an important one. IMO.
It seems a pointless thing to argue about, but the hearing before a judge which finally disposes of the claim in a civil case is a trial, both technically and colloquially.
From the judge's summing up in Jeffrey Archer's libel claim (the claim itself, *not* the later prosecution):
"Remember Mary Archer in the witness-box. Your vision of her probably will never disappear. Has she elegance? Has she fragrance? Would she have, without the strain of this trial, radiance? How would she appeal? Has she had a happy married life? Has she been able to enjoy, rather than endure, her husband Jeffrey?"
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
You write this Alan as though this is somehow a told you so, gotcha moment whereas it is (or would be) a profoundly tragic, potentially deadly and certainly hugely disruptive consequence of Brexit.
Which of course is why there won't be no deal, that said.
no I write it more in frustration that we have had years on pointlessly wanky discussions on what has been obvious for ages. Checks will take place away from the border ( as they do now ) and IT will bulk process the larger shipments. Nobody is going to get excited about shoppers in Newry or Dundalk. It's where could have got to ages ago and avoided all the needless cross border grief and the sour atmosphere that followed.
And if theres a deal then that just shows how even more ridiculous the whole thing has been
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
I thought Leavers would not be in favour of frowning on such adjectives. Would that not be "political correctness gone mad"? Mad? Can we not use that now either? Nope sorry! Ozzy Osbourn has just brought out a new album called "diary of a Leaver (who has no issues-honestly!)"
Calling "political correctness" mad is not the same as calling an MP a lunatic for not being in favour of a supranational trading cartel.
Remain have done a pretty good job of demonising leavers since 2016 - some pretty unpleasant stuff all round.
Aaargh: why can't BBC journalists get anything right?
The news at one just announces that the UK's biggest fraud trial is starting today. Really, I think. I wonder which one that is.
Oh no - it turns out that it is not a trial at all but the civil case between Autonomy (Mike Lynch) and HP.
How difficult it is for a journalist to understand the difference between a criminal trial and a civil case? This is basic stuff.
(This complaint is completely unconnected with the fact that the UK's biggest fraud trial was the one I handled.)
A civil trial is a trial.
A civil case is not a trial. People listening to that report would have assumed that this was a trial of an individual resulting in a conviction for fraud or not. A civil case is a different beast (different parties/standard and burden of proof / no jury etc etc) and the report should have said that. It may be a pedantic point but an important one. IMO.
I went thru' exactly the same thought process when watching the News.
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
I think that is a touch touchy. The vernacular is not one of mocking anyone but those such terms are used to describe.
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon is Owen Patterson. So amiable. So vacuous. So stubborn. It's a remarkable mix.
On TV recently:
"I'm not voting for it because it's not Brexit." "But it takes us out of the EU." "It's not Brexit." "But we leave and then have a transition to negotiate the future relationship." "It's not Brexit."
You just had to substitute "It's not Brexit" with "It goes to 11" and you had classic Spinal Tap.
A favourite movie! Another Nigel! Nigel left the band, but then, realising they were doing quite well without him then negotiated terms to come back in. Then the drummer spontaneously combusted (not sure what that is a metaphor for)
Aaargh: why can't BBC journalists get anything right?
The news at one just announces that the UK's biggest fraud trial is starting today. Really, I think. I wonder which one that is.
Oh no - it turns out that it is not a trial at all but the civil case between Autonomy (Mike Lynch) and HP.
How difficult it is for a journalist to understand the difference between a criminal trial and a civil case? This is basic stuff.
(This complaint is completely unconnected with the fact that the UK's biggest fraud trial was the one I handled.)
A civil trial is a trial.
A civil case is not a trial. People listening to that report would have assumed that this was a trial of an individual resulting in a conviction for fraud or not. A civil case is a different beast (different parties/standard and burden of proof / no jury etc etc )and the report should have said that. It may be a pedantic point but an important one. IMO.
It seems a pointless thing to argue about, but the hearing before a judge which finally disposes of the claim in a civil case is a trial, both technically and colloquially.
From the judge's summing up in Jeffrey Archer's libel claim (the claim itself, *not* the later prosecution):
"Remember Mary Archer in the witness-box. Your vision of her probably will never disappear. Has she elegance? Has she fragrance? Would she have, without the strain of this trial, radiance? How would she appeal? Has she had a happy married life? Has she been able to enjoy, rather than endure, her husband Jeffrey?"
Possibly. But the report implied that Mike Lynch was on trial - he isn't. It wouldn't take much, would it, to say that the "biggest civil fraud trial" is starting, would it? This would be accurate. I know I'm being pedantic but accuracy matters and every single case I've been involved in has been inaccurately reported even when it was piss-easy to get it right.
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
No doubt other synonyms will enter the lexicon over time.
"Leave him alone. He's a bit brexity, if you know what I mean."
If MV3 fails tomorrow and indicative votes on Wednesday show a majority for BINO e.g. permanent Customs Union and/or Single Market then May could call a snap general election on her Deal or BINO with Corbyn
What is annoying about the current situation is the way in which the current issues relating to Brexit cannot be bought to a conclusion. The first or at the very most the second meaningful vote on the deal should really have been the end of the matter. The endless delay, procrastination and putting things off is difficult to comprehend, given the enormous stakes involved. It seems so predictable, that there isn't even any point in following the news. Dependent on what happens next, it may even be seen as a profound failure of the current political system, ie the point where confidence in our current system of parliamentary democracy ends.
The problem really is that the legislature is trying to take over the executive’s job
The people voted to leave
The executive negotiated a deal to leave
Parliament rejected it
The executive negotiated some tweaks
Parliament rejected it
The executive is now asking “do you really mean it”?
However, if Parliament says “yes” they don’t get to instruct the executive what the executive should do. The executive can pursue no deal or revoke (there’s no time for another deal) - the legislature’s sanction is to VoNC the executive
A favourite movie! Another Nigel! Nigel left the band, but then, realising they were doing quite well without him then negotiated terms to come back in.
Were you watching a different movie?
In Spinal Tap the band imploded when Nigel left and were on the brink of breaking up.
He returned at the end and they had a triumphant return in Asia
Aaargh: why can't BBC journalists get anything right?
The news at one just announces that the UK's biggest fraud trial is starting today. Really, I think. I wonder which one that is.
Oh no - it turns out that it is not a trial at all but the civil case between Autonomy (Mike Lynch) and HP.
How difficult it is for a journalist to understand the difference between a criminal trial and a civil case? This is basic stuff.
(This complaint is completely unconnected with the fact that the UK's biggest fraud trial was the one I handled.)
A civil trial is a trial.
A civil case is not a trial. People listening to that report would have assumed that this was a trial of an individual resulting in a conviction for fraud or not. A civil case is a different beast (different parties/standard and burden of proof / no jury etc etc) and the report should have said that. It may be a pedantic point but an important one. IMO.
Indeed. One party needs to demonstrate loss on a balance of proof rather than beyond reasonable doubt
Aaargh: why can't BBC journalists get anything right?
The news at one just announces that the UK's biggest fraud trial is starting today. Really, I think. I wonder which one that is.
Oh no - it turns out that it is not a trial at all but the civil case between Autonomy (Mike Lynch) and HP.
How difficult it is for a journalist to understand the difference between a criminal trial and a civil case? This is basic stuff.
(This complaint is completely unconnected with the fact that the UK's biggest fraud trial was the one I handled.)
A civil trial is a trial.
A civil case is not a trial. People listening to that report would have assumed that this was a trial of an individual resulting in a conviction for fraud or not. A civil case is a different beast (different parties/standard and burden of proof / no jury etc etc) and the report should have said that. It may be a pedantic point but an important one. IMO.
I went thru' exactly the same thought process when watching the News.
Hmm, I think they're called (civil) trials here in the US, so the influence of American media is probably the reason.
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
You write this Alan as though this is somehow a told you so, gotcha moment whereas it is (or would be) a profoundly tragic, potentially deadly and certainly hugely disruptive consequence of Brexit.
Which of course is why there won't be no deal, that said.
no I write it more in frustration that we have had years on pointlessly wanky discussions on what has been obvious for ages. Checks will take place away from the border ( as they do now ) and IT will bulk process the larger shipments. Nobody is going to get excited about shoppers in Newry or Dundalk. It's where could have got to ages ago and avoided all the needless cross border grief and the sour atmosphere that followed.
And if theres a deal then that just shows how even more ridiculous the whole thing has been
They are talking about at border customs checks.
"It is clear that the EU is insisting that a way must be found to perform these checks – somewhere – and protect the EU single market, particularly in crunch areas like food and product safety."
It is difficult to see no checks being sustainable, even with Bertie's blind eye strategy.
A favourite movie! Another Nigel! Nigel left the band, but then, realising they were doing quite well without him then negotiated terms to come back in.
Were you watching a different movie?
In Spinal Tap the band imploded when Nigel left and were on the brink of breaking up.
He returned at the end and they had a triumphant return in Asia
It is a while since I watched it. Maybe it is a metaphor for UKIP. Perhaps they are going to have a renaissance in Japan. The drummer was Tommy Robinson
Parliament can't stop it. Only she can. And when parliament refuses to back her deal in MV19 that will leave her with no deal or revoke.
Unless she is going to revoke (and I keep pointing out that I've predicted this as a scenario for her final action as PM) then its no deal.
I'm beginning to think Liz Truss might be worth an outside bet at 100/1. She wants the job, she has got a clear message that would appeal to a lot of Conservatives (lower taxes, less government spending, less state) and she has been moving herself over to the hard Brexit group. Sun's approval can't hurt either.
Ms Phillips is doing what I would expect her to do, as an 'old-fashioned', honourable constituency MP; use the specialist knowledge she has gained as an MP to represent the best interests of her constituents, regardless of whether it is what they, from time to time, agree with.
I am sure she will take the opportunity to tell them that not only are they wrong in what they think but in fact they don't think that at all.
Aren't we all lucky to have MPs to let us know what we really want and think.
If they don’t like her she will lose her seat.
Only if she joins TIG
My guess is that she is one of the small number of MPs who has a large personal vote. But she’d certainly struggle to hold on if she did leave Labour. I expect all the TIG MPs to lose their seats except, perhaps, Allen, Wollaston and Gapes.
Yes, and like others I'm bearish on Gapes.
Allen and Wollaston I expect will end up joining the Lib Dems after the next election. A gang of two would be a very lonely place to be.
Yep, sounds like I got Gapes wrong.
One of the reasons we won't have EP elections is that they will be a big boost to TIG, just as they were to UKIP.
I doubt that TIG would fare at all well were we to have EP elections. They are not a political party , have no organisational infrastructure and have pretty well disappeared without trace.
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
Yes, bonkers but then I have a touching faith in my fellow person.
I think it will go through. I can't see the Boles/Letwin thing passing and that really leaves sane MPs with one option after that. I think there must be 320 sane MPs, mustn't there?
You'd think so - but then up pops Mark Francois or some other loon again on the radio.
320 sane MPs leaves 310 profoundly stupid ones!
Who with talent becomes an MP now?
It’s a career choice now for those who are quite interested in politics at university and want to stay “in the business” thereafter.
There are quite a number of very talented individuals. Many of whom are individually minded so therefore are not on the frontbenches of either of the two main parties. Our party political system is broken. The cream no longer rises to the top, it is homogenised so as to become indistinguishable from the sour old curds that are favoured by the party faithful. Corbyn and May are the end result of this, and the Brexit fiasco the concomitant allergic reaction.
Such as?
Many if not most are conscientious, smart, capable. Politics is messy and each MP can only do so much to unmessify the current situation.
I wish I could agree.
Many have supreme confidence, self-belief, and the endurance and determination to fight for a seat for years, and can do public speaking, meet & greets and press releases. They generally have degrees too, and so are modestly well educated.
That’s it. There are only a handful of members on both sides of the houses I’d class as original thinkers, capable leaders and competent executives.
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
I thought Leavers would not be in favour of frowning on such adjectives. Would that not be "political correctness gone mad"? Mad? Can we not use that now either? Nope sorry! Ozzy Osbourn has just brought out a new album called "diary of a Leaver (who has no issues-honestly!)"
Calling "political correctness" mad is not the same as calling an MP a lunatic for not being in favour of a supranational trading cartel.
Remain have done a pretty good job of demonising leavers since 2016 - some pretty unpleasant stuff all round.
No, not demonised. Often ridiculed, and with a few exceptions, quite rightly so. They are not cool enough to be demonised.
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
I thought Leavers would not be in favour of frowning on such adjectives. Would that not be "political correctness gone mad"? Mad? Can we not use that now either? Nope sorry! Ozzy Osbourn has just brought out a new album called "diary of a Leaver (who has no issues-honestly!)"
Calling "political correctness" mad is not the same as calling an MP a lunatic for not being in favour of a supranational trading cartel.
Remain have done a pretty good job of demonising leavers since 2016 - some pretty unpleasant stuff all round.
No, not demonised. Often ridiculed, and with a few exceptions, quite rightly so. They are not cool enough to be demonised.
"quite rightly so"
The remainer argument since Cameron came home with nothing.
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
No doubt other synonyms will enter the lexicon over time.
"Leave him alone. He's a bit brexity, if you know what I mean."
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
You write this Alan as though this is somehow a told you so, gotcha moment whereas it is (or would be) a profoundly tragic, potentially deadly and certainly hugely disruptive consequence of Brexit.
Which of course is why there won't be no deal, that said.
no I write it more in frustration that we have had years on pointlessly wanky discussions on what has been obvious for ages. Checks will take place away from the border ( as they do now ) and IT will bulk process the larger shipments. Nobody is going to get excited about shoppers in Newry or Dundalk. It's where could have got to ages ago and avoided all the needless cross border grief and the sour atmosphere that followed.
And if theres a deal then that just shows how even more ridiculous the whole thing has been
They are talking about at border customs checks.
"It is clear that the EU is insisting that a way must be found to perform these checks – somewhere – and protect the EU single market, particularly in crunch areas like food and product safety."
It is difficult to see no checks being sustainable, even with Bertie's blind eye strategy.
looking at TV reports the irish are looking a checks away from the border which if theyd stopped green tub thunping both sides could have agreed.
There a residual push by the EU to make the border hard, this will be Varadkar shooting himself in the foot, frankly he should tell Selmayr to stand at Belleek and the do the checks himself. It would unite North and South in target practice.
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
I thought Leavers would not be in favour of frowning on such adjectives. Would that not be "political correctness gone mad"? Mad? Can we not use that now either? Nope sorry! Ozzy Osbourn has just brought out a new album called "diary of a Leaver (who has no issues-honestly!)"
Calling "political correctness" mad is not the same as calling an MP a lunatic for not being in favour of a supranational trading cartel.
Remain have done a pretty good job of demonising leavers since 2016 - some pretty unpleasant stuff all round.
No, not demonised. Often ridiculed, and with a few exceptions, quite rightly so. They are not cool enough to be demonised.
"quite rightly so"
The remainer argument since Cameron came home with nothing.
"Trust us we know better than you plebs"
Wasn't nothing. But we explained all that to you before. Not our fault you're ******* *** ** * ******
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
I'll tell you a riddle: You're waiting for a Deal, a Deal that will take you far away. You know where you hope this Deal will take you, but you don't know for sure. But it doesn't matter. How can it not matter to you where that Deal will take you?
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
No doubt other synonyms will enter the lexicon over time.
"Leave him alone. He's a bit brexity, if you know what I mean."
He is one Brexit short of a full 27
His petition is only 12.5 million short of winning a referendum ?
The difference as I see it - and I do recognise my purist view is not shared by many - is that at a GE we do not vote for any individual policy, we vote for an individual representative. As long as that representative is allowed to take their seat in Parliament the contract with the electorate has been fulfilled. If subsequently there is a recall and a new vote because the MP turns out to be unfit to hold office it is not a problem as the original vote was respected.
In the referendum we voted for a particular policy. Until such times as that policy is enacted we have not fulfilled the contract. As I keep repeating (ad nauseum I know) democracy is not just about asking a question, it is about abiding by the answer.
Once we have left then it would clearly be ridiculous to refuse another referendum if that is what is wanted. And if Remain won then we would be duty bound to rejoin the EU under whatever conditions they ask before asking the public again.
Hmm. We vote for individuals yes, but we do so in order for them to enact a set of promises which have been described in a manifesto.
And of course your "as long as they take their seat in parliament" point counters any criticism of remain-inclined MPs in Leave constituencies.
No, it counters any legitimate cause to remove them before they have served their term. It does not counter any criticism of them for dishonesty if they promised to abide by the referendum to get elected (eg Soubry) .
Yes criticise away very happy with that. Equally, the point about the manifesto still stands. You are in effect saying that unless and until every manifesto promise is enacted we shouldn't have another GE.
No I a really not because I have always maintained we elect individual MPs not parties. As such as long as the elected MP can take their seat the contract has been fulfilled.
So if we had a system where an MP would take their seat for a day then be replaced through some non-democratic system immediately afterwards, that would be fine?
Not at all. Nor have I advocated it nor even intimated it anywhere in what I have written.
Okay. So it's not just them taking their seat which is required to respect the vote then, is it? It's them remaining in their seat through the term they were elected for.
Nope. Because there are legal ways in which they can be removed. You specifically mentioned non-democratic ways of doing it. Please try to be consistent.
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
I thought Leavers would not be in favour of frowning on such adjectives. Would that not be "political correctness gone mad"? Mad? Can we not use that now either? Nope sorry! Ozzy Osbourn has just brought out a new album called "diary of a Leaver (who has no issues-honestly!)"
Calling "political correctness" mad is not the same as calling an MP a lunatic for not being in favour of a supranational trading cartel.
Remain have done a pretty good job of demonising leavers since 2016 - some pretty unpleasant stuff all round.
No, not demonised. Often ridiculed, and with a few exceptions, quite rightly so. They are not cool enough to be demonised.
"quite rightly so"
The remainer argument since Cameron came home with nothing.
"Trust us we know better than you plebs"
I accept it is subjective. I personally think it is quite correct to ridicule Liam Fox, Boris Johnson, Jacob Rees Mogg and Mark Francois. They are cartoon characters. Utterly ridiculous. They are the Brexit leaders. Gove is at least just unpleasant, but not nearly as ludicrous as most of the rest.
Anyway, it will be No Deal on April 12th. Why? Our MPs and government are numpties and are not using the time granted by the EU to do something useful.
A further long can kick I think, with a very angry EU.
No-one wants No Deal.
I would like to think so as the last thing I want is No Deal.
But I think that we are in danger of believing what we want to be true.
The UK is taking no steps to avoid a No Deal exit. So it will happen. All that happened last week was that the date was pushed back. May is as unable as ever to get agreement; not enough MPs appear to have shifted their votes; the ERG see their prize in sight; and MPs are busy debating possible alternatives as if (a) the EU had agreed these; and (b) we had months and months to come to a decision. They are in La-La-Land, I'm afraid.
The EU can see the sands shifting and are being heavily lobbied by their friends here.
They know the longer the can is kicked with no outcome that eventually we’ll revoke and stay. It’s just a question of time.
They’re fed up of May, I admit. But I think they’ll keep kicking.
Anyway, it will be No Deal on April 12th. Why? Our MPs and government are numpties and are not using the time granted by the EU to do something useful.
A further long can kick I think, with a very angry EU.
No-one wants No Deal.
I would like to think so as the last thing I want is No Deal.
But I think that we are in danger of believing what we want to be true.
The UK is taking no steps to avoid a No Deal exit. So it will happen. All that happened last week was that the date was pushed back. May is as unable as ever to get agreement; not enough MPs appear to have shifted their votes; the ERG see their prize in sight; and MPs are busy debating possible alternatives as if (a) the EU had agreed these; and (b) we had months and months to come to a decision. They are in La-La-Land, I'm afraid.
The EU can see the sands shifting and are being heavily lobbied by their friends here.
They know the longer the can is kicked with no outcome that eventually we’ll revoke and stay. It’s just a question of time.
They’re fed up of May, I admit. But I think they’ll keep kicking.
You assume they want us to stay. I think they are now ambivalent. I wish it were not so, but who can blame them.
The difference as I see it - and I do recognise my purist view is not shared by many - is that at a GE we do not vote for any individual policy, we vote for an individual representative. As long as that representative is allowed to take their seat in Parliament the contract with the electorate has been fulfilled. If subsequently there is a recall and a new vote because the MP turns out to be unfit to hold office it is not a problem as the original vote was respected.
In the referendum we voted for a particular policy. Until such times as that policy is enacted we have not fulfilled the contract. As I keep repeating (ad nauseum I know) democracy is not just about asking a question, it is about abiding by the answer.
Once we have left then it would clearly be ridiculous to refuse another referendum if that is what is wanted. And if Remain won then we would be duty bound to rejoin the EU under whatever conditions they ask before asking the public again.
Hmm. We vote for individuals yes, but we do so in order for them to enact a set of promises which have been described in a manifesto.
And of course your "as long as they take their seat in parliament" point counters any criticism of remain-inclined MPs in Leave constituencies.
No, it counters any legitimate cause to remove them before they have served their term. It does not counter any criticism of them for dishonesty if they promised to abide by the referendum to get elected (eg Soubry) .
Yes criticise away very happy with that. Equally, the point about the manifesto still stands. You are in effect saying that unless and until every manifesto promise is enacted we shouldn't have another GE.
No I a really not because I have always maintained we elect individual MPs not parties. As such as long as the elected MP can take their seat the contract has been fulfilled.
Well you might have maintained it but I think it is accepted that an individual MP is elected "on his/her(/their?) party's manifesto".
If that were the case then about 80% of the current lot would be out on their ear. But more seriously, whatever the public perception, legally what I have said is correct. We vote for individual MPs not for parties.
You're including MPs who were reelected after voting against invoking Article 50 in your 80%.
Nope. Only 13% of MPs (89) voted against invoking A50.
A favourite movie! Another Nigel! Nigel left the band, but then, realising they were doing quite well without him then negotiated terms to come back in. Then the drummer spontaneously combusted (not sure what that is a metaphor for)
Yes it still delivers. I watched it again last week when I had the flu. At the end of it I still had the flu but for about 95 minutes I didn't.
From the judge's summing up in Jeffrey Archer's libel claim (the claim itself, *not* the later prosecution):
"Remember Mary Archer in the witness-box. Your vision of her probably will never disappear. Has she elegance? Has she fragrance? Would she have, without the strain of this trial, radiance? How would she appeal? Has she had a happy married life? Has she been able to enjoy, rather than endure, her husband Jeffrey?"
Anyway, it will be No Deal on April 12th. Why? Our MPs and government are numpties and are not using the time granted by the EU to do something useful.
A further long can kick I think, with a very angry EU.
No-one wants No Deal.
I would like to think so as the last thing I want is No Deal.
But I think that we are in danger of believing what we want to be true.
The UK is taking no steps to avoid a No Deal exit. So it will happen. All that happened last week was that the date was pushed back. May is as unable as ever to get agreement; not enough MPs appear to have shifted their votes; the ERG see their prize in sight; and MPs are busy debating possible alternatives as if (a) the EU had agreed these; and (b) we had months and months to come to a decision. They are in La-La-Land, I'm afraid.
The EU can see the sands shifting and are being heavily lobbied by their friends here.
They know the longer the can is kicked with no outcome that eventually we’ll revoke and stay. It’s just a question of time.
They’re fed up of May, I admit. But I think they’ll keep kicking.
Dunno. The Commission published a statement this morning saying no deal is a serious possibility
If MV3 fails tomorrow and indicative votes on Wednesday show a majority for BINO e.g. permanent Customs Union and/or Single Market then May could call a snap general election on her Deal or BINO with Corbyn
How many Tory MPs would vote for a general election?
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
You write this Alan as though this is somehow a told you so, gotcha moment whereas it is (or would be) a profoundly tragic, potentially deadly and certainly hugely disruptive consequence of Brexit.
Which of course is why there won't be no deal, that said.
no I write it more in frustration that we have had years on pointlessly wanky discussions on what has been obvious for ages. Checks will take place away from the border ( as they do now ) and IT will bulk process the larger shipments. Nobody is going to get excited about shoppers in Newry or Dundalk. It's where could have got to ages ago and avoided all the needless cross border grief and the sour atmosphere that followed.
And if theres a deal then that just shows how even more ridiculous the whole thing has been
They are talking about at border customs checks.
"It is clear that the EU is insisting that a way must be found to perform these checks – somewhere – and protect the EU single market, particularly in crunch areas like food and product safety."
It is difficult to see no checks being sustainable, even with Bertie's blind eye strategy.
looking at TV reports the irish are looking a checks away from the border which if theyd stopped green tub thunping both sides could have agreed.
There a residual push by the EU to make the border hard, this will be Varadkar shooting himself in the foot, frankly he should tell Selmayr to stand at Belleek and the do the checks himself. It would unite North and South in target practice.
I don't see the demonisation of Varadkar. He has used the situation to advance his cause maybe, but previous "technology" or "blind eyes" have been IMO unrealistic.
Even away from the border checks comes with problems. Who's to say whether that blue Toyota Hiace van came from an away from the border check or not as it eventually does cross the border?
From the judge's summing up in Jeffrey Archer's libel claim (the claim itself, *not* the later prosecution):
"Remember Mary Archer in the witness-box. Your vision of her probably will never disappear. Has she elegance? Has she fragrance? Would she have, without the strain of this trial, radiance? How would she appeal? Has she had a happy married life? Has she been able to enjoy, rather than endure, her husband Jeffrey?"
I thought that was Peter Cook satire not real!
Unbelievable, wasn't it?
The Peter Cook version hardly outdid the real thing, but it did say "is she not called Mary, like unto the Mother of our Lord?"
Yes, bonkers but then I have a touching faith in my fellow person.
I think it will go through. I can't see the Boles/Letwin thing passing and that really leaves sane MPs with one option after that. I think there must be 320 sane MPs, mustn't there?
You'd think so - but then up pops Mark Francois or some other loon again on the radio.
320 sane MPs leaves 310 profoundly stupid ones!
Who with talent becomes an MP now?
It’s a career choice now for those who are quite interested in politics at university and want to stay “in the business” thereafter.
There are quite a number of very talented individuals. Many of whom are individually minded so therefore are not on the frontbenches of either of the two main parties. Our party political system is broken. The cream no longer rises to the top, it is homogenised so as to become indistinguishable from the sour old curds that are favoured by the party faithful. Corbyn and May are the end result of this, and the Brexit fiasco the concomitant allergic reaction.
The difference as I see it - and I do recognise my purist view is not shared by many - is that at a GE we do not vote for any individual policy, we vote for an individual representative. As long as that representative is allowed to take their seat in Parliament the contract with the electorate has been fulfilled. If subsequently there is a recall and a new vote because the MP turns out to be unfit to hold office it is not a problem as the original vote was respected.
In the referendum we voted for a particular policy. Until such times as that policy is enacted we have not fulfilled the contract. As I keep repeating (ad nauseum I know) democracy is not just about asking a question, it is about abiding by the answer.
Once we have left then it would clearly be ridiculous to refuse another referendum if that is what is wanted. And if Remain won then we would be duty bound to rejoin the EU under whatever conditions they ask before asking the public again.
Regarding the part of your otherwise well-argued answer I have highlighted in bold: the referendum was explicitly advisory on Parliament, not binding.
Anyway, it will be No Deal on April 12th. Why? Our MPs and government are numpties and are not using the time granted by the EU to do something useful.
A further long can kick I think, with a very angry EU.
No-one wants No Deal.
I would like to think so as the last thing I want is No Deal.
But I think that we are in danger of believing what we want to be true.
The UK is taking no steps to avoid a No Deal exit. So it will happen. All that happened last week was that the date was pushed back. May is as unable as ever to get agreement; not enough MPs appear to have shifted their votes; the ERG see their prize in sight; and MPs are busy debating possible alternatives as if (a) the EU had agreed these; and (b) we had months and months to come to a decision. They are in La-La-Land, I'm afraid.
The EU can see the sands shifting and are being heavily lobbied by their friends here.
They know the longer the can is kicked with no outcome that eventually we’ll revoke and stay. It’s just a question of time.
They’re fed up of May, I admit. But I think they’ll keep kicking.
You assume they want us to stay. I think they are now ambivalent. I wish it were not so, but who can blame them.
The difference as I see it - and I do recognise my purist view is not shared by many - is that at a GE we do not vote for any individual policy, we vote for an individual representative. As long as that representative is allowed to take their seat in Parliament the contract with the electorate has been fulfilled. If subsequently there is a recall and a new vote because the MP turns out to be unfit to hold office it is not a problem as the original vote was respected.
In the referendum we voted for a particular policy. Until such times as that policy is enacted we have not fulfilled the contract. As I keep repeating (ad nauseum I know) democracy is not just about asking a question, it is about abiding by the answer.
Once we have left then it would clearly be ridiculous to refuse another referendum if that is what is wanted. And if Remain won then we would be duty bound to rejoin the EU under whatever conditions they ask before asking the public again.
Regarding the part of your otherwise well-argued answerI have bolded: the referendum was explicitly advisory on Parliament, not binding.
A favourite movie! Another Nigel! Nigel left the band, but then, realising they were doing quite well without him then negotiated terms to come back in. Then the drummer spontaneously combusted (not sure what that is a metaphor for)
Yes it still delivers. I watched it again last week when I had the flu. At the end of it I still had the flu but for about 95 minutes I didn't.
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
No doubt other synonyms will enter the lexicon over time.
Touche !
"Leave him alone. He's a bit brexity, if you know what I mean."
He is one Brexit short of a full 27
His petition is only 12.5 million short of winning a referendum ?
Yes, bonkers but then I have a touching faith in my fellow person.
I think it will go through. I can't see the Boles/Letwin thing passing and that really leaves sane MPs with one option after that. I think there must be 320 sane MPs, mustn't there?
You'd think so - but then up pops Mark Francois or some other loon again on the radio.
320 sane MPs leaves 310 profoundly stupid ones!
Who with talent becomes an MP now?
It’s a career choice now for those who are quite interested in politics at university and want to stay “in the business” thereafter.
There are quite a number of very talented individuals. Many of whom are individually minded so therefore are not on the frontbenches of either of the two main parties. Our party political system is broken. The cream no longer rises to the top, it is homogenised so as to become indistinguishable from the sour old curds that are favoured by the party faithful. Corbyn and May are the end result of this, and the Brexit fiasco the concomitant allergic reaction.
Such as?
On the Tory side both Rory Stewart and Johnny Mercer.
I think Mark Francois is rather hoping that a bit of good old wartime type rationing might be the one diet that stops him looking like the Brexiteer that ate all the pies
My favourite Leaverloon
What is it with Remainers and mocking those with mental health issues ?
"Loons" "Nutters" "Headcases" "mad" "insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
No doubt other synonyms will enter the lexicon over time.
"Leave him alone. He's a bit brexity, if you know what I mean."
He is one Brexit short of a full 27
His petition is only 12.5 million short of winning a referendum ?
The difference as I see it - and I do recognise my purist view is not shared by many - is that at a GE we do not vote for any individual policy, we vote for an individual representative. As long as that representative is allowed to take their seat in Parliament the contract with the electorate has been fulfilled. If subsequently there is a recall and a new vote because the MP turns out to be unfit to hold office it is not a problem as the original vote was respected.
In the referendum we voted for a particular policy. Until such times as that policy is enacted we have not fulfilled the contract. As I keep repeating (ad nauseum I know) democracy is not just about asking a question, it is about abiding by the answer.
Once we have left then it would clearly be ridiculous to refuse another referendum if that is what is wanted. And if Remain won then we would be duty bound to rejoin the EU under whatever conditions they ask before asking the public again.
Regarding the part of your otherwise well-argued answerI have bolded: the referendum was explicitly advisory on Parliament, not binding.
Aaargh: why can't BBC journalists get anything right?
The news at one just announces that the UK's biggest fraud trial is starting today. Really, I think. I wonder which one that is.
Oh no - it turns out that it is not a trial at all but the civil case between Autonomy (Mike Lynch) and HP.
How difficult it is for a journalist to understand the difference between a criminal trial and a civil case? This is basic stuff.
(This complaint is completely unconnected with the fact that the UK's biggest fraud trial was the one I handled.)
A civil trial is a trial.
A civil case is not a trial. People listening to that report would have assumed that this was a trial of an individual resulting in a conviction for fraud or not. A civil case is a different beast (different parties/standard and burden of proof / no jury etc etc) and the report should have said that. It may be a pedantic point but an important one. IMO.
Indeed. One party needs to demonstrate loss on a balance of proof rather than beyond reasonable doubt
Googling around... they're not the only ones (certainly the Telegraph, and a number of others, some of whom have at least put "civil trial"). Combined with the use of fraud, ie a criminal offence, it's not a good look.
Yes, bonkers but then I have a touching faith in my fellow person.
I think it will go through. I can't see the Boles/Letwin thing passing and that really leaves sane MPs with one option after that. I think there must be 320 sane MPs, mustn't there?
You'd think so - but then up pops Mark Francois or some other loon again on the radio.
320 sane MPs leaves 310 profoundly stupid ones!
Who with talent becomes an MP now?
It’s a career choice now for those who are quite interested in politics at university and want to stay “in the business” thereafter.
There are quite a number of very talented individuals. Many of whom are individually minded so therefore are not on the frontbenches of either of the two main parties. Our party political system is broken. The cream no longer rises to the top, it is homogenised so as to become indistinguishable from the sour old curds that are favoured by the party faithful. Corbyn and May are the end result of this, and the Brexit fiasco the concomitant allergic reaction.
Such as?
On the Tory side both Rory Stewart and Johnny Mercer.
I think there are talented people on all sides of the House and all sides of the current debate. There are also some loons (sorry Mr TGOHF) on all sides. I think this " all MPs are terrible" meme is very damaging, and was not helped by our current PM recently. Most do what they think is right.
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
I do love the Irish explanation of why you have to show your passports to enter Ireland from the UK - "To prove you don't have to show your passport"!
There was, in the past, an unfortunate incident involving Irish immigration officials and non-white UK citizens where nationality assumptions and actions around perceived illigality were made. Requiring passports is easier than changing immigration official attitudes.
Parliament can't stop it. Only she can. And when parliament refuses to back her deal in MV19 that will leave her with no deal or revoke.
Unless she is going to revoke (and I keep pointing out that I've predicted this as a scenario for her final action as PM) then its no deal.
I'm beginning to think Liz Truss might be worth an outside bet at 100/1. She wants the job, she has got a clear message that would appeal to a lot of Conservatives (lower taxes, less government spending, less state) and she has been moving herself over to the hard Brexit group. Sun's approval can't hurt either.
She has a skeleton in her cupboard though - hence ,being called locally 'the Tory trollop'!
Aaargh: why can't BBC journalists get anything right?
The news at one just announces that the UK's biggest fraud trial is starting today. Really, I think. I wonder which one that is.
Oh no - it turns out that it is not a trial at all but the civil case between Autonomy (Mike Lynch) and HP.
How difficult it is for a journalist to understand the difference between a criminal trial and a civil case? This is basic stuff.
(This complaint is completely unconnected with the fact that the UK's biggest fraud trial was the one I handled.)
A civil trial is a trial.
A civil case is not a trial. People listening to that report would have assumed that this was a trial of an individual resulting in a conviction for fraud or not. A civil case is a different beast (different parties/standard and burden of proof / no jury etc etc )and the report should have said that. It may be a pedantic point but an important one. IMO.
It seems a pointless thing to argue about, but the hearing before a judge which finally disposes of the claim in a civil case is a trial, both technically and colloquially.
From the judge's summing up in Jeffrey Archer's libel claim (the claim itself, *not* the later prosecution):
"Remember Mary Archer in the witness-box. Your vision of her probably will never disappear. Has she elegance? Has she fragrance? Would she have, without the strain of this trial, radiance? How would she appeal? Has she had a happy married life? Has she been able to enjoy, rather than endure, her husband Jeffrey?"
Possibly. But the report implied that Mike Lynch was on trial - he isn't. It wouldn't take much, would it, to say that the "biggest civil fraud trial" is starting, would it? This would be accurate. I know I'm being pedantic but accuracy matters and every single case I've been involved in has been inaccurately reported even when it was piss-easy to get it right.
I think of it as Private Eye syndrome. It's enjoyable until it writes about something you know the detail of . When it's invariably wrong, and not in a minor way. Then you start to wonder about everything else they've written with some other "you" thinking the same.
having protested aginst customs checks and disparaging online processing for RoI to NI trade, the RoI decides to go for customs checks and online processing for trade NI to RoI
I do love the Irish explanation of why you have to show your passports to enter Ireland from the UK - "To prove you don't have to show your passport"!
Unless I'm misunderstanding your point, you don't. Under the terms of the CTA (Common Travel Area), there are currently no ID checks of any kind on ferries arriving in Ireland from the UK, and most airlines (Ryanair excepted) will accept most forms of photo ID such as UK driving licence or even a bus pass.
The gov.uk. website confirms that even in the event of a no-deal Brexit ,all the current features of the CTA (which dates back to the 1920's) will still apply.
Aaargh: why can't BBC journalists get anything right?
The news at one just announces that the UK's biggest fraud trial is starting today. Really, I think. I wonder which one that is.
Oh no - it turns out that it is not a trial at all but the civil case between Autonomy (Mike Lynch) and HP.
How difficult it is for a journalist to understand the difference between a criminal trial and a civil case? This is basic stuff.
(This complaint is completely unconnected with the fact that the UK's biggest fraud trial was the one I handled.)
A civil trial is a trial.
A civil case is not a trial. People listening to that report would have assumed that this was a trial of an individual resulting in a conviction for fraud or not. A civil case is a different beast (different parties/standard and burden of proof / no jury etc etc )and the report should have said that. It may be a pedantic point but an important one. IMO.
It seems a pointless thing to argue about, but the hearing before a judge which finally disposes of the claim in a civil case is a trial, both technically and colloquially.
From the judge's summing up in Jeffrey Archer's libel claim (the claim itself, *not* the later prosecution):
"Remember Mary Archer in the witness-box. Your vision of her probably will never disappear. Has she elegance? Has she fragrance? Would she have, without the strain of this trial, radiance? How would she appeal? Has she had a happy married life? Has she been able to enjoy, rather than endure, her husband Jeffrey?"
Possibly. But the report implied that Mike Lynch was on trial - he isn't. It wouldn't take much, would it, to say that the "biggest civil fraud trial" is starting, would it? This would be accurate. I know I'm being pedantic but accuracy matters and every single case I've been involved in has been inaccurately reported even when it was piss-easy to get it right.
I think of it as Private Eye syndrome. It's enjoyable until it writes about something you know the detail of . When it's invariably wrong, and not in a minor way. Then you start to wonder about everything else they've written with some other "you" thinking the same.
Comments
On TV recently:
"I'm not voting for it because it's not Brexit."
"But it takes us out of the EU."
"It's not Brexit."
"But we leave and then have a transition to negotiate the future relationship."
"It's not Brexit."
You just had to substitute "It's not Brexit" with "It goes to 11" and you had classic Spinal Tap.
Unless she is going to revoke (and I keep pointing out that I've predicted this as a scenario for her final action as PM) then its no deal.
"Loons"
"Nutters"
"Headcases"
"mad"
"insane"
If you must insist on othering are there not other adjectives available ?
I look forward to Arlenes application in Dublin and Michelle Oneill becoming a brit
But I think that we are in danger of believing what we want to be true.
The UK is taking no steps to avoid a No Deal exit. So it will happen. All that happened last week was that the date was pushed back. May is as unable as ever to get agreement; not enough MPs appear to have shifted their votes; the ERG see their prize in sight; and MPs are busy debating possible alternatives as if (a) the EU had agreed these; and (b) we had months and months to come to a decision. They are in La-La-Land, I'm afraid.
Which of course is why there won't be no deal, that said.
Hasn't caused any problems at all, no siree...
From the judge's summing up in Jeffrey Archer's libel claim (the claim itself, *not* the later prosecution):
"Remember Mary Archer in the witness-box. Your vision of her probably will never disappear. Has she elegance? Has she fragrance? Would she have, without the strain of this trial, radiance? How would she appeal? Has she had a happy married life? Has she been able to enjoy, rather than endure, her husband Jeffrey?"
And if theres a deal then that just shows how even more ridiculous the whole thing has been
Remain have done a pretty good job of demonising leavers since 2016 - some pretty unpleasant stuff all round.
"Leave him alone. He's a bit brexity, if you know what I mean."
The people voted to leave
The executive negotiated a deal to leave
Parliament rejected it
The executive negotiated some tweaks
Parliament rejected it
The executive is now asking “do you really mean it”?
However, if Parliament says “yes” they don’t get to instruct the executive what the executive should do. The executive can pursue no deal or revoke (there’s no time for another deal) - the legislature’s sanction is to VoNC the executive
In Spinal Tap the band imploded when Nigel left and were on the brink of breaking up.
He returned at the end and they had a triumphant return in Asia
"It is clear that the EU is insisting that a way must be found to perform these checks – somewhere – and protect the EU single market, particularly in crunch areas like food and product safety."
It is difficult to see no checks being sustainable, even with Bertie's blind eye strategy.
Many have supreme confidence, self-belief, and the endurance and determination to fight for a seat for years, and can do public speaking, meet & greets and press releases. They generally have degrees too, and so are modestly well educated.
That’s it. There are only a handful of members on both sides of the houses I’d class as original thinkers, capable leaders and competent executives.
The remainer argument since Cameron came home with nothing.
"Trust us we know better than you plebs"
There a residual push by the EU to make the border hard, this will be Varadkar shooting himself in the foot, frankly he should tell Selmayr to stand at Belleek and the do the checks himself. It would unite North and South in target practice.
They know the longer the can is kicked with no outcome that eventually we’ll revoke and stay. It’s just a question of time.
They’re fed up of May, I admit. But I think they’ll keep kicking.
The No Outsiders programme at five Birmingham schools stopped when parents said it was age-inappropriate and incompatible with Islam.
Sir Michael Wilshaw, the former head of Ofsted, said people had to accept they were "living in this country with the values that this country holds".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-47692617
NEW THREAD
https://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/brexit-eu-says-no-deal-is-now-increasingly-likely-1-4895109
Even away from the border checks comes with problems. Who's to say whether that blue Toyota Hiace van came from an away from the border check or not as it eventually does cross the border?
The Peter Cook version hardly outdid the real thing, but it did say "is she not called Mary, like unto the Mother of our Lord?"
Unless I'm misunderstanding your point, you don't. Under the terms of the CTA (Common Travel Area), there are currently no ID checks of any kind on ferries arriving in Ireland from the UK, and most airlines (Ryanair excepted) will accept most forms of photo ID such as UK driving licence or even a bus pass.
The gov.uk. website confirms that even in the event of a no-deal Brexit ,all the current features of the CTA (which dates back to the 1920's) will still apply.