There are also Protestant and Unionist parts of Fermanagah that does not change the fact the county is majority Catholic as Antrim and Down are majority Protestant
Free the occupied six counties!
They are not occupied, certainly no more than Israel and have been in existence with a Protestant and Unionist majority for longer than the USA.
Sounds like something an occupier would say.
Sound like something a traitor would say
As someone who has received a fair amount of abuse on here over the years and who thought that various temporary and oddly applied bans on certain terms (GNats, PB Tories) were silly, nevertheless could I ask that use of the word 'traitor' be banned, certainly when applied to the politics of the last 40 years? Being sent mad by Brexit (temporarily or not) is not an excuse.
No it should not be banned, if people want to hand over Protestant and Unionist parts of Northern Ireland to the Republic without consent it is the correct term for them
It is striking that it has become a working assumption that the EU will grant an extension. They have previously said that they would only consider doing this if there was a clear reason for going so, e.g. a GE.
Given that under the ridiculous FTPA Corbyn, in effect, chooses when the GE will be, how can the EU be assured that the extension will be followed in the short term (i.e. before the end of the next deadline) by a GE?
The further point is that even if we have a GE, the EU can look at the polls and see that in all likelihood we either have a Tory majority - and possibly No Deal - or more chaos under a mix and match coalition. Why the hell allow us the time for a GE then?
No further extension means they have us by the balls. We can No Deal - but this current Parliament won't. They could Revoke - but that has always so far failed to get anywhere. Or we could pass whatever WA is on the table after the upcoming summit. All by month end.
These budget estimates show you the point of the LibDem Revoke pledge. Corbyn can't spend that money, because the voters might vote Leave again. The LibDem manifesto can turn all those billions directly into fabulous presents.
All parties seem to have an orchard of magic money trees. The reality is that the world economy is slowing dangerously, and our debt levels remain high. A bit of judicious green infrastructure spending may be wise, ballooning the deficit rather less so.
Right, but the LibDems want the non-Trumpy bit of the Conservative vote, who care whether your sums add up. It's a fairly small niche in the grand scheme of things but they have the potential to take it permanently.
The LDs want the non socialist, non anti Semite bit of Labour and the diehard Remainer bit of the Tories
They want those too but that's the easy part, the bit they need to optimize for is Labour voters who are somewhat socialist and/or only slightly anti-semitic, and Tories who are moderate Remain or even moderate Leave but have had enough of all the crazy shit.
Combined that would probably get the LDs to 30%+ I agree, it is the coalition the Liberal Democrats need to build if they ever want to win a general election and form a government rather than just being a minor party in government at best or simply hold the balance of power
These budget estimates show you the point of the LibDem Revoke pledge. Corbyn can't spend that money, because the voters might vote Leave again. The LibDem manifesto can turn all those billions directly into fabulous presents.
All parties seem to have an orchard of magic money trees. The reality is that the world economy is slowing dangerously, and our debt levels remain high. A bit of judicious green infrastructure spending may be wise, ballooning the deficit rather less so.
Right, but the LibDems want the non-Trumpy bit of the Conservative vote, who care whether your sums add up. It's a fairly small niche in the grand scheme of things but they have the potential to take it permanently.
The LDs want the non socialist, non anti Semite bit of Labour and the diehard Remainer bit of the Tories
There are also Protestant and Unionist parts of Fermanagah that does not change the fact the county is majority Catholic as Antrim and Down are majority Protestant
Free the occupied six counties!
For several generations there was building pressure in rural Ireland to overturn what they saw as fundamental inequities in the structure of society. Even despite Wolfe Tone it was an economically driven campaign (“Fair rents! Free sale! Fixity of tenure!)
It was handled poorly by the British government, expertly exploited by Daniel O’Connell and had a bit of luck with Kitty Shaw
Despite all this there was a very significant Irish Unionist Party which strongly campaigned against independence
Ultimately the situation became untenable which led to the Buckingham Palace Agreement (which saw a time limited arrangement whereby Ulster would remain part of the U.K. for 6 years before joining an independent Ireland - Carson’s “sentence of death” with a “stay of execution”)
The final compromise was the Fourth Home Rule Bill which created two autonomous Home Rule regions - the majority Unionist Northern Ireland and the 26 counties to be ruled by Dublin (with a Council of Ireland and a common Lord Lieutenant which were expected to evolve into an all Ireland government over time)
It was never implemented in the south because of the War of Independence and the Civil War, but still forms the basis of Northern Ireland today.
You can’t do justice to the complexities of Irish history in a short post but the North isn’t occupied: it is governed with the consent and support of its citizens. Should they withdraw their consent the things will change but, until and unless they do, the status quo remains the legitimate arrangement
You’re right that a short post cannot do justice to the complexities of Irish history.
The situation became untenable, as you put it, because a minority in Ireland refused to accept the democratically expressed wishes of the majority. It is one of the many historical ironies that the party which supported that minority is so loudly now proclaiming its adherence to the principle that a majority should get its way regardless of the wishes of the minority. Had this party held onto that principle then there might never have existed the artificially created border which is creating such grief today for that party.
Aren't most borders 'artificially created' ?
There's an interesting paradox with some people who think its wrong to have an international border across the island of Ireland but right to have an international border across the island of Britain. While some other people who think vice versa.
There are also Protestant and Unionist parts of Fermanagah that does not change the fact the county is majority Catholic as Antrim and Down are majority Protestant
Free the occupied six counties!
For several generations there was building pressure in rural Ireland to overturn what they saw as fundamental inequities in the structure of society. Even despite Wolfe Tone it was an economically driven campaign (“Fair rents! Free sale! Fixity of tenure!)
It was handled poorly by the British government, expertly exploited by Daniel O’Connell and had a bit of luck with Kitty Shaw
Despite all this there was a very significant Irish Unionist Party which strongly campaigned against independence
Ultimately the situation became untenable which led to the Buckingham Palace Agreement (which saw a time limited arrangement whereby Ulster would remain part of the U.K. for 6 years before joining an independent Ireland - Carson’s “sentence of death” with a “stay of execution”)
The final compromise was the Fourth Home Rule Bill which created two autonomous Home Rule regions - the majority Unionist Northern Ireland and the 26 counties to be ruled by Dublin (with a Council of Ireland and a common Lord Lieutenant which were expected to evolve into an all Ireland government over time)
It was never implemented in the south because of the War of Independence and the Civil War, but still forms the basis of Northern Ireland today.
You can’t do justice to the complexities of Irish history in a short post but the North isn’t occupied: it is governed with the consent and support of its citizens. Should they withdraw their consent the things will change but, until and unless they do, the status quo remains the legitimate arrangement
You’re right that a short post cannot do justice to the complexities of Irish history.
The situation became untenable, as you put it, because a minority in Ireland refused to accept the democratically expressed wishes of the majority. It is one of the many historical ironies that the party which supported that minority is so loudly now proclaiming its adherence to the principle that a majority should get its way regardless of the wishes of the minority. Had this party held onto that principle then there might never have existed the artificially created border which is creating such grief today for that party.
If Ireland hadn't been partitioned, we wouldn't need to worry about Backstops!
Brexit an entertaining point of discussion. We had a Brexit plan last time and spent/tied up cash we didn't have. This time we're not bothering (as we don't have the cash to do it again), and whilst there is a decent risk of crashing out by accident I can't call it either way at this point. Events over the next couple of weeks will be all, and whilst there's an uneasy calm at the moment, we all know it will get heated very very quickly.
Some contradicting lies are about to go splat onto the wall of reality. The EU aren't about to cave. The EU aren't going to be persuaded to veto the deal or accept a post-it on our letter saying "the letter is a lie please ignore". The government don't have a wiggle way out of the Benn Act and cannot break the law. Johnson will not resign once he asks for an extension.
For those of us with a keen eye and a vat of popcorn to eat, this is great fun. I expect less fun for cultists on either side such as Jezziah and HYUFD who will find the hoops they have to jump through ever higher as black becomes white becomes black again and they have to justify that the changes were always happening.
These budget estimates show you the point of the LibDem Revoke pledge. Corbyn can't spend that money, because the voters might vote Leave again. The LibDem manifesto can turn all those billions directly into fabulous presents.
All parties seem to have an orchard of magic money trees. The reality is that the world economy is slowing dangerously, and our debt levels remain high. A bit of judicious green infrastructure spending may be wise, ballooning the deficit rather less so.
Right, but the LibDems want the non-Trumpy bit of the Conservative vote, who care whether your sums add up. It's a fairly small niche in the grand scheme of things but they have the potential to take it permanently.
The LDs want the non socialist, non anti Semite bit of Labour and the diehard Remainer bit of the Tories
They want those too but that's the easy part, the bit they need to optimize for is Labour voters who are somewhat socialist and/or only slightly anti-semitic, and Tories who are moderate Remain or even moderate Leave but have had enough of all the crazy shit.
Lib Dem landslide territory, I would have thought. Excellent. And a sound economy into the bargain.
And that’s before we get to his desire to dismantle our military and security apparatus.
Corbo's Government of All the Trots would be a net positive for actual military capability due to having zero inclination toward foreign adventurism and thereby easing the current retention and resourcing crisis. They would also probably be less likely to run defence policy as corporate welfare program for BAE and Babcock.
Also, don't forget he is no leader of any type, as thick as fuck and ineffably lazy so he'll make modest, at best, progress toward any transformative goals he may harbour in his withered breast.
Brexit an entertaining point of discussion. We had a Brexit plan last time and spent/tied up cash we didn't have. This time we're not bothering (as we don't have the cash to do it again), and whilst there is a decent risk of crashing out by accident I can't call it either way at this point. Events over the next couple of weeks will be all, and whilst there's an uneasy calm at the moment, we all know it will get heated very very quickly.
Some contradicting lies are about to go splat onto the wall of reality. The EU aren't about to cave. The EU aren't going to be persuaded to veto the deal or accept a post-it on our letter saying "the letter is a lie please ignore". The government don't have a wiggle way out of the Benn Act and cannot break the law. Johnson will not resign once he asks for an extension.
For those of us with a keen eye and a vat of popcorn to eat, this is great fun. I expect less fun for cultists on either side such as Jezziah and HYUFD who will find the hoops they have to jump through ever higher as black becomes white becomes black again and they have to justify that the changes were always happening.
You'd almost think me and HYUFD voted leave and you voted remain.
Now in fairness HYUFD is something of a born again leaver, but I've never been anything more than willing to compromise / put up with a soft Brexit, I was someone who voted remain and I am someone who signed both the second referendum and revoke article 50 petitions (was to avoid no deal and it mentioned this is the people's vote we aren't going to get)
Becoming a zealous Lib Dem doesn't make you some kind of super remainer, or doesn't make your opponents Brexiteers. I don't like you because your an angry man who seems to constantly get angry at me for things I haven't done or have never supported. Here the example is I somehow have to jump through hoops and pretend that black is white in regards to justifying Johnson breaking the Ben act or pretending his letter is a lie. Why the hell would I do that you crazy little man?
I'm happy to argue with you about things I have actually done or said but quite frankly you are a lunatic who seems to have hallucinations and claim all kinds of mad things that never happened.
It seems pretty clear to me that the Government’s current “plan” is to avoid an extension by getting the EU to reject it.
Although there is an underlying contradiction (when is there ever not) in their unhinged arguments that the Benn Act has destroyed the chances of securing a deal (because the EU aren’t being forced to confront the alternative of No Deal), whilst expecting the EU to actively choose to trigger no deal anyway.
MarqueeMark says: "No further extension means they have us by the balls. We can No Deal - but this current Parliament won't. They could Revoke - but that has always so far failed to get anywhere. Or we could pass whatever WA is on the table after the upcoming summit. All by month end."
This current parliament won`t pass any deal (unless sufficient Labour MPs rebel from the party line). The LP would rather have No Deal that grant the Tories the kudos of leaving with a deal. They will enjoy the chaos that ensues (if there is no chaoes they will manufacture it) and blame the Tories for leaving without a deal.
What would be quite amusing, I suppose, would be if Johnson asked for an extension, the EU refused it, and then the HoC voted through May’s deal against Govt opposition.
I agree with your conclusion. But when you have seen how these sorts of forecasts are created, it’s hilarious that anyone takes them seriously.
The world of economic and financial modelling is a bunch of mainly 20-somethings staying up late creating vast spreadsheets.
The innumerable input assumptions are at best open to challenge and at times outright flawed but barely interrogated at all due to time constraints or dogma.
If that was the worst of it maybe it wouldn’t be so bad. But very often the models contain loads of circular references and macros that break down one time out of every three times run. So you can’t even trust the output regardless of the input!
There’s a lot that Gove has to say with which I disagree profoundly. But his infamous comment about experts was perhaps the most wise statement by any politician in recent decades. And you don’t have to look very hard for the evidence. The modelling behind Greece’s Eurozone accession and subsequent austerity programme being good examples.
I am not sure where you have seen people creating forecasts using spreadsheets containing circular references and broken macros, but as someone who is an economic forecaster for a living (I even worked for one of the organisations with an acronym for a name that the innumerate hack Gove got so worked up about) I think you're talking shite. Take a look at how the economy has performed relative to forecasts by the BOE or OBR and you will see that their forecasts have been pretty accurate. I know of no credible forecaster who doesn't think that Brexit has already harmed the UK economy and will do further damage once implemented, especially on a no deal basis.
You are not the only person who has experience with such modelling in esteemed organisations so perhaps you'd like to calm down a bit.
I did not say Brexit has not harmed the UK economy or that no deal would not cause further harm. The comment was in the context of IFS modelling that a Corbyn govt is preferable to a Boris no deal brexit.
alex says: "What would be quite amusing, I suppose, would be if Johnson asked for an extension, the EU refused it, and then the HoC voted through May’s deal against Govt opposition."
Crikey that`s interesting. I never thought of that. If opposition MPs took control of the house again, could they quickly pass a bill in support of May`s WA? Is this possible. This would avoid No Deal and massively embarrass the government - Corbyn would love this solution.
Right. Because there's only 27 other countries on this planet of ours isn't there?
The article was specifically referring to EU countries.
Yes but the "queue" will have more than just EU countries post-Brexit. And if one country wishes to be at that front of that, then they can help us out now.
There are also Protestant and Unionist parts of Fermanagah that does not change the fact the county is majority Catholic as Antrim and Down are majority Protestant
Free the occupied six counties!
They are not occupied, certainly no more than Israel and have been in existence with a Protestant and Unionist majority for longer than the USA.
Sounds like something an occupier would say.
Sound like something a traitor would say
As someone who has received a fair amount of abuse on here over the years and who thought that various temporary and oddly applied bans on certain terms (GNats, PB Tories) were silly, nevertheless could I ask that use of the word 'traitor' be banned, certainly when applied to the politics of the last 40 years? Being sent mad by Brexit (temporarily or not) is not an excuse.
I'm not defending HYUFD but out of curiosity do you think occupier is OK?
We will always be culturally closer to Australia and NZ than Europe, even if their Asian population grows so is ours too anyway
We use the word differently to Australia
The Australians use the American sense of the word "Asian" - people from South-East Asia, so Chinese, Malay, Thai etc.
We use the British sense of "Asian" - people from Pakistan, India, etc
When I came back to England I found that one of the oddest discrepancies.
I use Asian to mean people from Asia, or of Asian descent, as that is what it means.
You can use South Asian or East Asian if you wish to clarify.
I agree with you on this one and I think people who use Asian meaning specific nations to be silly. But then again we use Europe to describe the EU and America to describe the USA so its not a hill I am particularly exercised by.
MarqueeMark says: "No further extension means they have us by the balls. We can No Deal - but this current Parliament won't. They could Revoke - but that has always so far failed to get anywhere. Or we could pass whatever WA is on the table after the upcoming summit. All by month end."
This current parliament won`t pass any deal (unless sufficient Labour MPs rebel from the party line). The LP would rather have No Deal that grant the Tories the kudos of leaving with a deal. They will enjoy the chaos that ensues (if there is no chaoes they will manufacture it) and blame the Tories for leaving without a deal.
In a shoot out between WA and No Deal then I think WA wins. Corbyn and Boris will be left high and dry.
There are also Protestant and Unionist parts of Fermanagah that does not change the fact the county is majority Catholic as Antrim and Down are majority Protestant
Free the occupied six counties!
For several generations there was building pressure in rural Ireland to overturn what they saw as fundamental inequities in the structure of society. Even despite Wolfe Tone it was an economically driven campaign (“Fair rents! Free sale! Fixity of tenure!)
It was handled poorly by the British government, expertly exploited by Daniel O’Connell and had a bit of luck with Kitty Shaw
Despite all this there was a very significant Irish Unionist Party which strongly campaigned against independence
Ultimately the situation became untenable which led to the Buckingham Palace Agreement (which saw a time limited arrangement whereby Ulster would remain part of the U.K. for 6 years before joining an independent Ireland - Carson’s “sentence of death” with a “stay of execution”)
The final compromise was the Fourth Home Rule Bill which created two autonomous Home Rule regions - the majority Unionist Northern Ireland and the 26 counties to be ruled by Dublin (with a Council of Ireland and a common Lord Lieutenant which were expected to evolve into an all Ireland government over time)
It was never implemented in the south because of the War of Independence and the Civil War, but still forms the basis of Northern Ireland today.
You can’t do justice to the complexities of Irish history in a short post but the North isn’t occupied: it is governed with the consent and support of its citizens. Should they withdraw their consent the things will change but, until and unless they do, the status quo remains the legitimate arrangement
You’re right that a short post cannot do justice to the complexities of Irish history.
The situation became untenable, as you put it, because a minority in Ireland refused to accept the democratically expressed wishes of the majority. It is one of the many historical ironies that the party which supported that minority is so loudly now proclaiming its adherence to the principle that a majority should get its way regardless of the wishes of the minority. Had this party held onto that principle then there might never have existed the artificially created border which is creating such grief today for that party.
If Ireland hadn't been partitioned, we wouldn't need to worry about Backstops!
Even without Ireland, there would still be a backstop and probably the ERG's objections would be much the same, that we would be trapped as a vassal state.
There are also Protestant and Unionist parts of Fermanagah that does not change the fact the county is majority Catholic as Antrim and Down are majority Protestant
Free the occupied six counties!
It was handled poorly by the British government, expertly exploited by Daniel O’Connell and had a bit of luck with Kitty Shaw
Despite all this there was a very significant Irish Unionist Party which strongly campaigned against independence
Ultimately the situation became untenable which led to the Buckingham Palace Agreement (which saw a time limited arrangement whereby Ulster would remain part of the U.K. for 6 years before joining an independent Ireland - Carson’s “sentence of death” with a “stay of execution”)
It was never implemented in the south because of the War of Independence and the Civil War, but still forms the basis of Northern Ireland today.
You can’t do justice to the complexities of Irish history in a short post but the North isn’t occupied: it is governed with the consent and support of its citizens. Should they withdraw their consent the things will change but, until and unless they do, the status quo remains the legitimate arrangement
You’re right that a short post cannot do justice to the complexities of Irish history.
The situation became untenable, as you put it, because a minority in Ireland refused to accept the democratically expressed wishes of the majority. It is one of the many historical ironies that the party which supported that minority is so loudly now proclaiming its adherence to the principle that a majority should get its way regardless of the wishes of the minority. Had this party held onto that principle then there might never have existed the artificially created border which is creating such grief today for that party.
Aren't most borders 'artificially created' ?
There's an interesting paradox with some people who think its wrong to have an international border across the island of Ireland but right to have an international border across the island of Britain. While some other people who think vice versa.
Surely most land borders are the result of two neighbouring 'barons' reaching a point where it was more trouble to fight on further and try and grab more territory than to call it quits and agree the status quo. Classic example is surely Portugal. Even the Pyrenees don't provide a complete border; there are Basques and Catalans on both sides at the seaward ends.
I agree with your conclusion. But when you have seen how these sorts of forecasts are created, it’s hilarious that anyone takes them seriously.
The world of economic and financial modelling is a bunch of mainly 20-somethings staying up late creating vast spreadsheets.
The innumerable input assumptions are at best open to challenge and at times outright flawed but barely interrogated at all due to time constraints or dogma.
If that was the worst of it maybe it wouldn’t be so bad. But very often the models contain loads of circular references and macros that break down one time out of every three times run. So you can’t even trust the output regardless of the input!
There’s a lot that Gove has to say with which I disagree profoundly. But his infamous comment about experts was perhaps the most wise statement by any politician in recent decades. And you don’t have to look very hard for the evidence. The modelling behind Greece’s Eurozone accession and subsequent austerity programme being good examples.
I am not sure where you have seen people creating forecasts using spreadsheets containing circular references and broken macros, but as someone who is an economic forecaster for a living (I even worked for one of the organisations with an acronym for a name that the innumerate hack Gove got so worked up about) I think you're talking shite. Take a look at how the economy has performed relative to forecasts by the BOE or OBR and you will see that their forecasts have been pretty accurate. I know of no credible forecaster who doesn't think that Brexit has already harmed the UK economy and will do further damage once implemented, especially on a no deal basis.
You are not the only person who has experience with such modelling in esteemed organisations so perhaps you'd like to calm down a bit.
I did not say Brexit has not harmed the UK economy or that no deal would not cause further harm. The comment was in the context of IFS modelling that a Corbyn govt is preferable to a Boris no deal brexit.
There are also Protestant and Unionist parts of Fermanagah that does not change the fact the county is majority Catholic as Antrim and Down are majority Protestant
Free the occupied six counties!
For several generations there was building pressure in rural Ireland to overturn what they saw as fundamental inequities in the structure of society. Even despite Wolfe Tone it was an economically driven campaign (“Fair rents! Free sale! Fixity of tenure!)
It was handled poorly by the British government, expertly exploited by Daniel O’Connell and had a bit of luck with Kitty Shaw
Despite all this there was a very significant Irish Unionist Party which strongly campaigned against independence
Ultimately the situation became untenable which led to the Buckingham Palace Agreement (which saw a time limited arrangement whereby Ulster would remain part of the U.K. for 6 years before joining an independent Ireland - Carson’s “sentence of death” with a “stay of execution”)
You can’t do justice to the complexities of Irish history in a short post but the North isn’t occupied: it is governed with the consent and support of its citizens. Should they withdraw their consent the things will change but, until and unless they do, the status quo remains the legitimate arrangement
You’re right that a short post cannot do justice to the complexities of Irish history.
The situation became untenable, as you put it, because a minority in Ireland refused to accept the democratically expressed wishes of the majority. It is one of the many historical ironies that the party which supported that minority is so loudly now proclaiming its adherence to the principle that a majority should get its way regardless of the wishes of the minority. Had this party held onto that principle then there might never have existed the artificially created border which is creating such grief today for that party.
If Ireland hadn't been partitioned, we wouldn't need to worry about Backstops!
Even without Ireland, there would still be a backstop and probably the ERG's objections would be much the same, that we would be trapped as a vassal state.
We wouldn't have to worry about a 'backstop' as such but because of geography we'd still be doing a lot of business with the EU and having to accept their standards.
alex says: "What would be quite amusing, I suppose, would be if Johnson asked for an extension, the EU refused it, and then the HoC voted through May’s deal against Govt opposition."
Crikey that`s interesting. I never thought of that. If opposition MPs took control of the house again, could they quickly pass a bill in support of May`s WA? Is this possible. This would avoid No Deal and massively embarrass the government - Corbyn would love this solution.
I wonder if that is where we are heading. Boris I think might try to go with the flow and offer Parliament a free vote. Corbyn, however, would not be amused.
Comments
No further extension means they have us by the balls. We can No Deal - but this current Parliament won't. They could Revoke - but that has always so far failed to get anywhere. Or we could pass whatever WA is on the table after the upcoming summit. All by month end.
Old Thread, this.
There's an interesting paradox with some people who think its wrong to have an international border across the island of Ireland but right to have an international border across the island of Britain. While some other people who think vice versa.
Some contradicting lies are about to go splat onto the wall of reality. The EU aren't about to cave. The EU aren't going to be persuaded to veto the deal or accept a post-it on our letter saying "the letter is a lie please ignore". The government don't have a wiggle way out of the Benn Act and cannot break the law. Johnson will not resign once he asks for an extension.
For those of us with a keen eye and a vat of popcorn to eat, this is great fun. I expect less fun for cultists on either side such as Jezziah and HYUFD who will find the hoops they have to jump through ever higher as black becomes white becomes black again and they have to justify that the changes were always happening.
Now in fairness HYUFD is something of a born again leaver, but I've never been anything more than willing to compromise / put up with a soft Brexit, I was someone who voted remain and I am someone who signed both the second referendum and revoke article 50 petitions (was to avoid no deal and it mentioned this is the people's vote we aren't going to get)
Becoming a zealous Lib Dem doesn't make you some kind of super remainer, or doesn't make your opponents Brexiteers. I don't like you because your an angry man who seems to constantly get angry at me for things I haven't done or have never supported. Here the example is I somehow have to jump through hoops and pretend that black is white in regards to justifying Johnson breaking the Ben act or pretending his letter is a lie. Why the hell would I do that you crazy little man?
I'm happy to argue with you about things I have actually done or said but quite frankly you are a lunatic who seems to have hallucinations and claim all kinds of mad things that never happened.
Although there is an underlying contradiction (when is there ever not) in their unhinged arguments that the Benn Act has destroyed the chances of securing a deal (because the EU aren’t being forced to confront the alternative of No Deal), whilst expecting the EU to actively choose to trigger no deal anyway.
This current parliament won`t pass any deal (unless sufficient Labour MPs rebel from the party line). The LP would rather have No Deal that grant the Tories the kudos of leaving with a deal. They will enjoy the chaos that ensues (if there is no chaoes they will manufacture it) and blame the Tories for leaving without a deal.
You can use South Asian or East Asian if you wish to clarify.
I did not say Brexit has not harmed the UK economy or that no deal would not cause further harm. The comment was in the context of IFS modelling that a Corbyn govt is preferable to a Boris no deal brexit.
Crikey that`s interesting. I never thought of that. If opposition MPs took control of the house again, could they quickly pass a bill in support of May`s WA? Is this possible. This would avoid No Deal and massively embarrass the government - Corbyn would love this solution.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2019/09/03/corbyn-better-no-deal-brexit-say-investment-banks-anti-capitalist/