15-12-18, 01:04 AM
(This post was last modified: 15-12-18, 01:08 AM by fazersharp.)
(15-12-18, 12:27 AM)mtread link Wrote: Two pieces of EU legislation which I presume you are happy to do away with :
1.EU motor insurance regulations direct that your UK motorcycle insurance automatically covers you for 3rd party liability in any other EU country, without paying an extra premium
2. Your mobile phone roaming charges cover all EU countries. So 'roam like home' includes voice, sms and data.
All benefits from being part of the 'single market', which we will lose.
You can dump the 3rd party only - almost useless, better to pay extra and get something worth while which I would of thought that anyone who is travelling to the EU would do anyway. Its not like its really useful for those times that you find your self in the Eu by accident :rolleyes . And do you actually think that premiums are not loaded to add the cover- we do pay extra but we have no choice to or not.
Roaming - yes we will keep that one.
And that's my point we don't have to throw it all out, we keep what is good and useful and correct for our country and amend others to suit us and keep others. Our choice.
I don't do rain or threat there of. dry rider only with no shame.
(14-12-18, 11:39 PM)mtread link Wrote: Again I say, how do you know all of those who voted Leave wanted a 'No Deal' version? What gives you the right to speak for 52% of the population? How do you know that none of them wanted to leave but with a Norway type deal? What utter arrogance! Because a Norway type deal was not on the ballot paper - that's how he knows people did not vote for it.
I don't do rain or threat there of. dry rider only with no shame.
Interesting article in the Washington post by Henry Olsen worth a read unless your from north of the border or an ex customs and excise worker
Quote:Again I say, how do you know all of those who voted Leave wanted a 'No Deal' version? What gives you the right to speak for 52% of the population? How do you know that none of them wanted to leave but with a Norway type deal? What utter arrogance!
There's a mistake there - 28% of the population voted to leave. I think your quoted 52% refers to those that voted?
is it clean enough?
(15-12-18, 07:56 AM)bludclot link Wrote: Quote:Again I say, how do you know all of those who voted Leave wanted a 'No Deal' version? What gives you the right to speak for 52% of the population? How do you know that none of them wanted to leave but with a Norway type deal? What utter arrogance!
There's a mistake there - 28% of the population voted to leave. I think your quoted 52% refers to those that voted?
what percentage of the population voted Remain?
(14-12-18, 08:31 PM)agricola link Wrote: [quote author=agricola link=topic=24678.msg288057#msg288057 date=1543485191]
[quote author=VNA link=topic=24678.msg288043#msg288043 date=1543444716]
Quote:Prior to EU membership, i never had to pay 20% tax on anything i bought
That’s incorrect, as I’ve pointed out before VAT replaced the purchase tax in the UK.
Quote:So tell me again, how I'm better off in the EU
Agricola you continue to blame the EU for the policies of successive UK governments, and it appears local councils too. :eek
You were given a ball to kick, and like many others you kicked it hard. But I’m afraid you’ve kicked the wrong ball.
So tell me how Im better off in the EU then
[/quote]
Still waiting
[/quote]
Still waiting
All the talk now is of a second referendum as the only way to break the deadlock.
They're saying that if the result is Leave again we're back were we are now and Parliament will still reject it.
If the result is Remain they'll accept it and we stay in forever more.
15-12-18, 12:33 PM
(This post was last modified: 15-12-18, 12:34 PM by VNA.)
Quote:All the talk now is of a second referendum as the only way to break the deadlock.
They're saying that if the result is Leave again we're back were we are now and Parliament will still reject it.
If the result is Remain they'll accept it and we stay in forever more.
There are a few problems with a referendum. The first is time. We can’t hold a carefully considered referendum and meet the march deadline.
The second is the question. My suggestion is – May’s Deal or Cancel article 50. My reasoning is that May’s deal is the only deal on the table (so we are told), and though it will cost the UK economically it’s the not the hellish prospect that NO DEAL is. However, there are almost endless options for the question, and the question at the end of the day has to satisfy the public. And while I can understand those who call for NO DEAL on the voting slip, will parliament whom is overwhelmingly opposed to NO DEAL agree to risk such a disaster?
3. As for parliament rejecting the result. If the question is agreed and the legislation passed to make the result legally binding – well that is that. Whatever people decide must be enacted.
That’s why I think a cross party committee is a better and more likely solution.
Deadlock is indeed where we are right now. It’s where we were always going to end up following the LEAVE result in 2016. David Cameron opened one big focc off can o worms.
I've got a bad feeling about all this. I can see us Leavers getting robbed of our victory  .
Quote: Because a Norway type deal was not on the ballot paper - that's how he knows people did not vote for it.
Neither was 'No Deal' although you all seem to think it was......
Quote: All the talk now is of a second referendum as the only way to break the deadlock.They're saying that if the result is Leave again we're back were we are now and Parliament will still reject it.If the result is Remain they'll accept it and we stay in forever more.
Interesting article in the Guardian today (yeah I know left wing elitist rag blah blah). As you say, another referendum cannot be Remain/Leave as we would be no further forward. If it's a two choice referendum it's either got to be No Deal/Theresa's Deal, Theresa's deal /Remain or No deal /Remain. So something would have to be eliminated making one lot unhappy.
The other option they suggested was putting 3 on the paper, and allow a second preference vote. The worry with that is we all end up with Theresa's deal :eek
Has anyone seen the vid of junker yesterday ruffling up a Woman's hair. What ever happened to "me too" Now if that was Borris who did that it would be called a sexual assault and there would be calls for him to be sacked. How come Junker has not been sacked ----- oh wait a minute, no one can.
I don't do rain or threat there of. dry rider only with no shame.
Quote: Has anyone seen the vid of junker yesterday ruffling up a Woman's hair. What ever happened to "me too" Now if that was Borris who did that it would be called a sexual assault and there would be calls for him to be sacked.
No I've got better things to do. Was it Theresa?  Actually, if it was Boris it would be a sexual assault. Incidentally, where is Boris? He's gone very quiet lately. Sulking because he can't make a leadership challenge for another 12 months? :lol
Actually, while we're on the subject of sexual assaults, interesting to see that two Tory MPs who had the whip suspended because of allegations of sexual misconduct were suddenly 'unsuspended' just so they could take part of the 'confidence' vote for May. So it just goes to show that within the Tory party, morals take second place to power. :rolleyes
15-12-18, 05:42 PM
(This post was last modified: 15-12-18, 05:43 PM by fazersharp.)
I don't do rain or threat there of. dry rider only with no shame.
I just see white, and it's not even snowing (yet) :lol
Uh oh. Sounds like you know who's been sampling the VSOP with a bit too much enthusiasm again 
VSOP! That's European isn't it? 
Quote:Interesting article in the Guardian today (yeah I know left wing elitist rag blah blah). As you say, another referendum cannot be Remain/Leave as we would be no further forward. If it's a two choice referendum it's either got to be No Deal/Theresa's Deal, Theresa's deal /Remain or No deal /Remain. So something would have to be eliminated making one lot unhappy.
The other option they suggested was putting 3 on the paper, and allow a second preference vote. The worry with that is we all end up with Theresa's deal [img alt=:eek]http://foc-u.co.uk/Smileys/efocicon/shocked.gif[/img]
But the priority of parliament is to avoid a NO DEAL BREXIT.
Bearing in mind that;
1. The 2016 referendum should have never been put to the people.
2. That May tried to by-pass parliament with her deal.
3. Further May tried to block parliament’s right to stop the whole process.
Therefore, surely, parliament must now take control. Otherwise arguably our democracy appears to be failing.
I think we will increasingly hear of a cross party initiative over the next few days. This may either happen by consensus or via the brutal mechanism of a no confidence vote.
I think the 2 overall priorities will be;
1. There cannot be a NO DEAL BREXIT
2. The Good Friday Agreement must not be undermined in any shape or form.
Plus, initially somewhat privately across the Labour, Tories and Lib Dems (what’s left of them) the third objective will be to squash any call for a second Independence referendum.
If the three priorities can be agreed, then it’s not difficult to see where we end up.
Plus parliament will have asserted it’s power, uncertainty nipped in the bud and our economy can begin to move forwards again. Unrest in NI averted and the integrity of the UK secured for some years to come.
Talking of consensus.
What the English don’t seem to realise, and certainly the English press don’t, and indeed despite a number of coalitions in our UK history, is that a lack of majority is not the end of the world.
Our government here in Scotland is a minority government (apart from one term when the SNP did the impossible and won a majority). The current SNP government cannot pass legislation without the support of others.
Many countries right round the world operate on this basis.
What Westminster, now needs to do, is what it thinks is not possible, but which in fact is the norm for so many countries across the globe.
|
