E.U: Leave or Stay? Your thoughts.

Well I guess this is down to one's philosophical viewpoint. I would rather that government didn't intervene in our activity unless it is manifestly essential. Some of the posts seem to assume that the government should by default regulate the activities we are involved in unless they cannot see a way to do so.

This is a difference of outlook, not a dispute of facts.

 

There's talk that some Tories could walk if BoJo is moved in to take over from May.

Mind you other prospects include Dominic Raab, Esther McVey, David Davis, Michael Gove and Andrea Leadsom.

I hope this is the people at the very bottom of the list. They're what's left in the box of Quality Street when all the nice sweets have been eaten.

And yeah, not a fan of Quality Street.

 

yeah, yeah, get the crayons out for the dummy.

/I'll leave you guys to your echo chamber.

 

A50 wouldn't automatically lapse because of a failure to put a withdrawal agreement in place, it could lapse because parliament hasn't passed legislation to repeal the act that took us into the EU in the first place.

INAL but the issues raised on that blog seem to be fairly well reasoned and logical, it was written by an Honorary Research Fellow at University of Bristol Law School, an author on EU law, and a barrister at Foundry Chambers so i guess he knows what he's talking about...either way it would be interesting, and not that surprising, if we can't even work out if we've actually left after we've left.

 

I didn't mean to imply that the blog is wrong - Just that the government are currently so busy fighting among themselves there's very little chance that they know. If they do know then they don't appear to give a hoot either.

Don't get me wrong, I'd be rolling on the floor laughing if the UK "leaves" on the 29th with no deal and then a few days later realise that the UK law says they haven't actually left. That'd be the icing on the **** sandwich that has been Brexit.

My issue with your comments is that they seem to suggest that the larger entities would self-regulate were the legislation not in place - And I don't think many here share that belief.

 

Good lord, you do like your straw man arguments. If you're not going to properly engage in a debate then why did you bother in the first place?

 

I think that I have explained why it is manifestly essential, and that this legislation allows most people the luxury of not being aware of that necessity. Check out the history of consumer protection if you don't believe me.

 

Would be true to form.

I'd pay good money to see that.

 

No, i know you weren't.

What i said was more about saying the guy seems to know what he's talking about so it would probably stand a good chance of being accepted as something admissible to the courts, that and like you say it would be comedy gold if we thought we'd left only find out later that we hadn't.

 

I feel like Brexit, with or without an extension, is going to drag on for a long time with regards to legal challenges as to whether it was legal, who did what wrong and how, and so on.

But I imagine the EU will just say "You're out, you can apply to join again though" and have no time for our pissing about, proving it all to have been a waste of time, money, and patience proving that legally we shouldn't have left.

 

The kids are back in the Parliament playground.

May talking about a third MV and lots of "I will not allow" this and that.

Edit: I'm amazed May doesn't hear herself speak and just say "you know what, it's all crap". Attacking the House now and their "indulgence".

She's really losing the plot. I think we may actually be seeing her having a breakdown

She's just made reference to "murderers and rapists" and that her 'deal' should be supported.

Mrs May. What the frak planet do you live on?

 

A Scottish conservative MP just made reference to 4% unemployment and the PM corrected him that it was actually 3.9% - evidently referring to this as a positive thing.

Unemployment as defined as working at least 1 hour a week. So, you earn £7.83 a week? You can thank the government for that magnanimous beneficence.

What the frak planet do ANY of them live on?

 

True, true.

I see she's happy to say what propositions have been rejected by the House as if they're done and dusted and yet holds a completely different view on her own motions that have been rejected, more than once.

That on top of saying the British voted and that's that, well, what's that? I'm sure there's a word.... Oh yeah, hypo(expletive)crite.

 

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

Sums it up very nicely.

She was also aware of this before PMQs.

 

Am I the only one seeing the real reason she went for a short extension before the new EU parliament?
It makes absolutely 100% sure that the EU will never grant a 2nd extension (as we won't have taken part in the EU election).

As a consequence if she gets that extension approved in both the EU and UK then she has definitely defeated Corbyn as the extension is too short for GE + renegotiate, while GE + another extension is impossible for the EU.

Meaning the only two games in town from all parties are now crash out with no deal (either with or without extension) or the May deal.

 

Something something something control...

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

Oh indeed she's chosen that date so that she can try and force her deal through, either now (if the EU say no to the date and she can blame them), or in a few weeks.

Edit: I think Macron is fed up and is going to oppose an extension. Don't blame him. I don't see why any of the EU will agree unless there's a reason. May gave no reason.