Brexit discussion
New thread to discuss Brexit.
Guidelines The constant baiting, belittling of either side of the vote needs to end. The new thread must be a reasonable and a frank debate, it's impossible to agree on this topic but none of this "he/she is thick" or "you're a snowflake". This is not Facebook or twitter. |
Re: Brexit discussion
For those of a legalistic mind here's a dissection of the Withdrawal Bill.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_4OZS_HMQ2o Government are trying to play games with standing committees to ensure they get their way - offer some compromise on the Bill, render it pointless by trying to rig committees. http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entr...aafcf68a04?9fg Robert Peston of ITV looks into these here: https://www.facebook.com/pestonitv/p...13633722294697 Ending with this: Quote:
One thought: under the Bill there is nothing stopping a member of the House of Lords from being placed into the cabinet and bypassing Parliament entirely. Another thought: would those who think all this is necessary and support the Conservatives in this trust Jeremy Corbyn and Labour with these powers? There is zero guarantee that the Conservatives will still be a minority government by 2019. |
Re: Brexit discussion
So leaving all those thousands of regulations in the hands of the EU is grabbing back sovereignty? That is the alternative.
Love to know what other way it can be done. Nothing is actually changing other than transfer of control to the UK Parliament. With transfer of powers within the UK, eg Scottish devolution, it is a lot simpler. There are 12,000 EU imposed regulations. The obvious simple solution is to say as the EU no longer has any say, that those are all scrapped. That would be just silly. People might agree with a lot of those regulations. Grabbing back control of those is simple. Any amendments, additions, or removal can be done later by the normal Parliamentary process. The problem with the EU regulations is they are not specified in UK law, only in general that EU rules have to be followed. It is the EU that has set those rules, and will almost certainly specify that they only apply to EU(+other specified) countries, If those rules no longer apply, then what apply does instead of them? It would be an unsatisfactory free-for-all on those issues. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Any safeguards built into the Bill are meaningless as Ministers can, at their discretion, amend it and remove them. The future Conservative leader might build that straw man that it's that way or nothing but it's just wrong. This is a wholesale power grab made all the worse by that the electorate refused to give the Conservatives a majority at the last election. If HMG didn't need this level of delegated power during either World War or during the Great Depression they don't need it now. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...e-doesn-t-have What all this does prove is that we desperately need a written constitution to avoid this happening again. Right now the government of the day can, literally, re-write the rules as they go. ---------- Post added at 16:59 ---------- Previous post was at 16:52 ---------- Hat tip David Allen Green / @davidallengreen Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Something that came to mind earlier: if the government is serious about all this they should be preparing to leave the customs union.
By this I mean the IT, the acquisition of sites for trucks awaiting customs clearance, hiring of staff, etc should already be in progress. That's just for customs / trade borders. Then there's all the other stuff we have to do ourselves as we can no longer use shared EU systems. We will become a third nation so will have many things that were previously dependent on EU systems. Where is all this preparation? We can't simply copy/paste unless we plan on trying to remain in the EEA. As of right now we've made very little preparation for the WTO scenario and, indeed, thanks to the wonders of Leave.EU, etc, some people want us to leave right now and have no idea what that would entail. Campaign groups have no reason to be honest. HMG do. What are they up to? A transition deal requires agreement of the EU-27 and, with the current demands the government are making, no deal can be struck involving customs. Whatever your opinion on this HMG are either being incredibly cavalier over this or are misleading the UK for political reasons and will massively backtrack, likely trying to blame others when they themselves haven't even tried to prepare for the scenario they've tried to sell us. |
Re: Brexit discussion
So how on earth are 12,000 EU imposed regulations meant to make their way through Parliament? Just absurd. Just because something could be amended along the way, DOESN'T mean it will. If it does and in a major way, that would be the time to raise objections to that specific matter, and NOT the whole process.
It is rather perverse to argue that the UK Parliament isn't being allowed to consider matters, when it can't currently consider them anyway as they are purely under EU control. Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Read my post again. You are disagreeing with something I didn't say, right from the first paragraph where I remarked that delegated Henry VIII powers are necessary.
Given we are supposedly taking back control and reasserting the sovereignty of Parliament it's not perverse in the slightest to expect Parliament, not the executive, to control the process where feasible. That's a pretty strong 'what about...'. If you object to the EU sidelining Parliament it's far more perverse to not object to the executive doing so. If one is considered wrong both are as neither group were directly elected and given their power by the UK electorate. Ministers, the same as European Union Commissioners, are appointed. Even more exacerbated by that the electorate explicitly denied any one party a majority, there is no coalition in place, the Conservatives want to ignore recommendations and convention with regards to committees and are avoiding any Queens Speech for two years to provide fewer tests of their authority and fewer opportunities for them to be brought down. I consider the EU to be a flawed democracy. To replace that with the model the Conservatives set on pursuing, especially given their conduct to date, is crazy. If we must do this it should be done right, bringing as much of the population as possible along, not leaving it beholden to the internal politics of one party and at best ignoring, at worst demonising, dissent. |
Re: Brexit discussion
I think Theresa May seems to be reverting to type, ie keep maximum control over everything with minimal involvement of others. This is a character flaw and the removal of her two advisers Fiona Hill and Nick Timothy hasn't altered.
Parliament not Theresa May and her close inner circle should control the Brexit process. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Parliament is involved in brexit process, there is a major repeal bill, 2nd reading tomorrow.
|
Re: Brexit discussion
If it was just half a dozen things to be considered then Parliament would be involved. As it is 12,000 or more, that just isn't remotely practical in the time frame. How many DECADES would it take? The intention is introduce the SAME regulations. The whinges are not about doing that, but about the POSSIBILITY of changing something at the same time. It is NOT meant to be an ongoing "power grab" by the executive, but a one-off interim measure. So many of the regulations are likely to be the sort of things that can be introduced by statutory instrument and not involve Parliament anyway.
EU directives have to be passed at national level. Therefore UK laws already exist and have been passed by UK Parliament. An area where there are a lot of EU regulations is food safety. If no equivalents are set out in UK law, then there would be a free-for-all on food safety. Is that what people want? |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Perhaps this article puts it better than I am. 5 paragraphs from it: Quote:
---------- Post added at 19:31 ---------- Previous post was at 19:27 ---------- Quote:
A Bill that gives powers so open ended that the executive could, without recourse to Parliament at all, in theory cancel Brexit and take us into the Eurozone and Schengen, or take the UK into EEA/EFTA is not necessary. |
Re: Brexit discussion
And how do you specify and oversee 12,000 NEW regulations?
If any untoward changes are indeed made, that is the time whinge and complain. If Scotland had voted yes to independence, how would the Scots have dealt with the SAME situation. If anything their situation would have been worse as UK laws would also have to be transferred. From an article about the split up of Czechoslovakia and it's relevance to Brexit. Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Part of the irony here is that many of the workers rights that Labour are worrying about would be continued and confirmed by this bill. Curious that they would oppose it and lose those rights?
Of course this has nothing to do with that and is just a cycnical ploy to try and defeat the government and get a re-run of the election. Would anybody really trust Labour when they have proved to be even more duplicitous than the Lib-Dems in abandoning their promises, particularly to the young, that were fooled into voting for them the last time? |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Maybe Labour would still object if this bill were only concerned with confirming those rights but it's rather typically disingenuous to pretend it's that that they're objecting too in this massive bill. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Quote:
---------- Post added at 10:20 ---------- Previous post was at 10:18 ---------- Quote:
As I've already highlighted with regards to the split up of Czechoslovakia, the procedure is standard and accepted practice in international law. |
Re: Brexit discussion
BREAKING: Government wins EU Withdrawal Bill 2nd Reading. 326 For. 290 Against.
Labour loses Amendment vote. Bill now passes to committee stage. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Where hopefully it will be amended somewhat to rein it in and remove the worst of the excesses.
---------- Post added at 08:27 ---------- Previous post was at 08:25 ---------- Quote:
It may also be used to completely remove any Parliamentary involvement in the end result of the process. ---------- Post added at 08:30 ---------- Previous post was at 08:27 ---------- Quote:
If they feel changes are necessary why would they bother announcing them when they can amend at their leisure once this process is done? Since when have politicians announced things that might be unpopular in advance? Liam Fox is on record as saying the UK's labour market needs deregulation in order to make a success of the UK's departure from the EU. The 6 Labour MPs and the UKIP member for Vauxhall just voted to provide him and his party the authority to carry out that deregulation without further intervention of accountability to Parliament. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
There was 7 Labour rebels in last nights vote. Staunch Pro-Brexit MPs such as, Mann, Hoey, Field etc.
Dennis Skinner is a surprise rebel, he normally rallies around Corbyn. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Analysis of Robert Peston's Tweets on the subject of Brexit to date makes interesting if not surprising reading:
Quote:
Not much sign of anything positive to say there but then he did attend Universite Libre du Bruxelles... :) |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Rather than a Minister with an oversight committee fast tracking approx 12.000 EU rules, regulations and laws onto the statute books to comply with UK law instead of an EU body or the ECJ being the arbiter you'll be happy. The alternative is introducing each and every one to parliament for discussion and amendment which will take years. All the time that takes they will be null and void as we will no longer be members of the EU leaving a very large black hole in our statutes. The Great Repeal bill has a limited time of application (the opponents don't mention that do they?) and ends on Brexit day whenever that may be. Any of the rules regulations or laws that have been adapted can be modified by due process in parliament as and when they deem necassary just like any other laws. So, what is your alternative? |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
So even the mighty Gates now sees the sense in Brexit. :) |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
I hope scence does boom, but if so it'll be despite Brexit not because of it. |
Re: Brexit discussion
I think Juncker has had too much from the bottle again. "Brits will soon regret their vote to leave."
Not this Brit! Up yours Juncker. :2up: |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
One thing I'm grateful to Junker for however is his confirmation, if one were needed, that the EU is totally committed to more integration and that would be the reality if the UK doesn't get out while it can. By hook or by crook and with, I'm sure, the co-operation of certain of our own politicians who refuse to accept the Brexit vote, we would be inevitably drawn further into the whole thing making leaving or even reform of the EU a practical impossibility. That's of course what they all want and if we were to remain inside the EU doing so would become a priority for the Eurocrats. The EU refused reform even in the face of the club's second largest contributor and world's 5th largest economy leaving. How much less likely would they be to accept change were we to give in to their threats and remain?... |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
I was in Europe last week, there was almost pity for us, apart from the French who are glad to see the back of us ! The EU will lose and we'll lose, but they are in a much better position to recover by virtue of size. The signs are already there, the EU economy is storming ahead and ours is stagnating. |
Re: Brexit discussion
And here's the analysis of Robert Peston's Tweets on the subject of Brexit. Anyone care to guess how what percentage have been positive?
Quote:
Yes he's twice as positive as his ITV counterpart, not that it means much as can be seen above. Did anyone really expect more balance amongst these media heavyweights? |
Re: Brexit discussion
Why is it his duty to be positive? He's a reporter not a cheerleader. I imagine you could take a lot of topics and find that reporter sentiment is largely negative from the NHS to transport. Things make news when they're going wrong, not when everything is working smoothly, and for that matter the reporting can reflect the reality of the situation.
This is about trying to shut people up from criticising the government by pretending balanced coverage means 50% positive and 50% negative reporting. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Unfortunately they are few and far between from both sides of the argument/discussion. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Welcome back from your trip away btw. |
Re: Brexit discussion
And just in case anyone's in any doubt about Juncker's plans for the EU and where it's heading they include further expansion, moving towards compulsory membership of the Euro for all member states and an end to national vetoes.
https://order-order.com/2017/09/13/j...-its-own-army/ |
Re: Brexit discussion
Where's Nick Clegg to tell us again that an EU army is a dangerous fantasy, everything Juncker said today shows exactly why brexit is happening and also shows the EU hasn't learnt a damn thing just gone back to their usual expantionist federal head in the sand approach.
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
On Brexit, we know some of what we're losing but pretty little of what we're gaining. City AM, one of the many pro-Brexit media, made the point reluctantly in an editorial that it had not seen a business case for Brexit for the UK service industry. That sector makes up 80% of the UK's exports. If a pro-Brexit publication can be critical about the Government's efforts here, rest assured less biased ones will be even more critical. ---------- Post added at 23:23 ---------- Previous post was at 23:17 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Doesn't change the fact that he is a liar though. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
No they are not liars, they just cannot tell the truth! |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Most politicians lie to varying extents, they have to or the mugs wouldn't vote for them. Reporters would tear them to shreds if they honestly answered questions (e.g. what do you think of job your PM is doing ? ). Most try to not answer questions than outright lie, but don't always succeed. Our crappy media culture is partly to blame. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki_JNrgHvqk
Be good to hear some substantial comments on why Norgrove's fears are unfounded rather than the platitudes and insults we're currently getting from HMG. Dan Hannan utterly failed to supply anything of substance yesterday in his debate with Ian Dunt on LBC. This is a guy who has had an awful lot of time to put flesh on the Brexit bones. I'm very open to being convinced that EFTA/EEA isn't the best way forward for the UK. I'm yet to hear anything substantial to indicate otherwise. ---------- Post added at 10:44 ---------- Previous post was at 10:28 ---------- Actually let me ask peeps here - if we go WTO, which it looks like we will, the EU's tariffs kick in on our exports to them. What would people have us do in response? |
Re: Brexit discussion
For those of you who thought voting "remain" was for the status quo, here's Juncker's latest booze fuelled vision:
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
It was for the status quo, at least in the short term. The above we either had opt-outs on, a veto, or would've triggered a referendum here if they were enacted. Every EU member state has committed to joining the Euro besides those with opt-outs, and those can't be circumvented. Schengen much the same.
Without our influence, votes and veto the EU can take a different path if it so chooses. It's worth remembering that, contrary to the opinions of some, Juncker can say whatever he pleases as far as his vision of the EU goes but he doesn't have the power to implement it. He doesn't get to decide what actually happens, that's down to the Council of Ministers, the elected heads of state of each member state, and the EU Parliament. It's fair to say, though, that Juncker's comments don't set out whatever the future of the UK within the EU would've been. EDIT: If I remember at some point I'll find an article that focuses on what he said and its ramifications seriously. The article linked made me feel dumber having read it. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Meanwhile, back in the real world, away from 'hatred' of individuals, John Lewis profits have fallen 50% and are blaming the uncertainty caused by Brexit. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-41264277
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
This is a bit concerning too.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-a7945956.html Quote:
Our negotiators - headless chickens, running about, giving interviews about how brilliantly everything is going and achieving nothing..... Meanwhile the EU carries on as usual, economies growing, while time runs out for us. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Remainers keep harping on about the service industry and how vital it is to the UK economy. I do not deny there's money to be made there but now let's put it into context. Goods and services exports to the EU only account to 12-15% of the UK's export market. Even that figure is skewed by any exports via ports such as Rotterdam which then become part of EU export figures not the UK's. Quote:
There is a fallacy that tariffs cost businesses billions, they don't. There is only one person who pays the tariff and that is the end consumer. If the goods and services that this country exports are superior to any other product then the end user will pay for them, this will push innovation and development in this country to be better than anyone else. As regards a "tit for tat" response to tariffs and the need to do nothing, this can only lead to reduced prices for the consumer. See, I can put forward a reasoned contribution to a debate.:D Before I forget, the LINK where I got the total export figures from. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
I may be missing something but any fall in profits (c. £30m) due to Brexit/Sterling suffered by John Lewis is dwarfed by the £56m restructuring charge isn't it. What's the actual cost to JLP of the fall in Sterling since the Brexit vote? Unless we know that figure we can't judge what negative effect there's actually been.
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
I'm sure none of us have lived our lives entirely 'lie' free. Some are just a lot more practiced at it than others. ;)
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
However, WTO rules would kick in and would to some extent reduce that figure as would trade under WTO with the rest of the world until trade agreements were finalised. This (potentially) could mean a boom in the UK economy. Not so much of the "Doom and Gloom" scenario now is there? Is there nothing else in my post you disagree with? |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Brexit uncertainty is hitting all sorts of things here and in the EU, you wouldn't think that latter though. We rarely hear about the worries of or the effects on EU businesses but I don't see that changing. Brexit uncertainty won't last forever however. When the deal is done in whatever form it takes, there'll be no more. At that point we'll start hearing more about EU uncertainty and all the huge problems they're going to be grappling with whilst we get on with dealing with all the realities of an uncertain world. |
Re: Brexit discussion
At this point I think it goes without saying that no agreement will be made in time with regards to a Brexit deal.
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Once we leave and are outside the customs union, we would expect to be charged and pay around 2.5% in trade tariff revenues. The article said, the membership of the EU, along with it's hefty fee compared paying just 2.5% in revenues, is the biggest case of mis-selling that dwarfs the banking PPI scandal. If I can find the article I will link to it. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Once both brexiteers and remoaners wake up to the fact it is going to happen then sensible discussion can then take place. Igni quite rightly picked me up on an error in my previous post in that the EU is responsible for 44% of exports, it still doesn't change the fact that it is only responsible of 15% of the economy and WTO rules could balance that 15% out. If anyone else sees a mistake in my post or can post a genuine rebuttal I look forward to it. The debate awaits. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
---------- Post added at 15:07 ---------- Previous post was at 15:03 ---------- Quote:
If it were as black and white as that it would make no sense for the various forecasts to be predicting the worst outcome for the UK being reverting to WTO. Pretty much the only group making economic forecasts that believe WTO is the best option for the UK is hyper-partisan. Everyone else from dedicated internationalists to those entirely indifferent consider things the opposite way. There's a really good reason why Leave.EU and Vote Leave didn't campaign on the economy. |
Re: Brexit discussion
And here's the stats re Faisal Islam's Tweets on Brexit. It'd be difficult for them to be less positive than his esteemed journalist colleagues wouldn't it so:
Quote:
He's the most positive about it of the three but it's perfectly obvious that none of them are happy and are finding it hard to hide that fact judging by their output. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
People tend to only read the views they want to hear. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
The facts re the Tweets are the facts there's no disputing that and there's plenty of anti-Tory stuff and a lot more on Guido's site for those who bother to look. But of course it's easier for some folks to just dismiss the stuff they don't like. They ridicule the notion that there's any media bias whatsoever against Brexit then when some evidence is put forward in relation to leading journalists they claim it's biased. I'm sure if the journalists concerned have been terribly misrepresented they'll be telling us all about it. Let's wait and see shall we...
|
Re: Brexit discussion
The £ vs $ is higher than it's ever been since brexit. Currently $1.34 to the £1. This is on the news that interest rates may increase next month, after they were held today.
This time 10 years ago. When I went to US for a month, the exchange rate was $2 to the pound. :erm: |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
So lower than all the time we have been in the EU. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how much the rise in Sterling has actually cost JLP because it's easy for companies to report a large fall in profits and blame it all on Brexit without backing that up, especially if the leadership of those companies happens to have a pro-EU agenda. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
You sure about that as some of the other makes are crap IMO as you get what you pay for l always say. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
---------- Post added at 22:06 ---------- Previous post was at 22:02 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Bottom line is. We will be better out. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
The most important thing for the UK is service industries which account for 80% of our exports. These require common standards and freedom of movement helps too. Tariffs are less important. Hence this is a key predicament that the UK faces post-Brexit which is currently sitting in David Davis's too-difficult pile. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
I'm just stating my own experience with his hoovers as others had, if you think i have an agenda on this issue then you're getting a bit touchy. I don't like Vax hoovers for the same reason either and I have no idea what allegiance "Mr Vax" has. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Can we have a separate vacuum cleaner thread ? There are many issues to discuss, what's wrong with a dustpan and broom for example ? ;)
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
---------- Post added at 22:41 ---------- Previous post was at 22:39 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Good to see you and MrK agree on the merits of dust pans. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
---------- Post added at 04:25 ---------- Previous post was at 04:22 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Here's an article for example on the concerns for Dover - https://www.ft.com/content/f308e8bc-...c-9588e51488a0 The HMRC does not think it will be ready for the sheer volume of customs checks needed for cross channel trade. On top of this is the potential divergence of standards between the EU and UK. If we start to separate ourselves from EU standards, then the EU will require inspections to ensure conformity to their standards to make sure we don't sneak a bendy banana or 2kW vacuum cleaner over the water. This will suddenly affect 44% of our exports and 53% of our imports where before, it was frictionless. Of course, we do this for the current 56% and 47% but this is an effective doubling of the load on customs and regulatory agencies. In addition, to customs and conformity, it will seriously affect manufacturer supply chains. Manufacturers warehouse materials with hours worth of stock and rely on a smooth supply chain for efficient running. Delays of a few hours of delivery of materials can shut down production. This worries car manufacturers for example. Finally, we can't ignore the 'Rotterdam Effect' and non-EU imports through ports not in the UK but in the EU. Joining the WTO tariff plan will remove EU ports from the equation.. Think tanks like Economists For Brexit have proposed zero import tariffs as a libertarian response but this still doesn't answer the question of conformity and traceability (plus zero import tariffs will destroy what's lefts of our manufacturing and agriculture) |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
Think I made the point earlier that it's very confusing that on one hand HMG are claiming to be ready for any result while on the other they are making no substantial preparations. When talking about doubling load you have to also remember that the load is unevenly spread - ports like Dover where the vast majority, 80-90%+, of imports are from within the customs union need quadrupling of customs capacity and so far nothing has been done. In other news a little reminder that, for all the rhetoric, neither Juncker or the Commission get to decide what happens within the EU, the member states via their MEPs and heads of government do - paywalled: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/f...ears-3v6v3vnqf Quote:
---------- Post added at 12:29 ---------- Previous post was at 12:06 ---------- Quote:
As I've said a couple of times it's noteworthy that neither of the two major leave campaigns attempted to campaign on economic grounds. Whether the benefits of leaving the EU will balance this is probably subjective. Extreme opinions from people willing to completely disregard any evidence that doesn't agree with their point of view abound on both sides of the argument with zero possibility of being dissuaded so it's a busted flush as far as discussion goes. I'm not going to disagree with Dyson. He is not an unbiased observer in this - his issues with EU regulations governing his products are well known - but he is putting his money where his mouth is which should be respected. |
Re: Brexit discussion
Quote:
|
Re: Brexit discussion
Bonkers Boris has repeated the £350m for the NHS lie. More to do to with leadership ambitions than any desire to help the NHS, when did he last use it ? If there was any money it would of course go on tax cuts for high earners, who most need it. Great timing too, just after a terrorist attack. I think Kermit would make a better PM...
|
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 18:15. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.