moonraker

Yes but they do not have parlmentary backing, the Government is not parliament, aka they are abusing our system so beloved of you Brexiters.

Glad you are a believer in our system, the same system that means parliament is supreme and the referendum was only advisory. Therefore it should, under our system, be for parliament to decide whether they take the peoples advice, but then you knew that.

Yes we have a Tory Government and there in lies the problem, it was the inability of the Tories to have a unified position on Europe that got us into this mess. For years your dysfunctional party (as are all political parties ) has failed to sort out what it really wanted from Europe, it called a referendum out of fear of UKIP and in an attempt to silence the B**stards in the party. Well it has failed on all counts and more importantly it has failed the country. Carry on spouting your crap about non-excitant bi-lateral trade deals, and how good (not) a weak pound is, any one with who has any grasp of how the modern world works would know you are spouting drivel. If that’s arrogance so be it, its better than your drivel. OAP Tories harking back to Empire you couldn’t make it up..

Which international collaborative, consensus based institution will we be camapigning to leave next. The whole leave campaign was and is a fraud, the world is interconnected and interdependent with one possible exception no country has real control we are all subjetc to outside regulations, laws and standards.

Hooray you have got something right at last.

Apology, the ASA did not take action, it was only suggested they should, but they can't rule on political adevertising, which is shame. In spite of my error it remains a fact it was a lie, a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood. All analysis of the claim has proven it to fit the definition of a lie, and all leave leaders have deistanced themselves from it since the vote. So no amount of insults or rewriting history will change it.

Rubbish, numeous interviews with leave voters demonstrated that many of them belived it, the advertsing standrads authority found against them. It is a lie worthy of Trump, an only an ideologue or an idiot would defend it, which are you?

Political campaigns are based on convicing the electorate to vote for one option or another. They have limited funds and clever people decide how best to convince the voters to vote for them, so the leave PR team decided claiming that the EU contribution would go to the NHS would sway enough voters to make it worthwhile. Whilst I agree that immigration was the number one issue, so why not use their limited funds to decorate the Boris Battle Bus with an anti-immigration message and re-enforce leaves key message?

And your point is? In 1975 reamain won with 67% of the votes cast, and polled only 320000 votes less than this years reamain vote, with a smaller population and a smaller turnout. 1975 was a far more empahtic win for remain than this years leave vote. In 1975 43% of the eleigible eletroarte voted to stay, in 2016 it was 37%. So by every measure 1975 was far more definitive than 2016. This is however academic and has no real relevence to our position today.

I know this is something of a hobbyhorse for you and they are certainly in a pickle but not exactly the same as Lehman: “Neil Wilson, a markets analyst at London-based spreadbetter ETX Capital highlighted the bank has been under pressure from aggressive short-selling, notably from some large hedge funds. This includes Soros Fund Management, the family office run by George Soros, which has built up a short position, according to a regulatory filing earlier this year. "It's not a Lehmans moment in the offing. Banks are generally better capitalized and able to cope with adverse shocks. And Deutsche's derivatives exposure can be overstated," Wilson said in a note Wednesday. "Deutsche's problem is not capitalization – it's just that its costs have soared (mainly through litigation and fines) and it's not that profitable any more." The world has changed since the banking crisis and whilst there is still risk, the commentators point about capitalisation is key. "It's not a Lehmans moment in the offing. Banks are generally better capitalized and able to cope with adverse shocks. And Deutsche's derivatives exposure can be overstated," Wilson said in a note Wednesday. "Deutsche's problem is not capitalization – it's just that its costs have soared (mainly through litigation and fines) and it's not that profitable any more." I assume such comentators are more knowledagble in this area than I.

Excellent post until the last sentence. Its not about cry babies, as a remainer I continue to campaign for what I believe in, would leavers simply have gone away if the result had been the exact opposite? My patriotism will ensure I do for my country whatever is required to make us successful, provided I am not expected to compromise principles in favour of extreme right or left wing policies.

I thought the current theme was about the views of people who were successful in business, not their expertise on Antarctic Birdlife or their predilection to use flippant comments. Simple questions: Is Sugar a successful business leader? Has he created wealth and jobs in the UK? Has he done despite his left leaning tendencies?

Thanks for that you are correct my comma is misused and confusing. I also note that the Head of the German equivalent of the CBI has totally contradicted the Brexit mantra that German Car Manufacturers or indeed German industry in general will be calling the shots over access to the 'Single Market' . So where does he sit in the Brexit rankings of business leaders and the veracity of their views.

I note Lord Sugar disagrees, with the German tabloid boss.

Like Brexit little more than a vanity project that is yet to be realised. Also its his money he can do with it as he likes, politicians on the other hand are spending/ gambling with our money.

I did not say Boris contradicted May I said he is liar and I take anything he says with a pinch of salt. I am not irked by May and actullay think she was a good choice for the task in hand. You make a good point wrt the looming German and French elections, however I think finnacial collapse in the Eurozone is unlikely in any time frame to suit Brexit.

Like everything else post Brexit there is no certainity about when we will start the formal process. You have taken Boris the Liar at his word, there are many things that May will want sorted before she triggers Article 50 and there aint much sign of any real progress yet. Perhaps it is all being done very covertly with no leaks and everything is tickity boo, at least that would be first for a Tory Government.

From where have you conjured this, that the highly improbable EU Army will be a conscripted force, but why not start another brexit myth. None of the major military nations in the EU have conscription so why would they re-introduce such a thing.

It simple, they made a donation, nothing more, they aquired no rights from their donations and no title. No one will invest anything like they are dreaming of and therfore they have no chance because any thing less than an 8 figure sum will have no long term benfefit. Still its nice thay can dream. There would be more chance of getting a few million if they invested the trusts loose change in the Lotto.

Good point Wes, however this is the heart of the problem, Brexit means many different things to the many different people who voted for it. The remain vote was for one thing only staying in the EU, there were no promises other than remaining. Once the fine details are sorted out and we know exactly what Brexit means a fair proportion of Brexiters will feel disenfranchised, then what?

Please clarify one thing for me, the referendum question was about leaving the EU not freedom of movement. A number of Brexiters have attempted to argue that the referendum was not decided on immigration, therfore why are so many Brexiters arguing that the ending of freedom of movement is essential in leaving the EU.

Further evidence if any evidence were needed that you like so many Brexiters don’t like the modern world, although I do have a Twitter account it is dormant I just haven’t got engaged with it, but to dismiss it as vacuous is in itself vacuous. In other news major US Banks and Financial institutions reiterate that Brexit will have a damaging impact on London as financial centre as they judge the EU will not allow the current pass-porting to continue, the continued wishful thinking of a large proportion of Brexiters that the EU will give the UK everything it wants s just that, wishful thinking.

Now come on this is unfair, difficult questions are not allowed, you could at least of provided multi choice answers, let me help; a)'we don't know b) that's scaremongering c) it will be all right d) suck it up losers. No other answers are acceptable as they have't got a f**cking clue

Without to much effort you could find examples for every politician failing to do what they said they would.

That's not one but two flying over the cuckoos nest. I like the way Duckhunter keeps getting, the remainers in government excuse in, it is not remainers in our, in control government, that are the problem but politicians around the world who have no particular interest or need for us outside of the EU. This whole shambles has been brought about by out of date 1950's Tory attitudes. An honourable and decent PM got it spectacularly wrong and has paid a very high personal price, sadly the rest of us will also pay a high price.