shurlock

You’ve been taken for a ride pal (not for the first time). You are Brexit.

Jesus wept. He could fill the Sea of Galilee with that whopper JJ.

Which future UK governments would never let happen - that's why the UK isn't part of the euro, schengen and has secured myriad other opt-outs. Europhiles in this country like John Major have always been pragmatic and fairweather europhiles, unlike say France where there has been a deeper ideological commitment among the governing classes towards the idea of Europe. Yet Baldrick thinks that there is some deep state cabal intent on thrusting us into a European superstate. When facts and reality don't agree, there's always the warm embrace of conspiracy I suppose.

You’re all over the shop You’re confusing incremental changes with fundamental treaty changes (protected by a referendum lock) and drawing in vain on the French experience when it has zero relevance to the UK given the two countries fundamentally different historical, economic and philosophical attitudes to the EU and integration.

Shifting the goalposts a tad The question is not whether Lisbon shifted too much power or not (FWIW independent analysis by the government suggests the balance of competences, on the whole, is about right). No the question is whether remainers didn’t know what they were voting for. We all knew about Lisbon at the time of referendum, so it’s wholly irrelevant. The point is that there are clear constitutional constraints that circumscribe the scope for further integration never mind the UK’s absolute veto in big areas such as foreign affairs, taxation, justice and the EU budget. While there might be reform in areas in which the EU has an existing exclusive competence or where competences are shared subject to a majority in the EU Council of Ministers, we ultimately know what those areas are (hence the word existing), ensuring any change would be incremental, not radical relative to the status quo and the leap into the dark that is Brexit. It’s a ludicrous false equivalence and I bet you know that deep down too Balders.

The EU or the Eurozone? Which parts have fundamentally changed? Which changes have been taken without the UK’s consent. I see you’ve completely ignored the fact that major treaty change -a new Maastricht or Lisbon- would require a referendum for approval.

The EU or the Eurozone? Which parts have fundamentally changed? Which changes have been taken without the UK’s consent. I see you’ve completely ignored the fact that major treaty change -a new Maastricht or Lisbon- would require a referendum. Which parts have fundamentally altered the UK’s relationship with the Eu

And the European Union Act 2011 included a referendum lock so that any amendments of future EU treaties -necessary for any real transfer of power from London to Brussels- would have to be approved both by an Act of Parliament and by the electorate in a referendum. That along with other rights, powers and derogations put clear restrictions on the ability to depart from the status quo. Baldrick is living up to his name again.

I understand that Cummings team at No.10 are sending detailed instructions to departments to ensure schools don't go without school lunches. #mess

No her red lines ruled out those options - again it show how swivel-eyed some have become (not necessarily you) that they can't see the woods through the trees and how many Brexit boxes May's deal and outline for the future relationship ticked. Arrogant about what? You continue to misunderstand the EU position - they're not out to get us or punish us. Its simply about addressing their substantive concerns and both the permanent customs union (with limited SM alignment for NI) and common market 2.0 do that.

hahahahaha

I've expressed my views on those questions here before. Its a telltale tic of yours that when you're stumbling and flailing, you bombard posters with poorly connected questions that have nothing to do with the original question. Don't say I don't pay attention to you pal Why do I need to specify which indicative votes? Its a process pal, a process to discover where the will of HoC lies and while I'd prefer the softest Brexit possible (as many thoughtful leavers do), I'd accept the outcome to find some compromise. Last time Ken Clarke's customs union proposal lost by only 3 votes and the common market 2.0 lost by 21 votes - very fine margins. If the alternative -to hold a second referendum (which lost by 12 votes) is still too toxic- the solution lies somewhere between the CU and the Common Market 2.0. As I say, with a new set of circumstances and the worst case scenario of a no deal becoming much starker, it's more than conceivable that one of those two proposals (or a variant of them) would now pass. They certainly have a better chance of passing than May's deal.

Now the opposition has seen the precipice, I would go back and revisit some of the indicative votes that came close to passing first time round. I suspect they would have the numbers now. And yes outside your scorched earth, spittle flecked understanding of Brexit, they would amount to leaving.

Jesus wept.

He's the second most famous graduate from pompey poly I'll let you know

An unfortunate phrase pal given you've wheeled it out before only to get egg on your face. You've s**t your pants more than tim henman has on centre court. Maybe wait and see.

Great quote! Not to mention countries have hundreds of bilateral agreements that while not constituting a full FTA, tackle obstacles to trade in specific sectors or policy areas that are not covered by the WTO. The EU has 100+ bilateral agreements with the US alone.

Piano wire and face smashed in classy?

If you believe this time is no different, then you're a bigger cretin than your litany of cretinous posts and previous embarrassments that have marked you out as the biggest cretin on here. Still betting on £ going up pal

Yep no deal is the most likely outcome; but don't underestimate Johnson's unnecessary escalation focusing the minds of the opposition parties and tory backbenchers.

Fatboy's going for it. https://news.sky.com/story/pm-boris-johnson-plans-to-ask-queen-to-suspend-parliament-from-mid-september-11795978

Torn Achilles are nasty (again can occur through noncontact). If you’re a professional sportsman, they’re probably harder to make a full recovery from than doing your ACL. But hopefully the lack of initial swelling is a positive sign.

Not really. ACLs frequently happen without any contact.

Both statements aren't incompatible.

This is a work of art. A beautifully painted picture of strawmen. You're like the Maidstone Monet.