EU happy to keep that agency in place in London provided it continues to be governed by ECJ rulings. It cannot have a regulatory agency in a rogue state. Why would 27 other countries put themselves in jeopardy by being subservient to a court, in a country which does not even have a written consitution. That is the breach of contract. The UK makes a decision to leave, fully aware of the consequences, (any rational government will of course calculated all contingencies, it's what they do is it not? ),
Brexit, for once some facts.
- Thread starter flecc
- Start date
The action that changed the situation was Brexit, how can you possibly imagine the case being their problem not ours?
We took the action and we will pay for it. Not the EU
Good grief Man, are you accusing this Government of being Rational?
I'd like you to provide proof!
(just kidding as no one can do that!)
From the BBC
"
The governor of the Bank of England has warned that uncertainty over Brexit is already weighing on the economy.
Mark Carney's comments came as the Bank voted to hold rates and cut growth forecasts.
It edged this year's growth forecast down to 1.7% from its previous forecast of 1.9% made in May. It also cut its forecast for 2018 from 1.7% to 1.6%.
The bank voted 6-2 to keep interest rates on hold at 0.25%. They have been at that level since August last year..
"Don't listen to him I hear the cry, he's just another expert, and as Gollum says, "We've had enough of experts!"
"
The governor of the Bank of England has warned that uncertainty over Brexit is already weighing on the economy.
Mark Carney's comments came as the Bank voted to hold rates and cut growth forecasts.
It edged this year's growth forecast down to 1.7% from its previous forecast of 1.9% made in May. It also cut its forecast for 2018 from 1.7% to 1.6%.
The bank voted 6-2 to keep interest rates on hold at 0.25%. They have been at that level since August last year..
"Don't listen to him I hear the cry, he's just another expert, and as Gollum says, "We've had enough of experts!"
still true!
They give everyone a headache.
Isabel Oakeshott is often on the Sky Press review most evenings. She is a classic Brexiter of the 'yah boo,we won,now deal with it or i'll shout at you' brigade. She is a pain in that she really doesnt know much but shouts down those that do,is she bright? She appears thick on the program.
The worst possible person to try to have a discussion with,Polly Toynbee takes her to pieces and so does the guy,named Abel,Oakeshott really throws her toys out of the pram when they are on the show.
KudosDave
With a deadlocked parliament, the possibility of an unfavourable deal and both parties so deeply divided on Europe, it may start to appear that the only way out of the impasse is a second referendum in which the government’s deal is put it to the people for legitimation.
That appears unlikely at the moment. Yet a referendum on Europe appeared even more unlikely when, in 1971, Tony Benn proposed it to Labour’s national executive but failed to find a seconder. James Callaghan presciently declared that for a divided party, the referendum might well prove a “rubber life raft into which the whole party may one day have to climb”. The Conservatives too may come eventually need that life raft.
Nigel Farage said that a further referendum would be needed: there is no doubt that Brexiteers would have continued their campaign to take Britain out of the EU and they would have had every democratic right to do so. But so equally do those who have doubts about the decision.
Brexit after all raises fundamental, indeed existential, issues for the future of the country. That is why the final deal needs the consent not only of parliament, but of a sovereign people.
Lord Butler
That appears unlikely at the moment. Yet a referendum on Europe appeared even more unlikely when, in 1971, Tony Benn proposed it to Labour’s national executive but failed to find a seconder. James Callaghan presciently declared that for a divided party, the referendum might well prove a “rubber life raft into which the whole party may one day have to climb”. The Conservatives too may come eventually need that life raft.
Nigel Farage said that a further referendum would be needed: there is no doubt that Brexiteers would have continued their campaign to take Britain out of the EU and they would have had every democratic right to do so. But so equally do those who have doubts about the decision.
Brexit after all raises fundamental, indeed existential, issues for the future of the country. That is why the final deal needs the consent not only of parliament, but of a sovereign people.
Lord Butler
... Yes but as I have said on a number of postings that is no longer within the power or gift of any UK government, that power was ceded on the sending of the article 50 document.
If the UK wishes to reverse from this cul de sac , it must try first to persuade an increasingly irritated EU.
I am not persuaded by the argument advanced at the time of the HoL debate that there is any UK veto.
The old Navajo Indian trick of screaming and begging might work[emoji1]
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
remainers - if you want to reverse brexit (it seems that danidl may be right, you can't), you have to win not just the mind of the brexit voters but also their heart.
Apparently, a recent poll suggests that the 4% margin has reduced to 3% after more than a year.
The only solution is a soft brexit.
Apparently, a recent poll suggests that the 4% margin has reduced to 3% after more than a year.
The only solution is a soft brexit.
But what was the reaction of the previously undecided?
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
there is no guarantee that EURef2 would have a larger participation than the last one.
TBH, I don't think EURef2 is the solution.
If labour comes out with an anti-brexit platform then they may just wrestle power from the tories and proceed to be a proper member.
Otherwise, soft brexit is the only solution.
TBH, I don't think EURef2 is the solution.
If labour comes out with an anti-brexit platform then they may just wrestle power from the tories and proceed to be a proper member.
Otherwise, soft brexit is the only solution.
Brexit isn't a solution, there wasn't a problem that it could possibly be a solution to or from , after all.
Brexit was simply an "anti" reaction to being artificially provoked into a negative and fearful state of mind by unscrupulous chancers posing as honest Political Figures, who played on the Public's shocking habit of not checking facts for themselves, then encouraged them into living in a state of self denial about it, with a campaign of Fake "Good News" when things are going downhill.
Pretty much the usual situation in Fascist states when things reach a crisis point.
Not aware that any other third country has offered the EU to allow ECJ rulings -- if that is the only requirement to stay then it looks like the 800 employees should start looking for alternative jobs maybe even in the UK subject to the EU excepting the generous offer on the table. Or they could try other third countries but they might find it more difficult as your own government department explains:
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/moving_country/moving_abroad/working_abroad/working_outside_the_eu.html
whatever you think of brexit, it's most likely going to happen. As kudosdave put it via Isobel oakeshott's mouth:
brexit or rather the EU, is a deep rooted problem, labour has never liked it because of its rules on immigration and state aids, conservatives never like it because of the supranationality. The 'elite' has to make us join because it is a real solution for our economy. You have to get to the root of the problem with immigration and nationality before you can properly rejoin.
Sorry you will have to be more explicit than that, as the Agency is moving into countries that do accept the ECJ, what point are you actually making?
What poll do you have that gives only a 1% shift,I haven't met anyone who voted Brexit who wouldn't either abstain or vote to Remain. My own workforce are pig sick about Brexit because the uncertainty is stopping pay rises,those that voted Brexit regret their decision...they would all vote remain if given the opportunity again,that's a 40% shift.
Many of my UK suppliers are in a similar position....they want to increase prices to cover the import price rises but daren't because the market is so fragile,pay rises are not even considered.
All of them echo Hammond's words 'they didn't vote Brexit to make them poorer'.....they thought it would make them richer....they are very angry that Boris and Gove lied to them....the recent increases in utility costs and food price rises are starting to hurt.....if the bank had put up interest rates today that would have hurt mortgage costs.
Project fear is now becoming reality,it just took longer than Osborne predicted....more pain will make the calls to stop Brexit but the EU may not let us return without some penalty....Cameron you should be tried for treason.
KudosDave
. A prerequisite for remaining within the EU is to accept ECJ rulings, principle of subsidiarity notwithstanding. How could you expect any country to find itself subjected to the laws of another country, where it has not right to engage in framing those laws . The word for that is tyrrany. That is the situation that allowing an EU regulatory agency would be in if it subjected itself to UK courts as the final arbitrator.
My point was a gentle dig at the concept of being out and in ... I would wish the UK to remain in