[Politics] Brexit

[GoldWithFalmer]

Have you ever sounded more daft? Priceless. But I digress.

Pastafarian: Internet addict, Troll.

 

[pastafarian]

Let's compare credentials.

Lord Kerr: Former head of the UK diplomatic service, House of Lords Peer, Secretary General of the European Convention, man who penned article 50.

Pastafarian: Internet addict, Troll.

I very much doubt Brexit will be stopped, I fear we will continue blindly marching into this disaster I am merely pointing out you are wrong when you say article 40 is irreversible. It's not. The EU cannot legally force us to leave whether article 50 has been triggered or not. That is FACT.

well if you want to resort to ridiculous comparisons between me and Lord kerr you wont mind saying who is more important in A50 matters ....Lord Kerr or a high court judge.......which one if it eventually came down to the crunch on the issue would you value. I presume you would say the judge especially as you are in support of the recent judicial judgement

 

[melias shoes]

you lost the vote
the primary decisions will be based on the majority not the minority.......one day you will understand the concept of referendum

The clamp? More like The Clown.

 

[The Clamp]

well if you want to resort to ridiculous comparisons between me and Lord kerr you wont mind saying who is more important in A50 matters ....Lord Kerr or a high court judge.......which one if it eventually came down to the crunch on the issue would you value. I presume you would say the judge especially as you are in support of the recent judicial judgement

Apology accepted. Anyway, I was just pointing out you were incorrect, whatever decision is made and I'm almost certain it will be to continue with Brexit , it can be reversed after article 50 is triggered and up to the point the Brexit agreement is made. It is highly unlikely but it is a fact. I'll leave you to it. It seems you understand now. Have a lovely Sunday.

 

[pastafarian]

Sorry Pasta:

From UK Business Insider:

We asked our witnesses whether it was possible to reverse a decision to withdraw. Both agreed that a Member State could legally reverse a decision to withdraw from the EU at any point before the date on which the withdrawal agreement took effect. Once the withdrawal agreement had taken effect, however, withdrawal was final. Sir David told us: "It is absolutely clear that you cannot be forced to go through with it if you do not want to: for example, if there is a change of Government." Professor Wyatt supported this view with the following legal analysis:

"There is nothing in the wording to say that you cannot. It is in accord with the general aims of the Treaties that people stay in rather than rush out of the exit door. There is also the specific provision in Article 50 to the effect that, if a State withdraws, it has to apply to rejoin de novo. That only applies once you have left. If you could not change your mind after a year of thinking about it, but before you had withdrawn, you would then have to wait another year, withdraw and then apply to join again. That just does not make sense. Analysis of the text suggests that you are entitled to change your mind."

... There is nothing in Article 50 formally to prevent a Member State from reversing its decision to withdraw in the course of the withdrawal negotiations. The political consequences of such a change of mind would, though, be substantial.

yes all wrong

 

[pastafarian]

Apology accepted. Anyway, I was just pointing out you were incorrect, I'll leave you to it. Have a lovely Sunday.

umm there was no apology at all, would you like me to point out how you are wrong or shall i string you along for a little longer.

 

[pastafarian]

Apology accepted. Anyway, I was just pointing out you were incorrect, whatever decision is made and I'm almost certain it will be to continue with Brexit , it can be reversed after article 50 is triggered and up to the point the Brexit agreement is made. It is highly unlikely but it is a fact. I'll leave you to it. It seems you understand now. Have a lovely Sunday.

the notice of article 50 cannot be reversed,it cannot be withdrawn......fact
you are simply very wrong

let me know when you are ready to hear the truth.

 

[The Clamp]

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/ldselect/ldeucom/138/13804.htm

 

[Baldseagull]

This is an odd way to attribute non voters, in that case its equally true to say
Those that did'nt vote and those that voted leave are the bigger majority!.....which is equally odd.




Actually this is wrong brexiters dont think this at all, read the thread again. Brexiters have been banging on how there are two sides to the negotiations, brexiters certainly believe there are strong points for negotiating common ground but lets be in no uncertain terms here. The EU can simply say no.

All brexiters realise this and its why many have been arguing that people insisting the UK government lays out its demands now is pointless. It means nothing if the EU eventually says no anyway.......why give them the upper hand? Unless of course thats what you want

Why are the remainers not demanding the EU lays out its terms and strategy now before negotiations,......because its stupid thats why

Why does Parliament having a discussion around the triggering of article 50 necessitate that we lay all our cards on the table?

I for one want to know what sort of mandate the Government believes it has, I have asked many leavers why they voted that way, I have had many answers, the most ironic currently being sovereignty of British Parliament and courts.
Some just don't want to hand money to the EU, some want to stop muslims coming here (I know, but that is what they think will be achieved), some want the fishing fleet restored, some were protesting and regret voting that way, but now pretend they are all for it, some don't want any more eastern europeans coming here, some think we are at breaking point with Syrian refugees, some think that it will somehow fix illegal immigration.
Clearly, some of these people are going to be disappointed before we even start, but you tell me, what does leave have to achieve for it to be what the people voted for?
Parliament needs to discuss this, vote on a way forward or least work out whether there is a possibility of a vote on whether to accept the results of negotiations, or to remain.

 

[pastafarian]

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201516/ldselect/ldeucom/138/13804.htm

you are living in the past

 

[pastafarian]

Let's compare credentials.

Lord Kerr: Former head of the UK diplomatic service, House of Lords Peer, Secretary General of the European Convention, man who penned article 50.

Pastafarian: Internet addict, Troll.

.

would you like me to put you out of your misery?

 

[Baldseagull]

A50 is very clear im afraid it is irrevocable, you and clampy im afraid are with respect wrong

With respect, it is not just my opinion that the position is unclear, I think I will wait for a better qualified opinion before ruling it out. It is quite important that the negotiating team know for sure.

 

[pastafarian]

Why does Parliament having a discussion around the triggering of article 50 necessitate that we lay all our cards on the table?

I for one want to know what sort of mandate the Government believes it has, I have asked many leavers why they voted that way, I have had many answers, the most ironic currently being sovereignty of British Parliament and courts.
Some just don't want to hand money to the EU, some want to stop muslims coming here (I know, but that is what they think will be achieved), some want the fishing fleet restored, some were protesting and regret voting that way, but now pretend they are all for it, some don't want any more eastern europeans coming here, some think we are at breaking point with Syrian refugees, some think that it will somehow fix illegal immigration.
Clearly, some of these people are going to be disappointed before we even start, but you tell me, what does leave have to achieve for it to be what the people voted for?
Parliament needs to discuss this, vote on a way forward or least work out whether there is a possibility of a vote on whether to accept the results of negotiations, or to remain.

The leave vote was to end membership of the single market,so we are able to forge our own trade links, the leave vote was to remove ourselves from The ECJ and have parliament more accountable to lawmaking. The leave vote was to end free movement and regain control of our borders. These were perfectly visible intentions, the remain side actively campaigned against them and said they were wrong. It was obvious what was on the table,remain voters claiming otherwise are lying and are guilty of project bullshit

 

[pastafarian]

With respect, it is not just my opinion that the position is unclear, I think I will wait for a better qualified opinion before ruling it out. It is quite important that the negotiating team know for sure.

the position is very clear and it is now qualified
have another look at the wording of article 50

 

[studio150]

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html

 

[pastafarian]

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html

yep very clear

surely you are not another in the club that we can withdraw our notice of leaving after we have done it........umm sorry we didnt really mean it can we come back into the club..............are there many more of you?

 

[The Clamp]

yep very clear

surely you are not another in the club that we can withdraw our notice of leaving after we have done it........umm sorry we didnt really mean it can we come back into the club..............are there many more of you?

The evidence has been presented to you and by far greater minds than you or I. Desperately wanting not to believe something does not make it disappear. I think you can probably rest easy that nobody will have the balls to reverse article 50 but whether you deny it or accept it, article 50 can be reversed in certain circumstances. A change of government could turn up such a situation.
Anyhow I suspect you know that and are trolling or you have suffered some kind of narcissistic injury and simply cannot let it go.

 

[alfredmizen]

Why does Parliament having a discussion around the triggering of article 50 necessitate that we lay all our cards on the table?

I for one want to know what sort of mandate the Government believes it has, I have asked many leavers why they voted that way, I have had many answers, the most ironic currently being sovereignty of British Parliament and courts.
Some just don't want to hand money to the EU, some want to stop muslims coming here (I know, but that is what they think will be achieved), some want the fishing fleet restored, some were protesting and regret voting that way, but now pretend they are all for it, some don't want any more eastern europeans coming here, some think we are at breaking point with Syrian refugees, some think that it will somehow fix illegal immigration.
Clearly, some of these people are going to be disappointed before we even start, but you tell me, what does leave have to achieve for it to be what the people voted for?
Parliament needs to discuss this, vote on a way forward or least work out whether there is a possibility of a vote on whether to accept the results of negotiations, or to remain.

Why do you think london is now the 6th biggest "french " city , ill give you a clue , a lot of the "french" here are from former french colonies.

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

The evidence has been presented to you and by far greater minds than you or I. Desperately wanting not to believe something does not make it disappear. I think you can probably rest easy that nobody will have the balls to reverse article 50 but whether you deny it or accept it, article 50 can be reversed in certain circumstances. A change of government could turn up such a situation.

Then why the sudden fuss against Mrs May Triggering it in the high court,let her get on with it..

 

[Baldseagull]

the position is very clear and it is now qualified
have another look at the wording of article 50

Qualified by whom?