FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > The Fab Referendum
The Fab Referendum
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The choices are flawed as leave is split in two meaning statistically remain recieve more votes even if it isn't the most popular. So it should just be leave or remain and we had that one already.
Leave won incase you missed it  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The choices are flawed as leave is split in two meaning statistically remain recieve more votes even if it isn't the most popular. So it should just be leave or remain and we had that one already.
Leave won incase you missed it "
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The choices are flawed as leave is split in two meaning statistically remain recieve more votes even if it isn't the most popular. So it should just be leave or remain and we had that one already.
Leave won incase you missed it "
Its not really flawed. You can count total leave and then sub divide it into the 2 categories of leave votes. And its just an informal fab poll anyway! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Leave but not on the EU terms they are making it hard for us to leave. As we pay so much money to them each year,they can't afford to lose us"
No ones making it hard to leave. You submitted Article 50 and thats all there was to it.
The difficult part is that you want all the benefits of being in while not being in. Thats what all the negotiation is about. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Remain
There is no other answer only if you all want to be worse off Why
"
Because being worse off for a while is not a good enough reason to stay. We shouldn't stay just because it's going to be bloody hard to leave. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leave but not on the EU terms they are making it hard for us to leave. As we pay so much money to them each year,they can't afford to lose us
No ones making it hard to leave. You submitted Article 50 and thats all there was to it.
The difficult part is that you want all the benefits of being in while not being in. Thats what all the negotiation is about."
Spot on |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leave but not on the EU terms they are making it hard for us to leave. As we pay so much money to them each year,they can't afford to lose us
No ones making it hard to leave. You submitted Article 50 and thats all there was to it.
The difficult part is that you want all the benefits of being in while not being in. Thats what all the negotiation is about. Spot on"
Not true. May's chequers plan seeks to keep benefits while not being in. Which is why it is not acceptable. As it's being 'out' in name only, while still really tied in, but without any say or voting rights in EU. If by 'benefits' you mean the whole NI border issue, not so much a benefit we want as a stumbling block we can't seem to find a way round. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Currently 9-5 in favour of remaining"
Maybe if you asked in the lounge, where the ones not really 'in' to politics live, you might get a different result. So many variables... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I voted remain , but i want the tory party to take us through a No deal .
Why , The tory party will after 4 or 5 years of a totally failed nation be Unelectable ever again
The party will split & become a full on samll centre right party, with the remainder either starting a new right wing party or reinvigorating UKIP.
Actually A full on ukip with rhys fogg & co is very scary.
REMAIN IT IS THEN . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Remain
But I don't think the deal which is on the table is open for changes. It probably will not get through parliament and that will ultimately lead to a no deal.
This will then give us the opportunity to see who was right and was wrong. As for parliamentarians, who having watched on tv yesterday, they leave a lot to be desired and there needs to be some form of examination to sift out those who are clearly as thick as shit!
As for Labour doing a better job I very much doubt it. In fact despite what's was said "we hold all the cards" - Well that's fantasy! 1 v 27 whose going to win? Read the book "adults in the room" - it was a chronicle of EU negotiation - and it's exactly the same result - EU win. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
No point in having a fab referendum but I suppose it's a bit of fun. Lobby your MP and ask him to abstain in the forthcoming debate which is effectively option 3  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
Not true. May's chequers plan seeks to keep benefits while not being in. Which is why it is not acceptable. "
And there is the brexit mindset in 2 sentences.
For anything to be acceptable we must give up the BENEFITS of being in the EU.
I seem to remember that 3 years ago the high priests of brexit were telling us all that the EU was a millstone round our necks and by casting it and the shackles of the EU off we would usher in a new era of economic prosperity with milk and honey for all. Then 18 months ago the EU divorce negotiations would be easy. DD would have a few fights over the summer and the EU would fold because they need us more than we need them.
How time changes everything bar the belief of the truly faithful. Am I the only one who sees parallels between the mindset of those devoted to brexit and The Branch Davidians of Wako who were not only willing to kill themselves and their children but were unwilling to let any who did not want to die leave? And before anyone says if I want to leave I can remember that the Maybot, her Tories and DUP enablers have already said that neither Scotland or NI can leave the UK (regardless of what those people want) until after she has forced them out of the EU as she continually says she intends to do to England and Wales (and of all the things she says she will do that is the only one I believe). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The elephant in the room regarding Leaving the EU is Northern Ireland, which most if not all leave voters totally ignore.
If there was an actual process of Leaving the EU that all sides agreed was suitable for the Northern Ireland border then great I'd vote leave this time because the leave vote won last time round and it's only fair that that result is carried out.
So while there isn't a credible solution to Northern Ireland I don't see how voting again for something that currently isn't possible to implement is worth the paper then question will be asked on.
You could say it's the DUP holding up BREXIT because hasn't the UK Government proposed the Customs border for NI out to sea or something as to avoid a hard border on land, but the DUP fuck this idea off ?
So until NI is solved I can't see any form of BREXIT unless we have a UK wide Customs Arrangement / union with the EU, but leave voters don't want that either.
So in my understanding, currently the whole idea of BREXIT is not possible to go through with. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Dr Peterson suggested from his experience in Canada that referenda are a poor way of making decisions. Given that most of the time you get no more than 3 binary options, and that they are treated as political manifestos without the responsibility and legality of them, and that the options may not be implementable, I'm inclined to agree.
If you are going to go with a referenda, go with more options and give people a priority choice and a secondary choice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
Not true. May's chequers plan seeks to keep benefits while not being in. Which is why it is not acceptable.
And there is the brexit mindset in 2 sentences.
For anything to be acceptable we must give up the BENEFITS of being in the EU.
I seem to remember that 3 years ago the high priests of brexit were telling us all that the EU was a millstone round our necks and by casting it and the shackles of the EU off we would usher in a new era of economic prosperity with milk and honey for all. Then 18 months ago the EU divorce negotiations would be easy. DD would have a few fights over the summer and the EU would fold because they need us more than we need them.
How time changes everything bar the belief of the truly faithful. Am I the only one who sees parallels between the mindset of those devoted to brexit and The Branch Davidians of Wako who were not only willing to kill themselves and their children but were unwilling to let any who did not want to die leave? And before anyone says if I want to leave I can remember that the Maybot, her Tories and DUP enablers have already said that neither Scotland or NI can leave the UK (regardless of what those people want) until after she has forced them out of the EU as she continually says she intends to do to England and Wales (and of all the things she says she will do that is the only one I believe)."
see... the thing with the most ardent leavers is whatever deal people came back with.. it was never going to be good enough and they were always going to find a way to still blame the EU
even if we were out the EU would still be the bogeyman, or they will find new people to blame...
the simple thing was always that you were never going to get better benefits of being outside the club than you were being in the club, and at least if you are in the club you get a say!
the new mantra of the leaver is that they finally admit we are going to be worse off... but it will only be for "a while"...
so how long is "a while"
5 years?
10 years?
20 years?
50 years?
basically what we did was commit the biggest case of self administered economic suicide..... what a lot of people are now trying to do is lessen the blow and protect themselves
the irish passport forms came out again last night, i have had it for a while but never filled it in... i will probably now do that over the weekend |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
The most important aspect of a referendums questions is the questions have to be able to be implemented to start with.
No point asking do you want this or that if they can't even implement the damn thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"The choices are flawed as leave is split in two meaning statistically remain recieve more votes even if it isn't the most popular. So it should just be leave or remain and we had that one already.
Leave won incase you missed it "
actually it is an easy thing to do... and you have the london mayoral election as your template...
people put on the ballot 1st preference and 2nd preference.... if any one preference in round 1 gets more than 50% of the vote, it wins.... if not... then the lowest option is removed and those 2nd preference votes are counted.... then you have your winner! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The most important aspect of a referendums questions is the questions have to be able to be implemented to start with.
No point asking do you want this or that if they can't even implement the damn thing."
There are some things which are so complex that the public are not qualified to vote on. If we have learned anything we should have learnt that! Incredible that some who voted expected us to leave the next day! The £350m a week some actually believed it!
We elect politicians to do a job - make decisions but the quality of our politicians is so low - God help us! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Dr Peterson suggested from his experience in Canada that referenda are a poor way of making decisions. Given that most of the time you get no more than 3 binary options, and that they are treated as political manifestos without the responsibility and legality of them, and that the options may not be implementable, I'm inclined to agree.
If you are going to go with a referenda, go with more options and give people a priority choice and a secondary choice.
"
Yes, that's why we have a representative democracy.
However, I'm not that convinced by our representatives either! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Not true. May's chequers plan seeks to keep benefits while not being in. Which is why it is not acceptable.
And there is the brexit mindset in 2 sentences.
For anything to be acceptable we must give up the BENEFITS of being in the EU.
I seem to remember that 3 years ago the high priests of brexit were telling us all that the EU was a millstone round our necks and by casting it and the shackles of the EU off we would usher in a new era of economic prosperity with milk and honey for all. Then 18 months ago the EU divorce negotiations would be easy. DD would have a few fights over the summer and the EU would fold because they need us more than we need them.
How time changes everything bar the belief of the truly faithful. Am I the only one who sees parallels between the mindset of those devoted to brexit and The Branch Davidians of Wako who were not only willing to kill themselves and their children but were unwilling to let any who did not want to die leave? And before anyone says if I want to leave I can remember that the Maybot, her Tories and DUP enablers have already said that neither Scotland or NI can leave the UK (regardless of what those people want) until after she has forced them out of the EU as she continually says she intends to do to England and Wales (and of all the things she says she will do that is the only one I believe).
see... the thing with the most ardent leavers is whatever deal people came back with.. it was never going to be good enough and they were always going to find a way to still blame the EU
even if we were out the EU would still be the bogeyman, or they will find new people to blame...
the simple thing was always that you were never going to get better benefits of being outside the club than you were being in the club, and at least if you are in the club you get a say!
the new mantra of the leaver is that they finally admit we are going to be worse off... but it will only be for "a while"...
so how long is "a while"
5 years?
10 years?
20 years?
50 years?
basically what we did was commit the biggest case of self administered economic suicide..... what a lot of people are now trying to do is lessen the blow and protect themselves
the irish passport forms came out again last night, i have had it for a while but never filled it in... i will probably now do that over the weekend "
Well said What baffles me,my friends here,work colleagues & Joe Soap on the street is since June 2016 when Leave was announced everyone here thought how is Brexit even possible with the Good Friday Agreement?As I presume Mr Cameron,Mr Johnson etc were aware since the signing of the GFA in '98,the commitment by the British Government to uphold the GFA limits the kind of economic model that the UK can pursue to those that are compatible to having an OPEN land border with the EU on the island of Ireland.And I'm not having a pop at those who voted Leave,that's your democratic right,but I'm curious that when the Brexit Referendum was held in 2016,that obviously the UK public were aware of the GFA as NI is part of the UK. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Not true. May's chequers plan seeks to keep benefits while not being in. Which is why it is not acceptable.
And there is the brexit mindset in 2 sentences.
For anything to be acceptable we must give up the BENEFITS of being in the EU.
I seem to remember that 3 years ago the high priests of brexit were telling us all that the EU was a millstone round our necks and by casting it and the shackles of the EU off we would usher in a new era of economic prosperity with milk and honey for all. Then 18 months ago the EU divorce negotiations would be easy. DD would have a few fights over the summer and the EU would fold because they need us more than we need them.
How time changes everything bar the belief of the truly faithful. Am I the only one who sees parallels between the mindset of those devoted to brexit and The Branch Davidians of Wako who were not only willing to kill themselves and their children but were unwilling to let any who did not want to die leave? And before anyone says if I want to leave I can remember that the Maybot, her Tories and DUP enablers have already said that neither Scotland or NI can leave the UK (regardless of what those people want) until after she has forced them out of the EU as she continually says she intends to do to England and Wales (and of all the things she says she will do that is the only one I believe).
see... the thing with the most ardent leavers is whatever deal people came back with.. it was never going to be good enough and they were always going to find a way to still blame the EU
even if we were out the EU would still be the bogeyman, or they will find new people to blame...
the simple thing was always that you were never going to get better benefits of being outside the club than you were being in the club, and at least if you are in the club you get a say!
the new mantra of the leaver is that they finally admit we are going to be worse off... but it will only be for "a while"...
so how long is "a while"
5 years?
10 years?
20 years?
50 years?
basically what we did was commit the biggest case of self administered economic suicide..... what a lot of people are now trying to do is lessen the blow and protect themselves
the irish passport forms came out again last night, i have had it for a while but never filled it in... i will probably now do that over the weekend Well said What baffles me,my friends here,work colleagues & Joe Soap on the street is since June 2016 when Leave was announced everyone here thought how is Brexit even possible with the Good Friday Agreement?As I presume Mr Cameron,Mr Johnson etc were aware since the signing of the GFA in '98,the commitment by the British Government to uphold the GFA limits the kind of economic model that the UK can pursue to those that are compatible to having an OPEN land border with the EU on the island of Ireland.And I'm not having a pop at those who voted Leave,that's your democratic right,but I'm curious that when the Brexit Referendum was held in 2016,that obviously the UK public were aware of the GFA as NI is part of the UK."
I honestly don't think anyone thought about The Good Friday Agreement during the referendum regarding Customs Union border issues & the problem that one is still needed for the GFA to exist. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal "
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So it's a win for remain.
Seems legit..."
.....maybe seems legit if you used to live in Zimbabwe. As already pointed out earlier on the thread it's not a fair poll as it splits the Leave vote in 2 while remain only has one option. It looks like a poll commissioned by tin pot dictator Robert Mugabe to rig the result. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave. "
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"
I honestly don't think anyone thought about The Good Friday Agreement during the referendum regarding Customs Union border issues & the problem that one is still needed for the GFA to exist."
John Major and Tony Blair both went to NI during the referendum campaign and warned about border and the Good Friday Agreement if UK voted to leave.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave.
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
"
The May chequers deal, some 500 odd pages published by the EU the other day will be a legally binding document/contract and once we sign it we'll be legally bound to it. It clearly states in the document for the UK to leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision. This is why it must be rejected as we can't be held in to the customs union against our will at the say so of the EU. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave.
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
The May chequers deal, some 500 odd pages published by the EU the other day will be a legally binding document/contract and once we sign it we'll be legally bound to it. It clearly states in the document for the UK to leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision. This is why it must be rejected as we can't be held in to the customs union against our will at the say so of the EU. "
You been studying contract law all of a sudden?
You have previously stated we can break a contract and pay nothing (no deal), so what's the difference between this contract and previous ones?
Do enlighten us? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leave
Yes we can with May's deal
I made no mention of any deal"
Then you most probably won't be leaving soon then, not unless a solution to Northern Ireland is found. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave. "
Yep I agree that does sound a shit position but if Northern Ireland remains in the UK & the GFA remains the same then we can't leave the CU at all anyway. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
Not true. May's chequers plan seeks to keep benefits while not being in. Which is why it is not acceptable.
And there is the brexit mindset in 2 sentences.
For anything to be acceptable we must give up the BENEFITS of being in the EU.
I seem to remember that 3 years ago the high priests of brexit were telling us all that the EU was a millstone round our necks and by casting it and the shackles of the EU off we would usher in a new era of economic prosperity with milk and honey for all. Then 18 months ago the EU divorce negotiations would be easy. DD would have a few fights over the summer and the EU would fold because they need us more than we need them.
How time changes everything bar the belief of the truly faithful. Am I the only one who sees parallels between the mindset of those devoted to brexit and The Branch Davidians of Wako who were not only willing to kill themselves and their children but were unwilling to let any who did not want to die leave? And before anyone says if I want to leave I can remember that the Maybot, her Tories and DUP enablers have already said that neither Scotland or NI can leave the UK (regardless of what those people want) until after she has forced them out of the EU as she continually says she intends to do to England and Wales (and of all the things she says she will do that is the only one I believe).
see... the thing with the most ardent leavers is whatever deal people came back with.. it was never going to be good enough and they were always going to find a way to still blame the EU
even if we were out the EU would still be the bogeyman, or they will find new people to blame...
the simple thing was always that you were never going to get better benefits of being outside the club than you were being in the club, and at least if you are in the club you get a say!
the new mantra of the leaver is that they finally admit we are going to be worse off... but it will only be for "a while"...
so how long is "a while"
5 years?
10 years?
20 years?
50 years?
basically what we did was commit the biggest case of self administered economic suicide..... what a lot of people are now trying to do is lessen the blow and protect themselves
the irish passport forms came out again last night, i have had it for a while but never filled it in... i will probably now do that over the weekend Well said What baffles me,my friends here,work colleagues & Joe Soap on the street is since June 2016 when Leave was announced everyone here thought how is Brexit even possible with the Good Friday Agreement?As I presume Mr Cameron,Mr Johnson etc were aware since the signing of the GFA in '98,the commitment by the British Government to uphold the GFA limits the kind of economic model that the UK can pursue to those that are compatible to having an OPEN land border with the EU on the island of Ireland.And I'm not having a pop at those who voted Leave,that's your democratic right,but I'm curious that when the Brexit Referendum was held in 2016,that obviously the UK public were aware of the GFA as NI is part of the UK."
that's because whenever anybody mentioned 'what about if there's no deal?' and 'what about the GFA?', the flock of brexcrement clowns shouted them down by repeatedly bleating their mantra 'that's just project fear' over and over ad infinitum |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"So it's a win for remain.
Seems legit...
.....maybe seems legit if you used to live in Zimbabwe. As already pointed out earlier on the thread it's not a fair poll as it splits the Leave vote in 2 while remain only has one option. It looks like a poll commissioned by tin pot dictator Robert Mugabe to rig the result. "
Fair since when has fairness featured? Oh yes as long as it's fair to leave - how about leave cheating - and proved to have cheated? You like to dole it out but you can't take it! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So it's a win for remain.
Seems legit...
.....maybe seems legit if you used to live in Zimbabwe. As already pointed out earlier on the thread it's not a fair poll as it splits the Leave vote in 2 while remain only has one option. It looks like a poll commissioned by tin pot dictator Robert Mugabe to rig the result. "
If this was a genuine referendum I think you'd have a point but, as it's not and as hardly anyone on here from either side has gone for the 'leave with deal' I don't think you should worry.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave. "
I love this. BREXIT's own paranoia is going to kill BREXIT. LOL |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"1. Leave without a deal
2. Leave with chequers deal
3. Remain
Over to you, please vote "
To even things out that there are two Remain options along with the two leave maybe we should also have a 4th option as below.
4) Remain but with less control and say.
Or is that the same as option 2? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
What we learn is that despite everything, and with all the information available. Some people still want to leave with no deal. Which I genuinely can’t understand why sacrificing so much to gain so little is something anyone would consider.
More evidence that we shouldn’t have another referendum. People can’t be trusted to vote in their own interests. The politicians need to get their fingers out and do the right thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave.
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
The May chequers deal, some 500 odd pages published by the EU the other day will be a legally binding document/contract and once we sign it we'll be legally bound to it. It clearly states in the document for the UK to leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision. This is why it must be rejected as we can't be held in to the customs union against our will at the say so of the EU.
You been studying contract law all of a sudden?
You have previously stated we can break a contract and pay nothing (no deal), so what's the difference between this contract and previous ones?
Do enlighten us?"
Once again it was the House of Lords who said if we leave with no deal then legally we're not obliged to pay the EU a single penny. If it's legal to do that then we're not breaking any contract. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"
Once again it was the House of Lords who said if we leave with no deal then legally we're not obliged to pay the EU a single penny. If it's legal to do that then we're not breaking any contract. "
Parliament is sovereign.
Do you agree?
It can do whatever it wants, except bind its successor?
Do you agree?
Sometimes I wonder if your adherence to British nationalism blinds you to the truth.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave.
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
The May chequers deal, some 500 odd pages published by the EU the other day will be a legally binding document/contract and once we sign it we'll be legally bound to it. It clearly states in the document for the UK to leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision. This is why it must be rejected as we can't be held in to the customs union against our will at the say so of the EU.
You been studying contract law all of a sudden?
You have previously stated we can break a contract and pay nothing (no deal), so what's the difference between this contract and previous ones?
Do enlighten us?
Once again it was the House of Lords who said if we leave with no deal then legally we're not obliged to pay the EU a single penny. If it's legal to do that then we're not breaking any contract. "
It won't be the House of Lords who will be making the judgement it will be the international court - where we have just lost our sitting judge!
If you take out a loan and don't repay loan there are consequences.
If you do something at work and get sacked, it's because you broke the contract. Yes you can go for unfair dismissal and dependant on the terms of the procedural process there will be an award made good/bad.
World is run by rules despite what Trump or the alt right think. Law or tort rules! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave.
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
The May chequers deal, some 500 odd pages published by the EU the other day will be a legally binding document/contract and once we sign it we'll be legally bound to it. It clearly states in the document for the UK to leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision. This is why it must be rejected as we can't be held in to the customs union against our will at the say so of the EU.
You been studying contract law all of a sudden?
You have previously stated we can break a contract and pay nothing (no deal), so what's the difference between this contract and previous ones?
Do enlighten us?
Once again it was the House of Lords who said if we leave with no deal then legally we're not obliged to pay the EU a single penny. If it's legal to do that then we're not breaking any contract.
It won't be the House of Lords who will be making the judgement it will be the international court - where we have just lost our sitting judge!
If you take out a loan and don't repay loan there are consequences.
If you do something at work and get sacked, it's because you broke the contract. Yes you can go for unfair dismissal and dependant on the terms of the procedural process there will be an award made good/bad.
World is run by rules despite what Trump or the alt right think. Law or tort rules!"
We're leaving the EU legally though. Article 50 is written into the EU treaties as a mechanism to allow members states to leave legally. We've followed the rules and triggered article 50 as is our legal right under the EU treaties. We've not broken any contract. There is nothing in the EU treaties or article 50 about settling your bill or any outstanding payment when you leave. The House of Lords committee who looked at this In great detail ruled that legally were not obliged to pay the EU a single penny upon leaving.
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave.
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
The May chequers deal, some 500 odd pages published by the EU the other day will be a legally binding document/contract and once we sign it we'll be legally bound to it. It clearly states in the document for the UK to leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision. This is why it must be rejected as we can't be held in to the customs union against our will at the say so of the EU.
You been studying contract law all of a sudden?
You have previously stated we can break a contract and pay nothing (no deal), so what's the difference between this contract and previous ones?
Do enlighten us?
Once again it was the House of Lords who said if we leave with no deal then legally we're not obliged to pay the EU a single penny. If it's legal to do that then we're not breaking any contract.
It won't be the House of Lords who will be making the judgement it will be the international court - where we have just lost our sitting judge!
If you take out a loan and don't repay loan there are consequences.
If you do something at work and get sacked, it's because you broke the contract. Yes you can go for unfair dismissal and dependant on the terms of the procedural process there will be an award made good/bad.
World is run by rules despite what Trump or the alt right think. Law or tort rules!
We're leaving the EU legally though. Article 50 is written into the EU treaties as a mechanism to allow members states to leave legally. We've followed the rules and triggered article 50 as is our legal right under the EU treaties. We've not broken any contract. There is nothing in the EU treaties or article 50 about settling your bill or any outstanding payment when you leave. The House of Lords committee who looked at this In great detail ruled that legally were not obliged to pay the EU a single penny upon leaving.
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote. "
HoL didn’t rule on anything. They took legal advice who gave this conclusion , in the face of competing interpretations. Part of there being no obligation was (as far as I can tell) from their interpretation that the ECJ couldn’t rule on obligations accrued while under their rule once we were out of the EU. And so (simplifying) we couldn’t be made to pay.
Other interpretations have no such time limit... liabilities accrued during our time in the EU could be enforced. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave.
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
The May chequers deal, some 500 odd pages published by the EU the other day will be a legally binding document/contract and once we sign it we'll be legally bound to it. It clearly states in the document for the UK to leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision. This is why it must be rejected as we can't be held in to the customs union against our will at the say so of the EU.
You been studying contract law all of a sudden?
You have previously stated we can break a contract and pay nothing (no deal), so what's the difference between this contract and previous ones?
Do enlighten us?
Once again it was the House of Lords who said if we leave with no deal then legally we're not obliged to pay the EU a single penny. If it's legal to do that then we're not breaking any contract.
It won't be the House of Lords who will be making the judgement it will be the international court - where we have just lost our sitting judge!
If you take out a loan and don't repay loan there are consequences.
If you do something at work and get sacked, it's because you broke the contract. Yes you can go for unfair dismissal and dependant on the terms of the procedural process there will be an award made good/bad.
World is run by rules despite what Trump or the alt right think. Law or tort rules!
We're leaving the EU legally though. Article 50 is written into the EU treaties as a mechanism to allow members states to leave legally. We've followed the rules and triggered article 50 as is our legal right under the EU treaties. We've not broken any contract. There is nothing in the EU treaties or article 50 about settling your bill or any outstanding payment when you leave. The House of Lords committee who looked at this In great detail ruled that legally were not obliged to pay the EU a single penny upon leaving.
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
HoL didn’t rule on anything. They took legal advice who gave this conclusion , in the face of competing interpretations. Part of there being no obligation was (as far as I can tell) from their interpretation that the ECJ couldn’t rule on obligations accrued while under their rule once we were out of the EU. And so (simplifying) we couldn’t be made to pay.
Other interpretations have no such time limit... liabilities accrued during our time in the EU could be enforced. "
Your wasting your time my friend as the saying goes "you can't educate those who refuse to be educated "!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave.
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
The May chequers deal, some 500 odd pages published by the EU the other day will be a legally binding document/contract and once we sign it we'll be legally bound to it. It clearly states in the document for the UK to leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision. This is why it must be rejected as we can't be held in to the customs union against our will at the say so of the EU.
You been studying contract law all of a sudden?
You have previously stated we can break a contract and pay nothing (no deal), so what's the difference between this contract and previous ones?
Do enlighten us?
Once again it was the House of Lords who said if we leave with no deal then legally we're not obliged to pay the EU a single penny. If it's legal to do that then we're not breaking any contract.
It won't be the House of Lords who will be making the judgement it will be the international court - where we have just lost our sitting judge!
If you take out a loan and don't repay loan there are consequences.
If you do something at work and get sacked, it's because you broke the contract. Yes you can go for unfair dismissal and dependant on the terms of the procedural process there will be an award made good/bad.
World is run by rules despite what Trump or the alt right think. Law or tort rules!
We're leaving the EU legally though. Article 50 is written into the EU treaties as a mechanism to allow members states to leave legally. We've followed the rules and triggered article 50 as is our legal right under the EU treaties. We've not broken any contract. There is nothing in the EU treaties or article 50 about settling your bill or any outstanding payment when you leave. The House of Lords committee who looked at this In great detail ruled that legally were not obliged to pay the EU a single penny upon leaving.
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
HoL didn’t rule on anything. They took legal advice who gave this conclusion , in the face of competing interpretations. Part of there being no obligation was (as far as I can tell) from their interpretation that the ECJ couldn’t rule on obligations accrued while under their rule once we were out of the EU. And so (simplifying) we couldn’t be made to pay.
Other interpretations have no such time limit... liabilities accrued during our time in the EU could be enforced.
Your wasting your time my friend as the saying goes "you can't educate those who refuse to be educated "!
"
He's not agreeing with you either if you read it properly. He's saying there are different legal interpretations and that the House of Lords went with the interpretation that we don't owe the EU anything upon leaving. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave.
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
The May chequers deal, some 500 odd pages published by the EU the other day will be a legally binding document/contract and once we sign it we'll be legally bound to it. It clearly states in the document for the UK to leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision. This is why it must be rejected as we can't be held in to the customs union against our will at the say so of the EU.
You been studying contract law all of a sudden?
You have previously stated we can break a contract and pay nothing (no deal), so what's the difference between this contract and previous ones?
Do enlighten us?
Once again it was the House of Lords who said if we leave with no deal then legally we're not obliged to pay the EU a single penny. If it's legal to do that then we're not breaking any contract.
It won't be the House of Lords who will be making the judgement it will be the international court - where we have just lost our sitting judge!
If you take out a loan and don't repay loan there are consequences.
If you do something at work and get sacked, it's because you broke the contract. Yes you can go for unfair dismissal and dependant on the terms of the procedural process there will be an award made good/bad.
World is run by rules despite what Trump or the alt right think. Law or tort rules!
We're leaving the EU legally though. Article 50 is written into the EU treaties as a mechanism to allow members states to leave legally. We've followed the rules and triggered article 50 as is our legal right under the EU treaties. We've not broken any contract. There is nothing in the EU treaties or article 50 about settling your bill or any outstanding payment when you leave. The House of Lords committee who looked at this In great detail ruled that legally were not obliged to pay the EU a single penny upon leaving.
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
HoL didn’t rule on anything. They took legal advice who gave this conclusion , in the face of competing interpretations. Part of there being no obligation was (as far as I can tell) from their interpretation that the ECJ couldn’t rule on obligations accrued while under their rule once we were out of the EU. And so (simplifying) we couldn’t be made to pay.
Other interpretations have no such time limit... liabilities accrued during our time in the EU could be enforced.
Your wasting your time my friend as the saying goes "you can't educate those who refuse to be educated "!
He's not agreeing with you either if you read it properly. He's saying there are different legal interpretations and that the House of Lords went with the interpretation that we don't owe the EU anything upon leaving. "
indeed. But to be clear, it doesn’t matter which way the HoL went, they don’t get to decide. However when entering such matters as we are now it is important to have a view of what the outcome may be. There is always a risk we are wrong. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Leave
Yes we can with Mays deal
We can't leave the customs union as part of May's deal though. It locks us into the EU customs union and the UK then can't decide to leave on its own. To leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision, and seeing as the EU want to keep us imprisoned in they will never agree to let us leave.
The only thing Parliament cannot do is bind its successor.
If the UK Parliament votes to revoke a treaty with the EU, it is revoked.
Now, that may not be good for future relations, with the EU, Ireland or anyone else.
But the idea the UK Parliament cannot act without the permission of the EU, well, that really is fake news.
The May chequers deal, some 500 odd pages published by the EU the other day will be a legally binding document/contract and once we sign it we'll be legally bound to it. It clearly states in the document for the UK to leave the customs union must be a joint uk/EU decision. This is why it must be rejected as we can't be held in to the customs union against our will at the say so of the EU.
You been studying contract law all of a sudden?
You have previously stated we can break a contract and pay nothing (no deal), so what's the difference between this contract and previous ones?
Do enlighten us?
Once again it was the House of Lords who said if we leave with no deal then legally we're not obliged to pay the EU a single penny. If it's legal to do that then we're not breaking any contract.
It won't be the House of Lords who will be making the judgement it will be the international court - where we have just lost our sitting judge!
If you take out a loan and don't repay loan there are consequences.
If you do something at work and get sacked, it's because you broke the contract. Yes you can go for unfair dismissal and dependant on the terms of the procedural process there will be an award made good/bad.
World is run by rules despite what Trump or the alt right think. Law or tort rules!
We're leaving the EU legally though. Article 50 is written into the EU treaties as a mechanism to allow members states to leave legally. We've followed the rules and triggered article 50 as is our legal right under the EU treaties. We've not broken any contract. There is nothing in the EU treaties or article 50 about settling your bill or any outstanding payment when you leave. The House of Lords committee who looked at this In great detail ruled that legally were not obliged to pay the EU a single penny upon leaving.
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
HoL didn’t rule on anything. They took legal advice who gave this conclusion , in the face of competing interpretations. Part of there being no obligation was (as far as I can tell) from their interpretation that the ECJ couldn’t rule on obligations accrued while under their rule once we were out of the EU. And so (simplifying) we couldn’t be made to pay.
Other interpretations have no such time limit... liabilities accrued during our time in the EU could be enforced.
Your wasting your time my friend as the saying goes "you can't educate those who refuse to be educated "!
He's not agreeing with you either if you read it properly. He's saying there are different legal interpretations and that the House of Lords went with the interpretation that we don't owe the EU anything upon leaving. "
Did I say he was agreeing with me?
The point being your so stuck in your "world" you are unable to be rational about anything other than your own extreme right ideologies!
As I have said to you many times we will soon see who is right and who is wrong! Can't wait roll on April next year! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ara JTV/TS
over a year ago
Bristol East |
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote. "
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andS66Couple
over a year ago
Derby |
"
see... the thing with the most ardent leavers is whatever deal people came back with.. it was never going to be good enough and they were always going to find a way to still blame the EU
even if we were out the EU would still be the bogeyman, or they will find new people to blame...
the simple thing was always that you were never going to get better benefits of being outside the club than you were being in the club, and at least if you are in the club you get a say!
the new mantra of the leaver is that they finally admit we are going to be worse off... but it will only be for "a while"...
so how long is "a while"
5 years?
10 years?
20 years?
50 years?
basically what we did was commit the biggest case of self administered economic suicide..... what a lot of people are now trying to do is lessen the blow and protect themselves
the irish passport forms came out again last night, i have had it for a while but never filled it in... i will probably now do that over the weekend "
I think people are blaming May for the agreement, not the EU.
As for 'how long is a while'?
How long is the transition period, potentially, in the agreement, during which time we continue to pay our 'membership contributions'?
And how long after the transition period ends, in the agreement, do we continue to adhere to the EU's rules on, for example, VAT?
Good luck with your passport.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
see... the thing with the most ardent leavers is whatever deal people came back with.. it was never going to be good enough and they were always going to find a way to still blame the EU
even if we were out the EU would still be the bogeyman, or they will find new people to blame...
the simple thing was always that you were never going to get better benefits of being outside the club than you were being in the club, and at least if you are in the club you get a say!
the new mantra of the leaver is that they finally admit we are going to be worse off... but it will only be for "a while"...
so how long is "a while"
5 years?
10 years?
20 years?
50 years?
basically what we did was commit the biggest case of self administered economic suicide..... what a lot of people are now trying to do is lessen the blow and protect themselves
the irish passport forms came out again last night, i have had it for a while but never filled it in... i will probably now do that over the weekend
I think people are blaming May for the agreement, not the EU.
As for 'how long is a while'?
How long is the transition period, potentially, in the agreement, during which time we continue to pay our 'membership contributions'?
And how long after the transition period ends, in the agreement, do we continue to adhere to the EU's rules on, for example, VAT?
Good luck with your passport.
"
That depends on the negotiation of the FTA.
We also have the added problem of the GFA! It just goes to show those idiots in the 90's who gave away NI and British sovereignty to do stop a few bloody terrorists and gain peace - only to fuck it up for us 20yrs later! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
"
That's fine with me, as cunts like Kinnock and Mandelson won't get theirs either. Did they really want to stay in the EU when they campaigned for remain or were they just campaigning to protect their pension? I know which my money would be on from those 2 options! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
That's fine with me, as cunts like Kinnock and Mandelson won't get theirs either. Did they really want to stay in the EU when they campaigned for remain or were they just campaigning to protect their pension? I know which my money would be on from those 2 options! "
Interesting theory! As they are no longer MP's, and as they are both of an age, where their pension is being paid already - do you seriously think, that they campaigned to keep their pension?
Because if you are, then you are saying, leaving the EU means our pensions, (the stalwarts who voted leave) are going to lose their pensions? If your getting the pension, then your statement infers losing it. However, you could have a point, as we have a precedent in Greece - things got so bad, that pensions were cut - bring on a hard brexit yeah. You reap what you sow! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
That's fine with me, as cunts like Kinnock and Mandelson won't get theirs either. Did they really want to stay in the EU when they campaigned for remain or were they just campaigning to protect their pension? I know which my money would be on from those 2 options! "
Probably both in equal measures. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
That's fine with me, as cunts like Kinnock and Mandelson won't get theirs either. Did they really want to stay in the EU when they campaigned for remain or were they just campaigning to protect their pension? I know which my money would be on from those 2 options!
Interesting theory! As they are no longer MP's, and as they are both of an age, where their pension is being paid already - do you seriously think, that they campaigned to keep their pension?
Because if you are, then you are saying, leaving the EU means our pensions, (the stalwarts who voted leave) are going to lose their pensions? If your getting the pension, then your statement infers losing it. However, you could have a point, as we have a precedent in Greece - things got so bad, that pensions were cut - bring on a hard brexit yeah. You reap what you sow!"
The post i made was in reply to someone talking about MEP's pensions. It was not a post about the general public's pensions. Kinnock and Mandelson are former members of the European Parliament, Mandelson was a former EU trade commisioner, so it was a clear reference to losing their EU gravy train pensions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *abioMan
over a year ago
Newcastle and Gateshead |
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
That's fine with me, as cunts like Kinnock and Mandelson won't get theirs either. Did they really want to stay in the EU when they campaigned for remain or were they just campaigning to protect their pension? I know which my money would be on from those 2 options! "
oh dear.... does "someone" want to point out to centy that neither kinnock or mandelson were MEP's, they were Commissioners appointed by the UK Government.... so they would get MP's pensions (since they both served in the UK parliament) and they would get civil service pension
farage refuses to give up his MEP's pension.....
isn't that still hypocritical of your boy? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
That's fine with me, as cunts like Kinnock and Mandelson won't get theirs either. Did they really want to stay in the EU when they campaigned for remain or were they just campaigning to protect their pension? I know which my money would be on from those 2 options!
oh dear.... does "someone" want to point out to centy that neither kinnock or mandelson were MEP's, they were Commissioners appointed by the UK Government.... so they would get MP's pensions (since they both served in the UK parliament) and they would get civil service pension
farage refuses to give up his MEP's pension.....
isn't that still hypocritical of your boy?"
oh dear.....does "someone" want to point out to Fabio that former EU commissioners in office before May 1st 2004 are entitled to an EU pension worth 4.5% of the salary they last received for each year of service. As Neil Kinnock was Vice President of the European Commission before May 1st 2004 he is entitled to an EU Pension of £90,000 per year. Peter Mandelson became an EU trade commissioner on 22nd November 2004, and according to Wikipedia is entitled to claim an EU Pension of £31,000 per year when he reaches the age of 65. This is also contingent on a "duty of loyalty to the EU communities" which also applies to after his term in office.
No wonder they campaigned for Remain!
It was also put to them in the House of Lords during the EU Withdrawal bill votes that they should not be voting as they had a clear conflict of interest with their EU Pensions, along with Lord Patten, who also receives a generous EU Pension.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/18/neil-kinnock-peter-mandelson-among-pro-eu-peers-looking-force/ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
That's fine with me, as cunts like Kinnock and Mandelson won't get theirs either. Did they really want to stay in the EU when they campaigned for remain or were they just campaigning to protect their pension? I know which my money would be on from those 2 options!
oh dear.... does "someone" want to point out to centy that neither kinnock or mandelson were MEP's, they were Commissioners appointed by the UK Government.... so they would get MP's pensions (since they both served in the UK parliament) and they would get civil service pension
farage refuses to give up his MEP's pension.....
isn't that still hypocritical of your boy?
oh dear.....does "someone" want to point out to Fabio that former EU commissioners in office before May 1st 2004 are entitled to an EU pension worth 4.5% of the salary they last received for each year of service. As Neil Kinnock was Vice President of the European Commission before May 1st 2004 he is entitled to an EU Pension of £90,000 per year. Peter Mandelson became an EU trade commissioner on 22nd November 2004, and according to Wikipedia is entitled to claim an EU Pension of £31,000 per year when he reaches the age of 65. This is also contingent on a "duty of loyalty to the EU communities" which also applies to after his term in office.
No wonder they campaigned for Remain!
It was also put to them in the House of Lords during the EU Withdrawal bill votes that they should not be voting as they had a clear conflict of interest with their EU Pensions, along with Lord Patten, who also receives a generous EU Pension.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/18/neil-kinnock-peter-mandelson-among-pro-eu-peers-looking-force/"
And your point is?
You silly boy - they will still get their "EU" pension whether we are in or out!
Jesus it's like flogging a dead horse!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
That's fine with me, as cunts like Kinnock and Mandelson won't get theirs either. Did they really want to stay in the EU when they campaigned for remain or were they just campaigning to protect their pension? I know which my money would be on from those 2 options!
oh dear.... does "someone" want to point out to centy that neither kinnock or mandelson were MEP's, they were Commissioners appointed by the UK Government.... so they would get MP's pensions (since they both served in the UK parliament) and they would get civil service pension
farage refuses to give up his MEP's pension.....
isn't that still hypocritical of your boy?
oh dear.....does "someone" want to point out to Fabio that former EU commissioners in office before May 1st 2004 are entitled to an EU pension worth 4.5% of the salary they last received for each year of service. As Neil Kinnock was Vice President of the European Commission before May 1st 2004 he is entitled to an EU Pension of £90,000 per year. Peter Mandelson became an EU trade commissioner on 22nd November 2004, and according to Wikipedia is entitled to claim an EU Pension of £31,000 per year when he reaches the age of 65. This is also contingent on a "duty of loyalty to the EU communities" which also applies to after his term in office.
No wonder they campaigned for Remain!
It was also put to them in the House of Lords during the EU Withdrawal bill votes that they should not be voting as they had a clear conflict of interest with their EU Pensions, along with Lord Patten, who also receives a generous EU Pension.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/18/neil-kinnock-peter-mandelson-among-pro-eu-peers-looking-force/
And your point is?
You silly boy - they will still get their "EU" pension whether we are in or out!
Jesus it's like flogging a dead horse!
"
No they won't as Theresa May's Chequers deal pays the divorce bill which is to cover Eu Pensions of past and present UK MEP's and commissioners. If we leave with no deal and don't pay a divorce bill they are liable to lose their EU Pensions. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
That's fine with me, as cunts like Kinnock and Mandelson won't get theirs either. Did they really want to stay in the EU when they campaigned for remain or were they just campaigning to protect their pension? I know which my money would be on from those 2 options!
oh dear.... does "someone" want to point out to centy that neither kinnock or mandelson were MEP's, they were Commissioners appointed by the UK Government.... so they would get MP's pensions (since they both served in the UK parliament) and they would get civil service pension
farage refuses to give up his MEP's pension.....
isn't that still hypocritical of your boy?
oh dear.....does "someone" want to point out to Fabio that former EU commissioners in office before May 1st 2004 are entitled to an EU pension worth 4.5% of the salary they last received for each year of service. As Neil Kinnock was Vice President of the European Commission before May 1st 2004 he is entitled to an EU Pension of £90,000 per year. Peter Mandelson became an EU trade commissioner on 22nd November 2004, and according to Wikipedia is entitled to claim an EU Pension of £31,000 per year when he reaches the age of 65. This is also contingent on a "duty of loyalty to the EU communities" which also applies to after his term in office.
No wonder they campaigned for Remain!
It was also put to them in the House of Lords during the EU Withdrawal bill votes that they should not be voting as they had a clear conflict of interest with their EU Pensions, along with Lord Patten, who also receives a generous EU Pension.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/18/neil-kinnock-peter-mandelson-among-pro-eu-peers-looking-force/
And your point is?
You silly boy - they will still get their "EU" pension whether we are in or out!
Jesus it's like flogging a dead horse!
No they won't as Theresa May's Chequers deal pays the divorce bill which is to cover Eu Pensions of past and present UK MEP's and commissioners. If we leave with no deal and don't pay a divorce bill they are liable to lose their EU Pensions. "
Then if you think they your a fool! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The only contract that says we have to pay a divorce bill is Theresa May's Chequers agreement with the EU, and that's not been signed yet because it hasn't been passed by Parliament and it won't be passed by parliament when it comes to a vote.
The good news in your interpretation, of course, is that Farage and his chums won't be lining their pockets with pay-offs and pensions as ex-MEPs.
That's fine with me, as cunts like Kinnock and Mandelson won't get theirs either. Did they really want to stay in the EU when they campaigned for remain or were they just campaigning to protect their pension? I know which my money would be on from those 2 options!
oh dear.... does "someone" want to point out to centy that neither kinnock or mandelson were MEP's, they were Commissioners appointed by the UK Government.... so they would get MP's pensions (since they both served in the UK parliament) and they would get civil service pension
farage refuses to give up his MEP's pension.....
isn't that still hypocritical of your boy?
oh dear.....does "someone" want to point out to Fabio that former EU commissioners in office before May 1st 2004 are entitled to an EU pension worth 4.5% of the salary they last received for each year of service. As Neil Kinnock was Vice President of the European Commission before May 1st 2004 he is entitled to an EU Pension of £90,000 per year. Peter Mandelson became an EU trade commissioner on 22nd November 2004, and according to Wikipedia is entitled to claim an EU Pension of £31,000 per year when he reaches the age of 65. This is also contingent on a "duty of loyalty to the EU communities" which also applies to after his term in office.
No wonder they campaigned for Remain!
It was also put to them in the House of Lords during the EU Withdrawal bill votes that they should not be voting as they had a clear conflict of interest with their EU Pensions, along with Lord Patten, who also receives a generous EU Pension.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/18/neil-kinnock-peter-mandelson-among-pro-eu-peers-looking-force/
And your point is?
You silly boy - they will still get their "EU" pension whether we are in or out!
Jesus it's like flogging a dead horse!
No they won't as Theresa May's Chequers deal pays the divorce bill which is to cover Eu Pensions of past and present UK MEP's and commissioners. If we leave with no deal and don't pay a divorce bill they are liable to lose their EU Pensions. "
I doubt that anyone will loose their pension. The EU MEPs' and commissioners' pensions would be part of a contract between the EU and the individuals, possibly guaranteed by their national governments. Either way all the individuals will get them. The only question is will it be paid by the EU or our government and, if it is paid by the EU, whether the EU has any legal redress against the UK for the money. I would imagine it probably does.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is anyone keeping a count of the OP referendum result?
Just wondering!
It's a remain landslide - sanity prevails"
I have it as a draw at the moment. Seeing as I haven't cast a vote yet I'll opt for Leave with no deal. That puts Leave in the lead.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Is anyone keeping a count of the OP referendum result?
Just wondering!
It's a remain landslide - sanity prevails
I have it as a draw at the moment. Seeing as I haven't cast a vote yet I'll opt for Leave with no deal. That puts Leave in the lead. "
Do you actually have a life? You are on here all the time..can't be good for your health! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is anyone keeping a count of the OP referendum result?
Just wondering!
It's a remain landslide - sanity prevails
I have it as a draw at the moment. Seeing as I haven't cast a vote yet I'll opt for Leave with no deal. That puts Leave in the lead.
Do you actually have a life? You are on here all the time..can't be good for your health!"
I was accused yesterday of not replying quick enough to a question on another thread because I went out for a few hours, lol. Now you're saying I'm never off here, there really is no pleasing some people. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Is anyone keeping a count of the OP referendum result?
Just wondering!
It's a remain landslide - sanity prevails
I have it as a draw at the moment. Seeing as I haven't cast a vote yet I'll opt for Leave with no deal. That puts Leave in the lead.
Do you actually have a life? You are on here all the time..can't be good for your health!
I was accused yesterday of not replying quick enough to a question on another thread because I went out for a few hours, lol. Now you're saying I'm never off here, there really is no pleasing some people. "
Dura fab, sed fab, sed lex!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
