Another new Brexit thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ric
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I didn’t appreciate EU’s assent to the deal was provisional. Can’t see the EU Parliament not granting assent, but will allow them the opportunity to table amendments prior to full ratification.

Good to see the UK Parliament being given a full day to ratify, that will show those pesky Europeans how democracy should be done, I mean two months to analyse and debate a treaty? Pfft :)

‘What could turn out to be an important difference is that the UK Parliament will be giving the deal its full approval. In other words, no backsies.
The EU's approval is provisional and depends on full approval from the EU Parliament next year, probably at the end of February.

So if, in first 2 months of this deal's application, EU side thinks Johnson isn't living up to his word, they could refuse to give it full approval and we're back to no deal in March (provisional application expires 28 Feb).

But UK Parliament will have no such ability to cancel.’ @France24
 
BobKowalski said:
I didn’t appreciate EU’s assent to the deal was provisional. Can’t see the EU Parliament not granting assent, but will allow them the opportunity to table amendments prior to full ratification.

Good to see the UK Parliament being given a full day to ratify, that will show those pesky Europeans how democracy should be done, I mean two months to analyse and debate a treaty? Pfft :)

‘What could turn out to be an important difference is that the UK Parliament will be giving the deal its full approval. In other words, no backsies.
The EU's approval is provisional and depends on full approval from the EU Parliament next year, probably at the end of February.

So if, in first 2 months of this deal's application, EU side thinks Johnson isn't living up to his word, they could refuse to give it full approval and we're back to no deal in March (provisional application expires 28 Feb).

But UK Parliament will have no such ability to cancel.’ @France24
Click to expand...
I thought our approval was provisional as well. I stand corrected.
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
Hey, if that happens and you get desperate and need some Spam, hit me up.
Click to expand...
It's a generous offer, but assuming it's made under licence in the UK we won't be able to import the pork we need 'because of brexit' and the just in time supply chain of ground pork. We could get it from the US, but only if we agree to have chlorinated spam and privatise the NHS.
 
west didsblue said:
They admitted they hadn’t read the details last Thursday. In their haste to declare victory on this forum (which is clearly what’s important to them) they didn’t realise how ridiculous that sounded. Obviously they’re not going to admit they were wrong now they know what’s in it.

I don’t give a fuck what they feel about the deal. I’m just pointing out blatant hypocrisy.
Click to expand...
If you don't give a fuck, why "point out the blatant hypocrisy"? To who are you pointing it out to and for what purpose?

As I said, i've read their stance on what they wanted from a deal and their remarks are consistant with what has transpired. They gave two propositions, one if the result was a deal and the other if we were heading for no deal. The latter hasn't happened so I remember what they said about what they wanted from a deal and it's no different.

You should take time to listen to people more and not jump to conclusions.
 
Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese said:
It's a generous offer, but assuming it's made under licence in the UK we won't be able to import the pork we need 'because of brexit' and the just in time supply chain of ground pork. We could get it from the US, but only if we agree to have chlorinated spam and privatise the NHS.
Click to expand...
Spam actually has pork it it? I thought it was just bacon flavoured rubber.
 
Mëtal Bikër said:
If you don't give a fuck, why "point out the blatant hypocrisy"? To who are you pointing it out to and for what purpose?

As I said, i've read their stance on what they wanted from a deal and their remarks are consistant with what has transpired. They gave two propositions, one if the result was a deal and the other if we were heading for no deal. The latter hasn't happened so I remember what they said about what they wanted from a deal and it's no different.

You should take time to listen to people more and not jump to conclusions.
Click to expand...
I regularly point out hypocrisy. Why should I ignore it?

I’ve also read their stance and disagree with your understanding entirely. As we aren’t going to agree on this and I don’t have the inclination to go trawling for quotes to prove my point I’ll leave you to it.
 
west didsblue said:
I regularly point out hypocrisy. Why should I ignore it?

I’ve also read their stance and disagree with your understanding entirely. As we aren’t going to agree on this and I don’t have the inclination to go trawling for quotes to prove my point I’ll leave you to it.
Click to expand...
Alright. For one so keen in pointing out hypocrisy, it amazes me you don't recognise when you're doing it yourself.
 
metalblue said:
Will be interesting to see how Sturgeon plays this one. Side with the fisherman to hit Westminster with the “not looking after our interests” hammer and you devalue the Scotland wanted to remain argument for independence. She’ll probably bite her lip and stay silent
Click to expand...
Think either or more likely both works as an argument for independence. Don’t see how one negates the other really.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top