View Poll Results: 10 days left, what'll it be?

Voters
92. This poll is closed
  • Hard Brexit (crash out)

    45 48.91%
  • No Brexit (Remain by revoking A50)

    24 26.09%
  • Withdrawal Agreement (after a new session is called)

    0 0%
  • Extension + Withdrawal Agreement

    3 3.26%
  • Extension + Crashout

    9 9.78%
  • Extension + Remain

    11 11.96%
  1. #6421
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    I think you need to read up on what the referendum covered. It was a simple in/out question that covers anything from a BINO/EEA/Norway deal to maximum Brexit/no deal/oh fuck we're fucked.
    The government were quite clear that leaving the EU would mean leaving the SM and CU. You'd be right to say that this was dismissed by many as project fear but the information, that leaving meant leaving all of EU, both prior to and after the referendum was out there for all to see.

    Here is Call me Dave explaining just that;



    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    Sorry if my speech is getting a bit colloquial for someone who doesn't have English as a first language. What I mean is the number of people who are willing to accept the social, economic and logistical problems of no customs union just so JRM and his cronies can get rich on bespoke trade deals is small enough to be insignificant, apart from their chokehold on government of course.
    Ah, yes the ol' English is not your first language. Again. You really got me this time! I mean it can't possibly be you it must be that I can't understand you. I must be a thick ol' foreigner? Eh? Maybe you should shout, slowly. Grow up.

    What a nonsense argument. It is a complete strawman.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    If they were pushing for a bullshit fantasy alternative they would have used a bullshit fantasy name like "customs partnership."
    If it wasn't they'd tell us what they actually mean. If they mean staying the CU then why don't they come out say so? Why do they need to make the distinction between a CU (their idea) and the CU (the EU's actual real CU)?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    What obstacles are you worried about if the UK and EU were in a customs union post-Brexit?
    I am not worried about anything. The simple fact is the customs union would do what you think it would.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    I'm not quite as confident that the government could survive another leadership contest at this point. That's what gives JRM and co. so much power, the Conservatives are utterly terrified of the idea of Jeremy Corbyn as PM.
    Even Corbyn is not stupid enough to want to hold the Brexit chalice.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    Growing up working class in 1980's northern England means my dislike for the Tories is quite deep and complex thankyou very much. But with other Conservative PMs and governments you got the impression they were doing what they thought best for their country (even Mrs. Thatcher, God roast her soul.) The trouble with the current bunch is they are putting themselves before the party and the party before the country. They're not just governing in a way I find objectionable, they're fundamentally incapable of governing properly due to the web of minority interests that are needed to glue the week and wobbly structure together. Sadly in its current state I'm not sure our political structure is capable of forming a government that could be effective in the perilously short time we have left.
    Perhaps you should be open to the possibility that this dislike clouds your judgement?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    They aren't listening to "the people of Northern Ireland," they're listening to the DUP because they're needed to barely keep T-May's head above water. The devolved government of NI is currently broken thanks to a scandal involving the DUP and it's difficult to gage how much their elected MP's represent policies the people approve of, and how many are elected because they wear the correct badge in the Protestant/Unionist-Catholic/Republican divide. And let's not even mention Sinn Fein's absence from the UK Parliament.
    As an elected party The DUP do represent the people of NI. Your problem is not that they are listening to the people of NI but listening the wrong kind of NI people. Gotcha!

    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    A referendum hasn't even been discussed or offered by the government, instead they rush through a piece of legislation that forbids any sort of division in the Irish sea so they could turn to the EU and say sorry, can't even consider that as it would be illegal.
    Your point is utter nonsense. You are moaning that the Tories are not letting NI do something they haven't even asked for!


    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    I did you the favour of looking up what the referendum actually ask,



    As you can see the referendum specifically asks if the UK should remain a member of the EU or leave the EU.


    It doesn't mention the EEA or the Customs Union, the government is completely capable of following the result of the referendum by leaving the EU whilst remaining in the EEA and/or the CU.
    Really this is the basis of your argument? I know the others are weak but this really is something. When you go to vote does your voting slip list the individual party manifestos or does it just list the name of the candidate and their party?
    Last edited by Pann; 2018-07-21 at 10:01 PM.

  2. #6422
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    Really this is the basis of your argument? I know the others are weak but this really is something. When you go to vote does your voting slip list the individual party manifestos or does it just list the name of the candidate and their party?
    This wasn't a manifesto. This wasn't about voting for a party based on what they proposed. This was simply answering a question. And before you suggest that Vote Leave had effectively created a manifesto, since they were saying what a vote to leave meant, that won't wash. Because what we actually had was a whole bunch of people saying a whole bunch of different things about what they personally believed leave meant. Some of them were contradicatory. Some of them were flat out impossible. Some of them were lies.

    So unless we manage to produce a Brexit that achieves what EVERY single person in the leave campaign said it would achieve, we are back to the only thing we have. Which is a question, stating do you want to leave the EU. That's it. So if we leave the EU and stay in the CU/SM/ECJ and every other thing, that still fulfills the answer we got to that question.

    This is true regardless of how much it upsets you.
    When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
    Quote Originally Posted by George Carlin
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Douglas Adams
    It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

  3. #6423
    Quote Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl View Post
    This wasn't a manifesto. This wasn't about voting for a party based on what they proposed. This was simply answering a question. And before you suggest that Vote Leave had effectively created a manifesto, since they were saying what a vote to leave meant, that won't wash. Because what we actually had was a whole bunch of people saying a whole bunch of different things about what they personally believed leave meant. Some of them were contradicatory. Some of them were flat out impossible. Some of them were lies.

    So unless we manage to produce a Brexit that achieves what EVERY single person in the leave campaign said it would achieve, we are back to the only thing we have. Which is a question, stating do you want to leave the EU. That's it. So if we leave the EU and stay in the CU/SM/ECJ and every other thing, that still fulfills the answer we got to that question.

    This is true regardless of how much it upsets you.
    I never said that it was. Why would I suggest that leave had created a manifesto? It is very difficult to discuss things with you when you keep doing this. Please stop.

    You're ignoring the fact that the Tories were elected in 2017 on the basis of leaving the CU and CM so even if what you said was true it would be irrelevant.

    Why would I be upset? And what do you think might have upset me?

  4. #6424
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    I never said that it was. Why would I suggest that leave had created a manifesto? It is very difficult to discuss things with you when you keep doing this. Please stop.

    You're ignoring the fact that the Tories were elected in 2017 on the basis of leaving the CU and CM so even if what you said was true it would be irrelevant.

    Why would I be upset? And what do you think might have upset me?
    If the question that was asked on the referendum wasn't what was being voted on (as your response to the other poster suggested) what was it then? If it wasn't the precise question, then it would have to be what vote leave had defined the question to be, surely? If you meant something else, feel free to state it.

    And we have to do it because it was in the Tories manifesto? Do you actually want me to go back through the manifestos of recent governments and show the swathes of things that they said that they were going to do and didn't? There hasn't been a political party in my lifetime that didn't back out of something they promised. And that's even assuming that they had actually won the election. WHICH THEY DIDN'T. The Tories changed their manifesto massively when they went into coalition with the Lib Dems. So the fact they've done the same surely means that manifesto items are up for grabs?

    And it was the tone of your response that suggested to me that you were getting exasperated; like you felt you were having to respond to something so obvious and basic that it shouldn't have even been brought up. I guess I was just reading too much into it. Easy to do with the written word.
    When challenging a Kzin, a simple scream of rage is sufficient. You scream and you leap.
    Quote Originally Posted by George Carlin
    Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.
    Quote Originally Posted by Douglas Adams
    It is a well-known fact that those people who must want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it... anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.

  5. #6425
    Quote Originally Posted by Huehuecoyotl View Post
    If the question that was asked on the referendum wasn't what was being voted on (as your response to the other poster suggested) what was it then? If it wasn't the precise question, then it would have to be what vote leave had defined the question to be, surely? If you meant something else, feel free to state it.

    And we have to do it because it was in the Tories manifesto? Do you actually want me to go back through the manifestos of recent governments and show the swathes of things that they said that they were going to do and didn't? There hasn't been a political party in my lifetime that didn't back out of something they promised. And that's even assuming that they had actually won the election. WHICH THEY DIDN'T. The Tories changed their manifesto massively when they went into coalition with the Lib Dems. So the fact they've done the same surely means that manifesto items are up for grabs?

    And it was the tone of your response that suggested to me that you were getting exasperated; like you felt you were having to respond to something so obvious and basic that it shouldn't have even been brought up. I guess I was just reading too much into it. Easy to do with the written word.
    My post suggested no such thing. The referendum voting slip asked one question just like any other voting slip if you do not know what casting vote will entail then you only have yourself to blame.

    Don't worry you are not the first to bring this issue up;

    Here is Andrew Neil's reponse to Nick Clegg bringing up this very issue

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJt3bEA_ylg

    and Leanne Wood

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dghdvVbtowM

    Where did I say this? You're twisting my words once again. You claimed that staying in the CU/SM/ECJ would fulfill the answer to the question, this is quite clearly not the case as the Tories campaigned and won, by a narrow margin, on the basis that we would leave all of the above. At this point the ambiguity that you seem to believe exists surrounding the referendum has been removed.

    Why would I be upset by this? Does this kind of thing upset you?
    Last edited by Pann; 2018-07-21 at 10:53 PM.

  6. #6426
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    The government were quite clear that leaving the EU would mean leaving the SM and CU. You'd be right to say that this was dismissed by many as project fear but the information, that leaving meant leaving all of EU, both prior to and after the referendum was out there for all to see.

    Here is Call me Dave explaining just that;

    <snip>
    None of that changes the wording on the referendum, very few (if any) democratic processes are based on clip reels from YouTube. Maybe if the Leave campaign hadn't collectively shit their pants and done a runner they could have put forth their comprehensive plans for how the UK could leave the EU, the EEA and the Customs Union without wrecking the economy or breaking the peace in Northern Ireland, but as those plans failed to materialise (along with the 350m a week for the NHS coming directly from the funds that would have been sent to the EU) it's very likely such a thing isn't possible, so all options should be explored as to how we can honour the "Leave the European Union" result of the referendum (if we don't see common sense and have a second, better informed and more informative referendum to get a clearer picture of what the country actually wants.)

    Ah, yes the ol' English is not your first language. Again. You really got me this time! I mean it can't possibly be you it must be that I can't understand you. I must be a thick ol' foreigner? Eh? Maybe you should shout, slowly. Grow up.

    What a nonsense argument. It is a complete strawman.
    Like I said though, "nobody cares" is a common colloquial phrase used to indicate that an insignificant number of people care about bespoke trade deals to benefit the rich and privileged. It's unfortunate that small minority happen to have a chokehold on the government but it doesn't mean they represent the will of the people. Is there are reason you didn't address that part of the argument?

    If it wasn't they'd tell us what they actually mean. If they mean staying the CU then why don't they come out say so? Why do they need to make the distinction between a CU (their idea) and the CU (the EU's actual real CU)?
    “The customs arrangements at the moment are hardwired into the membership treaty, so I think everybody now recognises there is going to have to be a new treaty [between the UK and the EU]. It will do the work of the customs union. So it is a customs union,” Starmer said.

    “But will it do the work of the current customs union? Yes, that’s the intention.”

    I am not worried about anything. The simple fact is the customs union would do what you think it would.
    I think it would remove the need for border checks between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, why do you think it won't?

    Even Corbyn is not stupid enough to want to hold the Brexit chalice.
    Citation needed.

    Perhaps you should be open to the possibility that this dislike clouds your judgement?
    Always, but I'm quite happy that my assessment of the current UK government being crippled by internal divisions is accurate and I would feel the same level of disappointment with any Party that failed in its duty due to internal divisions during such a crucial time for the UK.

    As an elected party The DUP do represent the people of NI. Your problem is not that they are listening to the people of NI but listening the wrong kind of NI people.
    The devolved government of NI is currently broken thanks to a scandal involving the DUP and it's difficult to gage how much their elected MP's represent policies the people approve of, and how many are elected because they wear the correct badge in the Protestant/Unionist-Catholic/Republican divide. And let's not even mention Sinn Fein's absence from the UK Parliament.

    Gotcha!
    It's not a gotcha if I can counter by copy-pasting the text you thought you were gotchaing. By the same token as all major parties were against Brexit before the referendum then we shouldn't have had a referendum because the elected representatives already had an answer.

    Your point is utter nonsense. You are moaning that the Tories are not letting NI do something they haven't even asked for!
    No, I'm complaining that the Conservatives are failing to consult with the people of NI and instead have followed the hard-line of a tiny minority of MPs who's party wield a far larger amount of power than their vote-share would suggest.

    Really this is the basis of your argument? I know the others are weak but this really is something. When you go to vote does your voting slip list the individual party manifestos or does it just list the name of the candidate and their party?
    Is this a joke? Do you know what a referendum actually is? There is a huge difference between electing a person to represent your area and answering a question that will directly affect policy. I knew your grasp of how UK politics works was tenuous but I didn't realise you were struggling with the basics of democracy as a whole.

  7. #6427
    Quote Originally Posted by Dhrizzle View Post
    None of that changes the wording on the referendum, very few (if any) democratic processes are based on clip reels from YouTube. Maybe if the Leave campaign hadn't collectively shit their pants and done a runner they could have put forth their comprehensive plans for how the UK could leave the EU, the EEA and the Customs Union without wrecking the economy or breaking the peace in Northern Ireland, but as those plans failed to materialise (along with the 350m a week for the NHS coming directly from the funds that would have been sent to the EU) it's very likely such a thing isn't possible, so all options should be explored as to how we can honour the "Leave the European Union" result of the referendum (if we don't see common sense and have a second, better informed and more informative referendum to get a clearer picture of what the country actually wants.)



    Like I said though, "nobody cares" is a common colloquial phrase used to indicate that an insignificant number of people care about bespoke trade deals to benefit the rich and privileged. It's unfortunate that small minority happen to have a chokehold on the government but it doesn't mean they represent the will of the people. Is there are reason you didn't address that part of the argument?



    “The customs arrangements at the moment are hardwired into the membership treaty, so I think everybody now recognises there is going to have to be a new treaty [between the UK and the EU]. It will do the work of the customs union. So it is a customs union,” Starmer said.

    “But will it do the work of the current customs union? Yes, that’s the intention.”



    I think it would remove the need for border checks between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, why do you think it won't?



    Citation needed.



    Always, but I'm quite happy that my assessment of the current UK government being crippled by internal divisions is accurate and I would feel the same level of disappointment with any Party that failed in its duty due to internal divisions during such a crucial time for the UK.



    The devolved government of NI is currently broken thanks to a scandal involving the DUP and it's difficult to gage how much their elected MP's represent policies the people approve of, and how many are elected because they wear the correct badge in the Protestant/Unionist-Catholic/Republican divide. And let's not even mention Sinn Fein's absence from the UK Parliament.



    It's not a gotcha if I can counter by copy-pasting the text you thought you were gotchaing. By the same token as all major parties were against Brexit before the referendum then we shouldn't have had a referendum because the elected representatives already had an answer.



    No, I'm complaining that the Conservatives are failing to consult with the people of NI and instead have followed the hard-line of a tiny minority of MPs who's party wield a far larger amount of power than their vote-share would suggest.



    Is this a joke? Do you know what a referendum actually is? There is a huge difference between electing a person to represent your area and answering a question that will directly affect policy. I knew your grasp of how UK politics works was tenuous but I didn't realise you were struggling with the basics of democracy as a whole.
    Look I appreciate the effort you've gone to in your reply but I really can't be bothered with this. There's absolutely nothing I can discuss with you. Your points are a mess. They're all over the place - you argue from one position and then change it the next paragraph. It's almost as if you ignore anything that conflicts with your point of view and I am sorry to say that you don't even seem to be aware of the inconsistencies of your argument. The only consistency is your dislike for the Conservatives.

  8. #6428
    Quote Originally Posted by dribbles View Post
    What dribbles thinks tends to come true. Now who said recently on this forum that no deal means no money from the UK to the EU? Couldn't have been a wise and sensible brexiteer possibly could it? Ah well never mind, no hard feelings eurochums, a guy called Dominic Raab has replaced the old Brexit secretary David Davis after his resignation and tonight guess what he says? Well tah-dah here you go:-

    Dominic Raab: Britain will refuse to pay £39 billion divorce bill to Brussels if the EU fails to agree trade deal

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...-divorce-bill/

    Now all that remains is to decide what sort of timescale over which that payment is offered, to be reasonable I think it should be on the order of 1 euro a week for the next 39billion weeks. Bwahhahahahaaa
    Now, the bold part is a lie. But we know you're not taking the truth too honest.

    About Raab's... statement. Do you remember when you said the EU was threatening? Here, I'll remind you, since I know your attention span isn't very long:

    Quote Originally Posted by dribbles View Post
    I am not at all being aggressive, just responding to threats and attempts by the EU at UK intimidation.
    Please tell me again who's threatening. Go ahead. Tell me. Crooks and frauds usually don't get a good deal honestly. If he pulls that shit off, you can wave an FTA bye, bye. You'll be frozen out so cold, Eskimos will ask for warmer jackets just watching it on TV.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  9. #6429
    Deleted
    im sure not paying will do great things for relations with out biggest trading partner. This is absolutely criminal.

  10. #6430
    Think I've posted this before but just a reminder given JRM's statements today and Brexiteer's general reliance on WTO rules;

    Trump's hobbling the WTO.

  11. #6431
    Quote Originally Posted by dribbles View Post
    It is not complicated at all. No agreement means no payment and no way the EU can enforce it even if the ECJ rules otherwise. They could go for a resolution at the security council, but we are taking our permanent seat there with us and will just veto it.
    No payment means the UK won't get to buy their own debt for a minor sum (the so called "brexit bill"), they will have to pay the normal way which will certainly cost them more.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by dribbles View Post


    If the EU wants borders and to punish Ireland, we can give you borders.
    How about you post a picture of what is left of the UK's routes if both the EU and Ireland blockade them? ^^

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by dribbles View Post
    We promised to pay if a free trade agreement is signed. We promised not to pay if it wasn't.( Nothing is agrred until everything is agreed, remember?) Again we honour our promises.
    No, the EU offered the UK to sell them their (the UKs') debt for a minor sum so that they (the EU) could be rid of the annoyance that is dealing with the UK.
    If the UK does not want to take that deal then the debt will still be there and will have to be paid--by the UK.

  12. #6432
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    The way he set up those tariffs is also intended to be destructive to the WTO. "National security" is such an open-ended excuse that it can be used by anyone for anything. While I do not judge Trump to be clever enough for this, whoever gave him his lines for most of the time has the express purpose of hobbling the world order; breaking alliances, diminishing powerful international organizations, weakening the importance of treaties.
    I wonder what Russian country would have a desire to see that happen?

    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    No payment means the UK won't get to buy their own debt for a minor sum (the so called "brexit bill"), they will have to pay the normal way which will certainly cost them more.

    - - - Updated - - -



    How about you post a picture of what is left of the UK's routes if both the EU and Ireland blockade them? ^^
    Dribbles is at least consistent in that regard. He already noted that the UK will just not pay any debts and declare them null and void. Mind you, he also thinks that this would in no way adversely affect the UK's ability to make new deals. Not saying the position is smart, but it is internally consistent.

  13. #6433
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    And? No-one is denying that it was the UK's choice.

    The UK has come up with a solution it is now up to the EU to decide whether or not this is acceptable to them or if not whether there are ways to make it acceptable. If no way can be found then the UK and EU must ensure that Ireland suffers minimal disruption and that all efforts are made to preserve the peace.
    No they have come up with a magical fantasy world.

  14. #6434
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    The Brexit we're talking about now is subject to negotiation between the EU and the UK both parties have it within their power to reach an agreement where the GFA remains intact. If the GFA is broken then it will as a result of the failure of these negotiations.
    But failure is the default state.
    The UK knew that before calling the referendum.

  15. #6435
    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    This kind of strawman is getting really tedious! The EU and the UK have the power to broker a deal that keeps the GFA intact as it stands there are issues which both sides see as important that stand in the way. It may well be that these issues are insurmountable and other solutions need to be found.
    No, the UK has that choice, the EU doesn't.
    Either the UK agrees to the EU's proposal or it doesn't.
    The EU cannot transform the continent into some deranged version of Schroedigers Cat that exists both in the real world and in magic brexit fantasy land.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    Not necessarily but that is for the EU and UK to decide.
    The EU cannot "decide" to accept the UK's "solution" because it cannot change how physics work, nor can it force its member states to leave the WTO.
    Those are sovereign you know--just like the UK.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    I'm really struggling to see how this fits in with what I wrote.
    That must be because you apparently live in an alternate reality that is constantly filled with magical fog.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Pann View Post
    I agree with your solutions. There is also 5. The EU grants various exceptions to the Irish border. Before I get jumped on I am not saying that the EU should do this.
    No, that one is magical thinking, it is impossible for the EU due to other treaties its member states signed.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Not necessarily. Free Trade Agreements often have form committees for handling bilateral issues. Which is what May has suggested. The issue here is that no Free Trade Agreement has ever been as ambitious as what May requests or covered as large a volume of transactions.
    So a copy of the ECJ under another name?

  16. #6436
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Well no, the ECJ's jurisdiction reaches far further because it arbitrates on far more than the Single Market (all the other interlocking agencies and treaties). Go back to my post though, I explain why it is a problem for the EU (mainly that there is a desire to built such an international court and they have been laying the groundwork for it for some time now).
    But the Uk would need nearly all those other parts of it, too, to avoid that border.
    And since the member states that would contribute to that court would be the exact same that contribute to the ECJ it would effectly be a (poorly made and redundant) copy (with another name).

  17. #6437
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Well no, the ECJ's jurisdiction reaches far further because it arbitrates on far more than the Single Market (all the other interlocking agencies and treaties). Go back to my post though, I explain why it is a problem for the EU (mainly that there is a desire to built such an international court and they have been laying the groundwork for it for some time now).

    Edit: here it is:
    So they want to consolidate what is currently done by dozens, if not hundreds of separate trade arbitrators? Im failing to see what the problem is?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nymrohd View Post
    Also if they refused to pay their debt, the rating agencies will have a party.
    If the UK refuses to pay the money it owes I can't see how any trade partner would be willing to take them seriously.

  18. #6438
    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    How about you post a picture of what is left of the UK's routes if both the EU and Ireland blockade them? ^^
    What? Now that just doesn't make sense at all. The EU isn't allowed to do that! Says the law of Dribs!

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    But the Uk would need nearly all those other parts of it, too, to avoid that border.
    And since the member states that would contribute to that court would be the exact same that contribute to the ECJ it would effectly be a (poorly made and redundant) copy (with another name).
    You haven't paid attention it seems. That is exactly what the UK are proposing. They don't want to be under ECJ jurisdiction, but they grudgingly agree that someone has to do the arbitting. So they propose a court that works like the ECJ, follows the same rules as the ECJ but isn't the ECJ. Because then they'd be breaking their promise. Or something... it's really kindergarten logic, but what isn't in the UK these days...
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

  19. #6439
    Quote Originally Posted by Slant View Post
    You haven't paid attention it seems. That is exactly what the UK are proposing. They don't want to be under ECJ jurisdiction, but they grudgingly agree that someone has to do the arbitting. So they propose a court that works like the ECJ, follows the same rules as the ECJ but isn't the ECJ. Because then they'd be breaking their promise. Or something... it's really kindergarten logic, but what isn't in the UK these days...
    I know that that is what they are proposing, that is why I pointed out that that is what it would mean.
    What I ask myself is who would be paying for that redundant copy when the UK supposedly created all this mess in part to save money.

    (Yes, I wasn't online for a few days, other stuff to do...)

  20. #6440
    Quote Originally Posted by Noradin View Post
    I know that that is what they are proposing, that is why I pointed out that that is what it would mean.
    What I ask myself is who would be paying for that redundant copy when the UK supposedly created all this mess in part to save money.

    (Yes, I wasn't online for a few days, other stuff to do...)
    They expect the EU to pay, of course. What did you think? It's the UK, nothing but complete submission to the British Empire would satisfy the likes of Dribs.
    Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
    PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •