Hiya 9 books, gfa and free movement DO allow the movement of people and one can exist without the other, sorry if that offends your opinion, but the movement is guaranteed.
(listen to more jungle) Blighty wants his country back Fifty-inch screen in his cul-de-sac Whooping charm of the Union Jack As he cries at the price of a bacon bap Islam didn’t eat your hamster Change isn’t a crime So won’t you take my hand sir And sing with me in time [Chorus] G R E A T [Verse 2] Blighty wants her blue passport Not quite sure what the union’s for Burning bridges and closing doors Not sure what she sees on the seashore Islam didn’t eat your hamster Change isn’t a crime So won’t you take my hand sister And sing with me in time [Chorus] G R E A T [Outro] You can have it all, I don’t mind Just get ready to work overtime ‘Cause we’re all in this together
Another silly red assumption, if that^^ was the case, how do you account for so many leave voters being labour?
That must mean the Irish Times opinions are irrelevant too then as they quote british and irish governments on the matter https://www.irishtimes.com/life-and...itain-to-retain-rights-after-brexit-1.3628151
is that it? so much for to save the tory party the vote was about stay or leave, not what party do you want. Do you think this maybe the cause of so much of your information being wrong, you haven't fully understood it?
The GFA is 35 pages long There is nothing in it about what might happen if one country left the EU. For about the 20th time the border issue has more to do with goods and customs than it does with people. I can’t believe you get to vote
I agree with you however, this forum isn't all about you and the question on people travelling across the border was asked by shadow and I was answering him. You're so needy, wait till I tell your mum you're up this late, you're an only sibling aren't you, be honest now
I would say it's slightly less biased than some of the links posted here from "brexit central" and "breitbart", ffs!
I did answer your question, but you didn't like my answer so you're asking me again. But you don't see the irony in that...
I appreciate you making my point for me. JRM was not permitted to carefully answer a complicated question. Imagine JOB interviewing Einstein regarding General Relativity. Yes? Are we there yet? Which Brexiteers? The ones I find convincing exhibit no problems with their arguments although I have seen plenty of sloppy reasoning from some Brexiteers. Are you suggesting that because some folk argue unconvincingly for Brexit, we ignore the better arguments from all Brexiteers? Weird idea. False premise. Let me illustrate: "Why can't [Brexiteers] just stick to arguments I can agree with?". The fact that people arguing emotionally in favour of EU membership require logical arguments from Brexiteers is, well, ironic. Perhaps because Remainders always wish to frame the discussion in purely financial terms whereas Leavers accept the possibility that short-term financial disadvantage may - MAY - occur until the markets and the deals are settled ... and that for Leavers, the Remainder financial argument, whether realistic or not, is not central to the issue of EU membership. Thought experiment: Is the only way for a population to be contented and happy predicated upon economic principles? If so, and a totalitarian regime took over the government, would your only criteria for success be on economic grounds? NB, I am not equating the EU, as currently implemented, to a totalitarian regime. We would be getting ahead of ourselves there : o ) I have no idea why "they" are not pointing this out. Do you know? I don't believe that people are attempting to argue about subsidies for steel by countering with "cheap shoes". That is a stupid suggestion. The UK government handing over taxpayer money to the EU so that the EU can then hand a fraction of it back to sections of the UK that the EU deems worthy, is an ill-thought out strategy for investment for UK industries. For one thing, it's a little like handing over your financial affairs to an investment broker, who charges you half of your investment in return for his services. It's a pretty pricey way of doing business. Another problem is, why should the EU pick what UK industries it wishes to sponsor? Do they have the UK's best interest when they decide? Without any public discussion of the EU's decision making process, without any hope of transparency, we have only a belief in the bone fides of the EU to reassure us. I am sorry but I consider having a foreign power determining which of our industries is worthy of investment an act of insanity. Convince me. What positive reasons do you think are there for Brexit? I am sorry, but I don't believe you at this point. The British Government is engaged in a struggle to ensure the UK stay in the EU. What earthly reason would they have to demonstrate that they are capable of running the country on our own? Are you asking me if I have seen how bad the WA deal is? Yes, I looked through enough of it, when it first surfaced, to be able to discount it as a genuine method for Brexiting. It is not simply a piss-poor deal, it is a methodology for ensuring that the UK remains in, or quickly returns to, the EU. It is an excellent deal for the EU Project which means it is a complete non-starter for the democratic majority UK. If you have no problem with the dissolution of nation states in favour of EU federalisation, then I can see why the GFA would be a red line that cannot be crossed. However, and in my opinion, the GFA cannot be used as an excuse for dooming the UK to non-statehood and becoming a mere region of the EU Superstate. If you do not wish to see the UK subsumed into an EU Superstate, then remaining in the EU is the red line that cannot be crossed. The GFA will need to be adapted. I realise what I am saying here. I have weighed up both sides of the argument. Another thought exercise: If you were given the choice between the dissolution of the UK Government, in favour of Brussels rule and keeping the GFA intact ... or retaining a UK Government, at the risk of a return to the criminality and murdering of old in Ireland, which would you choose? (I lied - it isn't a thought experiment at all, it's the choice we may have to make)
This is why you use percentages fin, you claim Scotland does better than the U.K. and using this link YOU provided a bit further up https://www.uktradeinfo.com/Statistics/RTS/Pages/default.aspx i claim nothing more than how much we trade with the EU. you spent yer days claiming that we are a basket case. odd.
Interesting teaching opportunity here. Excellent! The guy is a WTO Expert. He can make comments on WTO, he can advise on WTO. What he cannot do is tell the UK that it needs to "Remain in the EU" or that it needs to "Leave the EU". His expertise does not stretch that far. Remind yourself of this moment when Sainsbury and Asda et al are effectively urging us not leave the EU.
Thank you Loz, I do wish they'd reconsider his job title then because 'Director General of the WTO' isn't clear enough in my opinion as to his authority on the matter. Bloody lazy HR department
