SkyBlueDom26
Well-Known Member
We're not in a strong negotiating position because we had a pathetic remainer in charge
We're not in a strong negotiating position because we had a pathetic remainer in chargeMassive potential to be bitch slapped into submission by Trump. As the EU negotiations have proved we are not in a strong negotiating position despite what the leave campaign promised.
Not if the remoaners have a sayAre we leaving?
We're not in a strong negotiating position because we had a pathetic remainer in charge
We're not in a strong negotiating position because we had a pathetic remainer in charge
USA saying they want to do new large trade deals with us...
Massive potential
We're not in a strong negotiating position because we had a pathetic remainer in charge
No they didn’t - they negotiated to remain and whatever politicians say civil servants do all the ground work and the real strategy
Are we leaving?
We're not in a strong negotiating position because we had a pathetic remainer in charge
David Davis and Dominic Rabb were both leavers. If you’re referring to May then you have to ask the question why all the leavers stood to one side so she could take the job unopposed. I would think that the magnitude of the referendum hit the leavers like a bad case of an STD so they offered May up as a pallet cleanser. The promised utopia of brexit was a unicorn promise but let’s let May take charge and then we can blame it on a remainer. Same with the general public, the reason brexit is a failure is because remainers, sorry remoaners, are all negative.
Sorry but project fear has quickly become reality and leavers disowning their votes and blaming remainers for something they didn’t vote for tells you all you need to know about the mentality of leavers. Always someone else’s fault, the EU, immigration, remainers etc etc.
Isn't the investment bank modelled on the German central bank, (can't remember the name but Mart will probably know)?
Are you claiming that the Brexiteers negotiated to remain, or have you misread the post?
The leave campaign misled voters and now we have the mess to prove it.
Maybe this: https://www.kfw.de/kfw.de.html
Grants credit for projects that maybe commercial banks wouldn’t. Things like investment in green technology or helping start ups.
The whole negotiating process is done by civil servants
The process was entirely geared to a remain or soft exit strategy which made negotiations impossible - no normal business would ever approach it like that.
This misled nonsense is also bollocks. The real misleading occurred in the 74 referendum when there was cover ups regarding the intent of an eu superstate. When foot and Benn stated this they were mocked and ridiculed as was Powell on the right.
Isn't the investment bank modelled on the German central ban
Already have under funded banks for Green initiatives and start-ups etc.Maybe this: https://www.kfw.de/kfw.de.html
Grants credit for projects that maybe commercial banks wouldn’t. Things like investment in green technology or helping start ups.
Here’s a question for you. There is constant dross about different people voting for different brexits.
Would you be happy with a remain question that stated remain means no more integration treaties, no power of veto ever to be removed and never to be part of the Euro?
You can’t bind future EU parliaments . No power of veto can be removed without agreement of all 28 states. We have an exemption from the Euro, despite some leavers saying that is going to be changed without our agreement. If we don’t sign integration treaties which have a veto, there won’t be any. Maybe future UK Parliaments will want more integration.
The whole negotiating process is done by civil servants
The process was entirely geared to a remain or soft exit strategy which made negotiations impossible - no normal business would ever approach it like that.
This misled nonsense is also bollocks. The real misleading occurred in the 74 referendum when there was cover ups regarding the intent of an eu superstate. When foot and Benn stated this they were mocked and ridiculed as was Powell on the right.
I am not a fan of Foot, Benn or Powell and what has happened so far has not resulted in a superstate. So, up until now, 46 years later, their predictions have not come true. They may or may not come true in the future. They will only do so if we agree to it. We could always leave if they were to deny us vetos on things we already have vetos on, without our agreement. But, that is up to future governments to decide. First we have to stop this madness which is based on madness and frightening people about things that have not happened.
That’s not what I asked. Many people who vote remain do so on the basis the status quo remains and there is no further integration. If there was a referendum should this option be made available as a question to show the remainers who want to stay but want integration to stop at the point we are at?
It has become true - people were lied to about increased integration were they not in 1974?
That’s not what I asked. Many people who vote remain do so on the basis the status quo remains and there is no further integration. If there was a referendum should this option be made available as a question to show the remainers who want to stay but want integration to stop at the point we are at?
Calm ya attitudeExplain the strengths of our negotiating position against the strongest economy and the most nationalistic President in the Western world. ( who is desperate for a win ). We will be classed as a distressed trading partner.
Off you go...
Waiting in suspense .
Calm ya attitude
This is where it finds itself in conflict. Few states want (or indeed could sell to their electorates) much further integration (certainly beyond tinance & trade) or surrendering of powers but this is what Brussels has increasingly been asking for.It is not a superstate. Increased integration in trade and workers rights is a great positive.
It’s a really good question and the reason why major changes were supposed to be agreed by each countryHere’s a question for you. There is constant dross about different people voting for different brexits.
Would you be happy with a remain question that stated remain means no more integration treaties, no power of veto ever to be removed and never to be part of the Euro?
It has become true - people were lied to about increased integration were they not in 1974?
Using your own logic, since then the country voted in governments who were committed to the EU and no party over the decades looking to undo it ever got close to actually getting in power, so that means the electorate were condoning it.
Your own logic, not mine
That says he didn't renege on a commitment, that says he promised a referendum if one was necessary.Nope one government reneged on its commitments
FactCheck: Did Blair promise Euro referendum? - Channel 4 News
That says he didn't renege on a commitment, that says he promised a referendum if one was necessary.
Well that's what your link says.Lol of course the blood stained Blair creature did - of course
Well that's what your link says.
It's almost like you haven't read your own link.“We will put the constitution to the people in a referendum and wholeheartedly campaign for a yes vote”
Ok
It's almost like you haven't read your own link.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?