Jump to content

Jools

Members
  • Content Count

    5,006
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by Jools

  1. The Lefty, EU loving MSM will continue to pander to Barnier & co, but the latter no longer have quisling supplicants in the UK government on their side -- 'Least none with any clout As to Sir Nigel of Farage (Mr.Brexit), the Tories would still be kissing Cameron's @rse and we wouldn't be leaving the EU if it wasn't for him
  2. UK / EU relations:Written statement - HCWS86 Made by: Boris Johnson (Prime Minister) HCWS86 UK / EU relations This statement sets out the Government’s proposed approach to the negotiations with the EU about our future relationship. Further details on this and other trade negotiations will be made available to Parliament as the process develops. The Government wishes to see a future relationship based on friendly cooperation between sovereign equals for the benefit of all our peoples. There is complete certainty that at the end of 2020 the process of transition to that relationship will be complete and that the UK will have recovered in full its economic and political independence. The Government remains committed in all circumstances to securing all those benefits for the whole of the UK and to strengthening our Union. The question for the rest of 2020 is whether the UK and the EU can agree a deeper trading relationship on the lines of the free trade agreement the EU has with Canada, or whether the relationship will be based simply on the Withdrawal Agreement deal agreed in October 2019, including the Protocol on Ireland / Northern Ireland. In either event the UK will be leaving the single market and the customs union at the end of this year and stakeholders should prepare for that reality. The Government will work hard to achieve a balanced agreement that is in the interests of both sides, reflecting the wide range of shared interests. Any agreement must respect the sovereignty of both parties and the autonomy of our legal orders. It cannot therefore include any regulatory alignment, any jurisdiction for the CJEU over the UK’s laws, or any supranational control in any area, including the UK’s borders and immigration policy. This points to a suite of agreements of which the main elements would be a comprehensive free trade agreement covering substantially all trade, an agreement on fisheries, and an agreement to cooperate in the area of internal security, together with a number of more technical agreements covering areas such as aviation or civil nuclear cooperation. These should all have governance and dispute settlement arrangements appropriate to a relationship of sovereign equals. Future cooperation in other areas does not need to be managed through an international Treaty, still less through shared institutions. The UK will in future develop separate and independent policies in areas such as (but not limited to) the points-based immigration system, competition and subsidy policy, the environment, social policy, procurement, and data protection, maintaining high standards as we do so. Cooperation on foreign affairs and related issues is of course likely to be substantial, but does not in itself require a joint institutional framework. In its negotiations with the EU, the Government will be acting on behalf of the UK Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories: the whole UK family. The UK proposes to agree similar arrangements with the EFTA states. Further information is set out below. Unless otherwise stated, it should be assumed that the UK’s aspiration and level of ambition is to reach agreement on provisions which are at least as good as those in the EU’s recent trade agreements, such as those with Canada or Japan. Free Trade Agreement A free trade agreement between the UK and EU should reflect, and develop where necessary, existing international best practice as set out, inter alia, in FTAs already agreed by the EU. It should cover the following areas: National Treatment and Market Access for Goods There should be no tariffs, fees, charges or quantitative restrictions between the UK and the EU. There should be a protocol setting out appropriate and modern rules of origin, in order to facilitate trade between the parties to the greatest extent possible. Trade Remedies The agreement should enable the UK to protect its industry from harm caused by unexpected surges in imports of goods or by unfair trading practices, while making the appropriate commitments to transparency, due process and proportionate use of trade remedies. Technical Barriers to Trade There should be provisions to address regulatory barriers to trade in goods, providing for cooperation on technical regulation, standards, conformity assessment procedures and market surveillance, building on the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement. Annexes to the agreement could include provisions facilitating trade in specific sectors, such as organic products, motor vehicles, chemicals and pharmaceuticals, as well as mutual recognition agreements focusing on conformity assessment, with full coverage of the relevant sectors. Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures The UK will maintain its own autonomous sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) regime to protect human, animal and plant life and health and the environment, reflecting its existing high standards. In certain areas it may be possible to agree equivalence provisions to reduce practical barriers to trade at the border. Customs and Trade Facilitation Facilitative customs arrangements, covering all trade in goods, should be put in place in order to smooth trade between the UK and the EU. These should ensure that both customs authorities are able to protect their regulatory, security and financial interests. Cross-Border Trade in Services and Investment Significant provisions on trade in services are an essential component of a comprehensive FTA. Accordingly, the Agreement should include measures to minimise barriers to the cross-border supply of services and investment, on the basis of each side’s commitments in existing FTAs. In areas of key interest, such as professional and business services, there may be scope to go beyond these commitments. There should be measures to support digital trade, building on the most recent precedents. Temporary Entry for Business Purposes (Mode 4) As is normal in a Free Trade Agreement, the agreement should include significant reciprocal commitments on the temporary entry and stay of individuals, so that both EU and UK nationals can undertake short-term business trips to supply services. This is of course without prejudice to the future points-based immigration system. Regulatory Framework There should be measures that reduce unnecessary barriers to trade in services, streamlining practical processes and providing for appropriate regulatory cooperation. Mutual Recognition of Professional Qualifications The Agreement should provide a pathway for the mutual recognition of UK and EU qualifications, underpinned by regulatory cooperation, so that qualification requirements do not become an unnecessary barrier to trade. Financial Services The Agreement should require both sides to provide a predictable, transparent, and business-friendly environment for financial services firms, ensuring financial stability and providing certainty for both business and regulatory authorities, and with obligations on market access and fair competition. Given the depth of the relationship in this area, there should also be enhanced provision for regulatory and supervisory cooperation arrangements with the EU, and for the structured withdrawal of equivalence findings. Road Transport There should be reciprocal commitments to allow EU and UK road transport operators to provide services to, from and through each other's territories, with associated rights, underpinned by relevant international agreements and commitments, and ensuring the necessary cooperation on monitoring and enforcement. Competition Policy, Subsidies, Environment and Climate, Labour, Tax The Government will not agree to measures in these areas which go beyond those typically included in a comprehensive free trade agreement. The Government believes therefore that both Parties should recognise their respective commitments to maintaining high standards in these areas; confirm that they will uphold their international obligations; and agree to avoid using measures in these areas to distort trade. Agreement on Fisheries The UK will become an independent coastal state at the end of 2020 and any agreement must reflect this reality. The UK will, like Norway, Iceland and the Faroe Islands, have annual negotiations with the EU on access to waters and fishing opportunities, and will consider a mechanism for cooperation on fisheries matters. Agreement on Internal Security Cooperation Protection of citizens is the highest duty of any Government. The UK believes it is in the UK’s and EU’s mutual interest to reach a pragmatic agreement to provide a framework for law enforcement and judicial cooperation in criminal matters between the UK and the EU, delivering strong operational capabilities that help protect the public. The detail of such an agreement must be consistent with the Government’s position that the CJEU and the EU legal order must not constrain the autonomy of the UK's legal system in any way. Other Areas of Cooperation The Government believes there is mutual benefit in an air transport agreement covering market access for air services, aviation safety and security, and collaboration on air traffic management. The UK is ready to work to establish practical provisions to facilitate smooth border crossing arrangements, as part of independent border and immigration systems, and on social security coordination. All such arrangements should be reciprocal and of mutual benefit. The UK is ready to discuss cooperation on asylum, including family reunion, and illegal migration. The UK is ready to consider participation in certain EU programmes, once the EU has agreed the baseline in its 2021-2027 Multiannual Financial Framework, and taking into account the overall value to the UK of doing so. Finally, there are certain areas where the UK considers agreement is self-evidently in the interest of both sides, and where early progress is a test of the constructive nature of the negotiating process. For example, there should be rapid agreement that the UK and the EU would list each other for trade in live animals, animal products, seeds and other plant-propagating material. There should be rapid progress towards a Civil Nuclear Agreement, given the implications for both sides of not doing so and the clear benefits of cooperation. Similarly, the UK would see the EU’s assessment processes on financial services equivalence and data adequacy as technical and confirmatory of the reality that the UK will be operating exactly the same regulatory frameworks as the EU at the point of exit. The UK intends to approach its own technical assessment processes in this spirit. A copy of this statement will be placed in the Library.
  3. Nissan’s post-Brexit plan exposes the limits of Project Fear ~ By Ross Clark Brexit voters are, of course, mostly fools who don’t know what is good for them – in contrast to all those Remain voters with their degrees and analytical skills. But none are so dim-witted as those in Sunderland who, like turkeys voting for Christmas, chose a course of action which will inevitably lead to them losing their jobs at the city’s Nissan plant. Or maybe not. It turns out that Sunderland’s Nissan workers might not be quite so stupid after all. It’s been revealed that the company is looking at a scenario in which it would close its EU plants and transfer production to Sunderland instead, raising its UK output from 350,000 to 400,000 vehicles a year. The Micra, which is currently manufactured in a Renault plant in France, would move to Britain, while its van plant near Barcelona would be closed. Nissan, quite reasonably, has been looking at what it would do in the event a trade deal fails. In common with other car manufacturers, the company currently relies on a complex supply chain which involves parts passing – tariff-free – backwards and forwards between Britain and the EU. It also exports a lot of its finished vehicles across borders. Such a business model faces disruption in the event of a failed trade deal – an outcome which, of course, neither the UK nor the EU wants. Arch-Remainers were not wrong to pick up on this as a potential cost of Brexit. But their error has been to assume that a hard Brexit would involve production draining away from Britain and towards the EU. What they ignore is that Britain is not just a producer of cars, it is a very large market for them, too. Indeed, German car-makers have called Britain ‘Treasure Island’, as it is a particularly profitable market. So what do you do if you currently make cars in Britain, some of which are sold here and some of which are sold in the EU? Do you shift production to the EU in order to avoid the tariffs you might have to pay on exports there? Or do you keep production in Britain, to avoid tariffs which would become payable on cars sold here? The advantage of doing the latter, as Nissan has twigged, is that the prices of many cars currently imported to Britain will rise if a trade deal fails. Cars made in Britain will therefore have a competitive advantage. Under Nissan’s scenario it would increase its share of the UK market from a current four per cent to as much as 20 per cent. For the moment, this is only a scenario, and one which Nissan officially denies – although to judge by the confidence with which the Financial Times reports the story this morning it has come from deep inside the company. But it is a reminder that the boot is not on the EU’s foot when it comes to trade negotiations, however much Michel Barnier might like to assert it is. In common with Britain, the EU has much to lose from a failed trade deal, not least because it has a large surplus in trade in goods with Britain. That is why our own government is right to ramp up the rhetoric in trade negotiations and assert that no deal is a serious possibility.
  4. That would explain the massive amount of building work going on around the Sunderland Nissan site in recent months... Or the government might be building rehab centres for demented Remaniacs
  5. Kai Weiss, Research and Outreach Officer at the Austrian Economics Center and a board member at the Hayek Institute knows his stuff: A farewell from Europe – now take your chance outside the EU By Kai Weiss As a European who likes free markets and is wary of Brussels’ mission of an “ever closer union” I was disappointed when Britain voted to leave the EU. I understood why the majority of Brits wanted to leave, but also lamented that the most realistic country in the union would now be departing. Without the naysayers across the Channel, centralisation can proceed apace, with all the negative implications it has for the continent’s economic freedom and – paramount in the Brexit debate itself – democracy. For a while, there was a sense that after the UK’s decision to leave, Brussels would dial down its federalist instincts and engage in some reflection on the EU’s original purpose of promoting free trade, cooperation, and peace between independent sovereign member states. Indeed, that would not have been far off David Cameron’s sensible pre-referendum demands for an EU that does not endlessly accrue power in Brussels, but hands it back to national governments – where a degree of scepticism, including the option not to adopt the euro, would be possible. Instead, within months, the ‘more Europe’ juggernaut was back in full flight. Just a year after Brexit, then-Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker was talking about the greatness of the European project and the need for more will by member states to come together and hand over their sovereignty to a supranational organisation. And all this when member states were singly failing to find common solutions to the big questions over the future of the Euro and the migration crisis. Nor has this push for ever more federalism abated over time. If anything it has got stronger with the new Commission headed by the former German defence minister, Ursula von der Leyen. Guy Verhofstadt, Europe’s federalist-in-chief, summed up the mood quite well again on Wednesday, saying that “Brexit is a failure of the Union. There is a lesson to learn from it: to deeply reform the Union. To make it into a real Union, a Union without opt-in, without opt-outs, without rebates, without exceptions. Only then we can defend our interests and defend our values.” Or to put it another way, instead of looking at the actual reasons why the UK opted to leave, why Brits handed a pro-Brexit party a resounding victory in December, and why the likes of Viktor Orbán, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, and Matteo Salvini are as popular as ever in their respective countries, the EU should just hammer home the same old story, clamp down on dissent and continue its one-size-fits-all approach. For the UK, however, Brexit means a unique opportunity to show how things can be done differently This was the promise of Brexit, after all: that with the newly gained freedom of being outside of the EU, Britain could chart its own course, and become Europe’s “shining city upon a hill”. Concretely, this means rejecting the EU’s plans to implement a protectionist and centrally planned agenda of industrial policy, trade defence mechanisms, subsidy programs, and massive spending sprees under the Green Deal. Instead of implementing a British version of these plans, the UK could set itself up for success with a different vision. This vision would be based on free trade and free markets, i.e. the vision of a Global Britain that many Brexiteers have advocated for years. Under Ursula von der Leyen, the EU is planning to develop further trade defence tools with which to unilaterally slap tariffs on other countries, most directly China and the U.S. This protectionist posturing is also visible in the plans to implement a digital tax which would almost exclusively target U.S. tech companies. Rather than following that same path, Britain could become the world’s leading advocate of free trade, signing comprehensive deals with the EU and other partners – and, instead of attacking the U.S., the UK could welcome innovative businesses and strengthen transatlantic ties. On economic policy in particular, Britain could show how free markets can trigger innovation and foster economic growth. After all, the EU plans for an industrial policy and a massive European Green Deal are based on the conviction that the government should use its power – and taxpayers’ money – to direct the economy centrally and fund projects that it finds useful. It would be, in fact, a clear case of Brussels picking winners and losers in an ever more heavy-handed economy. Britain could liberate its economy, now freed from the highly damaging Common Agricultural Policy and the redistributional programs of the Cohesion Funds. Instead of an industrial policy, instead of new taxes, and instead of nationalisations, the UK could use its newly available resources for a comprehensive tax reform and could use its newly found freedom to deregulate the economy and spur innovation. This is especially true when it comes to environmentalism and the fight against global warming, where the UK could become a trendsetter with green policies that are based on the market economy instead of government activism. The UK will profit immediately upon leaving the EU by taking power back from Brussels and being able to revitalise its democratic institutions, including Parliament. But for ‘take back control’ to be truly meaningful, government must not horde their repatriated power, but rather share it with businesses, entrepreneurs, local communities and Britons in general in a more decentralised way. Leaving the EU to implement Britain’s own version of top-down and centralised planning would defeat the purpose of Brexit. Three decades ago, Margaret Thatcher warned that “we have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them reimposed at a European level with a European super-state exercising a new dominance from Brussels.” Today, she might say that “we have not successfully left the European Union, only to see the same dominance from Brussels imposed in London.” As an outsider looking in, my words can – and should – only have limited influence. But, indeed, the UK outside the EU could follow the Iron Lady’s mantra of “action to free markets, action to widen choice, action to reduce government intervention.” By doing so, Britain can become a beacon for freedom, markets and democracy outside of the EU. This is my hope, as a European, as we say goodbye from Brussels to our great friend Britain. Of course you tiresome and predictable Lefty, Remainiacs will despise this Austrian's positivity and respond with negativity like the scratched and stuck vinyl records you are.
  6. Aye Remainer Tory MPs agreed a deal to support Theresa May if she pursued “continued economic alignment” with the EU – only to renege on it today with an amendment attempting to keep us in the customs union. Guido can reveal that on 1 July, key Remainer Stephen Hammond emailed his ‘Conservative Group for Europe’ of hardcore Remain MPs, outlining the terms of a coordinated threat to Number 10. The Remainers agreed that if the Cabinet backed a soft Brexit with “continued economic alignment” plus a backstop arrangement, they would not put down rebel amendments to the Trade and Customs Bill. Number 10 and the Cabinet went through a lot of pain to agree to the Remainers’ demands. Yet today Remain rebels are reneging on the deal and attempting to defeat the government with their customs union amendment. From: HAMMOND, Stephen Sent: 01 July 2018 To: SANDBACH, Antoinette; SOUBRY, Anna; ALLEN, Heidi; WOLLASTON, Sarah; GRIEVE, Dominic; CLARKE, Kenneth; SUGG, Debbie; MASTERTON, Paul; DJANOGLY, Jonathan; NEILL, Bob; MORGAN, Nicky; VAIZEY, Ed; FREEMAN, George; Tom Tugendhat MP; LEE, Phillip; LEFROY, Jeremy; SPELMAN, Caroline; PAWSEY, Mark; STEVENSON, John; HOLLINRAKE, Kevin; CARTLIDGE, James; CHALK, Alex; HEALD, Oliver Subject: Conservative Group for Europe Meeting on Tuesday Hi Apologies for the round robin of this email. Firstly we will have our usual meeting this week at 5 pm on Tuesday , currently scheduled in CR7. However, more importantly, we have to make the wider voice of Conservatives who want a sensible Brexit and are pro- business heard. Therefore we will probably need to commit to a number of actions this week. I suspect I shall be asking people for help with some different projects. So as a first task please could everyone make a point to call their Whip to deliver the following message; The PM has our support if the Cabinet resolves a proposal which not only allows continued economic alignment but that the Cabinet must also agree the Backstop arrangement. The proposal must be one that the EU will say shows progress and are likely to welcome. No more time nor political capital can be spent on foolish Brexiteer schemes. If the Cabinet can’t agree this then we will force a solution in Trade Bill and the Customs Bill. The only reason a compromise was accepted on meaningful vote was because it delivered what we wanted and we wanted to give the PM the space she asked for at the Council. That Council has now gone and no one should be under any illusion that we will vote against the Government if necessary, as happened in December”. If anyone has any issue or queries , please do get in touch All best Stephen Number 10 caved in to all these demands from their ultra-Remainer rebels, pursuing a soft Brexit to get them onside. Even with the ERG amendments yesterday, the government is still heading towards the softest of Brexits and “continued economic alignment”. And still the Remainers are breaking their promise and trying to keep us even closer to the EU. Shows the dishonesty of the Remainers, claiming that the ERG is controlling the government when it is they who have been coordinating threats to force Number 10 into a non-Brexit… July 17th 2018 @ 2:14 pm Always something there to remind me..
  7. This morning Philip Lee, Dominic Grieve, and Heidi Allen met to plan the launch of ‘Conservatives for a People’s Vote’ which formally relaunches on Thursday at 8 in the Shard. A shiny skyscraper in central London, surrounded by bankers… That’ll win over Mansfield… The group is expecting to receive explicit support from eleven Tory MPs, and plan to use the defeat of the PM’s deal to recruit more. Heidi Allen, who is voting for May’s deal, attended the planning meeting in the knowledge that it would be voted down. Her plan is to argue that she tried to pass the deal but now the only way out is a second referendum. Duplicitous… Guido understands that public affairs agency Hanover Communications is managing the campaign. In other news, Hanover Senior Adviser Steve Richards appeared on Sky News earlier today arguing for a second referendum. Fancy that! January 15th 2019 @ 12:30 pm
  8. Aye --- Below is a list of Conservative MPs who backed Remain Peter Aldous (Conservative), Waveney Edward Argar (Conservative), Charnwood Gavin Barwell (Conservative), Croydon Central Guto Bebb (Conservative), Aberconwy Paul Beresford (Conservative), Mole Valley Jake Berry (Conservative), Rossendale and Darwen Peter Bottomley (Conservative), Worthing West Steve Brine (Conservative), Winchester Robert Buckland (Conservative), Swindon South Simon Burns (Conservative), Chelmsford Alistair Burt (Conservative), Bedfordshire North East James Cartlidge (Conservative), Suffolk South Alun Cairns (Conservative), South Wales West Stephen Crabb (Conservative), Preseli Pembrokeshire Alex Chalk (Conservative), Cheltenham Kenneth Clarke (Conservative), Rushcliffe Greg Clark (Conservative), Tunbridge Wells Byron Davies (Conservative), Gower Sajid Javid (Conservative), Bromsgrove Jonathan Djanogly (Conservative), Huntingdon Oliver Dowden (Conservative), Hertsmere Jackie Doyle-Price (Conservative), Thurrock Flick Drummond (Conservative), Portsmouth South Alan Duncan (Conservative), Rutland and Melton Philip Dunne (Conservative), Ludlow Michael Ellis (Conservative), Northampton North Jane Ellison (Conservative), Battersea David Evennett (Conservative), Bexleyheath and Crayford Michael Fallon (Conservative), Darlington Kevin Foster (Conservative), Torbay Lucy Frazer (Conservative), Cambridgeshire South East Mike Freer (Conservative), Finchley and Golders Green Roger Gale (Conservative), Thanet North Edward Garnier (Conservative), Harborough David Gauke (Conservative), South West Hertfordshire John Glen (Conservative), Salisbury Robert Goodwill (Conservative), Scarborough and Whitby Helen Grant (Conservative), Maidstone and The Weald Dominic Grieve (Conservative), Beaconsfield Andrew Griffiths (Conservative), Burton Justine Greening (Conservative), Putney Sam Gyimah (Conservative), Surrey East Mark Harper (Conservative), Forest of Dean Luke Hall (Conservative), Thornbury and Yate Philip Hammond (Conservative), Runnymede and Weybridge Stephen Hammond (Conservative), Wimbledon Robert Halfon (Conservative), Harlow Matt Hancock (Conservative), West Suffolk Greg Hands (Conservative), Chelsea and Fulham Richard Harrington (Conservative), Watford Simon Hart (Conservative), Carmarthen West and South Pembrokeshire Sir Alan Haselhurst (Conservative), Saffron Walden Oliver Heald (Conservative), Hertfordshire NE James Heappey (Conservative), Wells Peter Heaton-Jones (Conservative), Devon North Nick Herbert (Conservative), Arundel and South Downs Damian Hinds (Conservative), Hampshire East Simon Hoare (Conservative), Dorset North George Hollingbery (Conservative), Meon Valley Kevin Hollinrake (Conservative), Thirsk and Malton Kris Hopkins (Conservative), Keighley John Howell (Conservative), Henley Ben Howlett (Conservative), Bath Nigel Huddleston (Conservative), Worcestershire Mid Nick Hurd (Conservative), Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner Jeremy Hunt (Conservative), South West Surrey Margot James (Conservative), Stourbridge Robert Jenrick (Conservative), Newark Joseph Johnson (Conservative), Orpington Andrew Jones (Conservative), Harrogate and Knaresborough Marcus Jones (Conservative), Nuneaton Seema Kennedy (Conservative), South Ribble Simon Kirby (Conservative), Brighton Kemptown Julian Knight (Conservative), Solihull Mark Lancaster (Conservative), Milton Keynes North Phillip Lee (Conservative), Bracknell Oliver Letwin (Conservative), West Dorset Jeremy Lefroy (Conservative), Stafford Brandon Lewis (Conservative), Great Yarmouth David Lidington (Conservative), Aylesbury David Mackintosh (Conservative), Northampton South Theresa May (Conservative), Maidenhead Alan Mak (Conservative), Havant Tania Mathias (Conservative), Twickenham Mark Menzies (Conservative), Fylde Johnny Mercer (Conservative), Plymouth Moor View Maria Miller (Conservative), Basingstoke Nicky Morgan (Conservative), Loughborough David Mundell (Conservative), South of Scotland Patrick McLoughlin (Conservative), Derbyshire Dales Amanda Milling (Conservative), Cannock Chase Andrew Mitchell (Conservative), Sutton Coldfield David Morris (Conservative), Morecombe and Lunesdale James Morris (Conservative), Halesowen and Rowley Regis Wendy Morton (Conservative), Aldridge-Brownhills David Mowat (Conservative), Warrington South Bob Neill (Conservative), Bromley and Chislehurst Sarah Newton (Conservative), Truro and Falmouth Caroline Nokes (Conservative), Romsey and Southampton North Guy Opperman (Conservative), Hexham George Osborne (Conservative), Tatton Neil Parish (Conservative), Tiverton and Honiton Mark Pawsey (Conservative), Rugby John Penrose (Conservative), Weston-super-Mare Claire Perry (Conservative), Devizes Chris Philp (Conservative), Croydon South Eric Pickles (Conservative), Brentwood and Ongar Dan Poulter (Conservative), Suffolk Central Rebecca Pow (Conservative), Taunton Deane Victoria Prentis (Conservative), Banbury Mark Prisk (Conservative), Hertford and Stortford Mark Pritchard (Conservative), The Wrekin Jeremy Quin (Conservative), Horsham Mary Robinson (Conservative), Cheadle David Rutley (Conservative), Macclesfield Amber Rudd (Conservative), Hastings and Rye Antoinette Sandbach (Conservative), Eddisbury Andrew Selous (Conservative), South West Bedfordshire Grant Shapps (Conservative), Welwyn Hatfield Anna Soubry (Conservative), Broxtowe Alok Sharma (Conservative), Reading West Alec Shelbrooke (Conservative), Elmet and Rothwell Keith Simpson (Conservative), Broadland Chris Skidmore (Conservative), Kingswood Chloe Smith (Conservative), Norwich North Julian Smith (Conservative), Skipton and Ripon Nicholas Soames (Conservative), Mid-Sussex Amanda Solloway (Conservative), Derby North Caroline Spelman (Conservative), Meriden Mark Spencer (Conservative), Sherwood John Stevenson (Conservative), Carlisle Rory Stewart (Conservative), Penrith and The Border Gary Streeter (Conservative), Devon South West Mel Stride (Conservative), Devon Central Graham Stuart (Conservative), Beverley and Holderness Hugo Swire (Conservative), East Devon Maggie Throup (Conservative), Erewash Edward Timpson (Conservative), Crewe and Nantwich Kelly Tolhurst (Conservative), Rochester and Strood David Tredinnick (Conservative), Bosworth Elizabeth Truss (Conservative), South West Norfolk Tom Tugendhat (Conservative), Tonbridge and Malling Andrew Tyrie (Conservative), Chichester Ed Vaizey (Conservative), Wantage Shailesh Vara (Conservative), North West Cambridgeshire Robin Walker (Conservative), Worcester Jeremy Wright (Conservative), Taunton Ben Wallace (Conservative), Wyre and Preston North Matt Warman (Conservative), Boston and Skegness Angela Watkinson (Conservative), Hornchurch and Upminster Helen Whately (Conservative), Faversham and Mid Kent Chris White (Conservative), Warwick and Leamington Craig Whittaker (Conservative), Calder Valley Craig Williams (Conservative), Cardiff North Gavin Williamson (Conservative), Staffordshire South Rob Wilson (Conservative), Reading East Dr Sarah Wollaston (Conservative), Totnes Some Mps who backed remain yet expressly stated they would push for Brexit after the vote. Heidi Allen (Conservative), Cambridgeshire South Victoria Atkins (Conservative), Louth and Horncastle Harriett Baldwin (Conservative), Worcestershire West Richard Benyon (Conservative), Newbury James Berry (Conservative), Kingston and Surbiton Nicola Blackwood (Conservative), Oxford West and Abingdon Nicholas Boles (Conservative), Grantham and Stamford Karen Bradley (Conservative), Staffordshire Moorlands James Brokenshire (Conservative), Old Bexley and Sidcup Neil Carmichael (Conservative), Stroud Jo Churchill (Conservative), Bury St Edmunds Therese Coffey (Conservative), Suffolk Coastal Damian Collins (Conservative), Folkestone and Hythe Oliver Colvile (Conservative), Plymouth Sutton and Devonport Alberto Costa (Conservative), South Leicestershire Caroline Dinenage (Conservative), Gosport Michelle Donelan (Conservative), Chippenham Tobias Ellwood (Conservative), Bournemouth East Charlie Elphicke (Conservative), Dover Graham Evans (Conservative), Weaver Vale Mark Field (Conservative), Cities of London and Westminster George Freeman (Conservative), Norfolk Mid Mark Garnier (Conservative), Wyre Fores Nick Gibb (Conservative), Bognor Regis and Littlehampton Richard Graham (Conservative), Gloucester Damian Green (Conservative), Ashford Ben Gummer (Conservative), Ipswich (ps - Don't tell Hans loopy rolo - leave him in a world of his own - Thick as two short ones.. )
  9. The FA Cup is the oldest national football competition in the world and if teams can't respect that they should forfeit it. I seriously commend the idea of a European League that the money teams can finally f*** off to. Apart from Leicester 2015-16, it's all gotten too boring and predictable.
  10. If Vrancic isn't in the starting 11, I will feel the urge to poke Farke in the eye.
  11. Aye, the Baseball Ground of the 70's -- total mud bath... The centre circle looked like Hermione's undercrackers when the GE exit poll results came in...
×
×
  • Create New...