The Positive Brexit Thread

[Yellow Fever 3,732]

53 minutes ago, horsefly said:

F**k Knows. Certainly not claimed in the originally loony rant. Only someone seriously lacking basic cognitive ability could think Starmer would say this. The man needs some remedial help.

Unfortunately HF this is modus operandi of nearly all the Brexit arguments. Spin, myths and downright lies. It started with a big red bus and went downhill from there. They don't care and many or frankly most of their supporters don't have the smarts to realise. For them the ends justifies the means.

[A Load of Squit 5,108]

1 hour ago, Herman said:

Where did he get the from the labour leader from? 

He got it from this

https://www.brexit-watch.org/how-the-withdrawal-agreement-could-pull-us-back-into-the-eu

The picture of Kier Starmer isn't really explained (no direct quotes from Starmer) which says a lot about the honesty of brexit-watch.org and so much more about the lack of intelligence displayed by Swindon.

Brexiteers, when they're not lying they're being very very stupid.

I expect Jools will be along soon telling us these are 'facts'.

 

 

 

[BigFish 1,986]

1 hour ago, A Load of Squit said:

He got it from this

https://www.brexit-watch.org/how-the-withdrawal-agreement-could-pull-us-back-into-the-eu

The picture of Kier Starmer isn't really explained (no direct quotes from Starmer) which says a lot about the honesty of brexit-watch.org and so much more about the lack of intelligence displayed by Swindon.

Brexiteers, when they're not lying they're being very very stupid.

I expect Jools will be along soon telling us these are 'facts'.

It all goes back to the lack of a strategy, or even a plan. The Brexiteers won the referendum, seized the government and took the UK out of the EU. So far, so good. The problem now is delivering on the promises made to get this far. This is much much harder, or rather impossible. As @PurpleCanary  repeatedly posts there were two incompatible objectives. They could have sovereignity or protect the UK economy, they couldn't have both. As the big day comes it is becoming increasingly obvious this is the case. The EU are playing negotiations with a straight bat despite Johnson/Cummings provocations and this leaves the Brexiteers to play the blame game. This is now the only objective to find someone else to be responsible for this mess that enough of the electorate will believe so they can maintain their hold on power. Unfortunately, @SwindonCanary is not unique in holding the intellectual (sic) position of hoping something will turn up, thinking there is a secret plan, thinking the EU will or indeed can back down or finally this is all someone else's fault. The not so silent (not) majority.

[SHRIMPER 328]

3 hours ago, Herman said:

Where did he get the from the labour leader from? 

You know the FVCKWIT is an inveterate liar Herman. Swindo is like trump..desperate for something to crow about so just makes it up.

[PurpleCanary 5,553]

38 minutes ago, BigFish said:

It all goes back to the lack of a strategy, or even a plan. The Brexiteers won the referendum, seized the government and took the UK out of the EU. So far, so good. The problem now is delivering on the promises made to get this far. This is much much harder, or rather impossible. As @PurpleCanary  repeatedly posts there were two incompatible objectives. They could have sovereignity or protect the UK economy, they couldn't have both. As the big day comes it is becoming increasingly obvious this is the case.

To be fair, I sometimes go a whole week without smugly repeating this...🤓

[Jools 584]

City of London Gains Ground on New York, #DespiteBrexit & #DespiteCovid

London has managed to significantly close the gap on New York in the competition to be the leading global financial centre, gaining 24 points in the latest Global Financial Centres Index and leaving the capital just four points behind the Big Apple. Despite Brexit and Corona…

The 24 point jump is by far the largest of the top 20 index, with Shenzhen seeing the second-highest rise of 10 points to 9th place. On top of London’s triumph, Edinburgh has also risen two points 14th place. The best the EU can muster is Luxembourg in 12th place and Paris in 18th. Shanghai, which remains in 3rd place, was previously only 2 points behind London, however has now opened up a -18 gap…

 

 

Remainiacs: "But, but.. Frankfurt and Paris!"

 

😀

[A Load of Squit 5,108]

Sir Jim Ratcliffe was certainly impressed with the Global Financial Centres Index.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/sep/25/sir-jim-ratcliffe-uks-richest-person-moves-to-tax-free-monaco-brexit-ineos-domicile

Sir Jim Ratcliffe, UK's richest person, moves to tax-free Monaco

Brexiter Ineos boss, who has an estimated £17.5bn fortune, officially changes tax domicile

Why are the rich Brexiteers moving out of the UK?

 

 

[SwindonCanary 455]

Look at all our MP's who voted not to support our veterans = labour 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54277942

[Surfer 1,547]

You see this is one of the positive advantages of putting Britain first and being open to global trade.... tax avoidance by the super rich.

Edited September 25, 2020 by Surfer

[NFN FC 1,118]

40 minutes ago, SwindonCanary said:

Look at all our MP's who voted not to support our veterans = labour 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54277942

If you read the bill it's not really supporting veterans. It would give less accountability for the actions on overseas operations. 

Obviously there are people out there that see the word veteran and just start waving the Union Jack without thinking. 

[SwindonCanary 455]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12753278/lefty-labour-mps-quit-shadow-cabinet/

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/labour-mps-quit-keir-starmers-22732524

[BigFish 1,986]

1 minute ago, NFN FC said:

Obviously there are people out there that see the word veteran and just start waving the Union Jack without thinking. 

Swindo does everything without thinking

[horsefly 4,273]

1 hour ago, Jools said:

City of London Gains Ground on New York, #DespiteBrexit & #DespiteCovid

London has managed to significantly close the gap on New York in the competition to be the leading global financial centre, gaining 24 points in the latest Global Financial Centres Index and leaving the capital just four points behind the Big Apple. Despite Brexit and Corona…

The 24 point jump is by far the largest of the top 20 index, with Shenzhen seeing the second-highest rise of 10 points to 9th place. On top of London’s triumph, Edinburgh has also risen two points 14th place. The best the EU can muster is Luxembourg in 12th place and Paris in 18th. Shanghai, which remains in 3rd place, was previously only 2 points behind London, however has now opened up a -18 gap…

 

 

Remainiacs: "But, but.. Frankfurt and Paris!"

 

😀

What a shame for you that the reality is that before the threat of Brexit London was well ahead of NY:

https://www.theweek.co.uk/101446/new-york-overtakes-london-as-world-s-financial-capital

New York has superseded London as the pre-eminent global financial capital because of turmoil caused by Brexit, leading financial services executives have said in a survey.

Consultancy firm Duff & Phelps released its 2019 Global Regulatory Outlook survey yesterday, having asked 183 leaders in private equity, hedge funds, asset management, brokerage, banking, and policy/government their opinion on the location of the world’s top financial centre.

As CNBC reports “London and New York switched places in the ranking from 2018, with 52% of respondents choosing New York as the globe’s financial hub, while 36% chose London. Last year, 42% chose New York and 53% chose London.” 

“Last year, Brexit cast a shadow of uncertainty over the United Kingdom’s economy; it has now escalated to a full-blown crisis,” the report said. (etc ,etc. Please read the whole article at the link)

 

And the present reality of the failing negotiations is:  https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/jp-morgan-switches-200bn-to-germany-before-brexit-fallout-gl290n6v0

 

JP Morgan switches €200bn to Germany before Brexit fallout

JP Morgan is transferring about €200 billion (£184 billion) from Britain to Germany as it prepares for Brexit, it was reported yesterday.

The transfer of assets, which is due to be completed before the end of the year, will make the US bank one of the largest in Germany based on the size of its balance sheet, Bloomberg News said.

JP Morgan, valued at $290 billion, is America’s largest bank and has a history in the UK dating back to the mid-1800s. London is its headquarters in Europe, the Middle East and Africa and it also has offices in Bournemouth, Glasgow and Edinburgh.

International banks in London are boosting their European operations as the prospect fades for an accord on financial services between Britain and ..."

Sit back and watch many more follow. Oh! and do please provide us with a reference or link to your cut and paste (wouldn't be Brexit factsfortw*ts by any chance?)

 

[Herman 9,692]

Those ridiculous safety notices you see everywhere in the States came about after Swindo's two week holiday to Orlando.

 

[Herman 9,692]

I tell what was really like East Germany under the Stasi. East Germany under the Stasi. Stop whining and pay your fine Sammy

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/sammy-wilson-mp-dup-facemask-london-underground-tube-stasi-b581848.html

[Yellow Fever 3,732]

43 minutes ago, horsefly said:

What a shame for you that the reality is that before the threat of Brexit London was well ahead of NY:

https://www.theweek.co.uk/101446/new-york-overtakes-london-as-world-s-financial-capital

New York has superseded London as the pre-eminent global financial capital because of turmoil caused by Brexit, leading financial services executives have said in a survey.

Consultancy firm Duff & Phelps released its 2019 Global Regulatory Outlook survey yesterday, having asked 183 leaders in private equity, hedge funds, asset management, brokerage, banking, and policy/government their opinion on the location of the world’s top financial centre.

As CNBC reports “London and New York switched places in the ranking from 2018, with 52% of respondents choosing New York as the globe’s financial hub, while 36% chose London. Last year, 42% chose New York and 53% chose London.” 

“Last year, Brexit cast a shadow of uncertainty over the United Kingdom’s economy; it has now escalated to a full-blown crisis,” the report said. (etc ,etc. Please read the whole article at the link)

 

And the present reality of the failing negotiations is:  https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/jp-morgan-switches-200bn-to-germany-before-brexit-fallout-gl290n6v0

 

JP Morgan switches €200bn to Germany before Brexit fallout

JP Morgan is transferring about €200 billion (£184 billion) from Britain to Germany as it prepares for Brexit, it was reported yesterday.

The transfer of assets, which is due to be completed before the end of the year, will make the US bank one of the largest in Germany based on the size of its balance sheet, Bloomberg News said.

JP Morgan, valued at $290 billion, is America’s largest bank and has a history in the UK dating back to the mid-1800s. London is its headquarters in Europe, the Middle East and Africa and it also has offices in Bournemouth, Glasgow and Edinburgh.

International banks in London are boosting their European operations as the prospect fades for an accord on financial services between Britain and ..."

Sit back and watch many more follow. Oh! and do please provide us with a reference or link to your cut and paste (wouldn't be Brexit factsfortw*ts by any chance?)

 

I was going to add this is all before the EU trims Londons sails.

Equivalence and euro clearing.

See for instance Reuters yesterday

"EU to rebalance, not shut City of London's market access"

Rather sad really.

Wonder what Jools will misrepresent next?

[horsefly 4,273]

2 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

Look at all our MP's who voted not to support our veterans = labour 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54277942

First, what has this got to do with Brexit?

Second, there are significant people in the military who are concerned about it too. If you had bothered to read the whole article (which you clearly haven't) you would have noticed the following: 

"The bill itself has also been criticised by some senior military figures including General Sir Nicholas Parker Commander in Chief, Land Forces 2010-2012.

He said he was worried the bill would risk the UK being perceived as "setting double standards". 

War crimes don't suddenly disappear after a 5 year time lapse. Or do you think all the Na*i war criminals should have been absolved in 1950?

Edited September 25, 2020 by horsefly
missing text

[A Load of Squit 5,108]

3 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

Look at all our MP's who voted not to support our veterans = labour 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-54277942

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/overseas-operations-bill-a-gross-injustice-to-veterans-say-lawyers/5105740.article

The Government are also trying to stiff the veterans by putting a time limit on claims that the vets can make against the MOD for injuries.

However, it also severely limits the ability of members of the armed forces to hold the government to account when it fails to provide adequate equipment or fails to protect them while they are serving.

https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2020/25-september/news/uk/triple-lock-overseas-operation-bill-opposed-by-quakers

"a former Lieutenant-Colonel in the British Army, said that the Bill “undermines international humanitarian law while shielding the Government against what may be wholly deserving claims”.

He continued: “The so-called triple lock will effectively introduce a statute of limitations for the offence of torture."

[Jools 584]

Good God, you Remainiacs are so deluded by your fanaticism for the EU that it distorts how you perceive everything - and I mean EVERYTHING!

 

Why have you given up on the 'Brexit Reprise' thread? You can wibble past tense and agree with each other 'til your heart's are content there, but I'd rather keep this thread current if that's at all possible.  

[Herman 9,692]

Hands up who thought that brexit would be so bad that the UK would lose Northern Ireland and Kent?

[Jools 584]

The Unlawful EU - The Shocking Truth - We Present The Evidence

Revealed: The international law-breaking EU has been at it for years

© Brexit Facts4EU.Org 2020

The EU has been breaking international law openly and shamelessly as a matter of EU policy

Why on earth won’t the UK Government tell the World?

An important and major report from Brexit Facts4EU.Org for MPs and World leaders

BREXIT FACTS4EU.ORG SUMMARY

The EU breaks international law and it does so as a principle

1. The EU’s Withdrawal Treaty itself contravenes the Good Friday Agreement which is enshrined in international law
2. The EU intends to put in border controls between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland if there is no trade deal
3. The EU breaks international laws regularly and with impunity
4. The EU disregards WTO judgements against it
5. The EU has already requested changes to the supposedly inviolable Withdrawal Treaty – five months after it was signed
6. The EU is preventing a simple border solution and is disregarding international laws of the sea
7. The EU has acted in bad faith throughout these EU-UK negotiations, breaking the terms of the Treaty

The Remain-voting Minister Brandon Lewis knew what he was doing when he stated in Parliament that:

“Yes, this does break international law in a very specific and limited way. We’re taking the powers to disapply the EU law concept of direct effect … in a certain very tightly defined circumstance.”

The UK Government’s draft Internal Markets Bill does NOT break international law. Not at all.

All it does is permit the United Kingdom to apply remedies
in the event that the EU breaks international law.

 

The Minister’s response to the question from another Remain-voting MP, Sir Bob Neil, was misleading and disingenuous. The true position is contained in the official Government statement issued by the Prime Minister's office on 17 September 2020.

This was a deliberate statement by a Remain-voting Government Minister which unnecessarily sent shock waves around the world. It has resulted in US Presidential candidate Joe Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi all but blocking any idea of a free trade agreement with the UK.

 

 

In light of this – and if the UK Government will not promulgate the truth about the EU’s systemic law-breaking - then it seems we must present the fundamental and indisputable facts of the EU’s intrinsic contempt for international law.

The evidence - 1. The EU intends to contravene the Good Friday Agreement

The EU’s Withdrawal Agreement itself contravenes the Good Friday Agreement (GFA), which is enshrined in international law and which is guaranteed by the United States. In its Constitutional Issues Section the GFA states that:-

“the present wish of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, freely exercised and legitimate, is to maintain the Union and, accordingly, that Northern Ireland's status as part of the United Kingdom reflects and relies upon that wish; and that it would be wrong to make any change in the status of Northern Ireland save with the consent of a majority of its people.”

The Withdrawal Agreement and Northern Ireland Protocol clearly alters the status of N.I. as part of the UK, without any consent of the voters. It thereby breaks the GFA. and in doing so breaks international law.

The evidence – 2. The EU intends to put in border controls without a trade deal

The UK has stated explicitly many times that it will not put any hard border between N.I. and the Republic of Ireland.

Conversely the EU has never stated that it will not impose border controls. It is clear that in the event of no deal, the EU intends to make the N.I./Republic of Ireland border into a hard border.

“If you push me to speculate on what will happen with a no-deal I think it’s pretty obvious. You will have a hard border." - Margaritas Schinas, 22 Jan 2019, then Chief Spokesman, now EU Migration and Asylum Commissioner.

Goods crossing the border from Northern Ireland into the Republic amount to no more than a rounding error in the EU’s import figures, totalling just 0.23% of all goods entering the EU. The N.I. border is a fictitious issue which has been used vexatiously by the EU in order to damage the constitutional integrity of the United Kingdom.

In the last week the EU has even threatened to ban food products from the UK, in direct contravention of WTO rules.

The evidence – 3. The EU breaks international laws regularly and with impunity

It is an incontrovertible fact that the EU sets its autonomy above international law. Some individual EU member countries have even set their own autonomy above the international EU Treaties they have signed.

“The obligations imposed by an international agreement cannot have the effect of prejudicing the constitutional principles of the EC Treaty”.

These were the words of the European Court of Justice’s (ECJ) Advocate General Maduro in 2008, in the opinion underpinning the ECJ’s judgement in the case of Kadi and Al Barakaat International Foundation v. Council and Commission. These words were taken into the judgement itself. The ECJ was clearly sending out an unambiguous message about the autonomy of the EU legal order vis-à-vis international law and institutions.

Interestingly, one of the main commentators on the Kadi case, Professor Gráinne de Búrca (NYU School of Law) wrote in 2009:

“The judgement represents a significant departure from the conventional presentation and widespread understanding of the EU as an actor maintaining a distinctive commitment to international law and institutions.”

Professor Gráinne de Búrca is not only an eminent academic in matters of law, in particular European Union law and international governance, but is also an Irish citizen.

The evidence - 4. The EU takes no notice of the judgements of the WTO

For 16 years the EU has been ignoring, appealing, and losing WTO judgements in respect of the actions brought by the US Government and Boeing against illegal state subsidies provided to the EU-made Airbus. This dispute has resulted in high tariffs being imposed by the US authorities against the EU, affecting UK goods such as Scotch whisky.

Another example of the EU vs the WTO started In 2008, when the European Court of Justice held that the EU cannot be called upon to compensate for damages resulting from a failure of EU institutions to comply with WTO rulings. In the case in question, the damages were suffered by two Italian companies after the WTO Dispute Settlement Body authorized the United States to suspend tariff concessions against the EU. As in the Airbus case, this was another long-standing dispute.

The evidence – 5. The EU has already requested changes to the Withdrawal Treaty, only five months after it was signed

The supposedly inviolable and unchangeable Withdrawal Treaty (WT) has already been proposed by the EU to be changed after they noticed errors in it.

In June the EU sought to “correct” parts of the WT. Below is just one example of the SEVEN points made in the EU’s decision about this, published in June 2020.

“(5) By oversight, two decisions of the Administrative Commission for the Coordination of Social Security Systems were not listed in Part I of Annex I to the Withdrawal Agreement and eight acts which are essential for the application of the rules of the internal market for goods to Northern Ireland were not listed in Annex 2 to the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland. Those decisions and acts should therefore be added to those annexes. In addition, three notes are also necessary to further define the scope of application of certain specific acts listed in Annex 2 to the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland. These notes should therefore be added to Annex 2 to the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland.”

- Council Decision (EU) 2020/769 of 10 June 2020

This makes a nonsense of the argument that the Withdrawal Treaty is inviolable. The EU itself already wishes to change it via the Joint Committee.

The evidence – 6. The EU is preventing a simple border solution and is disregarding international laws of the sea

Importantly, the EU and Irish Governments have prevented the Customs authorities of the UK and the Republic from speaking to each other to devise simple, alternative arrangements for the border between North and South – something crucial to preserve the integrity of the Good Friday Agreement.

On the fundamental international laws of the sea, Monsieur Barnier has made the extraordinary assertion that whilst the UK will have future sovereignty of its coastal waters, the UK should have no such sovereignty over the fish swimming within these waters. In international law this is nonsense, as the UN’s UNCLOS rules make clear.

The evidence – 7. The EU has acted in bad faith throughout these EU-UK negotiations, breaking the terms of the Treaty

 

The UK is entitled under international law to expect third countries to act within certain international norms. Of course the EU isn't a country but it likes to behave like one and is acting on the instructions of its 27 Member States, all of whom are obliged by international law to abide by certain UN Resolutions. Looking at just one of these: UN Resolution 2625 on "Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States" it requires, amongst other things, that:

”No State may use or encourage the use of economic, political or any other type of measures to coerce another State in order to obtain from it the subordination of the exercise of its sovereign rights and to secure from it advantages of any kind." and

”Every State shall refrain from any action aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity or territorial integrity of any other State or country."

It is evident that the EU has acted in bad faith throughout these negotiations between the United Kingdom and the EU. This alone allows the British Government to repudiate the Treaty and pursue actions in the interests of the country and its people.

The EU’s intent was clear from the outset.

“This will not be an amicable divorce”

- Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, 24 June 2016

This set the tone for all future discussions and was followed by a raft of EU diktaks, none of which were based in law.

For example, the EU forbade the UK from speaking to governments around the world about future trading relations. It even forbade the UK from speaking to the individual governments of EU member countries.

The EU has quite evidently not acted ‘in good faith’ and nor has it used its ‘best endeavors. It has consistently attempted to impose unreasonable restrictions on withdrawal and trade talks with the UK. The EU has insisted (and is still insisting) on discussing its red lines first, before talking about the details of a trade agreement.

During these supposed trade talks the EU has imposed restrictive clauses on the UK which it has not used on any other major country in trade negotiations. These demands are not in any way consistent with the conditions which prevail in any free trade agreement between any other major countries in the world.

In short, the EU has acted in a punitive and hostile manner towards the United Kingdom, and the UK is now within its rights under international law to repudiate the Withdrawal Treaty on this basis.

 

 

OBSERVATIONS

This report has principally been prepared for British MPs and for legislators worldwide, and in particular for Members of the US Congress.

It aims to set the record straight when looking at the final stages of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union, in terms of some of the key legal facts.

The United Kingdom Government has not broken international law

Indeed the record of the United Kingdom is exemplary when compared to that of the European Union, as we have shown above.

The EU habitually breaks international law and fails to abide by the judgment's of the WTO, insisting that its own laws are paramount. Members of Congress will be familiar with the high profile case involving Boeing and Airbus, for example.

The messaging has been dire but the message is sound

Sadly, the UK Government’s performance in communicating the salient facts to its own public and to the wider world have been lamentable. We hope that the worldwide audience will appreciate that whilst the communication has been dire, the facts are another matter.

The facts show that the EU is an habitual breaker of international law, that its own Withdrawal Treaty breaks the terms of the Good Friday Agreement, that it has treated the United Kingdom like a colony to be oppressed, and that the UK has acted with enormous restraint under all these circumstances.

An increasing number of MPs in the UK Parliament are now of the view that the EU has not acted in good faith nor used its best endeavours, as required by the Withdrawal Agreement and Northern Ireland Protocol. There is now a very solid case for the UK Government to repudiate the EU’s Withdrawal Treaty forthwith.

The World can continue to rely on the United Kingdom

The United Kingdom remains what it has always been: an originator and upholder of freedom, democracy, and the rule of law.

We sincerely hope to have the support of our many friends around the world in our determination to ensure that a fully free, independent, and sovereign United Kingdom can once again play its role on the world stage, unencumbered by totalitarian diktats from unelected officials in Brussels.

We are grateful for the help of senior UK lawyers expert in EU law for their review of this important article.

 

 

[ Sources: Hansard | The Prime Minister's office | Senator Joe Biden | The Good Friday Agreement | Margaritas Schinas, EU press conference | Eurostat | HMRC | NISRA | The European Court of Justice (CJEU) | The World Trade Organisation | The EU Council | The EU Commission | The Dáil (Irish Parliament) | Bundesverfassungsgericht Karlsruhe (German Constitutional Court) | The United Nations ] Politicians and journalists can contact us for details, as ever.

Brexit Facts4EU.Org, Tues 22 Sept 2020

 

[horsefly 4,273]

55 minutes ago, Jools said:

Good God, you Remainiacs are so deluded by your fanaticism for the EU that it distorts how you perceive everything - and I mean EVERYTHING!

 

Why have you given up on the 'Brexit Reprise' thread? You can wibble past tense and agree with each other 'til your heart's are content there, but I'd rather keep this thread current if that's at all possible.  

Pathetic! Typical Brexsh*teer bleating to be left alone to wave his bigoted racist flag without having to endure the horrors of actually defending those grotesque opinions. I have news for you Brexsh*t wimp, we won't go away. We will continue to call you lot to account for the damage you are doing to this country. How about attempting to provide some arguments for your position rather than pathetically cutting and pasting that ludicrous guff from your beloved Brexitfactsfortw*ts. 

[horsefly 4,273]

Thought so! no attempt to provide any rational argument. 

[SwindonCanary 455]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8774037/Hopes-Brexit-deal-October-50-50.html

[horsefly 4,273]

6 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8774037/Hopes-Brexit-deal-October-50-50.html

Quote from you thursday:

"Guaranty [sic] we don't give in to a level playing field or any of the other things the EU have come up with."

Quote from your link today:

"However, European Council president Charles Michel suggested the EU would not give in yesterday in his speech to the UN General Assembly.

'From now on, we will better enforce the level playing field in a market open to those who respect its standards, whether they leave our union or want to move closer to it,' he said."

Whatever, the outcome of these talks the only guarantee is that we will have a worse deal than if we had remained. But at least we will have gained the right to prevent free movement of people from Europe; oh yes! and of UK people to and from Kent.

[Herman 9,692]

15 hours ago, A Load of Squit said:

Sir Jim Ratcliffe was certainly impressed with the Global Financial Centres Index.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/sep/25/sir-jim-ratcliffe-uks-richest-person-moves-to-tax-free-monaco-brexit-ineos-domicile

Sir Jim Ratcliffe, UK's richest person, moves to tax-free Monaco

Brexiter Ineos boss, who has an estimated £17.5bn fortune, officially changes tax domicile

Why are the rich Brexiteers moving out of the UK?

 

 

The more I read about this plastic patriot scumbag the angrier I get.

[horsefly 4,273]

9 minutes ago, Herman said:

The more I read about this plastic patriot scumbag the angrier I get.

yep! and add James Dyson, Jacob Rees-Bogg et al to your list. The latter 2 ardent Brexsh*teers very swiftly moved major operations out of the UK to avoid the financial calamities Brexit will bring (such dedicated patriots!!!) 

[SwindonCanary 455]

[Rock The Boat 1,322]

3 hours ago, horsefly said:

yep! and add James Dyson, Jacob Rees-Bogg et al to your list. The latter 2 ardent Brexsh*teers very swiftly moved major operations out of the UK to avoid the financial calamities Brexit will bring (such dedicated patriots!!!) 

And don't forget BLM supporter Louis Hamilton and his Monaco privilege

[Herman 9,692]

What were his thoughts on brexit?