[Twosugars]

[Sticks]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

22nd May if MP's agree to the deal (they won't) and until 12th April to propose another plan if not are dates that have already been confirmed, Sticks. Nothing is happening on March 29th.

At the moment under UK Law, not EU concession, but UK Law, we are leaving THIS Friday, without a deal.

The law has not been changed here in the UK to reflect the machinations of the EU

[James]

Originally Posted by Sticks

At the moment under UK Law, not EU concession, but UK Law, we are leaving THIS Friday, without a deal.

The law has not been changed here in the UK to reflect the machinations of the EU

According to Andrew Neil this isn't the case.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Sticks

At the moment under UK Law, not EU concession, but UK Law, we are leaving THIS Friday, without a deal.

The law has not been changed here in the UK to reflect the machinations of the EU

Yes they are Due to do that this week.
So we can post the New Legal Date will be April 12th.


If she does her treaty deal
and it gets the votes?
Then we get a new date of May 22nd

[Twosugars]

Calls grow for public inquiry into Brexit

Calls for a public inquiry into Brexit are mounting among diplomats, business figures, peers and MPs, amid claims that the civil service is already planning for a future investigation into how it has been handled.

The decision to call the referendum, the red lines drawn up by Theresa May and Britain’s negotiating strategy are all issues that senior figures would like to be examined.

Bob Kerslake, the former head of the civil service, said an inquiry was needed into “the biggest humiliation since Suez, certainly since the IMF crisis [in 1976]”. The cross-party peer said he believed the civil service “is both expecting and preparing for this”.

“We do need to understand how on earth we ended up where we have and it probably needs to go back to the decisions around holding a referendum and the way the question was framed,” he said. “It would need to be a public inquiry, probably judge-led.”

Peter Ricketts, the former national security adviser and former head civil servant in the Foreign Office, cited the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war. “Chilcot took a long time, but it was cathartic,” he said. “The report was widely seen to have done the job and I think you can say the British system is better for it. I think the handling of Brexit has been such a failure of the process of government, with such wide ramifications, that there needs to be a searching public inquiry.

“What advice was given to ministers? Was it taken? Did the processes of collective cabinet decision-taking work? Were the right skills available, for example on no-deal planning and all the costs involved? They are all legitimate questions for an inquiry. It should have the powers of a judicial inquiry.”

One senior Tory peer said: “We want our Chilcot.”

Sir Mike Rake, the former chair of BT, said: “When the dust has settled, there really should be some kind of public inquiry, looking at both the issues around holding a referendum and the context of what has happened in terms of pursuing Brexit.”

Many figures are already pointing to May’s early decision to set out strict red lines that seriously limited Britain’s ability to negotiate. John Kerr, Britain’s former EU ambassador who drafted the article 50 process of leaving the bloc, said: “Those red lines laid down in 2016 emerged with no consultation with the country, the devolved assemblies, parliament or with the cabinet. Then there was the decision to trigger article, 50 still with no agreement in cabinet of where we wanted to end up.”

Sir Jonathan Faull, a former senior EU official, said: “It would be surprising if the events relating to UK withdrawal from the EU were not the subject of one or more inquiries. An important initial question will be when to start. The 2015 election? The 2016 referendum? The article 50 notification? The scope ranges from Whitehall and Westminster to Belfast, Brussels and beyond.”

There is also support in the Commons. Tom Watson, Labour’s deputy leader, said: “The government’s handling of Brexit has been a shambles from start to finish. It was a dereliction of duty to allow the country to get to this point, days before Brexit, in danger of crashing out with no deal or trying to force parliament to accept a deal it’s already rejected twice. We will certainly need a detailed postmortem of how this all came to pass.”

The whole thing stinks to high heaven. Inquiry will be essential.
The mishandling of the whole process lost Britain reputation for common-sense and efficiency. The brand UK is in the gutter bc of this.

[Sticks]

In Primary Legislation, namely the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 it says

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day.

This is primary legislation which has to go before both houses to be changed, plus committee stages, for which there is no time.

[arista]

[arista]

"The brand UK is in the gutter because of this. "


Sure Twosugars
but after we leave it will settle down.

[Twosugars]

George Monbiot on Leave campaign dodgy money

In Britain, for example, we now know that the EU referendum was won with the help of widespread cheating. We still don’t know the origins of much of the money spent by the leave campaigns. For example, we have no idea who provided the Ł435,000 channelled through Scotland, into Northern Ireland, through the coffers of the Democratic Unionist party and back into Scotland and England, to pay for pro-Brexit ads. Nor do we know the original source of the Ł8m that Arron Banks delivered to the Leave.EU campaign. We do know that both of the main leave campaigns have been fined for illegal activities, and that the conduct of the referendum has damaged many people’s faith in the political system. But, astonishingly, the government has so far failed to introduce a single new law in response to these events. And now it’s happening again.

Since mid-January an organisation called Britain’s Future has spent Ł125,000 on Facebook ads demanding a hard or no-deal Brexit. Most of them target particular constituencies. Where an MP is deemed sympathetic to the organisation’s aims, the voters who receive these ads are urged to tell him or her to “remove the backstop, rule out a customs union, deliver Brexit without delay”. Where the MP is deemed unsympathetic, the message is: “Don’t let them steal Brexit; Don’t let them ignore your vote.”

So who or what is Britain’s Future? Sorry, I have no idea. As openDemocracy points out, it has no published address and releases no information about who founded it, who controls it and who has been paying for these advertisements. The only person publicly associated with it is a journalist called Tim Dawson, who edits its website. Dawson has not yet replied to the questions I have sent him. It is, in other words, highly opaque.

[reece(:]

Originally Posted by arista

"The brand UK is in the gutter because of this. "


Sure Twosugars
but after we leave it will settle down.

This won't be over for many many years yet considering the agreement is merely step 1

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by arista

"The brand UK is in the gutter because of this. "


Sure Twosugars
but after we leave it will settle down.

Reputational damage takes a long time to recover, Arista.
And you're assuming whoever is in power after leaving (if it happens) will be competent. I don't see many competent people among brexit politicians, sorry.
Vast majority of sensible politicians is in the Remain camp as it is the sensible thing to do.

[arista]

[arista]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Reputational damage takes a long time to recover, Arista.
And you're assuming whoever is in power after leaving (if it happens) will be competent. I don't see many competent people among brexit politicians, sorry.
Vast majority of sensible politicians is in the Remain camp as it is the sensible thing to do.

Yes , better than her.

[Twosugars]

Paterson, the loon, doesn't even know the basics. Scary

[arista]

Originally Posted by reece(:

This won't be over for many many years yet considering the agreement is merely step 1

Yes more better deals to come
after we leave

[parmnion]

Very large turn out today, a few families with kids but mostly old people..all the young ones I saw were drinking heavily and trashing the streets..

On the way back from the March plenty middle aged snobs quaffing wine and food proudly showing thier yellow badges as the Romanian begger sat shivering, ignored on the street..or the old lady, preaching about God, being snarled at and mocked by the passers by.


But they care for Britain?


Load of **** they do...they care about the penny in thier pocket and **** all else.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by arista

Yes , better than her.

any names you care to mention?
Boris, fook business, Johnson?
Andrea, I'm a mother, Leadsom?
Moggy the Vampire?
David, I work only 2 days a week, Davies?

[arista]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Paterson, the loon, doesn't even know the basics. Scary

I posted that for Sticks
as Henry Newman knows the the EU Law.

[arista]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

any names you care to mention?
Boris, fook business, Johnson?
Andrea, I'm a mother, Leadsom?
Moggy the Vampire?
David, I work only 2 days a week, Davies?

a Muslim.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by arista

I posted that for Sticks
as Henry Newman knows the the EU Law.

who cares what Newman knows, he's not in parliament. Paterson is.

[bitontheslide]

Originally Posted by Twosugars

Paterson, the loon, doesn't even know the basics. Scary

he isn't necessarily wrong. It is something that can be legally challenged. For the example, the EU could then just say the brexit date is moved to 2100 ... haha you are not leaving .... thats not how it works.

[arista]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Very large turn out today, a few families with kids but mostly old people..all the young ones I saw were drinking heavily and trashing the streets..

On the way back from the March plenty middle aged snobs quaffing wine and food proudly showing thier yellow badges as the Romanian begger sat shivering, ignored on the street..or the old lady, preaching about God, being snarled at and mocked by the passers by.


But they care for Britain?


Load of **** they do...they care about the penny in thier pocket and **** all else.

Great Observation
parmnion.

[reece(:]

Petition at 4.5mill

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Sticks

In Primary Legislation, namely the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 it says

In this Act references to before, after or on exit day, or to beginning with exit day, are to be read as references to before, after or at 11.00 p.m. on 29 March 2019 or (as the case may be) to beginning with 11.00 p.m. on that day.

This is primary legislation which has to go before both houses to be changed, plus committee stages, for which there is no time.

Then I'm afraid you're going to have to lawyer up and take legal action against the government if you feel very strongly about this, sticks, as we will not be leaving next Friday.

[Twosugars]

Originally Posted by parmnion

Very large turn out today, a few families with kids but mostly old people..all the young ones I saw were drinking heavily and trashing the streets..

On the way back from the March plenty middle aged snobs quaffing wine and food proudly showing thier yellow badges as the Romanian begger sat shivering, ignored on the street..or the old lady, preaching about God, being snarled at and mocked by the passers by.


But they care for Britain?


Load of **** they do...they care about the penny in thier pocket and **** all else.

what a hateful post