OV9

Broccers wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 8:44 pm Just me actually watched the video then

NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 10:10 pm I’ll put it on my to-do list.

Broccers wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 7:18 pm

Broccers wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:09 pm "They dont want to" more like it

Lots of people think this


Is Parliament prorogued today btw

Broccers wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 9:50 pm Watch the 2 hours yourself.



Let us know your thoughts

Broccers wrote: ↑Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:01 pm Its quite astounding the smears coming out. Our Boris handled the BBC really well this morning. In a hospital, talking about positives, the interviewer was only interested in this none story. Piers got schooled on ITV this am too.

Broccers wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 7:57 am Yes Gavin I'm a moron.

NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 8:13 am

Broccers wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 7:57 am Yes Gavin I'm a moron.

Seconded

Gavin wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 7:49 am I am not sure why anyone bothers arguing with Broccers anymore. He is either an extremely talented troll or a moron. I am genuinely not sure which.

Has anyone yet come out with a positive outcome for Brexit? Maybe a good reason to commit economic suicide and speed up the break up of the Union?

The rumour that we had approached and tried to bribe a sovereign government to veto our own extension request I find horrendous. HTF have we been left with a parliament that lets these arseholes get away with this, not to mention the money Johnson back handed to his lady friend.

NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 9:52 am I tried but I couldn’t resist. Sorry Broccers.

NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:32 pm I remember discussing the backstop when it first appeared and I said I didn’t see what was so onerous. GG pointed out that a legal agreement with no end date that requires the full agreement of both parties to end meant one party could end up trapped in it against their will. Surely, then, the answer is a time-limited backstop with the option to extend with the agreement of both parties? Or is that too easy?

Swervin_Mervin wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 11:10 am

NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:32 pm I remember discussing the backstop when it first appeared and I said I didn’t see what was so onerous. GG pointed out that a legal agreement with no end date that requires the full agreement of both parties to end meant one party could end up trapped in it against their will. Surely, then, the answer is a time-limited backstop with the option to extend with the agreement of both parties? Or is that too easy?

"The EU are said to be prepared to make a major concession on Boris Johnson's Brexit deal by paving the way for the Northern Ireland assembly to leave a new Irish backstop after an unspecified number of years. "

NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 11:36 am

Swervin_Mervin wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 11:10 am

NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Tue Oct 08, 2019 3:32 pm I remember discussing the backstop when it first appeared and I said I didn’t see what was so onerous. GG pointed out that a legal agreement with no end date that requires the full agreement of both parties to end meant one party could end up trapped in it against their will. Surely, then, the answer is a time-limited backstop with the option to extend with the agreement of both parties? Or is that too easy?

"The EU are said to be prepared to make a major concession on Boris Johnson's Brexit deal by paving the way for the Northern Ireland assembly to leave a new Irish backstop after an unspecified number of years. "

Make perfect sense. It’s really the only way forward on a deal from here, I think.