Very obviously he’s talking about the situation, as in they have no solution and can’t move things forward because there’s too many issues.
As you’ve said previously, people see what they want to see.
Very obviously he’s talking about the situation, as in they have no solution and can’t move things forward because there’s too many issues.
I'll assist go to 21 minutes.
The backstop was put forward by the UK, how does this translate to being a trap? Genuine question, not trying to antagonise but would be good to have “the other side” explained on this one.
I watched it when it came out. All that I really saw was the EU's bemusement at our negotiating team being a a bunch of bumbling twats. They felt really quite sorry for us. As a slice of reality about the EU's position, it's very good, seemingly access all areas.
The smears you’re talking about - do they relate to the meetings between Arcuri and Johnson which were omitted from his mayoral diary but which he disclosed last night, only an hour after the extended deadline given for doing so?
Some things are just too easy...
The worst thing about Johnson’s friend with benefits is that she appears to be his sister in all but bloodGavin 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.
#notsorry
"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: ↑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?
Make perfect sense. It’s really the only way forward on a deal from here, I think.Swervin_Mervin wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 11:10 am"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: ↑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?
If true it should weed out whether No.10 are truly playing hardball for a deal or pushing towards no-deal.NotoriousREV wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 11:36 amMake perfect sense. It’s really the only way forward on a deal from here, I think.Swervin_Mervin wrote: ↑Wed Oct 09, 2019 11:10 am"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: ↑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?