OV9

Exactly so they havent granted it - lets not get ahead of ourselves.

No I do enjoy winding you lot up tho - its so easy - but do stick with facts

Jobbo wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:13 am

Broccers wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 8:34 am Lets be clear he sent an unsigned letter and another with it saying I don't want an extension but had to send a letter by law. Funny how people see things differently.

I honestly can't believe you aren't just trolling now. You have seen that the EU accepted the extension request, surely?

That's what Boris was obliged to do, and said he wouldn't do: request an extension.

Try reading what people post.

Broccers wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:24 am Exactly so they havent granted it - lets not get ahead of ourselves.

No I do enjoy winding you lot up tho - its so easy - but do stick with facts

Not wound up, just immensely amused at how manipulated you are and how unaware you are of it

He didnt want to but had to by law - not too hard to understand.

As for being amused - none more than the straw grasping here

What straws are being grasped at, except by you?

Lets see what the weasel midget says after 330pm and talk about the next steps then

Jobbo wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 7:33 am I read that thread last night - it’s interesting because I thought Boris’s withdrawal agreement was basically a done deal. The Letwin amendment on Saturday wasn’t inconsistent with passing Boris’s agreement, it just allows enough time for it to be considered properly. I see Boris is still attempting to rush it through without much debate; but that’s likely to backfire again because nobody, not even his own party, trust him now.

Surely you can't believe that the purpose (or result) of Letwin's amendment was simply to allow this agreement (i.e. the Withdrawal Agreement 2.0) to be "considered properly".

It has two purposes that are obvious - one arguably legitimate and the other not. The legitimate one (which Letwin was pushing as the reason for his amendment) was to ensure that we don't accidentally end up with a no-deal Brexit as a result of passing a WA in principle but then failing to get the necessary legislation through by the 31st.

The other reason (and why 2nd ref'ers and Lib Deb revokers are so happy about it) is to then allow wrecking amendments to the actual legislation itself to bind the government's hands as to how it negotiates the free trade deal during the transition period - i.e. that the UK must sign up to a Customs Union and therefore end up with much of the effect of the backstop via a different means and provide several months of extension to do so - i.e. make implementing legislation anything but.

It also allows for a potential VONC once the extension is secured.

Yes - also true. So many reasons that have nothing to do with what Oliver Letwin said the amendment was for.

The stupidity from Letwin's (and other pro-EU tories) perspective, is that in my opinion, the longer these shenanigans go on for, the higher the risk we end up with a Corbyn government as a result.

Funny how people are so paralysed with fear over a possible Corbyn government. What's to be so scared of?

DeskJockey wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:57 am Funny how people are so paralysed with fear over a possible Corbyn government. What's to be so scared of?

Communism or something.

Well - the school my child loves would be shut down and its assets confiscated (so as a result of poor secondary schools in the area we'd probably have to move to somewhere else), it would immediately result in me paying thousands a year in extra tax and the economy would tank and he's a risk to national security. Other than that, not much really.

DeskJockey wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:57 am Funny how people are so paralysed with fear over a possible Corbyn government. What's to be so scared of?

John McDonnell

Well - the house I've bought and currently rent out that forms part of my retirement plans so that I will not place any unnecessary burden on the state in my later years could be lost to me for a "Fair Price" which I can pretty much guarantee won't be fair to me, you know the person who's worked hard and sacrificed for the past 30 years to have it.

GG. wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:00 am Well - the school my child loves would be shut down and its assets confiscated (so as a result of poor secondary schools in the area we'd probably have to move to somewhere else), it would immediately result in me paying thousands a year in extra tax and the economy would tank and he's a risk to national security. Other than that, not much really.

That's based on stuff he says he'll do? I wouldn't worry. Like everyone else he blusters and will have to get things through parliament. He's not a dictator.

Making promises pre-election and then reneging on them after ???

How very Tory of him...

dinny_g wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:14 am Making promises pre-election and then reneging on them after ???

How very Tory of him...

Indeed. But the Brexiteer argument that they'll rather flush the country down the pan than let him become PM boggles the mind.

DeskJockey wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:10 am

GG. wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:00 am Well - the school my child loves would be shut down and its assets confiscated (so as a result of poor secondary schools in the area we'd probably have to move to somewhere else), it would immediately result in me paying thousands a year in extra tax and the economy would tank and he's a risk to national security. Other than that, not much really.

That's based on stuff he says he'll do? I wouldn't worry. Like everyone else he blusters and will have to get things through parliament. He's not a dictator.

But you can see why people won’t vote Labour based on this, right? The vast majority of people are moderate and are put off by the extremes. It’s no accident that Labour got into power and stayed there when they were more centrist. People tend to fall into slightly left or slightly right but aren’t full on communists or fascists.

NotoriousREV wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:16 am

DeskJockey wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:10 am

GG. wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 10:00 am Well - the school my child loves would be shut down and its assets confiscated (so as a result of poor secondary schools in the area we'd probably have to move to somewhere else), it would immediately result in me paying thousands a year in extra tax and the economy would tank and he's a risk to national security. Other than that, not much really.

That's based on stuff he says he'll do? I wouldn't worry. Like everyone else he blusters and will have to get things through parliament. He's not a dictator.

But you can see why people won’t vote Labour based on this, right? The vast majority of people are moderate and are put off by the extremes. It’s no accident that Labour got into power and stayed there when they were more centrist. People tend to fall into slightly left or slightly right but aren’t full on communists or fascists.

Yes, I get that. I don't think he'll be a good PM, but I'm not scared of the prospect.

GG. wrote: Mon Oct 21, 2019 9:52 am The stupidity from Letwin's (and other pro-EU tories) perspective

Letwin is in favour of Boris's withdrawal agreement:

Why did Boris want to rush through a vote? I don't think he wants No Deal, but he does want to get us out, with his deal, to bolster his support at the next election. The reason for the rush and the lack of the legislation which, uncannily, is now being brought forward today or tomorrow, is simply to avoid scrutiny. Because it'll be obvious that Boris has caved to so many of the EU's demands in order to get a revised draft withdrawal agreement, and unless rushed through it won't pass the House.