lets go for it UK!

mondo wrote:well they had better hurry up before the 100,000,000 Turks arrive...

Have they not arrived yet? I'm sure we were told Turkey would be joining the EU the week after the vote.

you are right jillandsteve...

but is it not galling that our politicians always seem to champion rights of other nationalities over our own?
We send aid to homeless in Africa while we have people sleeping on the streets in UK, we give free medical operations to health tourists yet deny lifesaving drugs to UK cancer patients, we borrow billions for aid to India who have a space programme, yet we cannot properly look after our sick elderly people!

Brexit has the politicans across Europe worried...the electorate is beginning to see through the deceit and corruption!

I suppose it is easier to be Saintly when you are on £300 per day or doubling your salary with expenses....

Even easier when powerful people like JC Clunker, do not have to worry about re election, when C Lagarde gets a slap on the wrist for millions of euros of negligence, when the Kinnocks and Mandelsohns can luxuriate in their EU pension pots!

The establishment has to change, it has become decrepit...Brexit is the plea of the people for a different system...cleaner, fairer...whatever challenges and risks await us!

Jillandsteve wrote:Flori, the House of Lords can want it but can't demand it. It will be ignored as Theresa May has the numbers in the end

Yes a toothless dog in reality but they can delay it..................
The House of Lords has the power to delay legislation for a year. If the House of Commons insists, it will have its way. This limitation was enacted under the Parliament Act, 1949 and had previously been two years under the Parliament Act, 1911. Therefore, the main purpose of the House of Lords is revision of bills. Many amendments to bills are accepted by the House of Commons, though some are contested. When this happens legislation can pass back and forth between the two houses until one yields to the other or the House of Lords decides to vote down the entire bill. Because they can only do this to cause a delay for a year, it's rarely done with government legislation.

People may not be aware that if we do not trigger article 50 by the end of this month the following applies.....
At the moment, Article 50 allows an EU Member State to secede from the Union by giving two years notice to the relevant authorities.However, as from March 31st 2017 –– Article 50 will be subject to the dreaded Qualified Majority Vote (QMV)…that is to say, we will have to persuade a total of 14 EU Member States to support our decision to leave.
So we do need to be very wary of the Lords

Of course, all the ramifications of leaving were thought over very carefully by the government and the voters before the referendum..

Weren't they?.. surely they must have been...?..

No one one vote for such a monumental change if they didn´t have all the details ... would they?

.
..

I cannot imagine the EU refusing the UK to leave....imprisoning us in a club of nations against our will?
Impossible!

We would simply tell EU where to get off!

We would not pay a penny to the EU, we would not contribute to anything to do with them, we would not import from them.

Most importantly we would WITHDRAW from the Eurovision Song Contest! That would teach them!

Reginaldo wrote:I cannot imagine the EU refusing the UK to leave....imprisoning us in a club of nations against our will?
Impossible!

We would simply tell EU where to get off!

We would not pay a penny to the EU, we would not contribute to anything to do with them, we would not import from them.

Most importantly we would WITHDRAW from the Eurovision Song Contest! That would teach them!

Reginaldo, I like your sentiments but I do think withdrawing from the Eurovision song contest is a bit heavy handed....this should be saved as a final bargaining chip, such as if they tried to make us eat snails instead of mushy peas....

Just to put a slightly different slant on it...the "leavers" are always assumed to be those who weren't fully informed, and weren't told the full facts. Let's not forget that the "remainers" weren't told the full facts either, so the vote was fair.

Talking of the vote...has anyone ever worked out how - with an "anonymous" vote - the "older generation" are always touted as being the ones who swung the vote towards Leave? Surely in this democratic system, Yes - they know who voted and who didn't by nature of the fact that they tick people off a list...but how can they then say who voted which way???

If the answer is "exit polls", then excuse me while I ROFL...!!!

mondo wrote:Of course, all the ramifications of leaving were thought over very carefully by the government and the voters before the referendum..

Weren't they?.. surely they must have been...?..

No one one vote for such a monumental change if they didn´t have all the details ... would they?

.
..

Well for me it was quite simple .......
Do you want to stay part of the European union
or
Do you want to leave the European union...
Pretty straight forward I think, and the majority made a choice, which should mean that we start the leave procedurethis week

100% agree florimondo.
Whether folk like it or not, we're a democracy.
The majority of the voting public wanted to leave.
The majority aren't all racists, and they aren't all thick (and I'm not suggesting anyone on here has said they are!!!)...they just wanted to leave, WITHOUT the aid of a crystal ball!!!

We all know that the vote was a "recommendation"...so I suppose the Government could have said "oh well - we won't bother"...I wonder how much credibility they'd have been left with then!!! I reckon the public would have been up in arms because their voice wasn't heard!!!