Cyprus-Forum.com

[cyprusgrump]

But it did go through the court and resulted to forcing the Government to get the parliament's approval before invoking article 50. Lordo was right!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... article-50

This automatically gave the right to the parliament to have a say on the terms of leaving the EU, hence the current mess

Indeed... If it wasn't for Gina Miller May could have pushed through her BINO WA!

When we leave we should put a statue of her outside the HoP... Next to the one of Sir Nigel Farage obviously...

[Paphitis]

The backstop is easily solved with a couple of check points for Goods and trade to pass through to protect the common market.

The citizens of Ireland can come pass through as they please, with no change to their day to day lives.

A simple remedy from a simple mind !!
Stop making a fucking fool of your self !

Oh shut up!

And of course there is a simple solution to this problem.

The issue is that it is the remoaners that do not want ANY solution whatsoever let alone a simple one.

The BOJO Government has already made a 277 page report with what it intends on doing in Ireland. This report will be lodged with the EU in due course.

But they have made it very clear, that Britain will BREXIT come what may on the 31st of October. And this stance is already bearing fruit because both Macron and Merkel have indicated they are now willing to negotiate and come to a compromise!

BOJO 1 EU 0

But !!! As you say General, the UK will be able to trade with the EU and people will come and go as they do now for up to 10 years . So the UK after Brexit will still be in ....the EU ! !! You are a Plonker General!!
By the way, have you disposed of Assad yet ??

No you silly old fart. It won't be in the EU.

People will come and go and the only difference is that they will need to apply for a VISA if they are coming in to study or to work. They just need to follow a process.

EU citizens already residents in the UK will be unaffected.

Trade will continueunder the present conditions as well.

[Paphitis]

It would have been challenged if Article 50 wasn't invoked.

Since Parliament voted for Article 50, there was no need to take anything to court.

But you are of course correct. The Parliamenbt can not over rule a referendum. If it did, then the whole democratic process has been undermined and is subject to legal action.

But it did go through the court and resulted to forcing the Government to get the parliament's approval before invoking article 50. Lordo was right!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... article-50

This automatically gave the right to the parliament to have a say on the terms of leaving the EU, hence the current mess

It could possible have been appealed or challenged. The referendum has a higher mandate than Parliament.

But since Article 50 was triggered, it would be pointless to do anything.

Once Article 50 is triggered, it's a one way street to BREXIT. There is no backing out unless the law is repealed, and that would be highly provocative and possible illegal.

[Londonrake]

But it did go through the court and resulted to forcing the Government to get the parliament's approval before invoking article 50. Lordo was right!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... article-50

This automatically gave the right to the parliament to have a say on the terms of leaving the EU, hence the current mess

The outcome of the court action brought by Gina Miller and her “anonymous backers” was to force the government to hold a vote on invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, rather than doing so by using the Royal prerogative. “Only parliament can take away rights given to the people by parliament”.

That vote was subsequently held on 29th March 2017 and was passed into UK law by 498 to 114, a majority of 384.

It’s been mentioned umpteen times - but despite, has obviously been unacceptable to some, who are effectively in denial - the clear implications to all those who voted were that it initiated a 2 year countdown to the UK’s departure from the EU. REGARDLESS OF ANY DEAL OR NOT.

There was a fortnight’s extension granted to 12 April, allowing Theresa May her zillionth attempt at passing the WA. The EU then granted a further 6 month extension to Oct 31st. The idea that the UK cannot leave without a further parliamentary vote is a fallacy. Leaving is the - legal - default - situation, which can only be stopped from happening by a similar vote revoking Article 50.

The best Remainer hope at present is for a vote forcing the government to obtain a further extension. Which will again be subject to the EU 27’s approval.

And to an earlier point made. Yes, you do want to deny me my democratic rights. I was asked for my opinion and solemnly promised by those on high that if it constituted a majority it would be implemented. You lied and continue to do so, in multiple guises. To a lot of self-satisfied members of this abhorrent parliament the message is loud and clear. Count your days.

[cyprusgrump]

Sky News Mocked for Brexit Scare Story Focused on Shortage of Foreign Au Pairs

Sky News has been mocked mercilessly for a report on the threat which Brexit supposedly poses to the “key childcare option” of importing foreign au pairs to look after children.
Sky cited figures from the British Au Pair Agencies Association — which appears to be oddly lacking in British au pairs — which indicate European Union recruits have “plummetted” by around 70 per cent since the vote to Leave the European Union in 2016, which may finally be delivered on at the end of October 2019.

“Currently, au pairs from the EU do not need a visa,” the broadcaster explained.

“They stay with a host family who provide them with a room, food and weekly “pocket money” of £80 to £100″ — less than £12 a day, at the the lower end of the spectrum.

“It is unclear how this key childcare option will continue when freedom of movement ends after Brexit,” the report added — unleashing a tidal wave of derision on social media.

I wonder if Tweedle-Dumb and Tweedle-Dumber have kids in the UK that need care...?

[cyprusgrump]

Trump Warns France, China on Trade War as G7 Summit Gets Underway

Trade wars will lead to recession, while trade deals will boost the economy,” EU Council President Donald Tusk said in Biarritz, the chic Atlantic resort chosen by French host President Emmanuel Macron to stage the annual meeting.

There you have it from the horse's mouth...

Tusk acknowledges that trade deals are important to the EU economy yet refuses a trade deal with the 100% compliant UK...

Tusk prefers recession for the EU and its citizens so he can punish the UK and discourage others from leaving...

[Lordo]

Trump Warns France, China on Trade War as G7 Summit Gets Underway

Trade wars will lead to recession, while trade deals will boost the economy,” EU Council President Donald Tusk said in Biarritz, the chic Atlantic resort chosen by French host President Emmanuel Macron to stage the annual meeting.

There you have it from the horse's mouth...

Tusk acknowledges that trade deals are important to the EU economy yet refuses a trade deal with the 100% compliant UK...

Tusk prefers recession for the EU and its citizens so he can punish the UK and discourage others from leaving...

bullshit and you know it. where do you see that uk will be 100% compliant?

without eu human rights
without freedom of movement.

compliant indeed.

in fact if we are in the backstop we would be 100% compliant.
so if they are going to be 100% compliant why are they objecting to backstop.
you really are talking out of your grumpy ass.
what you don't seem to understand is we will not be able to trade with even the eu under wto if we leave with no deal.

go figure.

[Pyrpolizer]

But it did go through the court and resulted to forcing the Government to get the parliament's approval before invoking article 50. Lordo was right!
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... article-50

This automatically gave the right to the parliament to have a say on the terms of leaving the EU, hence the current mess

The outcome of the court action brought by Gina Miller and her “anonymous backers” was to force the government to hold a vote on invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, rather than doing so by using the Royal prerogative. “Only parliament can take away rights given to the people by parliament”.

That vote was subsequently held on 29th March 2017 and was passed into UK law by 498 to 114, a majority of 384.

It’s been mentioned umpteen times - but despite, has obviously been unacceptable to some, who are effectively in denial - the clear implications to all those who voted were that it initiated a 2 year countdown to the UK’s departure from the EU. REGARDLESS OF ANY DEAL OR NOT.

There was a fortnight’s extension granted to 12 April, allowing Theresa May her zillionth attempt at passing the WA. The EU then granted a further 6 month extension to Oct 31st. The idea that the UK cannot leave without a further parliamentary vote is a fallacy. Leaving is the - legal - default - situation, which can only be stopped from happening by a similar vote revoking Article 50.

The best Remainer hope at present is for a vote forcing the government to obtain a further extension. Which will again be subject to the EU 27’s approval.

And to an earlier point made. Yes, you do want to deny me my democratic rights. I was asked for my opinion and solemnly promised by those on high that if it constituted a majority it would be implemented. You lied and continue to do so, in multiple guises. To a lot of self-satisfied members of this abhorrent parliament the message is loud and clear. Count your days.

Any idea on what legal grounds Theresa May passed the deal with the EU to the parliament for approval?

[Lordo]

so now it is tusk's fault if we may end up with no deal not boris's. pull the other one sunshine the middle one has bells on it. considering he is saying do or die we wil leave is beyond the joke. why would i wish to dies to leave the eu asshole. if you want to leave, fak off.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49458293

[Pyrpolizer]

Trump Warns France, China on Trade War as G7 Summit Gets Underway

Trade wars will lead to recession, while trade deals will boost the economy,” EU Council President Donald Tusk said in Biarritz, the chic Atlantic resort chosen by French host President Emmanuel Macron to stage the annual meeting.

There you have it from the horse's mouth...

Tusk acknowledges that trade deals are important to the EU economy yet refuses a trade deal with the 100% compliant UK...

Tusk prefers recession for the EU and its citizens so he can punish the UK and discourage others from leaving...

The UK basically wants full access to the EU single market, very limited restrictions to trade with the EU, without paying any
contributions to the EU, and without any obligation to follow any EU rules and laws, on the excuse that it didn't have any say in how those rules were formed....
The EU made it clear that nobody ever got such a deal, and nobody will. As simple as that.

This doesn't mean there will be trade war with Britain. Some limited trade deal that will benefit both sides is possible and will be signed after Brexit, but don't expect it to be anything close to what it has now.