Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

[Politics] Brexit

If there was a second Brexit referendum how would you vote?

  • Total voters
    1,081


Baker lite

Baker lite

Banned
Mar 16, 2017
6,309
in my house




vegster

vegster

Sanity Clause
May 5, 2008
27,886
nicko31 said:
golddene said:
The public have in many cases been sheltered from higher import costs with retailers taking the hit with disasterous consequences. But apparently its all worth it, cheaper shoes and clothing on the way, but Moggy says it will all be worth it in 50 years...
Click to expand...

My local chippy put a sign in his window explaining that he has reluctantly had to raise his prices as Spuds and fish have never cost him so much.
Click to expand...
 


L

Lincoln Imp

Well-known member
Feb 2, 2009
5,964
vegster said:
nicko31 said:
My local chippy put a sign in his window explaining that he has reluctantly had to raise his prices as Spuds and fish have never cost him so much.
Click to expand...
On this topic, one piece of good news last week was that the Daily Mail reported gloomy advertising sales, citing Brexit uncertainty among advertisers. Let that nasty rag suffer, at least. (Elsewhere on the DM, I see Quentin Letts has now abandoned ship.)
Click to expand...
 


beorhthelm

beorhthelm

A. Virgo, Football Genius
Jul 21, 2003
35,290
vegster said:
My local chippy put a sign in his window explaining that he has reluctantly had to raise his prices as Spuds and fish have never cost him so much.
Click to expand...

yeah my local chippy put up such sign couple years ago too. and a few years before that.
 


ManOfSussex

ManOfSussex

We wunt be druv
Apr 11, 2016
14,744
Rape of Hastings, Sussex
Lincoln Imp said:
On this topic, one piece of good news last week was that the Daily Mail reported gloomy advertising sales, citing Brexit uncertainty among advertisers. Let that nasty rag suffer, at least. (Elsewhere on the DM, I see Quentin Letts has now abandoned ship.)
Click to expand...

Unfortunately he's doing a Melanie Phillips and leaving the DM for The Times though.:rolleyes:
 






pb21

pb21

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2010
6,283
What's the deal with this legal advice and why don't they just publish it? The withdrawal deal is published so everyone is able to review it from a legal perspective?
 


Blue3

Blue3

Well-known member
Jan 27, 2014
5,567
Lancing
pb21 said:
What's the deal with this legal advice and why don't they just publish it? The withdrawal deal is published so everyone is able to review it from a legal perspective?
Click to expand...

If the reason is confidentiality then why no release the document to the shadow Brexit minister and the Brexit spokespersons for the other parties so that they can read it and to then ask questions in the house of the attorney general
 




A

astralavi

Active member
Apr 6, 2017
453
pb21 said:
What's the deal with this legal advice and why don't they just publish it? The withdrawal deal is published so everyone is able to review it from a legal perspective?
Click to expand...

I think they are partly arguing that as the details relate to further negotiations that to release this would give the EU an a negotiating advantage, thus against the national interest. (arguebly any government discussions and there release could be against the national interest) they are also saying there is not much to see in the paper which seems like a contradiction, the MPs are naturally suspicious. There is also concern that there is no real power to force a contempt motion, and even if it would not be in time for the vote
 


KZNSeagull

KZNSeagull

Well-known member
Nov 26, 2007
19,792
Wolsingham, County Durham
Blue3 said:
If the reason is confidentiality then why no release the document to the shadow Brexit minister and the Brexit spokespersons for the other parties so that they can read it and to then ask questions in the house of the attorney general
Click to expand...

The opposition parties have had the opportunity to ask questions on the legalities within the withdrawal agreement since 4:30pm. So far, only about 2 of them have asked anything vaguely pertinent.

The Attorney Generals argument is that to publish his legal advice in full when we are still negotiating with the EU is not in the national interest. Not because it holds anything in it that compromises the govt, but because it may contain information that could compromise the negotiations (eg different negotiation scenarios etc). He stated in the commons that he would give exactly the same answers that he gave the government on any question that members wanted to ask about the withdrawal agreement. He gave some very interesting answers to those that asked pertinent questions. The trouble is that opposition MP's decided that the only question they wanted to ask is why would not publish the entire legal advice. He answered that question about 50 times and therefore, in my opinion, wasted a golden opportunity to get to the crux of the issues.
 


Ernest

Ernest

Stupid IDIOT
Nov 8, 2003
42,739
LOONEY BIN
KZNSeagull said:
The opposition parties have had the opportunity to ask questions on the legalities within the withdrawal agreement since 4:30pm. So far, only about 2 of them have asked anything vaguely pertinent.

The Attorney Generals argument is that to publish his legal advice in full when we are still negotiating with the EU is not in the national interest. Not because it holds anything in it that compromises the govt, but because it may contain information that could compromise the negotiations (eg different negotiation scenarios etc). He stated in the commons that he would give exactly the same answers that he gave the government on any question that members wanted to ask about the withdrawal agreement. He gave some very interesting answers to those that asked pertinent questions. The trouble is that opposition MP's decided that the only question they wanted to ask is why would not publish the entire legal advice. He answered that question about 50 times and therefore, in my opinion, wasted a golden opportunity to get to the crux of the issues.
Click to expand...

Why didn't the Tories vote against it then ???
 








H

Hampster Gull

New member
Dec 22, 2010
13,462
I see the far right, the guy whose stage name is Tommy Robinson and others, are doing a Brexit Betrayal March this Sunday. Let’s hope the centre and the left stand up to this.
 








Blue3

Blue3

Well-known member
Jan 27, 2014
5,567
Lancing
KZNSeagull said:
The opposition parties have had the opportunity to ask questions on the legalities within the withdrawal agreement since 4:30pm. So far, only about 2 of them have asked anything vaguely pertinent.

The Attorney Generals argument is that to publish his legal advice in full when we are still negotiating with the EU is not in the national interest. Not because it holds anything in it that compromises the govt, but because it may contain information that could compromise the negotiations (eg different negotiation scenarios etc). He stated in the commons that he would give exactly the same answers that he gave the government on any question that members wanted to ask about the withdrawal agreement. He gave some very interesting answers to those that asked pertinent questions. The trouble is that opposition MP's decided that the only question they wanted to ask is why would not publish the entire legal advice. He answered that question about 50 times and therefore, in my opinion, wasted a golden opportunity to get to the crux of the issues.
Click to expand...

The problem is how can you ask questions about a document and its legal advise when you have not seen it?

It like being asked to review a book before it's been published
 


H

Hampster Gull

New member
Dec 22, 2010
13,462
Blue3 said:
The problem is how can you ask questions about a document and its legal advise when you have not seen it?

It like being asked to review a book before it's been published
Click to expand...

It’s convention not to publish, and for good reasons outlined. Any sensible party would get their own advice, unfortunately Labour are not a sensible party anymore
 






pb21

pb21

Well-known member
Apr 23, 2010
6,283
astralavi said:
I think they are partly arguing that as the details relate to further negotiations that to release this would give the EU an a negotiating advantage, thus against the national interest. (arguebly any government discussions and there release could be against the national interest) they are also saying there is not much to see in the paper which seems like a contradiction, the MPs are naturally suspicious. There is also concern that there is no real power to force a contempt motion, and even if it would not be in time for the vote
Click to expand...

Hadn't appreciated that it was legal advice on future scenarios as well as the withdrawal deal.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here