Getting brexit done!

[Voll Blau]

7 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

You know he's out of a job in a day and his brexit party has exactly zero MP's right? Hard to ditch a person more than that I feel. 

 

Also, if you want unity, probably best to ditch the embarrassing half and half scarves. Unity works both ways eh. 

I've literally no idea what you're on about I'm afraid.

 

I suspect we'll still be hearing plenty from "Good Old Nige" regardless of whether he's in office or not. It's never stopped him before...

Edited 30 January 2020 by Voll Blau

[Alf Bentley]

16 hours ago, MPH said:

“The Parliament's Brexit spokesman, Guy Verhofstadt, said it was "sad to see a country leaving that has twice given its blood to liberate Europe".

 

 

We are leaving the European Union, not Europe you donut. 

 

In 2015 I could have said it was "sad to see Cambiasso leaving, when he had performed at the top level 500+ times"

It would have been obvious that Cambiasso was leaving LCFC, but had mainly performed at the top level for Inter and Argentina, not LCFC.

 

It's obvious the UK is leaving the EU, not Europe as the latter would be a physical impossibility.

It's obvious that Brits (& many others) gave blood to liberate Europe, not the EU, as the EU didn't exist in 1914-18 or 1939-45 (Verhofstadt was clearly referring to the world wars).

 

Verhofstadt is entitled to see a connection between past conflicts in Europe and the current EU, a project established partly to avoid a repeat of past conflicts.

You're entitled to reject that connection and to see the EU however you see it. But Verhofstadt hasn't conflated Europe and the EU, so is not a "donut" - or even a doughnut.

 

https://writingexplained.org/doughnut-or-donut-difference 

[Innovindil]

5 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

I've literally no idea what you're on about I'm afraid.

 

I suspect we'll still be hearing plenty from "Good Old Nige" regardless of whether he's in office or not. It's never stopped him before...

 

 

[Jon the Hat]

On 27/01/2020 at 18:07, Mike Oxlong said:

Think the shit will really hit the fan in 11 months time when the holidaying Love Island types get a fvckin monstrous data bill mobile phone bill for all their social media use from their sunbeds in the Canaries 

Is there any evidence whatsoever that roaming charges will return?

 

Per the BBC:

If nothing is agreed then mobile operators would be able to implement roaming charges after the end of the transition period.

But the government has passed legislation that would provide some safeguards to consumers:

• A £45-a-month limit on the amount that customers could be charged for using mobile data abroad before having to opt into further use
• Requirements for customers to be informed when they have reached 80% and 100% of their data allowances
• Operators would have to take "reasonable steps" to avoid customers being charged for accidental roaming in Northern Ireland, which would happen if a phone in Northern Ireland locked onto the mobile signal coming from the Republic of Ireland.

Operators' plans

Of course, just because the operators might be allowed to reintroduce roaming charges, it does not necessarily mean that they would do so.

Three has no plans to bring them back in, regardless of how Brexit negotiations turn out.

Vodafone said it currently had no plans to change its roaming charges because of Brexit.

EE said: "Our customers enjoy inclusive roaming in Europe and we have no plans to change this based on the Brexit outcome."

And O2 said: "We currently have no plans to change our roaming services across Europe. We will be working closely with the UK government and other European mobile operators to try to maintain the current EU 'Roam like at home' arrangements once the UK leaves the EU."

Edited 30 January 2020 by Jon the Hat

[Voll Blau]

1 minute ago, Innovindil said:

 

 

OK, who are they?

[Jon the Hat]

5 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

In 2015 I could have said it was "sad to see Cambiasso leaving, when he had performed at the top level 500+ times"

It would have been obvious that Cambiasso was leaving LCFC, but had mainly performed at the top level for Inter and Argentina, not LCFC.

 

It's obvious the UK is leaving the EU, not Europe as the latter would be a physical impossibility.

It's obvious that Brits (& many others) gave blood to liberate Europe, not the EU, as the EU didn't exist in 1914-18 or 1939-45 (Verhofstadt was clearly referring to the world wars).

 

Verhofstadt is entitled to see a connection between past conflicts in Europe and the current EU, a project established partly to avoid a repeat of past conflicts.

You're entitled to reject that connection and to see the EU however you see it. But Verhofstadt hasn't conflated Europe and the EU, so is not a "donut" - or even a doughnut.

 

https://writingexplained.org/doughnut-or-donut-difference 

I think it is indicative of the fact that these officials do exactly that - their conviction in spite of all the evidence on the wishes of the poeple of Europe is that further EU integration is the way forward.  They are wrong.

[Innovindil]

1 minute ago, Voll Blau said:

OK, who are they?

Don't think I could name them all, but I believe they are labour/green whoever the **** meps. Basically "the other side". 

[Strokes]

21 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

I've literally no idea what you're on about I'm afraid.

 

I suspect we'll still be hearing plenty from "Good Old Nige" regardless of whether he's in office or not. It's never stopped him before...

You can’t silence someone you disagree with mate, I know that’s hard for you lefties to understand.

[Voll Blau]

4 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Don't think I could name them all, but I believe they are labour/green whoever the **** meps. Basically "the other side". 

OK, fair enough. I thought the Lib Dem MEPs' t-shirt stunt was crass a few months ago.

 

That said, whoever they are they don't have anywhere near the gravitas or pull of Farage, as the fact that neither of us recognised them goes to show. He's the figurehaead for the anti-EU movement in this country and has been for years. That's surely not in dispute by anyone on either side?

 

If pro-Brexit folks are going to continue to look up to him for leadership, they shouldn't be surprised people can't get behind their vision for the future of the UK. That's all I'm saying.

[Alf Bentley]

15 hours ago, bovril said:

We're the only one that has little idea of what our relationship with the Single Market will be in 11 months time.

 

13 hours ago, MPH said:

scaremongering.

 

If I say "we have little idea what our result will be against Chelsea on Saturday", is that scaremongering?

It could be, depending on my intention in saying it. But it's also a statement of fact, like Bovril's comment is.

 

I'd guess that he probably has concerns that the uncertainty over the future EU-UK relationship will not end well. If so, I share his concerns.

You might be optimistic that everything will turn out well. Maybe it will, but there's an awful lot that could go wrong in trying to agree a massively complex agreement with a bloc of 27 nations, covering dozens of important issues, within a few months.

Especially when the UK has aims that apparently conflict: no alignment or level playing field & UK control of fisheries, yet a close trading relationship etc.

 

Here's Wikipedia on the facts, though: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Single_Market#Integration_of_non-EU_states

 

"The [Single Market] encompasses the EU member states, and has been extended, with exceptions, to Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway through the Agreement on the European Economic Area and to Switzerland through bilateral treaties.

A number of potential EU accession candidates have Stabilisation and Association Agreements with the EU, which allow for limited participation in selected sectors of the Single Market, including Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, North Macedonia, Montenegro, and Serbia. In addition, through three individual agreements on a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) with the EU, the post-Soviet countries of Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine have limited access to the Single Market in selected sectors. Turkey has access to the free movement of some goods via its membership in the EU-Turkey Customs Union. [...] Britain's future relationship with the single market is unknown, following the UK's decision to withdraw from the EU"

 

[They could have added that Russia has a Partnership and Cooperation Agreement.....not sure about Belarus....]

 

I'm not suggesting that UK-EU trade will end. It obviously won't. Neither am I suggesting that the EU-UK relationship will become conflictual (might get a bit frosty, maybe not even that bad). Personally, my guess is that some sort of basic agreement will be signed by December.....but one involving a lot more friction to trade & a lot less cooperation than before - and probably a lot more UK compromises than Brexiteers hope. It might not even be that good.....No Deal on the future relationship is a distinct possibility, as is the prospect of agreement only on certain issues, with others, including key UK issues like trade in services dragging on into 2021 and beyond.

 

I hope that everything turns out well, but there's a very real chance of major damage. That's only an opinion. What Bovril said is a statement of fact.

[Voll Blau]

12 minutes ago, Strokes said:

You can’t silence someone you disagree with mate, I know that’s hard for you lefties to understand.

 

I'm not trying to "silence" anyone. Of course it's his right to act like a pr1ck with a little placcy flag if he wants, or to keep spouting the kind of stuff he's spouted for the last two decades. I'm just saying, as my post above states, don't be shocked if there continues to be dissent and ill-feeling towards the pro-Leave movement if they choose to keep him as a totemistic figure for what they believe. Likewise, I'd say the same about pro-Remain supporters and the more annoying public figures who do their cause more harm than good in the eyes of the average person.

Edited 30 January 2020 by Voll Blau

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, Kopfkino said:

Of course she knows how it works but preening and posturing to her crowd on social media is far more important than being a decent, respectable politician. 

 

You see PM on AN last night, or when you see Blair or Brown or Johnson or even Ed Balls and you can be impressed by them, now ****ing Kier Starmer is the great white hope. How the mighty fall. 

Was going to mention this but you've beaten me to it.

 

You see how Labour became the machine it did with people like Mandelson organising the effort - whatever you think of him they knew exactly how to appeal to middle England and they knew what sort of approach and executions of public relations was needed to win elections.

 

They've replaced that machine with people who moved activists from Kensington to Uxbridge on election day as they fell for a fake Twitter account saying Boris was in trouble

[Guest MattP]

8 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

If pro-Brexit folks are going to continue to look up to him for leadership, they shouldn't be surprised people can't get behind their vision for the future of the UK. That's all I'm saying.

His party got about 2-3% in a General Election just last month. His idea of an immediate FTA/No Deal Brexit was rejected by the vast majority of leave voters who have gone for the Boris deal instead.

 

The British public and almost all "pro-Brexit folk" have given our government a mandate to try and negotiate a trade agreement with the EU - Farage was necessary to get to this point but his "vision" for Brexit was trounced.

[Alf Bentley]

14 minutes ago, Strokes said:

You can’t silence someone you disagree with mate, I know that’s hard for you lefties to understand.

 

Doesn't stop you righties trying, though, does it?

- Tried to stop our democratic representatives even voting on your Article 50 policy until courts intervened

- Gave the courts dog's abuse as "traitors" for challenging your anti-democratic move

- Tried to suspend democracy so as to push through the govt's will, when our democratic representatives disagreed with it

 

I'm sure you'll cite the "undemocratic" attempts to get a second referendum......but those were attempts (which I didn't support until the latter stages) to change policy, made using democratic means of campaigning, lobbying & voting.

 

[Jon the Hat]

3 hours ago, Voll Blau said:

OK, fair enough. I thought the Lib Dem MEPs' t-shirt stunt was crass a few months ago.

 

That said, whoever they are they don't have anywhere near the gravitas or pull of Farage, as the fact that neither of us recognised them goes to show. He's the figurehaead for the anti-EU movement in this country and has been for years. That's surely not in dispute by anyone on either side?

 

If pro-Brexit folks are going to continue to look up to him for leadership, they shouldn't be surprised people can't get behind their vision for the future of the UK. That's all I'm saying.

When anyone on the left offers us any acceptable vision of the future of the UK come back and talk to us about it won't you ?

Edited 30 January 2020 by Jon the Hat

[Innovindil]

16 minutes ago, Voll Blau said:

OK, fair enough. I thought the Lib Dem MEPs' t-shirt stunt was crass a few months ago.

 

That said, whoever they are they don't have anywhere near the gravitas or pull of Farage, as the fact that neither of us recognised them goes to show. He's the figurehaead for the anti-EU movement in this country and has been for years. That's surely not in dispute by anyone on either side?

 

If pro-Brexit folks are going to continue to look up to him for leadership, they shouldn't be surprised people can't get behind their vision for the future of the UK. That's all I'm saying.

Of course he has more gravitas, he's been at it for 20 odd years now ain't he. I'm just pointing out that unity comes from both sides, and if flag waving is bad form from one, it's bad form for the other. 

 

Again though, not sure where the whole brexit folk looking to him for leadership is coming from tbh, Boris steers this ship now as was shown when he didn't sign up to a pact with the Brexit party, or shown when he didn't offer Farage anything at all to do with it (as was suggested by some at the time). 

 

As far as I'm concerned, he's nothing more now than an independent noise bleater. 

[Jon the Hat]

5 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Doesn't stop you righties trying, though, does it?

- Tried to stop our democratic representatives even voting on your Article 50 policy until courts intervened

- Gave the courts dog's abuse as "traitors" for challenging your anti-democratic move

- Tried to suspend democracy so as to push through the govt's will, when our democratic representatives disagreed with it

 

I'm sure you'll cite the "undemocratic" attempts to get a second referendum......but those were attempts (which I didn't support until the latter stages) to change policy, made using democratic means of campaigning, lobbying & voting.

 

If you don't think the courts have seriously and disasterously overstepped their authority in the polical arena in the past year you have been blinded by the fact that you liked what they did.  Fortunately a majority saw if for what it was, along with the biased speaker (with the new speaker moving to put in place procedure to deal with that this week).  You wouldn't be so happy if Bercow had been pro-brexit.  Poor show.

Edited 30 January 2020 by Jon the Hat

[Mike Oxlong]

42 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Is there any evidence whatsoever that roaming charges will return?

 

Per the BBC:

If nothing is agreed then mobile operators would be able to implement roaming charges after the end of the transition period.

But the government has passed legislation that would provide some safeguards to consumers:

• A £45-a-month limit on the amount that customers could be charged for using mobile data abroad before having to opt into further use
• Requirements for customers to be informed when they have reached 80% and 100% of their data allowances
• Operators would have to take "reasonable steps" to avoid customers being charged for accidental roaming in Northern Ireland, which would happen if a phone in Northern Ireland locked onto the mobile signal coming from the Republic of Ireland.

Operators' plans

Of course, just because the operators might be allowed to reintroduce roaming charges, it does not necessarily mean that they would do so.

Three has no plans to bring them back in, regardless of how Brexit negotiations turn out.

Vodafone said it currently had no plans to change its roaming charges because of Brexit.

EE said: "Our customers enjoy inclusive roaming in Europe and we have no plans to change this based on the Brexit outcome."

And O2 said: "We currently have no plans to change our roaming services across Europe. We will be working closely with the UK government and other European mobile operators to try to maintain the current EU 'Roam like at home' arrangements once the UK leaves the EU."

Depends on the market I guess but there I’m cautious after the optimism  re banks and competitive pricing for overdrafts 

[Voll Blau]

15 minutes ago, MattP said:

His party got about 2-3% in a General Election just last month. His idea of an immediate FTA/No Deal Brexit was rejected by the vast majority of leave voters who have gone for the Boris deal instead.

 

The British public and almost all "pro-Brexit folk" have given our government a mandate to try and negotiate a trade agreement with the EU - Farage was necessary to get to this point but his "vision" for Brexit was trounced.

 

8 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Of course he has more gravitas, he's been at it for 20 odd years now ain't he. I'm just pointing out that unity comes from both sides, and if flag waving is bad form from one, it's bad form for the other. 

 

Again though, not sure where the whole brexit folk looking to him for leadership is coming from tbh, Boris steers this ship now as was shown when he didn't sign up to a pact with the Brexit party, or shown when he didn't offer Farage anything at all to do with it (as was suggested by some at the time). 

 

As far as I'm concerned, he's nothing more now than an independent noise bleater. 

Good. That's the point I was making! But if he continues to very publicly make noise and maintain relevance after tomorrow then I don't want to hear any bleating about how we all need to shut up and get on with supporting it. He's a national embarrassment, and stunts like that are just going to keep pro-EU folks feeling alienated.

 

 

8 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

When anyone on the left whos us any acceptable vision of the future of the UK come back and talk to us about it won't you ?

You what?

[Alf Bentley]

3 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

If you don't think the courts have seriously and disasterously overstepped their authority in the polical arena in the past year you have been blinded by the fact that you liked what they did.  Fortunately a majority saw if for what it was, along with the biased speaker (with the new speaker moving to put in place procedure to deal with that this week).  You wouldn't be so happy if Bercow had been pro-brexit.  Poor show.

 

Likewise, I could say that you have been blinded by not liking what the courts or Bercow did, though I hope that's not the case. Agree to disagree.

 

I genuinely support greater democracy and greater decentralization of power. I don't want to see an all-powerful executive (govt) ride roughshod over the elected legislature (parliament) or the judiciary (courts). So I genuinely supported the actions of the courts and of the Speaker (even though Bercow seems a horrible bloke) & was disgusted to see right-wing media whip up hate mobs against them. I saw Bercow as pro-parliament, not pro-Brexit (whatever his personal views) - it was parliament, not the speaker, who kept blocking earlier deals (& often right-wing Hard Brexiteers, not just lefty Remainers)

 

I'm making a pro-democracy point (as I see democracy), not a right/left point. I fumed just as much when Labour reneged on their electoral reform pledge after 1997 and when Campbell & co cooked up the "dodgy dossier" on Iraq. I'm well aware that left-wingers can be undemocratic as well as right-wingers (er, Stalin & Mao!).

 

I'm not happy about Brexit proceeding as I don't see it as good for this country.....but I fully accept it as a democratic decision, and don't really quibble about the lies and manipulation that have gone on, as that always happens in politics to varying degrees - opponents have to deal with that (and did so very badly in the case of the parliamentary opposition & people's vote campaign).

[Guest MattP]

14 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

Likewise, I could say that you have been blinded by not liking what the courts or Bercow did, though I hope that's not the case. Agree to disagree.

 

I genuinely support greater democracy and greater decentralization of power. I don't want to see an all-powerful executive (govt) ride roughshod over the elected legislature (parliament) or the judiciary (courts). So I genuinely supported the actions of the courts and of the Speaker (even though Bercow seems a horrible bloke) & was disgusted to see right-wing media whip up hate mobs against them. I saw Bercow as pro-parliament, not pro-Brexit (whatever his personal views) - it was parliament, not the speaker, who kept blocking earlier deals (& often right-wing Hard Brexiteers, not just lefty Remainers)

Speaking of the poison dwarf - Hoyle seems to be going out of his way to restore perception of impartiality in the chair since he has arrived which is most welcome.

 

If as Bercow so obviously did, a speaker now ignores the advice of the clerks to favour his own preferred side in a particular debate when ruling on a motion - the clerks will now be able to write their advice in the commons library to be seen by MP's.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51293344

 

And another chunk of John Bercow's legacy is chipped away...

His successor as Commons Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, has announced a new system for handling situations where the Chair makes a ruling that departs from Commons rules or traditions.

In his decade in the Chair, John Bercow stretched or, on occasions, shattered long-established conventions and the provisions of Commons standing orders.

Speaker Bercow's rulings on apparently technical questions, like the number of amendments that could be allowed in a debate on the 2013 Queen's Speech, the selection of amendments to supposedly unamendable "meaningful vote" motions and his interpretation of the meaning in standing orders of the word "forthwith" (which had previously meant that a motion was debated immediately, without the opportunity for amendments to be put) were all controversial, and the first two had serious repercussions.

It is arguable that his 2013 ruling, which effectively allowed Tory Brexiteers to put an amendment to the Queen's Speech calling for an EU referendum, was the first pebble in the Brexit avalanche.

 

But it serves to highlight where a Speaker uses their power in a way that seems to go against the rules and conventions.

Sir Lindsay said that in the interests of transparency, he was creating a new system modelled on the power of accounting officers in government departments to "seek ministerial direction" when they believe they are being told to do something that is against the rules or outside normal policy.

In effect, they are requesting a written instruction, which would override their advice.

A similar procedure will in future apply where in the opinion of the Clerk of the House, the top adviser to the Speaker and the Commons, a ruling amounts to a substantial breach of Commons standing orders or of long-established conventions.

In those circumstances, the Clerk will be able to place a statement of their views in the Commons library, where it would be available to all MPs.

The effect would be to provide extra ammunition to MPs who wanted to challenge a controversial ruling by the Speaker.

The announcement was greeted by loud cheers, mainly from Conservative MPs, as it became clear that the Speaker was, sort of, renouncing Bercowesque powers to rewrite the rules and announcing a system which would, potentially, limit the powers of his office.

[Gordon the Great]

On 17/01/2020 at 18:33, MattP said:

That's exactly what many of them should have done in 2016. Be unhappy, but then try to find compromise to implement the result.

 

Had they done that they wouldn't be sitting here now with Boris until 2024 with a 80 seat majority.

 

I still think a lot of the "people's vote" mob, for whatever reason, thought they could gamble it all but still be shielded from defeat in doing so, life isnt like that.

2024, me thinks you might need to amend that a few times over the next 15 years!

[Strokes]

58 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

Doesn't stop you righties trying, though, does it?

- Tried to stop our democratic representatives even voting on your Article 50 policy until courts intervened

By voting for the democratic referendum to take place, I felt it was deemed that the democratic decision was passed onto the people

 

58 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

- Gave the courts dog's abuse as "traitors" for challenging your anti-democratic move

By voting for the democratic referendum to take place, I felt it was deemed that the democratic decision was passed onto the people

58 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

- Tried to suspend democracy so as to push through the govt's will, when our democratic representatives disagreed with it.

The reasons for suspending democracy were not cited as this by the government but it wasn’t a move I agreed with.

58 minutes ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I'm sure you'll cite the "undemocratic" attempts to get a second referendum......but those were attempts (which I didn't support until the latter stages) to change policy, made using democratic means of campaigning, lobbying & voting.

 

Absolutely I would cite that. I don’t disagree both sides played unfairly.

My original comment was a bit tongue in cheek but the fact you seem to have taken it all so serious speaks volumes.

[leicsmac]

....It's all gotten a bit prickly in here, hasn't it?

 

3 hours ago, Strokes said:

What?

Are we bringing in other political areas now or still discussing what people see as the difference between the EU and Europe?

Fair enough, what you said is factually correct (though the bit about the EU is rather debatable opinion).

 

3 hours ago, Kopfkino said:

Guarantee we get to something to do with the environment and fundamentalists in the US. Its vitally to important to consider it when thinking about the distinction between the EU and Europe

For someone composed of marvellous intellect, your knowledge of fishing is sadly rather lacking, Kopf.

[Alf Bentley]

9 minutes ago, Strokes said:

 

By voting for the democratic referendum to take place, I felt it was deemed that the democratic decision was passed onto the people

 

The democratic decision to Leave/Remain was indeed passed onto the people. That's why, despite not liking the outcome, I felt that it had to be implemented - unless another democratic decision somehow reversed it (didn't happen).

 

But the referendum didn't decide when or how we should leave. The "how" was left to our govt to decide & negotiate and our parliament to approve/disapprove. Likewise, the "when" (approval/timing of Article 50 notification).

 

It would have been ridiculous if the referendum had somehow automatically triggered Article 50, as the govt wouldn't have been ready for the 2-year clock to start ticking.

It would also have been ridiculous to have called a referendum to allow "our sovereign, democratic parliament to take back control from unelected Brussels bureaucrats" - and then prevented parliament from having a say over how/when it was done!

But most Brexiteers were up in arms about "our sovereign parliament" having a say & then lambasted the courts as "traitors" for upholding our democratic system. Utterly shameful!

 

9 minutes ago, Strokes said:

The reasons for suspending democracy were not cited as this by the government but it wasn’t a move I agreed with.

 

Pleased to hear that you disagreed with prorogation. I always knew you were one of the cuddlier Brexiteers. I'd come round and give you a cuddle if I didn't have so much on. 

 

As for Boris not citing his anti-democratic reasons for prorogation, as Mandy Rice-Davies said: "He would say that, wouldn't he?" (In passing, I enjoyed that "Trial of Christine Keeler" series - only partly because they'd employed a couple of suitably fruity actresses to play Keeler & Rice-Davies). 

 

9 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Absolutely I would cite that. I don’t disagree both sides played unfairly.

 

Don't you see the difference between:

- Trying to prevent parliamentary debate & legal rulings on democracy, then trying to suspend parliament (anti-democratic abuse); and

- Trying to campaign & lobby democratic representatives to have a democratic vote put up for reconsideration by a 2nd referendum?

 

I can understand you disagreeing with the "People's Vote" campaign - indeed, I disagreed with it myself until the latter stages - but it was a democratic campaign, unlike the attempts to shut down parliament & courts....

 

Anyway, water under the bridge as they all failed anyway, democratic/undemocratic & Remainer/Brexiteer alike........and democracy prevailed in the form of that stupid election & the stupid outcome it produced. 

 

9 minutes ago, Strokes said:

My original comment was a bit tongue in cheek but the fact you seem to have taken it all so serious speaks volumes.

 

I take important issues like democracy and Brexit seriously.....but only up to a point. After all, each of us has all the impact of a grain of sand on a beach - and we all have to get on with real life & personal issues, whatever decisions are taken.

 

If you thought that I was irate about your comment ("you seem to have taken it all so serious"), you're mistaken. I just enjoy arguing the toss as I'm an argumentative tosser! 

 

Anyway, I'll have to be on here a bit less in coming days. After a quiet week, I've just got an urgent job to do for tomorrow, plus a large 2-week job to be done within 15 days.

Must be the Brexit boom.....everything's coming up roses!