REMAINIACS

ignoring the idiots in our northern territories any MP voting against triggering article 50 should be de-selected, say goodbye to

clegg
cooper
farron
smith etc etc

they will be

this boat has sailed, you won, get over it.

not so fast, not until we are out of Europe and free trade and immigration are stopped

don't trust the leftists and liberals and remainers, none of them have left Britain yet

Gina Miller's still up to her tricks

52 people tell 48 people what to do, what they should think, what they should say,
who they let into the Country,after all you're in charge now we should shut up
and let you run the whole show.Good luck with your plan.

Might well end up being on the right side of history yet. 

Was speaking to a politics lecturer over Christmas and he seemed to think that actually triggering Article 50 didn't mean we will end up leaving the EU. He thought it would be triggered but we still actually wouldn't end up leaving.  The referendum result itself is not binding.  The French didn't follow the results of their Maastricht referendum in the 90s because they thought it wasn't in their country's interests and he felt history would repeat itself.    Negotiations will be highly complex and we may not be able to strike a deal in our country's interests, that the complexity will mean it will spill over to the next parliament, which may well be a hung parliament with a different mandate.

probably a communist

I don't think politics in this country would survive another betrayal after the expenses scandal. A50 has to be followed through.

The fact that only Ireland, France and Denmark held referendums on the Maastricht Treaty ratification is astounding as it was a complete change of contract with state relationships and the onset of the European Union.

France voted 51% for by the way.

By the way Breeding mad,  TMay and Hammond are the new Cameron and Osbourne, all Remainers. So in fact the Remainers are still in charge and you still aren't happy.

As the saying goes " How do you know when a plane full of Remainers has landed?  the engines are turned off but you can still hear it whining!"

I said that I thought if the Tory's thought they could cling on to power whilst remaining in the EU they would, but that I thought that it would damage their share of the vote too much, and therefore they will go ahead with it in this parliament because it increases their chances of clinging on to power.  I didn't know the subject well enough to argue with him, just said what I instinctively feel.

Whatever a deal has to be negotiated which will be highly complex.  We won't just accept a deal because of the referendum result if the terms of the deal are a stitch up.

I have noticed in the real world not online, that those who voted Brexit
seem to have shut up not a squeak out of them.. maybe they are embarrassed as
it looks more and more like a a stupid decision especially in the present World
economic climate.Brexiters seem to think it is some sort of competition they have
won but they don't want to collect the prize in case they don't like it or are
afraid the prize isn't a prize at all..

Spot on breedingmad.

You only have to look at the faces of Gove and Johnson the morning after the vote. They were stunned that leave won and had the look of men who didn't have a clue what came next.

Why would we accept a deal if the terms and conditions are a stitch up? that is not what anyone voted for.

The A50 process is merely the divorce settlement were compromise for both sides is thrashed out. At the moment we are hearing what pompous politicians on both sides are inferring.
The actual deal will be complex like the Canadian one, but it will be bespoke for the UK.

You only have to look at the faces of Gove and Johnson the morning after the vote. They were stunned that leave won and had the look of men who didn't have a clue what came next.


This is a great argument, it really is......."you only have to look t the faces........"

This word "Hard Brexit" basically just means Brexit, there's  nothing Hard
about it, people full well knew it meant coming out of the single market, i doubt
anyone voted for Brexit thinking we might be staying in the single market

I don't buy this complexity argument.

We're leaving. The only deal that needs agreement is terms of trade, which has a fallback of WTO rules - I don't see why that should be so disastrous given that these guidelines apply already to (e.g) China which has a significant trading relationship with the EU.

Looks to me the last desperate attempt by 'remain' to scare people off leaving.

"people full well knew it meant coming out of the single market"

I bet quite a high percentage didn't have a fecking clue

plenty would struggle to name the prime minister

50% of the country probably couldn't even tell you roughly where Birmingham is on a UK map

Everything is complexed with the EU Room 0182, one thing is certain, there will be complexity.

However we need to stand firm and the EU drama queens will soon get the message.

You could say the same thing for Remain voters CLYDE.

Remember Holly the Remain activist who thought leaving the EU meant we'd no
longer be able to travel to Europe & we'd also lose the NHS

I think the E.U know we are a bunch of xenophobic backward looking whingers
who have no idea what the hell we are doing or what sort of future we are after..

Yes Zen, let me rephrase.

The complexity/difficulty of the process shouldn't be an excuse not to leave. If the EU decide to play silly b*ggers over trade, we can just smile and wait for WTO rules to kick in after 2 years.

Totally agree Room 0182,  reforming of the EU internally is far more complex. The Maastricht and Lisbon Treaties are nigh on unreadable.

Complexity is nothing new, it's just that we have the Remainers jumping up and down about it now.

So our WTO agreement would be tariff free as stated by Brexiters?

Tariffs work both ways, so depending on the weight of business from both sides will decide on the outcome of the tariffs.

There will be a bespoke deal with the UK, that much is certain. EU business leaders will be nervous as well.

There's no obligation to impose tariffs under WTO rules, just an upper limit.

Don't recall anyone ever suggesting WTO was tariff free.

Thank you you put it so simplistically you make it sound like this Brexit trade lark is
a piece of cake no problems there then!..

Sad that you sound like you hope there will be.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-deal-tariff-free-trade-...

Not sure I understand the point of that link.

Paul Joseph Watson ‏@PrisonPlanet  11m11 minutes ago
Saying 2016 was the "worst year ever" because some people you never knew died & you were defeated politically is incredibly stupid.

60% of our trade is with the E.U. if we sever access to the single market
to keep the xenophobes happy where do we pick up the trade we lose?

It's 44%.

We won't lose access to the single market, we just won't be in it. Just like every other non EU country in the world.

At least we can look forwards to hundreds more unelected Bureaucrats paid
thousands a week to untangle us from the unelected Brussels overpaid Bureaucratic regime

there is no need for Britain to trade tariff free with any European country, or even any need to trade with them at all.

anything they have we can produce. or buy elsewhere.

too many poor European countries, if this changes we might consider rejoining

"there is no need for Britain to trade tariff free with any European country, or even any need to trade with them at all. anything they have we can produce. or buy elsewhere."

If this were true, it works both ways.  The only difference is we would be severing trade with 27 countries, whereas they would be severing links with 1. 

Imagine pineapples are made in Hawaii and the Ivory Coast.  The cost of pineapples from Hawaii are three times the cost of them in the IC.  If I piss of the IC and they refuse to sell me pineapples, I won't care about paying three times as much.  ... plus the 15-20% extra I'm already paying because of the falling pound.

pineapples never crossed my mind, I am sure we could grow our own

Indoors, but might be quite expensive.  Perhaps some high tech specification greenhouses would help...  Now where to find them?

"First brought to Europe by Christopher Columbus in 1493, from the Caribbean island of Guadeloupe, pineapples remained a rare delicacy for centuries and hence became a symbol of wealth and hospitality. In the 18th century, a pineapple cost the equivalent of £5,000 today."

Pineapples are a common fruit these days, something you see cut up in your salad or on sale at the grocery store. However, in the 1700s the fruit's crown-like top and gem-like texture was seen as a symbol of wealth and power.

Originally from South America, pineapples were discovered by Christopher Columbus on one of his voyages to the New World. When he brought them back to Spain, many Europeans -- royalty in particular -- were completely taken by the delicacy. It was a rare, beautiful fruit most people had never encountered before and artists began incorporating pineapples in their work -- whether lavishly depicted in  a painting or elegantly carved into wooden furniture.

The pineapple made its way to England in the 17th century and by the 18th century, being seen with one was an instant indicator of wealth -- a single pineapple could cost the equivalent of $8,000 today. In fact, the fruit was so desirable and rare that consumers often rented a pineapple for the night to show off to fellow party-goers.

When someone says "lobster" some words that might come to mind are delicacy, fancy, luxurious and most dismally, market price. However, it wasn't always this way. Formerly regarded as "the cockroach of the sea" and fed to servants, migrants and even people's cats, lobster was the laughing stock of seafood. Regarded as a dish fit only for the poor, even having lobster shells in your house was looked upon as a sign of poverty. Yet today lobster is seen as the poshest of the posh, the cousin of caviar. So, how the hell did this happen?

It starts with industrialization. When the railways began to expand across America, transportation managers realized that if no one apart from people who lived on the coast knew what lobster was, trains could serve it to inland passengers as if it were a rare, exotic item. This plan seemed to work as people started demanding lobsters beyond the railways and it didn't hurt that around this same time in the late 1800s, chefs discovered lobsters tasted much better when cooked live. Restaurants, too, got the memo. Then during World War II, lobsters weren't rationed like other foods, and so people of all classes began to eat it and "discover" its deliciousness. By the 1950s, lobster established itself as a bona fide luxury food item.