why did they anticipate a better deal than this?
They're politicians, any excuse will do.
why did they anticipate a better deal than this?
They're politicians, any excuse will do.
No I think it shows that what people voted for was never really clear. There were no set facts of what people would get, unlike the 1975 vote, which led to a myraid of different promises. Many of which are being shot down now.
Democracy being subverted is a giggle. It's a sound bite that doesn't mean much. Introduce online voting. That would liberate democracy. Piddeling around with whether the EU makes some laws on things like food safty is not subverting deocracy, its protecting people and trade.
The £39bn Mogg refers to was for previous fincial commitments made- pensions for EU officials, money promised to Syrian refugees, loan guarantees to Greece and Ukraine, money promised to Syrian refugees, migration schemes, etc. It is not a payment for favourable withdrawal conditions.
Mogg has a vested interest in the UK crashing out. His motivess are not politically motivated but financially.
why did they anticipate a better deal than this?
the deals we were offered?Because Canada, Korea, Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova have them
the deals we were offered?
the deals we were offered?
the technological solutions they said they would accept if proven but if we couldn't prove them then have a back stop? If we were confident there was one we could have just accepted the backstop (*there is no technological solution).And a new PM would accept and probably just squeeze through parliament.
We'd just need to get the EU to play ball over technological solutions to the Irish border.
There is no technical solution, it is a nonsence idea, and even if they somehow devised one it would take many many years to get working (and probably would be immediately vandalised). The tech solution is a red herring.And a new PM would accept and probably just squeeze through parliament.
We'd just need to get the EU to play ball over technological solutions to the Irish border.
the deals we were offered?
the technological solutions they said they would accept if proven but if we couldn't prove them then have a back stop? If we were confident there was one we could have just accepted the backstop (*there is no technological solution).
The better deal was the one we were offered and turned down, with the EU accepting a solution on NI but we were not confident so turned it down.
GB said they were better deals than this one, this one is our cookie cutter dealIts been done before, but this was the first way the EU decided to screw us. They knew no deal fully suited us, but refused to negotiate outside of the cookie cutter options they had.
The annoyance for me is that these existing cookie cutter options were all at one time negotiated, they werent the only original options when the EU was incepted.
It was a choice on their part to not even try to play ball.
OK put into practice with the backstop that won't be needed of it was possibleYou need some tracking chips and an agreed sampling checking rate at the origin and destination facilities. Parcelforce++. Perfectly within the intellectual wit of a species that has a permanently inhabited international space station.
GB said they were better deals than this one, this one is our cookie cutter deal
OK put into practice with the backstop that won't be needed of it was possible