Not really, my understanding is that it was more a secession, the back stop was the soft version which only included NI but then the UK rejected that too and asked for a UK wide back stop.
Brexit related judicial reviews: Supreme Court | Judgment: Prorogation was unlawful
- Thread starter owlo
- Start date
Not really, my understanding is that it was more a secession, the back stop was the soft version which only included NI but then the UK rejected that too and asked for a UK wide back stop.
He definitely doesn't, about any of this.
Yeah the new proposal is the one I would be delighted with and was gutted when the DUP scuppered it by forcing the Government to go for a UK wide version. Fingers crossed it happens.
I don't think answering a poll is assuming anything really.
Brexiteer's are basically flat earthers. You present them facts and they ignore them. You ask them questions they don't know the answer to, and they ignore them, all the while peddling their nonsense, looking like absolute fecktards of the highest order.
It's just the original back-stop before the DUP fecked it up.
So they offered no evidence to the High Court at all to support their argument, and then moan that the court made a mistake in not ruling in their favour
...It doesn't sound like the Judges even had a choice, never mind a decision to make.This is the idiots we have currently running the country and entrusted with organising Brexit. People who don't even understand how their own legal system works.
They could always appeal the decision to the EU...
Well I asked a leaver why he voted to leave on here before and he started going on about a United States of Europe being inevitable and that why we had to leave.
I'd say that's quite mental.
The thing is that nearly none of the 79% of people who answered that poll have the law background to support their answer.
To be fair, I don't think the poster should have to answer the question because well, his answer would be meaningless due to he small fact of them not being in the government...
Unless of course, they are in the government, in which case...carry on.
The usual remainer mantra. Brexiteers are all clueless etc
Well, you demonstrably are. Anyone that looks back over the car crash you've had today, or indeed anytime you deign to bless us with your presence, can see that.
You also claimed that you were representative of all Leave voters, so you've not really left us with much option, have you?
But it wasn't a backstop because NI were simply remaining. In the backstop, NI leaves unless the EU and the UK can't agree on a suitable deal and that was only for NI but the UK then asked to include everyone in that deal. The original proposition is supposed to not be a backstop.
They had probably seen that wacko european Lib Dem guy banging on about it.
And yes, he's quite mental. Unhinged even. Thankfully part of a deluded minority.
So it is the EU, not the UK, which insists on the Backstop ?
And which hundreds of UK politicians said is unacceptable to have one part of the UK treated differently than the rest of the UK, so no way was WDA including the backstop going to get through the HoC.
Cast your mind back about an hour ago - I said the EU insisted on conditions which would ensure the WDA would not be accepted in the HoC and the UK would remain trapped in the EU until.....
They're stupid but they saw an opening and grabbed it.
So essentially you are saying that nobody should be expected to have an opinion on the back-stop or what alternatives might be an option unless they are in the Government?
Ok - can somebody shut this thread down please now unless we have an MP here.
What? It's a straight question and answer poll or not.
The only answer for 99% of people to "are the supreme correct?" Should be 'I wouldn't have a clue if they weren't so I'll say yes because they're the fecking experts".
I forget we're still in the realms of opinion being as valid as experts.
Did you even read his post?
Obviously the problem is for the EU to solve, as it is the EU who have made it an obstacle in order to protect the integrity of their customs union. The UK and Ireland do not want a hard border, but the EU are forcing the Brits to come up with a solution that maintains integrity. The answer is, can the EU compromise in order to solve a difficult situation? Of course they can, but will want to be compensated heavily as part of ongoing negotiations. I'm sure the EU will find an answer easily if we accepted May's deal. This is what they'll go for I think, but we'll see.
Huh? Yes, it is the EU. I answered your question. The feck are you rambling on about?
What's the alternative to the backstop if the EU are insisting on it? Tell me.
Having an opinion isn't the same as demanding answers to something a person has absolutely no ability to influence.
If you want answers, contact the relevant people. Randomers on a forum will not be able to provide a sufficient answer.
The worrying thing about all this is that this chaos, this breaking of the rules and breaking of the system is all part of a political strategy devised by Steve Bannon and while it may seem like a series of defeats for Boris and the Government, Bannon and the other strategists that have been advising Boris will probably view this as a series of wins as the usual political protocols are out the window and they get to refine and propagate their messages of deep state elites doing dark work in order to fire their right wing base up.
If there is a deal, me reckons it's Arlene Foster and her goons getting fecked.
Yeah the back-stop is meant to be temporary until the UK can come up with alternative arrangements. The problem is that everybody knows there are no alternative arrangements which essentially means it will be of indefinite length. Personally I have no problem with that.
No, it's both sides. They both agreed to respect the GFA.
They are literally just saying they agree or disagree.
Beyond that nothing.
And judges are not experts. The clue is in the name.
Sorry but shouldn't the UK have a solution to the problem as it was the UK who initiated this process in the first place? Is that not unreasonable? By the way the EU already have offered a solution to the problem which is more than the UK ever has.
Judges are experts on the law - they were making a legal judgement - of course they are experts. What is this nonsense? You think you have heard it all but this thread just keeps on giving.
Yet they'll complain about being called clueless in spite of repeatedly showing themselves to be exactly that.
Regardless of if anyone here is in government or not, you can't just come on here saying the EU will drop the backstop and expect not to be asked what it will be replaced with.
fecking hell
Wasn't expecting a positive verdict let alone a unanimous one, unreal. Begs the question as to what the High Court were doing.
I think that if somebody has a strong view on something and is willing to put them forward then they should be expected to have some thought on how they might back it up rather than just throwing out comments and simply refusing to answer a direct question on it.
How can this be? NI don't want a hard border and it was their country(in part) that initiated the process. Why should it be up to the EU to provide solutions cause the UK cannot sort its politics out? The UK can leave tomorrow if it wants.
They should and are the biggest experts on the law in your country.
Got to say it’s very entertaining reading this thread as an outsider.
But the UK can't - HoC has democratically voted that they can't, three times if I remember correctly, that they won't accept the backstop, and therefore the GFA by implication, in the same way that it democratically voted that the UK can't leave the EU without a WDA.
Hard border it is then from the EU and / or RoI - which stuffs the GFA.
I wonder who'll build the Border Posts first ?? UK or EU ??
But you are aren't you?
I distinctly remember this post:
Bloody supreme court judges not knowing how our democracy works.
Which is the entire problem. The UK can't agree with itself and want things that are contradictory.
A hard border will 100% happen in a no-deal scenario.
I wish I could look at this and laugh as an outsider, unfortunately there is nothing to laugh about from where I am sitting.