| Home | Log In | Register | Our Services | My Account | Contact | Help |
You are NOT currently logged in
Register now or login to post to this thread.
Referendum : to be in Europe or not to be ?, that is the question ! (REF)
required field - 03 Feb 2016 10:00
Thought I'd start a new thread as this is going to be a major talking point this year...have not made up my mind yet...(unlike bucksfizz)....but thinking of voting for an exit as Europe is not doing Britain any good at all it seems....
hilary
- 15 Jan 2019 10:40
- 11538 of 12628
Thanks for that, Fred.
That's a pity. Can't he just re-register with a different moniker? That's what plenty of others do.
Best regards,
Kylie Minogue
:o)
That's a pity. Can't he just re-register with a different moniker? That's what plenty of others do.
Best regards,
Kylie Minogue
:o)
cynic
- 15 Jan 2019 10:41
- 11539 of 12628
i told you it would cheer you up :-)
Fred1new
- 15 Jan 2019 10:42
- 11540 of 12628
To put in your pipe.
I think the longer T.May leave another election be greater will be the majority the labour party will have.
I will be the biggest chance labour will have to change the tax policies and economy of the UK.
They will sweep you away.
8-)
I think the longer T.May leave another election be greater will be the majority the labour party will have.
I will be the biggest chance labour will have to change the tax policies and economy of the UK.
They will sweep you away.
8-)
Dil
- 15 Jan 2019 11:58
- 11541 of 12628
I'd still like to know why
Atomic Kitten
Atomik Kitten
Atomick Kitten and
Nuclear Pussy
were all banned.
Maybe Bullie can remember :-)
Atomic Kitten
Atomik Kitten
Atomick Kitten and
Nuclear Pussy
were all banned.
Maybe Bullie can remember :-)
Dil
- 15 Jan 2019 12:07
- 11542 of 12628
Apparently it was ADVFN he banned them from.
He didn't like their music :-)
He didn't like their music :-)
hilary
- 15 Jan 2019 12:08
- 11543 of 12628
To be fair, he had a point.
:o)
:o)
hilary
- 15 Jan 2019 12:08
- 11544 of 12628
200 for me please, Dilbert.
Dil
- 15 Jan 2019 12:11
- 11545 of 12628
Bit optimistic for you isn't Hils ?
And if it's ok with you I'm off to the pub with a couple of mates for lunch at 1 and bit of sheep shagging after :-)
And if it's ok with you I'm off to the pub with a couple of mates for lunch at 1 and bit of sheep shagging after :-)
Dil
- 15 Jan 2019 12:13
- 11546 of 12628
Dil 148
Diane Abbott 2 trillion
Hils 200
Stan (ringing a friend for help with the question)
Diane Abbott 2 trillion
Hils 200
Stan (ringing a friend for help with the question)
hilary
- 15 Jan 2019 12:14
- 11547 of 12628
Don't forget to take some photos.
:o)
:o)
Fred1new
- 15 Jan 2019 13:11
- 11548 of 12628
Who is this Hilary impersonating a CNG?
iturama - 15 Jan 2019 14:01 - 11549 of 12628
Me 218 Dil. Stan needs more information and will come up with a number tomorrow.
Fred1new
- 15 Jan 2019 14:21
- 11550 of 12628
Whatever the figure is, it won't say much for the bunch of incompetents in government.
iturama - 15 Jan 2019 18:04 - 11551 of 12628
It was on the BBC so must be true.
There's a big problem facing members of Parliament who want to avoid a no-deal Brexit. They can't just show there is a majority in the House of Commons against no deal - they need to prove there is a majority in favour of an alternative outcome.
That's because leaving the EU - with or without a deal - is currently the default.
If the agreement the prime minister has negotiated with the EU fails to pass the House of Commons, the UK will leave with no deal at all unless something changes, because leaving the EU is written into UK law.
The EU Withdrawal Act sets 29 March as the date of departure.
The wording of the act does allow a minister to change the definition of "exit day" relatively quickly using a statutory instrument - a piece of secondary legislation - rather than an entirely new act of Parliament that would need to be debated. A minister would have to propose the change and MPs would have to approve it.
Article 50
But there is a second and more significant reason why no deal would become the default position: that's what EU law says.
Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is the formal route for any country leaving the EU and it allows for a two-year process of negotiation. At the end of that period "the treaties shall cease to apply to the state in question" unless Article 50 is extended or revoked.
The most obvious way therefore to stop a no-deal Brexit, or any form of Brexit, is to revoke Article 50.
The question is would Teresa May dare after all that Brexit means Brexit palaver?
There's a big problem facing members of Parliament who want to avoid a no-deal Brexit. They can't just show there is a majority in the House of Commons against no deal - they need to prove there is a majority in favour of an alternative outcome.
That's because leaving the EU - with or without a deal - is currently the default.
If the agreement the prime minister has negotiated with the EU fails to pass the House of Commons, the UK will leave with no deal at all unless something changes, because leaving the EU is written into UK law.
The EU Withdrawal Act sets 29 March as the date of departure.
The wording of the act does allow a minister to change the definition of "exit day" relatively quickly using a statutory instrument - a piece of secondary legislation - rather than an entirely new act of Parliament that would need to be debated. A minister would have to propose the change and MPs would have to approve it.
Article 50
But there is a second and more significant reason why no deal would become the default position: that's what EU law says.
Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty is the formal route for any country leaving the EU and it allows for a two-year process of negotiation. At the end of that period "the treaties shall cease to apply to the state in question" unless Article 50 is extended or revoked.
The most obvious way therefore to stop a no-deal Brexit, or any form of Brexit, is to revoke Article 50.
The question is would Teresa May dare after all that Brexit means Brexit palaver?
Claret Dragon
- 15 Jan 2019 18:19
- 11552 of 12628
Off for a meaningful pint down the Nuclear before the withdrawal agreement at the close.
Stan
- 15 Jan 2019 19:58
- 11553 of 12628
Vote lost 230 votes, informed referendum and remain wins.
What a complete and utter waste of time and money.
What a complete and utter waste of time and money.
Martini
- 15 Jan 2019 20:10
- 11554 of 12628
The exercising of parliamentary democracy can hardly be described as a waste of time. The theatre goes on. I want the box set.
Fred1new
- 15 Jan 2019 20:12
- 11555 of 12628
Do you mean the conservative club fees or blood donors?
Donors to the bribery funds seem to be needed!
-=-=
Manuel, Dil and IT, must be in the Brewery waiting for the party.
Donors to the bribery funds seem to be needed!
-=-=
Manuel, Dil and IT, must be in the Brewery waiting for the party.
Stan
- 15 Jan 2019 20:15
- 11556 of 12628
What for two and a half years? M the Joker.
Dil
- 15 Jan 2019 20:29
- 11557 of 12628
Well that's Mrs Mays shitty deal well and truly binned.
Can't wait til we leave with no deal and Scarlett Johansson turns up on my door step.
Happy days :-)
Can't wait til we leave with no deal and Scarlett Johansson turns up on my door step.
Happy days :-)
| About MoneyAM | Ts and Cs | Privacy Policy | Investment Warning | Content Standards | Corporate Solutions | Advertise With Us | Site Map | © 2025 MoneyAM |
Register now for FREE
Share Prices,
Stock Quotes,
Charts, Bulletin Boards, Indices, Watchlists, Portfolio, Market News, Research
or see our Premium Services including Level 2, Terminal and much more.
Follow us on Twitter