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....

Interesting to some!

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-article50/british-government-cannot-stop-brexit-case-going-to-ecj-scottish-court-says-idUKKCN1ND1O5?feedType=nl&feedName=uktopnewsearly&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2018%20Template:%20LUNCH%20BREAK%20NEWS%202018-11-08&utm_term=NEW:%20UK%20Lunch%20Break


LONDON (Reuters) - Britain’s government cannot stop a case seeking to determine whether the country can unilaterally reverse Brexit - due to be considered by Europe’s top court on Nov. 27 - Scotland’s Court of Session ruled on Thursday.

Scottish politicians opposed to Britain leaving the European Union had successfully asked for a ruling to clarify whether Britain could withdraw its notification to leave without permission from the bloc’s other members.

Prime Minister Theresa May’s government, struggling to deliver Brexit, had argued that whether or not Britain could reverse the decision was immaterial, since the government had no intention of doing so. The government had asked for permission to appeal the case at Britain’s Supreme Court.

“The application for permission to appeal to the UK Supreme Court was refused,” a spokesman for the Court of Session said.

Scotland’s highest civil court agreed on Oct. 4 there was a case to be heard before the European Court of Justice.

The anti-Brexit petitioners aim to show that Britain has a legal unilateral option of staying in the world’s biggest trading bloc once it is known what the outcome of Brexit negotiations is.

Reporting by Elisabeth O'Leary; Editing by Michael Holden

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

Another waste of everyone's time and money by the moaners.

Only 141 days till the "Informed Referendum" now Dil.

Or put another way , 20 weeks and 1 day til we leave Stan.

Anyone know what time we actually leave ?

Hope it's about 12 noon , pub opens then.

Happy days.

Wake up little suzy.. wake up 😁

Well, I never!

Quelle dommage, Dilbert!

That should help his brother, and maybe that was the real intention.Blood being thicker than even left wing Labour supporters.

there are so many contradictory stories flying around, that it just shows that NOTHING you hear or read should be believed

fortunately, none of us can influence anything, so we may as well just get on with life and wait for the end result, whatever it is

When a butterfly like you flutters its wings what can be expected?

8-)

When a butterfly flutters its wings making a very small change in initial circumstances can have a signifcantly diffrent outcome in a later state.

It ain't over till the Fat Lady sings, ladies

:o)

I thought Jo Johnson was a singer hils , never heard of this one before this evenings news.

A no deal exit looking more and more likely imo and probably a lot of people's including my own preferred choice given the current alternative.

140 sleeps to go.

Labours Anna Sourpuss on Andrew Marr this morning , what a clown.

Couldn't explain how voting against a deal reached with the EU would lead to a better outcome rather than a no deal.

Also failed to explain how any of Labours six tests would be agreed to by the EU.

No wonder Fred is such a fan , they all live together in cloud cuckoo land.

Excellent article in today's Telegraph:

We will vote against a deal that prioritises the EU over the UK
STEVE BAKER
10 NOVEMBER 2018 • 9:07PM

The only plausible outline of a successful UK exit from the EU with a deal is obvious. It is the offer made by the EU, extended to the whole UK.

The deal offered would: ensure security cooperation and participation in institutions of research and innovation, culture and education; deal with potential absurdities like any threat to flights, data or the mutual recognition of our driving licences; and result in an advanced free trade agreement covering all sectors with zero tariffs, no quantitative restrictions and including services.

The obstacles to this deal are twofold: the border with Ireland must be made invisible and compliant in all circumstances, and the Prime Minister must ask for it.

The solution to the present impasse is to table a standalone treaty on trade facilitation with Ireland.

It would deliver an invisible, compliant border under WTO rules and it would be suitable for inclusion in the ultimate FTA as the Irish border protocol to the trade facilitation chapter. Ireland would have a permanent, legally enforceable backstop, consistent with all parties’ commitment to no hard border under any circumstances.

The EU would have a mechanism within their existing law for ensuring the integrity of the single market under WTO rules or an FTA. The whole UK would leave together, into a situation of self-government.

Unlike an Article 50-based backstop, the solution would be legally sure and therefore enduring.

Northern Ireland is in the frontline of the EU and Ireland’s demands, and the wrong Brexit would have implications for all parts of the UK. In Scotland, Unionists making the sound economic case for remaining in the UK’s internal market would have to explain why there are barriers to their trade with Northern Ireland.

Without an independent trade policy, Unionists could not bolster the unity of our country with improved access to key Northern Irish and Scottish markets in the USA and elsewhere. We would continue to look to Brussels and not our own Parliament for policy. And if the EU does steal away with the UK’s fish, what could the UK government say to Scottish fishermen who rightly counted on the UK Government to deliver them a fair share of the UK’s fish, only to see it negotiated away for nothing? Unionist MPs in Scotland would pay the price.

The current debate on the backstop - or the backstop to the backstop - is one no independent state should be having with its neighbours. The EU is demanding either that we split our country as we leave or that we remain under the structures of power of the EU without a voice in how that power is used.

If the EU believes it is entitled to break apart or subjugate the UK, then it is an outrage. But for the UK Government to entertain acquiescence in such an outrage would be a humiliation and a gross insult to people who sacrificed themselves through history to keep power under the consent of the governed.

We do not wish to see ‘no deal’ with our EU partners. We share the Prime Minister’s ambition for an EU free trade agreement, but not at any price and certainly not at the price of our Union.

If the Government makes the historic mistake of prioritising placating the EU over establishing an independent and whole UK, then regrettably we must vote against the deal. If Parliament is forced to reject the Government’s deal, then we will once again have called the bluff of vested interest lobbyists and Whitehall scaremongers. And again we will have made the right choice for our democracy and our Union.

(Steve Baker was a Brexit minister until July 2018 and is deputy chairman of the European Research Group. Sammy Wilson is the DUP's Brexit spokesman.)

Only another 139 days left before that ever growing demand for that informed referendum people is here.

Dil and Steve Baker should have been negotiating for the UK in 1913-14.


Or were they?

Perhaps, Exec was helping them.

Perhaps, in order to catch up, they should watch:

https://www.my5.tv/world-war-1-in-colour/season-1--2/world-war-1-in-colour

“Dil and Steve Baker should have been negotiating for the UK in 1913-14.


Or were they?

Perhaps, Exec was helping them.”

Fred I can’t speak for Exec or Baker but Dil’s “shoot to miss” policy was always going to take ages to settle anything...apparently he caught that policy from his football team 😀

Not long to the riots.