That's right - and if you got married and changed your name, they just sent the passport back to you with the old name crossed out and the new one written next to it. All very secure!
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Yes, there is and they've been quite clear on that. The issue is not that there's no viable deal it's that May's red lines prevent one.
Thought Mays deal was pretty much a soft brexit.
So basically we’re doing votes about votes?
Oh right, maybe mine has too then. I think you're supposed to send in old driving licences too but I haven't.
I could be wrong but isn't it somewhere in the middle of a hard and soft Brexit? which is why it keeps getting rejected, because it doesn't please leavers or remainers.
Can't remember, have had a french driving licence for more than ten years which has no expiry date.
We’re going to have a vote to invoke a democratic act of which the main argument against it is that it would be undemocratic to invoke this democratic act.
Wait am I reading this right , there will be proceedings concerning a second referendum?
Better than any other option mentioned on here or by anyone else apart from revoking Article 50 altogether.
MP's are mad.
GE - solves nothing unless winning party agrees to revoke A40 or do the EU/May WA
Referendum - total can of worms, probably solves nothing.
Norway - Pointless. Might as well revoke A50
CU Only - Possible. Upside - Irish solution, control of immigration. Downside - Money to pay, No independent trade deals, not free of ECJ (virtually pointless)
Sounds like many in PV campaign aren't happy about the tabling of the amendment today. I'd agree it's premature and should have come next week instead.
The government are also doing their usual trick of vaguely offering the same proposition as one of the amendments (indicative votes) so they can manipulate it's form. Hope parliament has learnt it's lesson and ignore them.
The government are also doing their usual trick of vaguely offering the same proposition as one of the amendments (indicative votes) so they can manipulate it's form. Hope parliament has learnt it's lesson and ignore them.
That would require a new Parliament and a new government though. The current one rejected May's deal twice, why would they accept an even softer deal?
Hope so!
Whilst to anyone with half a brain the bottom 2 are pointless, it's still technically leaving the EU and it's what I'd do if they were so hell bent on respecting the referendum result. Norway+ was offered by the EU and we should take it.
This is tough, I have to choose between no-deal and my country being crippled, or having to put up with this shite for another 21 months?
Norway + just means you're in the EU without a vote.
yes but it won't get passed - not enough support for it. Labour won't be supporting it, even though their members keep asking for it.
There is some value in what you say because from Norway we could at least rejoin in the future. But all our 'special treatments' will have gone and so we'd have to stomach the Euro and Shengen etc. Plus the Brixiteers have now been conditioned to think Norway is a sell out.
No deal and your country being crippled are the same thing
Surely putting up with any sort of shite to avoid that is worth it?
All deals without Mays red lines would be virtually pointless - may as well Remain.
Leaving without a deal would be too painful so not really an option.
May's deal sits between pointless and painful but at least provides for a comprehensive trade deal with the EU at the end.
It requires faith, goodwill and work on both sides to have any chance of success.
That is where our idiot MP's are sticking. They think the EU will shaft us.
But if I see it correctly there is no benefit in either side dragging their feet.
Well, EFTA not the EU. Although Norway have ruled out letting us join that anyway so it's a moot point.
Basically I think we should leave the EU in name only to honour the referendum result and deal with the domestic issues that have given rise to this entire shit show in the first place by ourselves.
I know you’re not fully serious but I’ve heard people say stuff like this for months. I’d rather people just stop watching the news for a while so that it’s sorted out properly than a car crash brexit
If the second ref amendment is rejected today, is there any hope for it in the future?
yeah that's why there wasn't a comma in between the two, I meant it as the same thing!
I'm not in any way serious, obviously I'd prefer the extension to them crashing out in 2 weeks.
Well there is certainly precedent for things being brought before parliament to be voted on again and again during this whole process anyway.
Yes EFTA plus the CU - but that is the most pointless of all. It honours the referendum result but the only other changes is that the UK loses its influence and still has to have the 4 freedoms, still send contributions and still can't make its own trade deals.
The EU would love this to be the UK's choice, this is their best option by far. Basically as you were without Farage. Win win.
Yeah. It's an amendment to todays motion, and there's an argument about why it's being moved, given that the motion is about an extension.
Firstly it is not utter horseshit. If you have taken the time to speak with and listen to so called Brexiteers you would realise that this is one of (but not only) cause of their dissatisfaction with the EU as THEY perceive it.
The logic in your post is perfectly understandable to me.
I was pointing out the views of many I speak with and remember you may think that way but the majority voted to leave.
Many people vote based on emotions and not logic.
You may not like it but it remains the truth.
Correct. That is a real risk.
So which half are you in ?
I don't think there's a chance of a second referendum getting the votes needed.
Best we can hope for is a two year extension.
Best we can hope for is a two year extension.
Said people should ask themselves that if the EU has been ruling us then what has the UK Parliament been doing for 40 years? Surely it would not have been necessary. Plus a large part of EU law making had substantial UK input. Then ask them to name a single EU directive that has caused them serious detriment - apart from straight bananas which would cause everyone detriment. Most of what has been passed into law in the EU has been readily adapted in the UK. People go on about things like Health and Safety directives etc. Know what. The UK is totally mad for such things. We uphold them better than any other country in the EU. Whole industries grow up around them.
We'll get to see which people vote down any 2nd ref vote right?
I can now read it the way you meant it (knowing in hindsight what you meant) and I apologise, but it could also have been read the way I originally read it too. You would not need the comma for the meaning I originally gleaned due to the conjunction. Not the end of the world, and was a little bit fussy on my part … which I hate in retrospect. so sorry again!
EDIT: I'm binning Grammerly app … it causes more problems than it fixes!
Yes, it was the same for the other amendments. It will be a nice stick to be certain MPs with.
Second ref should be pulled even the PV campaign is saying they won't advise to vote for it.
The government after making a big deal of parliament "not saying what it is for" is whipping against the amendment that allows them to do just that. Just no credibility
The government after making a big deal of parliament "not saying what it is for" is whipping against the amendment that allows them to do just that. Just no credibility