Brexit - The Final

I had a translator to work with patients, because understandably it would be a bit of a stretch to be able to learn French to the standard required to carry out a Parkinson's disease examination - especially the bits assessing verbal fluency.

Otherwise, I spoke enough to get by.
Histoire froide mon frère.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
He's been in the job for 3 months and this is one of the biggest FP challenges at the moment, why not visit the Parties involved and hear straight form the horses mouth what's going on rather than rely on garbled reports from Leaver and Remainer Press, and then go back and tell your colleagues
According to some on this thread, the Euro int agencies are so sh1t hot, he doesn't need to talk to any MP, the Fr & D spies would have already briefed him.

Or not.

Yup. We'll miss the Fr & D int input when we're gone.

Or not.

Eh, @dingerr?
 
You appear to have recognised that the Brexit fantasy went tits up long ago but are still not ready to admit it.
Do you think it’s ok to not be able to extricate ourselves from what was sold to the electorate as a trading community... and which we have now (obviously) voted to leave?

I’d have thought the logical conclusion of such acceptance of- and support for- EU Supremacy- would be the removal of the charade of a UK government?
 
Unionism still has the biggest voting base. Protestants still hold a majority of the population(Not that I believe, that's an automatic Unionist or Nationalist).

Ultimately it's for the SoS NI to decide if Nationalists would win a referendum..
I'm not sure that makes sense. Unionism, if in the majority, voted to remain within the EU, perhaps unexpectedly. Perhaps the desire to remain in the EU is strong enough to make people think again. It's the lesser of two "evils".......do they want to remain in the EU more than they don't want renunification?

The original question is whether there's a mechanism through which the SoSNI determines the prevailing mood, in order to meet his/her obligations under the GFA. I'm still no clearer on that.
 

rampant

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I see @Joe_Private has woken up to get another drink. Good idea - gotta keep those trembles away.


Though I do find it hard to have sympathy for someone who holds an awful attitude towards people who suffer from Parkinson's disease.
 
Last edited:
If that is what you think, then you're being naive at best. At every opportunity Bercow has made it quite clear that he doesn't support or respect the result of the referendum. He has conieved with a foreign entity to the detriment of the current goverment of who he is a member of.

The man is a duplicitous shit and all of his decisions need to be reviewed. The speaker must be and be SEEN to be impartial. Failure to be beyond reproach means he brings all the H.O.C procedures in question.

The remain camp had the audacity to state that Boris was acting illegally or breaking convention, that he was leading a coup. The only coup being performed at the moment is from those that wish to overturn a democratic vote.

If you think this is acceptable behaviour of the speaker of the H.O.C then you truly are a thunderc**t.

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
There is neither a written rule nor any 'constitutional convention' that requires decisions by a cabinet or a prime minister to be approved by parliament. The reason is that outwith periods of coalition government (e.g., ww2) Britains FPP system 'usually' returns a majority government that can rarely be outvoted.

Brexit changed that, first by facilitating the polarization not of party policies, but of Remainer v Brexit ideologies. For some MPs, party affiliation and policy succumbed to the percieved strength or weakness of argument on one side or the other; indiv.iduals crossed the floor; leaders misread the 'state of the nation' with a further strategic blunder that set the margin between government and opposition to the thinnest dimensions.........until it dissappeared altogether.

Constitutional convention would have resulted in a GE. But the fragmentery nature of the 'opposition' did little to instil confidence in any of the main groups. The resultant indecision created a vacumn which was unceremoniously exploited first, by the Speaker - desperately seeking his legacy project - and then by the 'rebellious Scots' who still have a nose for blood that has roots in the 'border reivers' exploits of the 13th-17th centuries.

These two exploitive disgraces were joined by a third which seized upon the insecurities exhibited by 'her majesties official opposition' and were/are percieved to indicate a ripe opportunity for a measure of lib-deminism/feminism advancement at the next GE. In doing so, the Speaker, the Rebel Scots, the Lib-Dem/Fems and Trotsky's private army are all seeking something different, but they are all, equally, willing to sustain a parliament that is broken, a government that is ineffective and a PM who has been schackled. At he same time, all are promoting not only policies that are inconsistent with the will of the people, but which are inconsistent with each other.

Rebel Scots - remain in Eu while leaving he UK
Lib D/Fems - cancel the referendum result, repeal article 50
Trotsky's - Maybe remai- maybe leave.......its up to the electorate!
Speaker - its up to all of the above.
 

Brotherton Lad

LE
Kit Reviewer
Do you think it’s ok to not be able to extricate ourselves from what was sold to the electorate as a trading community... and which we have now (obviously) voted to leave?

I’d have thought the logical conclusion of such acceptance of- and support for- EU Supremacy- would be the removal of the charade of a UK government?
I think it's absolutely OK, if that's what people still want. It's obviously not happening, though.
 

ACAB

LE
Good God! They're all coming out of the woodwork tonight!!!!
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
chuggafugga Brexit 18
Robbo_72 Brexit 50
retread2 Brexit 144

Latest Threads

Top