The EU Referendum - Thursday 23 June (with voting poll)

First topic message reminder :

Munchkin wrote:

Nico the gman wrote:Whether people like it or not the country voted to leave the EU and I don't think there's a cat in hells chance of a 2nd Referendum, those who did fail to vote and wanted to remain have in my opinion no argument.

I don't think a 2nd referendum will happen. I do think a 2nd referendum would vote Remain, even if the exact same voters come out.

Quite possibly.

ShahenshahG wrote:

Munchkin wrote:May will be PM by Wednesday. That was quick.

Pm's Premature Ejaculation

Hopefully it doesn't prove to be.

Tomorrow is Cameron's last PMQT. I feel kind of bad for the guy, but he's really fallen on his own sword.

Hold on to that sympathy once the financial implications really bite.

Munchkin wrote:May will be PM by Wednesday. That was quick.

David wants to get away now. We all know the feeling. When you've said you're going, you instantly hate lingering around.

Now how to stall the button pressing, for THAT is the question.

Of course, all of a sudden the propaganda will be that Theresa is not now the experienced mover ready to take the reins of Power in an instant. Instead, she'll be described as someone needing to get a handle on the job first before committing to any buttons.

"Hurry ze f**k up, you Briteesh p*gs!!!!" cries Juncker.
May sighs regally: "Could someone tell that GHASTLY little man that one does not rush lunch or slurp wine. Indigestion and flatulence is for the native stock on yonder Foreign den of demons and whores called the EU!"

SecretFly wrote:

Munchkin wrote:May will be PM by Wednesday. That was quick.

David wants to get away now.  We all know the feeling.  When you've said you're going, you instantly hate lingering around.

Now how to stall the button pressing, for THAT is the question.

Of course, all of a sudden the propaganda will be that Theresa is not now the experienced mover ready to take the reins of Power in an instant.  Instead, she'll be described as someone needing to get a handle on the job first before committing to any buttons.

"Hurry ze f**k up, you Briteesh p*gs!!!!" cries Juncker.
May sighs regally: "Could someone tell that GHASTLY little man that one does not rush lunch or slurp wine.  Indigestion and flatulence is for the native stock on yonder Foreign den of demons and whores called the EU!"

And it's a question that is under more pressure now that Cameron has been replaced so quickly.

Stuff Junker. Hopefully the autocrat wannabee is booted out soon.

Well, that escalated quickly.

And to the tune of Craaaaiigg Davvviidddd:

New PM by Wednesday
Pushed Brexit button Thursday
Country bombs in to ruins on Friday, Saturday Sunday and Monday and for all f***ing eternity!!!!!!

Coxy001 wrote:Well, that escalated quickly.

And to the tune of Craaaaiigg Davvviidddd:

New PM by Wednesday
Pushed Brexit button Thursday
Country bombs in to ruins on Friday, Saturday Sunday and Monday and for all f***ing eternity!!!!!!

...Tuesday lots of coffee to get over the Great Armageddon hangover,
Wednesday back to work,
Thursday the child-minder says she's emigrating to Australia (if she can afford the rowing boat)
Friday hire Leadsom instead and go Party!!!!!

So the cohort of people who chose the PM doesn't even include the 150K Conservative part members. Go Democracy....

lostinwales wrote:So the cohort of people who chose the PM doesn't even include the 150K Conservative part members. Go Democracy....

With Leadsom bowing out they had no one vote for.

I was available. Did they ask me? How much does the Prime Minister get paid...after expenses?

SecretFly wrote:I was available.  Did they ask me?  How much does the Prime Minister get paid...after expenses?

Difficult to say, but £143k + fictional expenses + after dinner speaking + brown envelopes. So about £3 million.

Nice! They don't know what they missed by not even sounding me out on it - basterdes!

It's an Etonian conspiracy, Fly o0

SecretFly wrote:I was available.  Did they ask me?  How much does the Prime Minister get paid...after expenses?

Sorry. PM's can only be English or Scottish (if they can drop the accent).

Munchkin wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I was available.  Did they ask me?  How much does the Prime Minister get paid...after expenses?

Difficult to say, but £143k + fictional expenses + after dinner speaking + brown envelopes. So about £3 million.

To be fair to Cameron he only had to repay £680. That makes him one of the good guys....

Obviously having a free plush house in the middle of London, free and highly secure transport and a minted wife doesn't quite cut it.

This is worth a re-hash:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/panama-papers-sir-alan-duncan-mp-speaking-in-defence-of-david-cameron-critcised-for-decrying-low-a6979826.html

This was a man "demoted" from the Shadow Cabinet for not only making improper claims of up to £5000 for doing up his garden, but had the brass neck to actually defend his actions, claiming that MP had to "live on rations" (£64k a year at the time).

He is still an MP and has a Knighthood. A "high achiever" indeed.

lostinwales wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I was available.  Did they ask me?  How much does the Prime Minister get paid...after expenses?

Sorry. PM's can only be English or Scottish (if they can drop the accent).

Yis didn't tell the Welsh yet?


.......if Phil hears this, well..................... well.................... I'm off!

lostinwales wrote:

SecretFly wrote:I was available.  Did they ask me?  How much does the Prime Minister get paid...after expenses?

Sorry. PM's can only be English or Scottish (if they can drop the accent).

It's true. If only Kinnock wasn't Welsh, we could have elected him.

Parallels with the past.

1983 Michael Foot was leader of the Labour party in opposition to Maggie Thatcher

wikipedia wrote:Foot's strongly left-wing political positions and criticisms of vacillating leadership made him an unpopular leader. Not particularly telegenic, he was also nicknamed "Worzel Gummidge" for his rumpled appearance. A right-wing faction of the party broke away to form the Social Democratic Party. Foot led Labour into the 1983 general election, when the party obtained its lowest share of the vote at a general election since 1918 and the fewest parliamentary seats it had had at any time since before 1945. He resigned after the election.

So it's not Theresa May push the button, it's Theresa Will push the button.

So, here's how it plays out. She pushes the button on Wednesday ... Doomsday happens, country on it's knees. We beg the eu to be back in, on thursday, subject to a new referendum on Friday. (I'm sure coxy can turn that into a Craig David song).

The referendum votes to go back in (it's a 'remain independent' or 'leave independence' vote so most of last times leave voters Vote leave again by mistake.

The EU let us back in on the same terms, a lesson has been learnt for any other country looking to leave the eu, so they're happy. The will of the British public has been honoured... Twice infact... As the wishes of the first referendum were honoured.

Problem solved by the weekend. Simples.

SecretFly wrote:I was available.  Did they ask me?  How much does the Prime Minister get paid...after expenses?

Well....

It's less than at least 1000 members of EU staff that no-one knows the names of, or what they actually do.

lostinwales wrote:Parallels with the past.

1983 Michael Foot was leader of the Labour party in opposition to Maggie Thatcher

wikipedia wrote:Foot's strongly left-wing political positions and criticisms of vacillating leadership made him an unpopular leader. Not particularly telegenic, he was also nicknamed "Worzel Gummidge" for his rumpled appearance. A right-wing faction of the party broke away to form the Social Democratic Party. Foot led Labour into the 1983 general election, when the party obtained its lowest share of the vote at a general election since 1918 and the fewest parliamentary seats it had had at any time since before 1945. He resigned after the election.

Foot got 37 percent in 83....That is despite his party being split by the SDP..

That's a higher percentage than Brown..Miliband and Probably Blair in 2005..

I have no idea what he was like or his policies..

But he don't seem to bad on paper.

Foot was a genuinely decent man and in his day a fine soap box speaker, who unfortunately was getting on a bit and wasn't suited to TV. The wiki article probably flatters his public appearance. He got butchered by the Maggie friendly media.

So the Labour Party learnt their lesson and replaced him with another decent man who wasn't suited to tv, the flustered balding ginger kinnock... who got butchered by the Maggie friendly media.

lostinwales wrote:Parallels with the past.

1983 Michael Foot was leader of the Labour party in opposition to Maggie Thatcher

wikipedia wrote:Foot's strongly left-wing political positions and criticisms of vacillating leadership made him an unpopular leader. Not particularly telegenic, he was also nicknamed "Worzel Gummidge" for his rumpled appearance. A right-wing faction of the party broke away to form the Social Democratic Party. Foot led Labour into the 1983 general election, when the party obtained its lowest share of the vote at a general election since 1918 and the fewest parliamentary seats it had had at any time since before 1945. He resigned after the election.

.....and remember, unlike Corbyn, Foot was actually really clever and a genuine thinker of the left. Corbyn is, in many respects, "Foot-lite". In fact he's more like Benn Snr, but without the passion and oratory skills, and with the baggage of various accusations of anti-Semitism and pro- (/not opposed to/"friends" of) various terrorist organisations.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Parallels with the past.

1983 Michael Foot was leader of the Labour party in opposition to Maggie Thatcher

wikipedia wrote:Foot's strongly left-wing political positions and criticisms of vacillating leadership made him an unpopular leader. Not particularly telegenic, he was also nicknamed "Worzel Gummidge" for his rumpled appearance. A right-wing faction of the party broke away to form the Social Democratic Party. Foot led Labour into the 1983 general election, when the party obtained its lowest share of the vote at a general election since 1918 and the fewest parliamentary seats it had had at any time since before 1945. He resigned after the election.

Foot got 37 percent in 83....That is despite his party being split by the SDP..

That's a higher percentage than Brown..Miliband and Probably Blair in 2005..

I have no idea what he was like or his policies..

But he don't seem to bad on paper.

I don't know what he was like when he was younger but by this time he was a bumbling idiot at a time when the Labour party was having a lot of trouble with far left activists. The liberal party was almost nowhere. A significant chunk of the labour MP's broke away to form the social democrats who eventually merged with the Liberals (hence the liberal democrats name). As for the Labour party Kinnock came in and managed to defeat the far left and came within a whisper of winning the election in 1992, after which he quit. 5 years later Blair did win, and before Iraq and all the other problems that day when he came to power in May 97 was a glorious moment.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Parallels with the past.

1983 Michael Foot was leader of the Labour party in opposition to Maggie Thatcher

wikipedia wrote:Foot's strongly left-wing political positions and criticisms of vacillating leadership made him an unpopular leader. Not particularly telegenic, he was also nicknamed "Worzel Gummidge" for his rumpled appearance. A right-wing faction of the party broke away to form the Social Democratic Party. Foot led Labour into the 1983 general election, when the party obtained its lowest share of the vote at a general election since 1918 and the fewest parliamentary seats it had had at any time since before 1945. He resigned after the election.

Foot got 37 percent in 83....That is despite his party being split by the SDP..

That's a higher percentage than Brown..Miliband and Probably Blair in 2005..

I have no idea what he was like or his policies..

But he don't seem to bad on paper.

Blair's share of the popular vote in 2005 was 35.2% (lowest for a majority government apparently), but he still won a comfortable majority of seats.

Foot's popular vote was actually 27.6%. Not sure where you got the 37% figure from (think you might be talking about Callaghan in 1979).

Labour got 700,000 more votes in 1983 than the SDP/Liberal alliance, yet won 186 more seats!

funnyExiledScot wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Parallels with the past.

1983 Michael Foot was leader of the Labour party in opposition to Maggie Thatcher

wikipedia wrote:Foot's strongly left-wing political positions and criticisms of vacillating leadership made him an unpopular leader. Not particularly telegenic, he was also nicknamed "Worzel Gummidge" for his rumpled appearance. A right-wing faction of the party broke away to form the Social Democratic Party. Foot led Labour into the 1983 general election, when the party obtained its lowest share of the vote at a general election since 1918 and the fewest parliamentary seats it had had at any time since before 1945. He resigned after the election.

Foot got 37 percent in 83....That is despite his party being split by the SDP..

That's a higher percentage than Brown..Miliband and Probably Blair in 2005..

I have no idea what he was like or his policies..

But he don't seem to bad on paper.

Blair's share of the popular vote in 2005 was 35.2% (lowest for a majority government apparently), but he still won a comfortable majority of seats.

Foot's popular vote was actually 27.6%. Not sure where you got the 37% figure from (think you might be talking about Callaghan in 1979).

You're right I'm wrong...But 28 percent with a break off party doesn't seem too bad...

Think the SDP may have kept Thatcher in power...

I don't subscribe to the view that the SDP was responsible for keeping Thatcher in power.

Those that formed it did so because Labour had lurched far left and even had Labour won, would take the country in the wrong direction (in their view).

If there was to be a split in the current Labour Party, I think it would be wrong to blame those that left for the inevitable Tory victory at the next General Election (whenever that will be). I blame Corbyn and those that voted for him. You don't win UK General Elections on a platform of wanting a republic, re-nationalising industry, scrapping nuclear weapons and, as a likely side effect, leaving NATO (as well as the EU), breaking historically friendly ties with the US and failing to denounce and hold responsible terrorist organisations for their actions. You don't win UK General Elections by mumbling and bumbling your way through Prime Ministers Questions, for just reading out questions from the public and offering no challenge by way of follow-up and, when it came to the biggest issue put to the British public I can remember, for saying that you were "7/10" on it.

Corbyn is weak and dangerous. If he survives the challenge from Eagle (also a poor choice but hopefully just a means to an end in terms of ditching Corbyn) then I would strongly encourage supporters and members to abandon Labour and either join the Lib Dems, or create a new centre/left party on the principles of New Labour.

Perhaps you're right I have no real handle on the Foot tenureship..

We both agree that Corbyn has to go...

Don't think Eagle is the one though..

Big fan of Stella Creasey...Attractive...likeable....comes across as caring..center grounded..

With a probable recession coming...All the qualities one needs..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Perhaps you're right I have no real handle on the Foot tenureship..

We both agree that Corbyn has to go...

Don't think Eagle is the one though..

Big fan of Stella Creasey...Attractive...likeable....comes across as caring..center grounded..

With a probable recession coming...All the qualities one needs..

Agree 100%. Probably a bit young, but I'd have her front and centre of the shadow cabinet.

You know she's good when the "progressive" Momentum group has been doing its utmost to unseat her.

funnyExiledScot wrote:I don't subscribe to the view that the SDP was responsible for keeping Thatcher in power.

Those that formed it did so because Labour had lurched far left and even had Labour won, would take the country in the wrong direction (in their view).

If there was to be a split in the current Labour Party, I think it would be wrong to blame those that left for the inevitable Tory victory at the next General Election (whenever that will be). I blame Corbyn and those that voted for him. You don't win UK General Elections on a platform of wanting a republic, re-nationalising industry, scrapping nuclear weapons and, as a likely side effect, leaving NATO (as well as the EU), breaking historically friendly ties with the US and failing to denounce and hold responsible terrorist organisations for their actions. You don't win UK General Elections by mumbling and bumbling your way through Prime Ministers Questions, for just reading out questions from the public and offering no challenge by way of follow-up and, when it came to the biggest issue put to the British public I can remember, for saying that you were "7/10" on it.

Corbyn is weak and dangerous. If he survives the challenge from Eagle (also a poor choice but hopefully just a means to an end in terms of ditching Corbyn) then I would strongly encourage supporters and members to abandon Labour and either join the Lib Dems, or create a new centre/left party on the principles of New Labour.

1983 Maggie Thatcher was still basking in the warm glow in the aftermath of the Falklands war. Her reputation went up hugely at a time when overall the UK had not been doing so well.

Labour had militant tendency....

The coy, pretend-subtle hypocrisy that circles the Political world can be quite striking.

Leadsom was practically tarred and feathered for alluding to her notion that having a kid or two allowed her to have more of a stake in the future.
It was an opinion that could easily have been challenged and opposed in more conventional debating terms - but no, it was portrayed as a Crime against Humanity by the seasonal PC police - mostly the female sect of that cult on this occasion.  The Cheek of her!  The outrageousness of such an opinion!.  The offence to childless women (and I assume childless men?)

But onwards, and now this politician called Eagle openly says that a good reason for voting for her is because she's a woman.

?  You're a what?

That's all she has?  'Vote for me coz I'm a woman?'  She even goes further, vote for her because she's a woman, and do so because the Conservatives are going to get a woman.  It's like a schoolyard: "We want what they're having! - And we want it now!"

Maybe Corbyn should add now that he's a MAN and is therefore obviously more qualified in gender terms to Lead a Political Party?

SecretFly wrote:But onwards, and now this politician called Eagle openly says that a good reason for voting for her is because she's a woman.

The usual backward thinking of the Labour Party, obsessed with identity politics, the same as Yvette Cooper last year.

All the way back in 1979, Mrs. Thatcher got it perfectly right when she said: "Does it really matter if it's [a leader] a man or a woman? Isn't it just best to get it right?"

You're a labour party member you said Duty.

I think having children can make a tremendous difference (did to me) but that it doesn't mean it will, nor does it mean that the childless will necessarily suffer in comparison.

The fact that the issue came up with Leadsome at all suggests that she didn't get as much out of the experience as could have been hoped.

No 7&1/2 wrote:You're a labour party member you said Duty.

No I didn't. No I'm not.

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:You're a labour party member you said Duty.

No I didn't. No I'm not.

Ah sorry, I've misunderstood when you wrote 'Hope Jeremy hangs in there.

He only needs to get on the ballot paper and he'll be victorious (and if you need my vote again Jeremy, just holler).'.

lostinwales wrote:I think having children can make a tremendous difference (did to me) but that it doesn't mean it will, nor does it mean that the childless will necessarily suffer in comparison.

The fact that the issue came up with Leadsome at all suggests that she didn't get as much out of the experience as could have been hoped.

And she was a woman, which weakened her case anyway. The Conservatives were right, the chose a woman instead. Wise move.

funnyExiledScot wrote:I don't subscribe to the view that the SDP was responsible for keeping Thatcher in power.

Those that formed it did so because Labour had lurched far left and even had Labour won, would take the country in the wrong direction (in their view).

If there was to be a split in the current Labour Party, I think it would be wrong to blame those that left for the inevitable Tory victory at the next General Election (whenever that will be). I blame Corbyn and those that voted for him. You don't win UK General Elections on a platform of wanting a republic, re-nationalising industry, scrapping nuclear weapons and, as a likely side effect, leaving NATO (as well as the EU), breaking historically friendly ties with the US and failing to denounce and hold responsible terrorist organisations for their actions. You don't win UK General Elections by mumbling and bumbling your way through Prime Ministers Questions, for just reading out questions from the public and offering no challenge by way of follow-up and, when it came to the biggest issue put to the British public I can remember, for saying that you were "7/10" on it.

Corbyn is weak and dangerous. If he survives the challenge from Eagle (also a poor choice but hopefully just a means to an end in terms of ditching Corbyn) then I would strongly encourage supporters and members to abandon Labour and either join the Lib Dems, or create a new centre/left party on the principles of New Labour.

At the time it was a neat trick. But as far as I can remember (or its been reported) he only did it the once. I am struggling to think of anything of note he has actually done since.

We desperately need a viable opposition in this country, regardless of which party actually forms the government. Andrea Leadsome is a perfect example of what we could end up with if we don't. Whatever his personal qualities Corbyn is part laughable, part scary and part invisible. He is anything but an effective leader of the opposition. Cameron for once had it absolutely right when he said Corbyn was good for the conservative party but bad for Britain. All he had to do was show some leadership, consistency and authority during the BREXIT campaign and he'd be riding high in the polls. He absolutely failed in that.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36771595

German industrial giant Siemens has said it will continue to invest in the UK, despite earlier warnings that a vote to leave the EU could affect its future activities in the country.

Siemens chief executive Joe Kaeser told a number of media organisations that the company remained fully committed to manufacturing in the UK.

At an event at the House of Commons, Mr Kaeser said the UK continued to matter and be a "good place to do business" whether it was inside or outside the EU.

But he called on Theresa May to clarify the UK's trade position as soon as possible to give business some certainty.

The rubbish of the Remain side continually exposed as, shock horror, companies still want to do business in the UK despite us leaving a decaying political union!

Duty281 wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36771595

German industrial giant Siemens has said it will continue to invest in the UK, despite earlier warnings that a vote to leave the EU could affect its future activities in the country.

Siemens chief executive Joe Kaeser told a number of media organisations that the company remained fully committed to manufacturing in the UK.

At an event at the House of Commons, Mr Kaeser said the UK continued to matter and be a "good place to do business" whether it was inside or outside the EU.

But he called on Theresa May to clarify the UK's trade position as soon as possible to give business some certainty.

The rubbish of the Remain side continually exposed as, shock horror, companies still want to do business in the UK despite us leaving a decaying political union!

Or we could have chosen to stay in and then we wouldn't need to make so much fuss over these kinds of statements in the first place.

Also worth pointing out yet again that we haven't actually left yet...

Think the fact she lied about the title of nearly every job she had hurt her worse than the cheap "Child-less" pop at May..

Trust issues are always must worrying.

funnyExiledScot wrote:

If there was to be a split in the current Labour Party, I think it would be wrong to blame those that left for the inevitable Tory victory at the next General Election (whenever that will be). I blame Corbyn and those that voted for him. You don't win UK General Elections on a platform of wanting a republic, re-nationalising industry, scrapping nuclear weapons and, as a likely side effect, leaving NATO (as well as the EU), breaking historically friendly ties with the US and failing to denounce and hold responsible terrorist organisations for their actions. You don't win UK General Elections by mumbling and bumbling your way through Prime Ministers Questions, for just reading out questions from the public and offering no challenge by way of follow-up and, when it came to the biggest issue put to the British public I can remember, for saying that you were "7/10" on it.

Corbyn is weak and dangerous. If he survives the challenge from Eagle (also a poor choice but hopefully just a means to an end in terms of ditching Corbyn) then I would strongly encourage supporters and members to abandon Labour and either join the Lib Dems, or create a new centre/left party on the principles of New Labour.

The kind of people that vote for Corbyn (and the kind that are joining the Labour party to bolster him again) would, in my opinion, not be remotely the kind of people that look at Prime Minister's Questions.  That show is to them a staged theatrical show of learned cat-calls and rehearsed ad-libs.  They don't buy that show.  I think this is actually symbolically an example of the divide between the party animals at Westminster (plus their followers) and that rebellious Membership.  The Labour Partyists are embarrassed by Corbyn's lack of Parliamentary etiquette and the Rebel Membership pour scorn on the theatrics of that Parliamentary presence.

That bit about disenchanted New Labour people moving over to Lib Dems, well that's correct.  Such natural movement of people to Parties that Genuinely reflect their political views, rather than holding on to ancient but hollow tribal traditions, will probably be the method of ending the drama circus.

lostinwales wrote:

Duty281 wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36771595

German industrial giant Siemens has said it will continue to invest in the UK, despite earlier warnings that a vote to leave the EU could affect its future activities in the country.

Siemens chief executive Joe Kaeser told a number of media organisations that the company remained fully committed to manufacturing in the UK.

At an event at the House of Commons, Mr Kaeser said the UK continued to matter and be a "good place to do business" whether it was inside or outside the EU.

But he called on Theresa May to clarify the UK's trade position as soon as possible to give business some certainty.

The rubbish of the Remain side continually exposed as, shock horror, companies still want to do business in the UK despite us leaving a decaying political union!

Or we could have chosen to stay in and then we wouldn't need to make so much fuss over these kinds of statements in the first place.

Also worth pointing out yet again that we haven't actually left yet...

Oops, OK - despite voting to leave a decaying political union.

And yes, we could have chosen to stay in, we could have chosen EU law to be supreme and all the rest of it, but I don't think it would have been as beneficial in the long-term.

So how do you get a vote for the Labour party then Duty?

No 7&1/2 wrote:So how do you get a vote for the Labour party then Duty?

Last year I managed it by signing up as an 'registered supporter' for £3.

Best £3 I've ever spent. Glorious entertainment.

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So how do you get a vote for the Labour party then Duty?

Last year I managed it by signing up as an 'registered supporter' for £3.

Best £3 I've ever spent. Glorious entertainment.

Ah. Very democratic of you. Did you vote for what's best for Labour, or for what you feel would weaken them. it doesn't sound like the first so do you not believe in opposition parties, just have the politics you support?

Duty281 wrote:

lostinwales wrote:

Duty281 wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36771595

German industrial giant Siemens has said it will continue to invest in the UK, despite earlier warnings that a vote to leave the EU could affect its future activities in the country.

Siemens chief executive Joe Kaeser told a number of media organisations that the company remained fully committed to manufacturing in the UK.

At an event at the House of Commons, Mr Kaeser said the UK continued to matter and be a "good place to do business" whether it was inside or outside the EU.

But he called on Theresa May to clarify the UK's trade position as soon as possible to give business some certainty.

The rubbish of the Remain side continually exposed as, shock horror, companies still want to do business in the UK despite us leaving a decaying political union!

Or we could have chosen to stay in and then we wouldn't need to make so much fuss over these kinds of statements in the first place.

Also worth pointing out yet again that we haven't actually left yet...

Oops, OK - despite voting to leave a decaying political union.

And yes, we could have chosen to stay in, we could have chosen EU law to be supreme and all the rest of it, but I don't think it would have been as beneficial in the long-term.

All the ones you have a trade deficit with are dying to continue doing business with you.

Lets see how anxious to stay the financial services are when the UK loses its financial passport. Frankfurt and Paris are already touting for it.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:So how do you get a vote for the Labour party then Duty?

Last year I managed it by signing up as an 'registered supporter' for £3.

Best £3 I've ever spent. Glorious entertainment.

Ah. Very democratic of you. Did you vote for what's best for Labour, or for what you feel would weaken them. it doesn't sound like the first so do you not believe in opposition parties, just have the politics you support?

Both. Labour are a socialist party, and so what is best for them is to have a socialist leader. Of course, this weakens them because there is no great appetite for socialism in this country.

I do believe in opposition parties but, as I've stressed before, there is no reason that opposition automatically has to be one of the Tories/Labour.

Yeah, bit of a scummy thing to do then.

Don't mind Sin, he was the Remain camp's chief external advisor