So back on topic - which 5 UK or global political figures would you invite to dinner and which ones would you poison?
T May Boris Farage Netanyahu Le Pen, I would have a nice dinner with them and then put them in a taxi and send over to Jacoby's house for an after dinner drink.
Presumably he was just trying to do the right thing by his children whilst fighting the hatred that killed his wife. I read that he forced his thumb into a woman’s mouth in a sexual nature. Very odd.
Jeremy *unt As I would punch him on the nose. Jeremy Corbyn as I would ask him what is like being a Spy for the Russians Boris as he has a Russian name Alan Johnson so we can talk QPR. Teresa May would be fab then poison me.
Geese weren't at the forefront of my mind when I vote Leave, but animal welfare is nowhere on the EU agenda. The UK will be free to take this on once unshackled - both the Tories and Labour are showing interest - and I'd be delighted if it did.
Sunday Times reported that he pushed a woman against a wall with his hand around her throat and told her he wanted "to ****" her. I don't know, is this Northern foreplay? I think the guy has a problem with drink - it turns him into Mr Hyde.
I already have the Beef. Have a contact at Smithfields It's cheese i want and have to pay 23 Euros a Kg for WYKE from a Frenchie
They certainly will apart from the fact that the UK doesn't produce enough. The best most farms can do in the UK is to grow caravan pitches or dig a hole and sell fishing permits. Sincerely hope this government starts looking after the farmers again. The potential is there without doubt but I am certainly that the UK will have to buy it all in. Kenya is still the future certainly for Veg
That is a standard greeting of an evening in Sutton. In Brighton it's the same however the gentleman is obliged to dip his thumb in hummus
Yes i know I have seen the keystone I was born in Rushlake Green East Sussex if you can find that on a twattermap thing. I was a product of the Village idiot and Old Ma Pucksy the local gyspy witch finder of the time. Think of Sergeant Howie from the Wicker man and Nora Batty is a magical love festival Sutton in general has been a big eye opener for me. I live there now every two weeks as we have rented out the house in Kingston. There's you answer to why i am so grumpy ... Sutton twinned with the South of France
Prime Minister Theresa May’s team has drawn up a secret contingency plan to withhold billions of pounds in Brexit payments in order to force the European Union to give the U.K. the trade deal it wants. Senior British officials have privately discussed the idea as a fall-back option that could be used if the EU reneges on its commitment for a new free-trade deal to come into force after Brexit, three people familiar with the matter said. please log in to view this image Prime Minister Theresa May Photographer: Jack Taylor/Getty Images The plan is far from the U.K.’s preferred outcome, but senior members of the government believe it could be necessary. May says she wants a draft accord by October to cover future trading terms, which can then be signed soon after the U.K. leaves the bloc. Despite this, the EU says October’s agreement will contain little detail and will be only a political declaration. “Either the EU gives us a trade deal or they won’t get any money at all,” said Iain Duncan Smith, the former leader of May’s Conservative Party. “Everything is agreed, or nothing is agreed.” The disclosure of the potentially explosive proposal comes at a sensitive time in the Brexit talks as the clock runs down on the U.K.’s departure in March 2019. As one of the biggest EU contributors, the U.K. side can use money as leverage -- though it’s a gamble that could provoke the EU. Read more: The Brexit bill and whether Theresa May needs to pay up Speaking on condition of anonymity, three senior officials said the U.K. would have the option to halt payments of the 40-billion-pound ($56 billion) Brexit bill if EU leaders tried to cut and run. One said the precise mechanism for paying the cash had yet to be agreed, leaving open the possibility of holding it back. These officials fear the U.K. loses power in the detailed trade talks that will have to take place during the transition phase because the country will already have left the EU. It will also be legally committed to paying a financial settlement of up to 40 billion pounds as part of the withdrawal agreement -- a pledge that will be binding. The idea that the U.K. could threaten to withhold the cash risks reopening the argument over money that nearly wrecked the first stage of Brexit negotiations last year. In Brussels, the argument might be made that the bill is for liabilities accrued and not up for debate. Racing for a Summit The two sides are locked in talks over the terms of the transition period that businesses want to help smooth their path to Brexit -- with a deal due to be agreed at a summit next month. Once the transition agreement is finalized, negotiations will move on to the terms of future trade. Euroskeptics in May’s Conservative Party reacted with anger to the idea that the U.K. should pay the EU anything. Lawmakers have since raised concerns that the so-called “framework” agreement on the future relationship that’s due to be reached in October won’t be legally enforceable, leaving Britain vulnerable if the EU backslides on its promises. One of the officials said the two sides had decided that the U.K.’s financial obligation would be to pay for staff pensions and other liabilities as they came due, potentially involving annual payments lasting many years. The British government could then halt these payments in the future if necessary, though such an outcome would be unlikely and undesirable. “The EU is desperate to get the money in the short to medium term, otherwise they will have to fork-out for it,” Duncan Smith said. “If there’s no trade agreement, guess who is going to suffer the most -- it will be the EU because we’re going to open our markets to the rest of the world.” A fourth senior official was more cautious, warning that such an approach would risk backfiring, creating the bad faith and atmosphere of mistrust that would make a breakdown more likely.
