We should really do what JRM, Davies and Redwood suggested regarding a public vote on the negotiated deal. Unless they have changed their minds.....
It's not really amazing. The EU is demanding $39 billion plus It's not. We agreed that in negotiations an Irish backstop in perpetuity It's not. It is an interim measure pending a trade agreement - something you said earlier could be achieved within 5 years in your earlier post. Are you retracting that now? plus customs arrangement that would allow the EU to carry on selling their goods to the UK. and us to sell to them - that is the essence of a bilateral trade agreement between trading partners who currently both buy and sell from each other What's not to like? Subject to those corrections, I agree. All good for everybody
Agree - it would be awful if all of those unelected MPs took control over an issue in place of a directly elected Prime Minister. Glad we also agree that turmoil as a result uncertainty for businesses is also an important issue...no deal is clearly the way to resolve that one!
£39bn - The EU demanded it in return for the withdrawal agreement and a promise of a future free trade agreement. May/Robbins waved the white flag. Shameful. Backstop in perpetuity - It would be an interim measure and there would be a trade agreement in about 5 years if we don't agree this indefensible concession. Otherwise, it can be used as leverage against us to force us to accept a poorer deal. Surely even you, with your EU star-spangled spectacles, can see that? Trading - the point I was making is that the EU gets a bigger benefit than we do, since they sell more to us than we do to them. It gives them greater incentive as an organisation
That's right, Parliament has forced elected British governments to step aside so they can take over, regularly throughout history, haven't they? - or perhaps not, because it could lead to a constitutional crisis. It's interesting, for bad loser Remainers, "minority" is now treated as "majority". They won the referendum after all, who'd have thought it?
British jihadis face being locked up in Guantanamo Bay by the US – as American officials run out of patience with the way the UK treats them US officials want at least two British jihadis to be prosecuted in the US There is a fear two of The Beatles would be treated more leniently in Britain President Trump's administration 'can put 50 jihadi inmates in Guantanamo' By Zoie O'brien For Mailonline Published: 12:36 AEDT, 15 February 2019 | Updated: 19:26 AEDT, 15 February 2019 British jihadis could be sent to Guantanamo Bay after the UK is being seen to do little to punish them, it has been reported. US officials believe the UK is not doing enough to punish people returning from Syria as they are offered rehabilitation programmes, rather than facing legal consequences. According to The Times there is a growing opinion the UK is avoiding its responsibility over extremist converts who have joined ISIS. Now, the paper has been told the two surviving members of the British terrorist group known as 'The Beatles' because of their English accents, El Shafee ElSheikh and Alexanda Kotey, could be prosecuted in America. The Trump administration fears they could end up evading justice and want to send them to Guantanamo where there is room for about 50 jihadis. 'These guys have American blood on their hands,' a source told The Times. US photographer James Foley was executed by the leader of 'The Beatles' Mohammed Emwazi known as Jihadi John. Fresh talks over how jihadis who return from Syria are dealt with have begun after the discovery of one of the three schoolgirls from Bethnal Green who fled to Syria in 2015. please log in to view this image Shamima Begum, now 19, married in Syria after running away from home with friends Amira Abase and Kadiza Sultanta. At nine months pregnant she wants to come home and have her third child in Britain, despite showing no remorse for joining ISIS. She left the surrounded village of Baghuz as ISIS fights for its last slither of territory in eastern Syria. She said she has 'no regrets' about joining them. Security Minister Ben Wallace said the UK would not be rescuing her from the Northern Syrian camp she escaped to. He said: 'I'm not putting at risk British people's lives to go and look for terrorists or former terrorists in a failed state. 'The message this government has given for many years is that actions have consequences.' please log in to view this image Her journey: The different place in Syria where Begum has lived in the four years since she left east London for ISIS Sharmeema Begum - the first Bethnal Green girl to flee to Syria before her three younger friends followed 2014 - December - Counter terrorism police question Shamima Begum, Kadiz Sultana and Amira Abase after their friend Sharmeema Begum goes to Syria. 2015 - February 17 - Kadiza Sultana, 16, and 15-year-olds Shamima Begum and Amira Abase leave their east London homes at 8am to travel to Istanbul in Turkey from Gatwick Airport. Begum and Abase - who has not yet been publicly named - are reported missing by their families later the same day. - February 18 - Sultana is reported missing to the police. - February 20 - The Metropolitan Police launch a public appeal for information on the missing girls who are feared to have gone on to Syria. - February 21 - Four days after the girls went missing, police believe they may still be in Turkey. It is revealed that at least one of the missing girls had Twitter contact with Aqsa Mahmood, who left her Glasgow home in November 2013 and travelled to Syria after becoming radicalised. - February 22 - Abase's father Abase Hussen says his daughter told him she was going to a wedding on the day she disappeared. Metropolitan Police officers arrive in Turkey, but refuse to confirm whether they are involved in the search for the teenagers. 2016 - August 2016 - Sultana, 17, is reportedly killed in Raqqa when a suspected Russian air strike obliterates her house. 2019 - February 14 - Begum, 19, tells Anthony Loyd of The Times that she wants to return to the UK to give birth to her third child. Speaking from a refugee camp in Syria, she adds she does not regret joining IS and that she believes, contrary to reports in 2018, that her other companion Abase is still alive in Baghuz. Many want the girls to be forgiven and welcomed home for rehabilitation. The father of Sharmeena Begum – the first teenager from the East London school to flee to Syria – urged the British Government to forgive her. Begum, who loved watching EastEnders and wanted to be a doctor, vanished in December 2014 at the age of 15. Two months later she was joined in Raqqa, the self-styled capital of the Islamic State, by her best friends Kadiza Sultana, Amira Abase and Shamima Begum. Last night Sharmeena’s father Mohammad Uddin said the girls should be forgiven because they were radicalised and brainwashed. A local imam disagreed, saying they were ‘a danger to the community’. Abase’s father Hussen claimed that his daughter fled to Syria on a humanitarian mission after seeing images of civilians starving on the internet. He urged the Government to let her and the others back in to the country, insisting: ‘They are no threat to us.’ Mr Abase, 52, a security guard who came to Britain as a refugee from Ethiopia in 1999, said: ‘The girls should be allowed to come back. When they left the country they were teenagers. They [British officials] have to understand that. ‘She is a naturally generous person. She saw in the media and on the internet [that] people over there are starving and I think she wanted to go and help. I have had no contact with her since she left. It’s been very hard on my family – I have a wife and two other children, aged 13 and 17. They all miss her. It was just a mistake that the girls left their families to go to a place like that.’ Kadiza was reported to have been killed in an airstrike on Raqqa in May 2016, while Ms Begum has recently heard second-hand from other people that Amira, and the other schoolgirl who left Britain in 2014, may still be alive. When she arrived, Ms Begum was put in a house where jihadist brides-to-be waited to be married, she said. Ten days after arriving in Raqqa in 2015, she wed a Dutchman who had converted to Islam. She claims her husband was later arrested, charged with spying and tortured. The mother of the white British Islamic convert known as ‘Jihadi Jack’ joined the calls for Shamima Begum to be allowed back into Britain. Sally Letts, 55, said at her Oxford home: ‘Of course she should be allowed back. She was a child, she was groomed and abused and now they want to judge her as an adult!’ please log in to view this image please log in to view this image Bethnal Green runaway Amira Abase (left in September) used a pictured of a woman in a full veil clutching a knife on her Twitter page, which has been shut down Jack Letts, 22, went to IS territory and was captured two years ago by Kurdish fighters. He is awaiting trial in northern Syria. Letts denies joining the terror group and his parents deny three charges of financially aiding terrorism. They are due to go on trial at the Old Bailey in May. They allege Letts went to the region for ‘religious and humanitarian reasons’.
If it's in both sides interests to put it in place promptly, and both sides currently trade on similar terms with similar standards, no one has shown me why it wouldn't be a lot quicker than, say, the EU/Canada trade deal - unless we've signed the backstop and are kept in the CU.
So you do actually agree that the backstop is an interim measure not a permanent arrangement as you had stated. Also that 5 years should be long enough to do the trade deal. Surely even you with Brexit blinkers on can see that your original post was wholly misleading. You justify it by referring to the 'indefensible concession' where you completely distorted the truth to make your point. To remind you and anyone else who saw and read what was going on at the time. - the 39 billion was not the price demanded for the EU agreeing to the Withdrawal agreement - it was payment of debts incurred and acknowledged by the UK for benefits received and to be received in the future paid for by European funds. That has never been disputed until now. Which Brexiteer came up with that rewrite of very recent history? It couldn't be right because once Article 50 is triggered the EU is unable to stop a withdrawal. It will happen either with or without a deal As for your last point, if that is what you meant why not say so instead of "plus customs arrangement that would allow the EU to carry on selling their goods to the UK." In one sentence you convert a bilateral trading relationship into one where the EU sells to us only. Finally, before your attention span wanes, can I remind you that David Davies was still in post and fully supportive of the figure agreed as was Johnson - not just May and Robbins. If it was the correct figure for them then and I don't recall any dissent at all from other Brexiteers at that time please don't try to mislead us now about it. That really is shameful.
No. Read what I said: "It would be an interim measure and there would be a trade agreement in about 5 years IF we don't agree this indefensible concession." We don't agree the backstop if it is not time limited. Why do you think May's deal was voted down so heavily. Even Remainers can't accept an indefinite backstop. Incidentally, there's talk today that the EU is suggesting to Ireland that it must either accept some sort of hard border or leave the Single Market. The $39 bn is much less clear than you say. For a start, it applies to a contribution to annual budgets up to 2020, which would bite if we leave with no deal. There are arguably a number of set offs that could apply eg UK's contribution to land and buildings in the EU. So the £39bn very much had a sweetener included in it for the EU, whereby they would get a huge lump sum of money uncontested, and without all the delays that would result in having to break it down and apply set offs. And of course, there is a House of Lords report that concludes the UK doesn't owe a penny. So I don't know how you can say the £39bn hasn't been disputed! Davies, Johnson etc were, and may still be, in favour of the £39bn IF a backstop is limited AND terms of a future Trade Agreement are set out in greater detail.
As a fully independent country, stand by and be a good neighbour to Europe and help where we can with their many difficulties
