I'm sure that some cabinet posts will be given to leave campaigners, and some to Remain campaigners. Wouldn't change the fact that Boris, IDS, Farage and LEadsom all quit and Gove showed his true colors. That's what I referred to. If they get invited back with offers of jobs in the cabinet, it won't change the fact that as of now, they are nowhere to be seen...
Interesting? That is a bigger u-turn than Osbourne and that emergency budget or WWIII? Maybe when you analyse in the future you should think about short/medium and long term. We can leave it at that.
Thanks. I read what you wrote in #5368 and understood it without agreeing with your reasoning. However, none of it contains a benefit, just features. Oh well...
How can it not be a benefit to have the best trained and most experienced judges making decisions that affect all our lives, as opposed to some that come from countries with little democratic history and questionable rule of law?
Something immensely tiresome must be happening in London as the Beeb has sent Huw Edwards to utter his endless banality for hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hoursand hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hoursand hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hoursand hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hoursand hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hoursand hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours and hours....(yawn)
I'll try and explain the difference between a feature and a benefit again... Here's your statement using feature and benefit wording. "We have the best trained and most experienced judges making decisions that affect all our lives" (That is a feature, definitely not a benefit) "which means when people go to the highest courts in the land to get fair treatment, those judges will apply the law as just fairly as they used to before we left the EU, with the added confidence they won't be overridden by a higher court that sometimes has a different view on things and may sometimes dispute their decision." (This would be a benefit to the powers-that-be who used to get infuriated when their power wasn't always translated into the action they wanted because the overriding court had a different view. Not the EU court, usually, but the European Court of Human Rights, a body we will still be involved with once we've left the EU - unless we leave that too.) How can it not be a benefit to have an external check and balance on some aspects of law using people who are not appointed by the UK body politic and cannot be influenced by it - even if it's unconsciously so? Depends on the sort of laws you're trying to pass and enforce, I guess.
So having well trained and experienced English judges preside over trials and make the law is not a benefit? I suggest you go and commit an offence in Turkey and see how you get on. The ECJ is not a check or balance. It's a court manned by inadequate judges that overrides domestic judgements often for political EU reasons
Philip Hammond was appointed the U.K.’s Chancellor of the Exchequer, tasked with the job of protecting the economy from the fallout of Brexit and meeting new prime minister Theresa May’s pledge to tackle “burning injustice” in society
Did I actually say he'd remain as Chancellor? No. Are you starting to look stupid with your attempts to 'prove me wrong'? Yes. Is it getting tiresome? definitely...
His role will be purely diversional, whilst the Foreign Office Permanent Secretaries do the real work. He IS Jim Hacker and I claim my five dollars.
oops Boris hasn't disappeared, he is now Foreign Secretary. Now David Davis another vocal Brexit boy arrives at number 10.
Oh look here comes Dr Liam Fox another Brexit Boy who disappeared...oh no he didn't did he. I'm good at this analyst s2it. pretty good on predicting what would happen.
