yes he has but the country he has left is one that is better than when he came to power he would have won the next election too best to leave on a high
There was a frightening ten minutes or so when I was down to my last £100,000, but thankfully that moment passed quite swiftly.
Renzi does a Cameron and shoots himself in the head calling what he thought was a technical referendum. Now it's business as usual in Italy.
At least Cameron was elected. I suspect ultimately it will be more far reaching than business at usual, we'll see. Juncker will be hitting the vino harder than ever today
Stroller I don't know what your angle is here but I am NOT Far- Right or Fascist or whatever you are dreaming up. As for 'rubbing my hands together' or happy to see Far-right parties taking over or even the EU demise, you are wide of the mark. I have never supported or wanted parties like that to get into power. You need to give it a rest and stop making these silly accusations. You are rambling like Holloway. So Just for you I will explain and hopefully it will sink in and you can start some anti-Fascist rhetoric with someone else. I wanted to leave the EU because I felt they had too much power over us. I wanted our country to make its own decisions. From reading I could see that other countries were also unhappy with the EU inward thinking. Like with many others I voted to leave. Since then the 'remoaners' backed many broadcasting outlets have tried to derail the will of the people, which is wrong. I also read that the bloke in Austria was tipped to win so that's why I said he probably would. I was wrong but it means nothing to me as I don't live there. I have said many times that the EU doesn't need people like me to bring it down it will do so on its own. As for Trump or even the bloke in Austria, it amazes me how people can suddenly know how someone in Pittsburgh or Innsbruck feels? We are suddenly experts now? No, we listen to broadcasting outlets driven by an agenda who tell us what we should do. As for Putin? You honestly think that us being in the EU will have some sort of difference? You need to smell the coffee. Ask the people of Aleppo if us being in the EU has helped them? Was that Russian task force that went through the Channel (just 2 miles from our shores) part of a strong EU stance on Putin? Do you want to talk about the neighbouring states of Russia? Yes that's EU members living in fear. What would we do if he invaded? Nothing, we would want the Americans help. Seriously if you are going to come out with all this incorrect cr2p about what I want and support at least know what you are talking about.
Not a single Prime Minister of the UK or Italy has ever been 'elected', unless you count internal political party elections. The British one is invited to form a Government by the Queen, same process but with a President for Italy. And on the grounds you are arguing, where does that leave disMay? All parliamentary democracies are the same, presidential republics directly vote for the leader of their executive. It's business as usual in that the Italian system is the same as it was yesterday. They voted to maintain the existing establishment. They are not leaving the EU or the Euro, but their banks are in big trouble. Of course, the anti establishment way to vote in the Italian election was 'yes', but Renzi cocked up and made it about himself.
It's one thing to want Britain to leave the EU, but it's quite another to wish that the rest of the EU disintegrates. You now say that you do not want to see the demise of the EU or the rise of far-right parties in Europe. Good, I apologise for misinterpreting this....
There's a big difference between a party winning power and its leader taking the role of prime minister or the equivalent e.g. Blair or Cameron, and a party changing its leader mid-term e.g. Renzi or Theresa May. You compared Renzi to Cameron, and I just pointed out a fundamental difference between the two. The difference between Renzi and May is that while the unelected Renzi went to the electorate to push through his changes, May is simply implimenting changes already mandated by referendum. It's too soon to say that Italy are not leaving the Euro, unless you mean they are not leaving it today (which I assume you don't). The election was indeed about Renzi and his government's economic failures, but there begins to be a perceptible direction of travel.
I try not to have a view one way or another on the EU, except as it directly affects the UK. If the UK is unaffected, then I wish the EU and its members well in their struggle. The problem is that it does affect the UK at the moment. Brussels are threatening virtually immovable negotiations and punishing sanctions/compensation as a result of Brexit. How this plays out for the UK does depend on the governments of the important member states, Germany, France, Italy, the Low Countries. If these governments change to become more Eurosceptic, it's in this country's interests. So I hope they do. I have no interest whatsoever in a Neo-Nazi becoming President of Austria, so I'm glad he's been seen off, albeit not entirely convincingly.
I did actually use it in the context of the comments Guy Verhofstadt said after the Richmond by election. Which was my follow up post but you chose not to mention that? To be honest I was a bit miffed at what Guy Verhofstadt said after the Richmond by election. He should keep his nose out of our business. Regarding 'fascists' I would be one of the last supporters of that ideology. I can just see the EU all falling down. It will be it's own fault because it doesn't listen. As I said you won't find anything disturbing in my politcal views other than I voted Brexit. I don't need to say anymore.
You couldn't make it up! In a move that is pure Yes Minister, the Cabinet Secretary has ordered a leak inquiry into the leak of a letter he wrote warning civil servants not to leak and threatening those who are caught leaking with the sack. No... honestly! The letter was written by Sir Jeremy Heywood, who is dubbed "Sir Cover-Up" over his reputation for Whitehall secrecy and is the current holder of the post held by the fictional Sir Humphrey Appleby in the TV comedy. Under the heading "Official: Sensitive", Sir Jeremy began by saying: "Leaking is corrosive and undermines trust and good government." And he said Theresa May had directed "that we urgently tighten security processes". But less that a week after it was written on 28 November, the whole letter appeared across pages 1, 4 and 5 of The Mail on Sunday, under the headline: "Panic in No 10 over Cabinet Brexit leaks".
Supreme Court case begins. Forget Brexit, this is about whether rights granted to citizens by Parliament can be removed by government without reference to Parliament. If the appeal is upheld an interesting precedent is set.
Correct. It won't stop Brexit and it isn't about Brexit. It's about government power and its accountability to Parliament. The specific issue doesn't matter - it's the principle. In recent times, we have not been a country that changes the law without the agreement of Parliament just because the current government wants to do so. That happens a lot in some other countries, I believe...
I think I must be living in a parallel universe! You're telling me that the current case before the Supreme Court isn't about Brexit? Gina Miller must have been wasting her money then, because she's been talking about Brexit non-stop since her win at first instance. Incidentally, these other countries you refer to... did they hold referendums?
Without a discussion in The Houses on the terms of Brexit, my right to (for example) freedom of movement around the EU, access to healthcare in other EU nations, certain employment protections, my right to some environmental standards (how many blue flag beaches did we have before the EU directives), could be bargained away without my elected representatives having a say. All these are the direct result of the 1972 act which took us in to the EU, which was passed by Parliament. But that really isn't the point. I am resigned to losing these things anyway. It's the precedent which is, as I say, interesting. I know a lot of Brextards don't really understand what this case is about, hence the whining about 'the will of the people' and the hate in the press and on social media. But all those who were voting out on the basis of the 'sovereignty' argument (not me I'm not bothered) would do well to reflect on what sovereignty really is under our unwritten constitution. Or just admit that they don't like immigrants.
Parliament gave the electorate the right to vote on leaving the EU. It could have specified that ministers powers would be restricted in the event of an OUT vote, but didn't. I'd say government has a right to put in effect the result of the referendum, but I'm expecting the Supreme Court to follow the earlier decision. I'll ignore your claim that all Leave voters are racist
Reading problems Goldie? Nowhere did I say what you are implying, interesting that you should jump to that conclusion. I thought it was patriotic to have 'concerns' about immigrants. Do you think Parliament should vote on the results of the negotiation? I notice you have heard Jeremy Wright's argument. Let's see what the judges think.
Absolutely Parliament should vote on the result of the negotiation. That is the precedent. Government negotiates treaties, Parliament approves them.
