Off Topic So, what now?

In a nutshell Yup xxx

 

I’ve not had an issue with mine, like I said it’s my wife’s and the comments made to her. The truth is none of us know what will happen.
But hey ho it’s all scare merchants, just a shame you wasn’t here to say that to her when she was suffering

 

Can you imagine her as leader of Labour and Boris leader of the Tories at the same time? Prime Ministers questions would be a comedy show. I shouldn't laugh really as this could be a reality!

 

Mrs R takes a shed load of tablets and liquids each week and I've just picked up her latest batch.
I had an issue with non supply of my tablets 3 years ago before the referendum. According to some it's OK to blame everything on the leave vote. Out of interest my Pharmacist told me he hasn't any supply problems.

 

Something cropped up yesterday which alarmed me.
Did l hear correctly? The EU are claiming that should we leave without a deal that they will still demand our £39 billion quid!!!
So as it stands, whose bank is in possession of that money? I have an uncomfortable feeling it's the EU's
If this is the case, does Madam May's deal appear more attractive to MPs?

 

I think you're misquoting to be fair mate. I think it was along the lines of, if we leave without a deal, they will refuse to re-open the negotiations or go back to May's deal without the £39bn.

Not to be all EU-loving again, but I can kind of see their point. If we've committed to spending £39bn, we should really honour it. But then in return we should get whatever benefits may come directly from that spend (if it's feasibly possible).

As for who's in possession of the money... I doubt it really 'exists' in the same way it exists for you or I. It will probably just get printed, like 99% of modern day currencies.

 

please log in to view this image

Basically... Brexit is taking a bird home from Chasers.

 

I'd say, it's better to have a clean exit!!

 

Just ploughed through the news.
Junker does say that we must pay the £39 billion if we leave with ''' no deal"

 

Yeah fair enough, I've just seen it myself. My fault!

Either way, and I really can't stand Juncker, but I don't think he's wrong. We've committed to spending that money. It sets a very bad precedent for us to renege on that. Particularly if we're going to go around the world trying to get trade deals, the worst message we could send is, 'we're the UK and we don't honour our commitments. Do a deal with us!'.

 

ERRRRRRRRRRRRRR 39 billions saving for a start

 

This is where l feel for Parliament. They are clearly more in touch with the details of the negotiation because it's their job and they live within a close knit community of fellows.

 

I was under the impression that the £39B was our payment in order that we received a more favourable arrangement.

 

i
UK has ALREADY LEFT! Legal battle launched to show Brexit HAPPENED on March 29 - we're

A LEGAL battle claiming Britain has already left the European Union has been launched in the High Court by the leader of the English Democrats.

Robin Tilbrook insists Britain left the bloc on March 29 as originally planned and dismissed Theresa May’s extension as nul and void because she never had the power to make such a decision in the first place. The legal challenge mirrors Gina Miller's high-profile court battle with the Government over Article 50 in 2016. Mr Tilbrook tweeted: “Our case has now fully served and issued and we are just waiting for the High Court to give us a hearing date in the near future.

Now we really need as much help as possible so that we can match the well-funded Remain groups and the tax funded government lawyers!”

The judicial review application argues Mrs May did not have the power to extend the Brexit date past March 29.

Mr Tilbrook said: “What we're hoping to achieve with it is a declaration that we're already out. If you've read it, you can see that the argument's very strong.


“We've done it all, we started a month or so ago. We've served all the paperwork in advance and we've issued it today.
“I fully expect it to be heard fairly soon. I've asked the High Court for it to be heard on an expedited basis. I think the argument's strong that we're out.

“The Government's proceeding on the basis that we're still in. We're saying that's not the case. If there's a declaration from the High Court that we're out, the Government's got a new reality to deal with.”

Legal experts have cast doubt on whether Mr Tilbrook’s case will succeed.

Thom Brooks, Professor of Law and Government at Durham University Law School, told MailOnline: “I think the idea is that Parliament voted to leave on 29 March, this date has passed without a new Act of Parliament and so we're out.

“But Parliament did agree for the Prime Minister to have more time and both the UK and EU have agreed our 'deal' remains, or at least for now. This is through temporary extensions.

“Someone was bound to try this - but I'm not expecting a Miller-like result.”

Ms Miller launched a high-profile legal challenge in 2016, saying that Parliament had to approve the triggering of Article 50.

The High Court and later the Supreme Court both found in her favour and forced MPs to vote on the formal start of the Brexit process.

 

Which we've pretty much already lost.

 

isn't it great to have a remote control fast forward, rewind and watch the previous minutes ...check out what programmes come later .. with the sound down and that little box in the corner you know when its safe to return to normality... watched PMQ'S some pretty tame exchanges until the finale and then she smacked him with her last comment … poor Cor boliks he knows it is coming and his face is magic …..

is it this or naproxen?

 

do some research find out what the money is for and it answers your question