Not really, first a GE IS FOR 5 years or less, then you do get a re-run, second in a GE the parties publish a manifesto do you know what you are voting for.
What false promises, as we haven't left yet, no one has had a chance to do as they promised, come back in 5-10 years.
On what basis? We were told there would be a deal agreed before we triggered art 50, where is it? When did they tell us what would be in the deal?
Was it on the ballot no, so you believed every individual who just said anything ? You're nieve in the extreme , no wonder you don't understand the vote,they shouldn't really let you vote at all.
They killed many cyclists brissy, I see irresponsible cycling everyday when I ride to work and back home on my motorbike, irresponsible riding is one thing but nobody deserve to die.
Of course, I agree, but they don't help themselves sometimes. A little common sense goes a long way to having a safe journey. However, this is a footy forum and I have my answers. Thanks, guys.
I think you'll find that's not correct, it was just vote leave or remain. Article 50 states a deal is not required for a member state to leave the EU. It also says, the leaving member state and the EU may strike up a deal if in agreement, if no agreement can be reached then leaving the EU with a no deal is the default option. In addition, Article 50 and EU law overrides Parliamentary law therefore, if Boris takes us out with no deal, he won't be breaking any laws. When you analyse things, Everything the remoaners have done, are trying to do, and voted for is not set in concrete. The remoaners know this, which is why they're still trying every dirty trick to try and stop Brexit.
I would have thought he would have broken the law if he didn't ask for an extension? But if the EU don't grant one then leaving without a deal is not breaking the law.
Going down the road of history. You can listen to all of the video, or go straight to 5.20 and listen from there. According to Cameron, cabinet agreed to accept the referendum leave result. Cameron on "in or out" referendum
The official Leave campaign said we would negotiate the terms of a new deal before triggering article 50.
Correct.................but an extension can be anything from 5 minutes to 5 years. If Boris doesn't ask for an extension, then in principle he's going against Parliamentary law as voted by Parliament and the House of Lords, it doesn't mean he has to ask for an extension. As most probably know, it's obviously not set in concrete as the remoaners are trying to get Boris jailed if he doesn't ask for an extension, therefore, it sounds like there's a loophole there, otherwise there would be no need to try and get Boris jailed if he didn't.. He himself can keep his promise and get someone else to do it on his behalf, doesn't mean EU Parliament will accept it as, by law, the EU only deal with Sovereign Governments. I'd say this is a tricky one to call. Boris can refuse to put forward a commissioner to the EU, therefore, and apparently the EU are forced to kick UK out of the EU Union. Problem with Parliament passing laws regarding Brexit is, the EU law overrides Parliamentary law, therefore, it creates loopholes, and leaves room to find all the loopholes if they haven't been found already. Once Boris meets with the EU negotiators, he must abide by EU laws and regulations, and not Parliament. Government have already said they and Boris will not break the law but.............what is hidden the remoaners don't know about.........it's a big but. Has the "Boris must seek an extension" vote been passed into law?............if it has, it will have to be voted down again once Brexit has happened because it no longer is a law of any significance.............basically, it's a temporary law only. What happens remains to be seen, there's quite a few twists and turns to come yet, and I personally feel they'll benefit the Brexit camp. Nigel Farage has already told Boris to use EU law to leave under WTO terms. Remoaners hate Farage interfering..............I wonder why.
The vote itself was for in or out, as mentioned by Cameron. The vote happened based on what the people wanted. What you posted happened after the vote when Cameron gave one of his many speeches after the referendum ruled in favour of leaving EU. Article 50, and EU law states a deal between a leaving member and the EU is not a requirement required to leave, which is why the "no deal exit" clause is also entered into the law as default should the 2 parties fail to come to an agreement.
Totally wrong. I am talking about what people were told by the Leave campaign before and up to the vote.
