CelticRambler wrote: » Someone commented earlier on this thread that there's a suspicious smugness about all these Conservatives saying Boris will comply with the law, and we will leave on the 31st. I'm beginning to feel the same way. Despite their proven talent for believing in alternate realities, they all demonstrate this unjustifiable assurance so I've been wondering: Johnson goes to the summit on the 17th, comes back with nothing because he doesn't try very hard, writes a letter "Dear Brussels, please give me an extension" on the 19th, and then ... ... ... what? Even if he's promised not to frustrate efforts to have the EU grant an extension, he can't be put under any obligation to sincerely pursue one. Back home, he can spin any further discussions with the EU as "meaningful" to stave off a VoNC while all the time sitting on his hands in Brussels. The only way around this that I can see, would be for the Rebel Alliance to time a VoNC for just before he gets HMQ to prorogue Parliament again and get their caretaker cabinet in place before Halloween.
fash wrote: » Much of the growth in EU (& other) countries is simply down to the increase in head count. These extra people (or Consumers) generate growth from nothing.
Around half a million indebted Polish homeowners have won their fight to be freed from crippling Swiss franc mortgages. The Swiss currency has doubled in value since 2008, sending mortgage-holders' debts soaring. Now, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled that they can ask Poland's courts to let them convert their loans into the Polish zloty.
fash wrote: » The letter he is obliged to hand in if already written and included in the act. The act says: "IF NO DEAL BY 17 THEN SUBMIT "LETTER"" "LETTER" = ...." It's not possible to legally get around it.
fash wrote: » Boris is parroting this line that EU membership is costing a billion pounds per day or is it per week I’m not sure. My brain obviously didn’t absorb it. Just sounds completely spurious anyway. But that is the only benefit he currently seems to be pushing anyway.
CelticRambler wrote: » I appreciate that, but as I said, he can comply with the law by delivering the letter (and just the one, not a second one saying "ignore that first message") - but the EU have to be convinced that there's a good reason for it, and for the time being, they are legally obliged to negotiate with Johnson & Co., not the Rebel Alliance or anyone else.
Water John wrote: » BTW, I think Johnson needs to give the EU a credible reason for asking for an Ext. He probably will omit that part.
threeball wrote: » Because they're terrified that Scotland will then want the same deal, eventually leading to independence and loss of oil and gas fields as well as most of the UKs fishing waters. I think this is the likely outcome in any case.
An Ciarraioch wrote: » ITV saying that the shortage of EU-based seasonal migrants is affecting British fruit harvests, and there aren't enough non-EU workers arriving to make up the shortfall:https://www.itv.com/news/2019-10-04/tonnes-of-british-grown-fruit-wasted-over-shortages-of-eu-workers-amid-no-deal-brexit-fears/
Junkyard Tom wrote: » threeball wrote: » Because they're terrified that Scotland will then want the same deal, eventually leading to independence and loss of oil and gas fields as well as most of the UKs fishing waters. I think this is the likely outcome in any case. It's bigger than oil and fish. There'd be two competing political entities in Britain for the first time in hundreds of years. Greater England's all-island integrity would be gone, in geopolitical terms that would be a disaster.
threeball wrote: » Yes I agree and Scotland would attempt to cut in to the Irish pie of being an English speaking country that adopted the euro. That is possibly a bigger threat to us than brexit.
Stop moaning ffs wrote: » It’s funny the fishing is even brought up. It’s less than 1% of the U.K. economy and all the fishing rights of the entire country owned by 5 or 6 people
threeball wrote: » Small but it would be eradicated if Scotland left and no country likes to lose resources no matter how small they may be.
Stop moaning ffs wrote: » You’re right on that aspect but I still support Scottish independence all the way. It’s the only way forward for them to come into the real world and truly develop and its much needed and deserved.
jm08 wrote: » Being able to fish in Scottish waters would be attractive to EU fishermen.
A Shropshire Lad wrote: » I dont see the Scots going for independence when push comes to shove. There are too many Unionists in Scotland, and Unionism is entrenched in the Scottish psyche.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » Barclay trying to make it out as if the BIG problem is the consent mechanism in Britain's proposals - they say they are open to "tweaks" Quite clever but hardly going to fool anyone.
Stop moaning ffs wrote: » 200,000 at that independence march yesterday and Tories have thrown in the towel in Scotland completely. It’s a certainty at this stage.