Brexit

[Jack Staff]

The High Court has ruled today

I wasn't aware that the High Court sat on a Sunday!

It was a quote from last year.

[Jack Staff]

Confirmation bias dictates that you ignore the facts that don't agree with your position. It's a common phenomenon.

Just got confused with which particular case in which particular court, as Vote Leave have already been found guilty.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Last year eh? A bit slow in handing out the sentence then?

And again your quote has a bit missing Jack.

"The High Court agreed with the Electoral Commission finding in July that Vote Leave had broken the law, but said the watchdog had misinterpreted the rules, in the run-up to the June 2016 referendum, in advice it gave to the Leave campaign."

So they currectly asked the Commission who gave them incorrect advice.

[Jack Staff]

Last year eh? A bit slow in handing out the sentence then?

And again your quote has a bit missing Jack.

"The High Court agreed with the Electoral Commission finding in July that Vote Leave had broken the law, but said the watchdog had misinterpreted the rules, in the run-up to the June 2016 referendum, in advice it gave to the Leave campaign."

So they currectly asked the Commission who gave them incorrect advice.

Yes, we did that already. You told us all about it earlier, 14:52.

Ignorance is no excuse. But they are Brexiters, so that's all right then.

[towny44]

Last year eh? A bit slow in handing out the sentence then?

And again your quote has a bit missing Jack.

"The High Court agreed with the Electoral Commission finding in July that Vote Leave had broken the law, but said the watchdog had misinterpreted the rules, in the run-up to the June 2016 referendum, in advice it gave to the Leave campaign."

So they currectly asked the Commission who gave them incorrect advice.

Yes, we did that already. You told us all about it earlier, 14:52.

Ignorance is no excuse. But they are Brexiters, so that's all right then.

Calling brexiteers ignorant, is that better or worse than being accused of not fully telling the truth?

[Gill W]

Referendum corruptly won?

This is from last week

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ ... ult-stands

[Jack Staff]

Ignorance is no excuse. But they are Brexiters, so that's all right then.

Calling brexiteers ignorant, is that better or worse than being accused of not fully telling the truth?

Nicely twisting my words there Towny. You know full well I did not call Brexiters ignorant, just pointing out Ignorantia juris non excusat or Ignorantia legis neminem excusat.

"ignorance of the law excuses no one".

(except if you are a Brexiter, with friends, with power)

Content edited

[oldbluefox]

Referendum corruptly won?

This is from last week

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ ... ult-stands

from the same link:
" according to the barrister who took the government to court".

[Mervyn and Trish]

Last year eh? A bit slow in handing out the sentence then?

And again your quote has a bit missing Jack.

"The High Court agreed with the Electoral Commission finding in July that Vote Leave had broken the law, but said the watchdog had misinterpreted the rules, in the run-up to the June 2016 referendum, in advice it gave to the Leave campaign."

So they currectly asked the Commission who gave them incorrect advice.

Yes, we did that already. You told us all about it earlier, 14:52.

Ignorance is no excuse. But they are Brexiters, so that's all right then.

There is a big difference between ignorance and acting on advice sought from and given by the recognised authority in the matter.

[Jack Staff]

There is a big difference between ignorance and acting on advice sought from and given by the recognised authority in the matter.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the Electoral Commission should get away with it either.
Indeed,
"The Electoral Commission misinterpreted election law in the run-up to the Brexit vote, the High Court ruled yesterday, raising questions about the judgment of the watchdog." {Sunday Times}

The whole Brexit vote was a dogs breakfast.

[Mervyn and Trish]

Though you wouldn't be saying that if you'd won.......

[Jack Staff]

Though you wouldn't be saying that if you'd won.......

We will this time....

[Gill W]

Referendum corruptly won?

This is from last week

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ ... ult-stands

from the same link:
" according to the barrister who took the government to court".

So?

That’s why I put a question mark in my first sentence.

If I could be bothered to find the link, I’d mention that the government QC stated that the PM was aware of irregularities in the referendum when she triggered A50.

Oops, I mentioned it- strike it from the record as unverified!

[towny44]

Referendum corruptly won?

This is from last week

https://www.lbc.co.uk/radio/presenters/ ... ult-stands

from the same link:
" according to the barrister who took the government to court".

So?

That’s why I put a question mark in my first sentence.

If I could be bothered to find the link, I’d mention that the government QC stated that the PM was aware of irregularities in the referendum when she triggered A50.

Oops, I mentioned it- strike it from the record as unverified!

Gill, no need to apologise, the internet is awash with articles about brexit covering the full gamut of opinions, however all of them are merely the views of the author, and the direction his editor wanted the opinion slanted.
None of us are going to know which are correct until well down the line, and by then there will have been countless other articles which have taken into account the latest trends as they progress.
Hopefully by later this week we may know a little better whether May's WA stands a better chance of being accepted, clearly the recent improvement in sterling indicates that the money markets are more positive about a successful deal.

[Gill W]

Not so sure about that......

All that 'negotiation' that was supposed to be going on appears to have gone nowhere. Cox has given up trying to get changes to the backstop (probably because EU have said until they are blue in the face that are not renegotiating) He's now trying to go for an 'arbitration' method of getting out of the backstop.

As it says in the article, that falls far short of the ERG demands.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/po ... and-brexit

[barney]

The EU are just paying lip service to this 'negotiation'

I fully agree that there is no negotiation going on, but they want it to appear so , so that May can save a bit of face.

Now that Parliament has declared that they will not allow the UK to leave without a WA, the EU need to do nothing but wait it out.

I wonder what they would do if the UK had to take part in EU elections because we are still technically in the EU and we return 75 Brexit MEPs

I've never voted in an EU election as I deemed it irrelevant, but I certainly would in that one

it would be hilarious.

[Mervyn and Trish]

All that 'negotiation' that was supposed to be going on appears to have gone nowhere. Cox has given up trying to get changes to the backstop (probably because EU have said until they are blue in the face that are not renegotiating) He's now trying to go for an 'arbitration' method of getting out of the backstop.

According the Telegraph, say this article.

It may or not be right but I wish people on all sides would stop reporting as fact what they read in one side or other of the slanted media.

We won't know until we actually know. Towny is absolutely right in his post.

[anniec]

This is what Mr Cox himself has to say:

"The DT (Daily Telegraph) reporting of the last 24 hours consists of misunderstood fag ends dressed up as facts. Some of it is accurate, much more of it isn’t and what is not is far more significant than what is. Complex and detailed negotiations cannot be conducted in public".

[Gill W]

The EU are just paying lip service to this 'negotiation'

They've repeatedly said, since December, there's no further negotiation on the WA.

That's not paying lip service, that's being clear. Yet, people still don't believe them, as evidenced by TM and people on this forum.

[Gill W]

This is what Mr Cox himself has to say:

"The DT (Daily Telegraph) reporting of the last 24 hours consists of misunderstood fag ends dressed up as facts. Some of it is accurate, much more of it isn’t and what is not is far more significant than what is. Complex and detailed negotiations cannot be conducted in public".

As ever, I wonder what these negotiations are, bearing in mind the EU have said, over and over, that they are not going to renegotiate the WA

[Gill W]

All that 'negotiation' that was supposed to be going on appears to have gone nowhere. Cox has given up trying to get changes to the backstop (probably because EU have said until they are blue in the face that are not renegotiating) He's now trying to go for an 'arbitration' method of getting out of the backstop.

According the Telegraph, say this article.

It may or not be right but I wish people on all sides would stop reporting as fact what they read in one side or other of the slanted media.

We won't know until we actually know. Towny is absolutely right in his post.

I know trust in the media is low, but it's rock bottom if we can't regard anything in respected media sources as 'factual'

Although, if I recall correctly, everyone was falling over themselves to regard as factual the report that Norway was going to carry on investing in the UK

[Mervyn and Trish]

All that 'negotiation' that was supposed to be going on appears to have gone nowhere. Cox has given up trying to get changes to the backstop (probably because EU have said until they are blue in the face that are not renegotiating) He's now trying to go for an 'arbitration' method of getting out of the backstop.

According the Telegraph, say this article.

It may or not be right but I wish people on all sides would stop reporting as fact what they read in one side or other of the slanted media.

We won't know until we actually know. Towny is absolutely right in his post.

I know trust in the media is low, but it's rock bottom if we can't regard anything in respected media sources as 'factual'

Although, if I recall correctly, everyone was falling over themselves to regard as factual the report that Norway was going to carry on investing in the UK

Yes guilty as charged!

However what makes the Telegraph respected and the BBC, the Mail and the Guardian not so, I don't know! Having worked in and with the media for a long time I wouldn't trust any of them as far as I could throw them. They all have their standpoints.

And I did only post that story as balance to the constant flow of selective Brexit negatives from Jack!

[towny44]

This is what Mr Cox himself has to say:

"The DT (Daily Telegraph) reporting of the last 24 hours consists of misunderstood fag ends dressed up as facts. Some of it is accurate, much more of it isn’t and what is not is far more significant than what is. Complex and detailed negotiations cannot be conducted in public".

As ever, I wonder what these negotiations are, bearing in mind the EU have said, over and over, that they are not going to renegotiate the WA

I think everyone knows that Gill but as I understand it, Cox is trying to negotiate a codicil to the political agreement which would override or make clear that the backstop in the WA is time limited, which I believe the theory has been accepted, but not yet the text.

[anniec]

As ever, I wonder what these negotiations are, bearing in mind the EU have said, over and over, that they are not going to renegotiate the WA

I'm hoping that after a weekend of Mr Cox in full flow, they'll give us whatever we want just to get rid of us

[barney]

The fact that the EU have said negotiations are over is a good enough reason to say bye bye. They can then get on with setting up the Irish border that they say they are so keen to avoid. I wonder if Varadkar can survive that politically.