Menu
Sister Sites

  • Parliament should make final decision on whether to leave EU, barristers say

    From theguardian.com

    More than 1,000 barristers have signed a letter to the prime minister urging him to allow parliament to decide whether the UK should leave the European Union. The letter describes the referendum result as only advisory because it was based on “misrepresentations of fact and promises that could not be delivered”. The barristers argue that there must be a free vote in parliament before article 50 of the EU’s Lisbon treaty can be triggered – paving the way for the UK’s withdrawal. The initiative has been coordinated by prominent barristers in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland including more than ... (full story)

So next time you are had up in court and you don't like the sentence you can tell the judge to hell with the verdict I don't think you are correct. Im not going to abide by your decision. Love to see how they would take it.The lawyers should keep there toffee noses out of a democratic vote. It is already showing the Britain has made the right decision The big banks are not pulling out. USA is not backing out of Britain so for god sake Britain don't buckle under pressure
  •  Guest
  • | IP XX.XXX.24.139
the remainers just can't accept out. So they want to overturn democratic decision. This country is a DEMOCRACY. The majority carried the vote. The law is an ass!
There was a vote, and the vote was to put to a referendum!
Again the political elite ignore the will of the people.Who the hell do these people think they are,The upper classses have always believed that they rule and democracy for them is whe evrybody agrees with their point of view.Its pathetic.Theyre spoilt beyond belife
Let them try it, and all hell will break out. The people have voted, and it's about time all these 'remainers' got over it.

Seriously can't understand why anybody would want to remain in the sinking ship known as the EU.
  •  Guest
  • | IP XX.XXX.89.230
The letter describes the referendum result as only advisory because it was based on “misrepresentations of fact and promises that could not be delivered”

Did they mean WW3, collapse of the economy, interest rates going up and killing the property market, no trade with eu without freedom of movement, emergency budgets, etc..
This is typical arrogance from a bunch of so called "elites". We, the great unwashed, are obviously not capable of effecting democracy. What part of 52% against 48% don't the judges (and others) not understand?
They should be very careful what they wish for - 17 million of us; a thousand of them!!!
If the result of the referendum had gone Remain's way, what about their promise that Britain would be able to influence the future decision making of the EU - when they know full well that would only be true if Mrs Merkel allowed it.

The EU has not been remotely interested in what its insubordinate members what or need. What is good for Germany is ALL that matters. They hold the purse strings of Europe and as we all know - he (or she) who pays the piper calls the tune.

I am more than slightly ashamed at the hysteria and and lack of confidence - shown by many in the Remain camp - for the ability of the UK to stand on it's own two feet and successfully orchestrate its own future. It's time to stop talking the country down and to start working together in order to carry out the democratic decision of majority of the population of the UK as a whole.
Its tough enough that we have to deal with crooked lawyers, judges, and politicians in Africa. So to see the same happen in the UK just goes to affirm the notion that we are all living in an animal farm regardless of economic status. people in a communist or dictatorship have a zero grazing experience whereby you know you are locked up and cant get out. people in a democracy have a free range grazing experience in a paddock where it seems like there are no boundaries but if you veer off far enough in a straight line you will realize there is an electric fence keeping you enclosed. Britons are on that fence right now and they seem to be realizing that they were never really free to leave the farm.
Seriously can't understand why anybody would want to remain in the sinking ship known as the EU.



Well said I agree entirely
"Those that make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable", John F Kennedy.

The people have spoken, Parliament are the servant of the people.

Remainders, shut up, you lost, move on.

Simple
Why cant the remainers accept democracy.Maybe thats why they were so fond of the eu in the first place
Don't worry guys, this is the Guardian, the leading pro-remain newspaper in the UK. We're out, we voted out, and unless they want outright anarchy on the streets, that's the way it's going to stay. The remainians still can't get their head around the fact that they lost, so expect these pathetic little tantrums to carry on for a while longer.
  •  Guest
  • | IP XX.XXX.173.191
These supposedly well-educated people do not appear to know the meanings of the words "Democracy" and "Hypocrisy".

Democracy was served when over 30 million people turned out to vote (72.2% of the total eligible electorate), a turnout that was far higher than most UK General Elections. This turnout was higher than the one that brought a certain Tony Blair to power in 1997 - and nobody to this day has ever said that that result was wrong or undemocratic, despite all the deaths that he and his cronies have caused.

It is true that, in the UK, referendum results are not considered legally binding as opposed to General Results, which are.

However, in the lead-up to the referendum, it was repeatedly stated by the Prime Minister and the rest of the political elite, both in the UK and in the EU, that the result would be final and irreversible.

It was also stated by the Government that, even if the referendum was won by a single vote, it would be a valid result. I am sure that they said this in the firm belief that the Remain side would win, but they said it nevertheless.

I am sure that these overpaid, whinging leeches (i.e. the barristers) would have insisted that, had the Remain camp won, it would have been a valid and binding result and they would have berated the Leave side if they had dared questioning the legality of such a result.

It is odd that they now say that a majority of 1,269,501 in favour of the Leave side should be ignored and that the UK should continue along its merry way in the EU as if the referendum result was a complete irrelevance.

I can only conclude that these very barristers specialize in (EU) Human Rights laws and litigation and that they foresee their gravy train emptying before their very eyes.

If the establishment dares to ignore or re-interpret the result of a democratic decision with such a large turnout and a significant majority (in terms of votes), no matter if it is technically legally binding or not, no future result of any UK election would ever be accepted or considered "final" by the losing side.

The UK would, in effect, be telling the World that "Democracy is Dead".
A round of an unsavory comic display by an influential few to thwart the right of the people?
Do your homework, follow the footprints of smart money
It appears that you've missed the key to this legal argument. They are saying that the leave argument was based on misrepresentation and promises that could not be kept. If you have been following the news you will have seen and heard this for yourself. So much for democracy when the elected upholders of it lie just to progress their own private agenda.
Quoting cat
Don't worry guys, this is the Guardian, the leading pro-remain newspaper in the UK. We're out, we voted out, and unless they want outright anarchy on the streets, that's the way it's going to stay. The remainians still can't get their head around the fact that they lost, so expect these pathetic little tantrums to carry on for a while longer.
The legality of invoking Article 50, which is effectively an irreversible repeal of EU laws that confers many rights on those living in the UK, by an executive order, is highly questionable. As the referendum was advisory, the invoking of Article 50 will likely have to be passed by an Act in Parliament and go through the usual legislative process.
Quoting KimKim23
Its tough enough that we have to deal with crooked lawyers, judges, and politicians in Africa. So to see the same happen in the UK just goes to affirm the notion that we are all living in an animal farm regardless of economic status. people in a communist or dictatorship have a zero grazing experience whereby you know you are locked up and cant get out. people in a democracy have a free range grazing experience in a paddock where it seems like there are no boundaries but if you veer off far enough in a straight line you will realize there is an...
Good analogy
Carbon-Dioxide: the gas of life!
Quoting NewtonsCash
"Those that make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable", John F Kennedy.

The people have spoken, Parliament are the servant of the people.

Remainders, shut up, you lost, move on.

Simple
Yes, Parliament should be the servant of the people, with MPs acting on behalf of their constituents. But from a legal perspective, it is unlikely that a Prime Minister has the authority to invoke Article 50, thereby stripping laws and rights from UK citizens, acting in an executive fashion.

It is right and proper that the result of the referendum and the votes and views of citizens in various constituencies are the guiding factor in how MPs vote on any Act to invoke Article 50.
Both sides lied their asses off trying to win their corner. Only the naive would believe anything different. All is fair in love and war - allegedly. Now the dust has settled, grin and bear it.


Quoting SaudiMail
Let them try it, and all hell will break out. The people have voted, and it's about time all these 'remainers' got over it. ...
Messing with democracy is dangerous, you only have to look to the East....
Carbon-Dioxide: the gas of life!
  •  Guest
  • | IP XXX.XXX.20.12
Quoting NewtonsCash
"Those that make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable", John F Kennedy.

The people have spoken, Parliament are the servant of the people.

Remainders, shut up, you lost, move on.

Simple

"It Is Not The EU Philosophy That The Crowd Can Decide Its Fate"

M. Shulz,
President of the EU Parliament
27th June, 2016

---

Never forget this when your country want its own independence.
and the soap opera lives on...
"Bulls make money, bears make money, pigs get slaughtered"
Quoting Guest
"It Is Not The EU Philosophy That The Crowd Can Decide Its Fate"

M. Shulz,
President of the EU Parliament
27th June, 2016

---

Never forget this when your country want its own independence.
Wasn't that a quote from "Mein Kampf" ?
  •  Guest
  • | IP XX.XXX.26.254
Well, if the UK main parties would look at the country or people's interest instead of what good/bad for the party, they'd call for a general elections right this moment. (As would be natural in case the lastly selected ones implode regardless of other issues.)

Then people could elect the desired leaders to arrange the exit or the remain, whatever the choice. And election is inherently binding.
Quoting gammase1
The legality of invoking Article 50....... is highly questionable. ......
Only if you voted remain it is. There is nothing questionable about the democratic vote to leave the EU. It will be done and so it will be.
Quoting cat
Only if you voted remain it is. There is nothing questionable about the democratic vote to leave the EU. It will be done and so it will be.
No, it's a question of Public Law, ensuring that a Prime Minister acts within the established legal framework, respecting the limitations of executive action. Remember that the referendum is advisory, not legally binding - this important legal distinction was agreed by Parliament in the Referendum Act.

How one voted is a separate issue. The law must be repsected, if only to avoid timely legal challenges that will follow any invocation.
I voted to leave, but nevertheless, putting aside all the hysteria from both sides, it should be noted that our membership of the EU was ratified by an Act of Parliament, so in order to give effect to the 'leave' vote, notwithstanding Article 50, that Act will have to be repealed by another Act of Parliament. Since a majority of MP's were in favour of 'remain' what chance is there of both houses passing such a bill into law. Our constitution rests on the notion of 'the Queen in parliament' and our MP's are representatives of the people, NOT delegates and are therefore required to vote according with their own conscience. There is almost certainly a constitutional crisis in the offing.
It matters not how slow we are to learn, as long as we do not stop.
  •  Guest
  • | IP XX.XXX.224.174
the whole brexit referendum has proved that the British, no let's make that the English, political situation is a joke, and the English electorate are a joke, giving "the last great act of defiance" middle finger salute.
Quoting CloudRider
I voted to leave, but nevertheless, putting aside all the hysteria from both sides, it should be noted that our membership of the EU was ratified by an Act of Parliament, so in order to give effect to the 'leave' vote, notwithstanding Article 50, that Act will have to be repealed by another Act of Parliament. Since a majority of MP's were in favour of 'remain' what chance is there of both houses passing such a bill into law. Our constitution rests on the notion of 'the Queen in parliament' and our MP's are representatives of the people, NOT delegates...
I agree. Troubling times ahead. Legally, it seems inevitable that an Act of Parliament will be needed before the irreversible Article 50 is invoked.
Quoting Guest
the whole brexit referendum has proved that the British, no let's make that the English, political situation is a joke, and the English electorate are a joke, giving "the last great act of defiance" middle finger salute.
Astute of you to post this as 'Guest'. Well you have over-stayed your welcome, kindly return to facebook or wherever. <middle-finger-icon>
Carbon-Dioxide: the gas of life!
With Teresa May now virtually confirmed as the new UK PM, where are the "Brexit" crew? All of the big guns of the "leave" campaign have now rapidly "left" the scene. Why have they abdicated, should be the question every "Leave" voter should be asking themselves? In my opinion it's simple: they can blame some one else when the UK population suffers declining living standards. What a bunch of "T*SS**S.
Teresa May has stated that Brexit is the way forward.
Carbon-Dioxide: the gas of life!
Quoting Denandjo
With Teresa May now virtually confirmed as the new UK PM, where are the "Brexit" crew? All of the big guns of the "leave" campaign have now rapidly "left" the scene. Why have they abdicated, should be the question every "Leave" voter should be asking themselves? In my opinion it's simple: they can blame some one else when the UK population suffers declining living standards. What a bunch of "T*SS**S.
I would suggest they have been "Advised " to go by certain un savoy people.
if REMAINERS and barristers are not happy, they can always migrate to other EU states...

The people has voted. Now you tell them their vote is not counted ?? They will give you BIG a middle finger...
Quoting Exodus
Teresa May has stated that Brexit is the way forward.
Theresa May ... the 'h' stands for hot air But I digress...

If Parliament challenges the Brexit vote, a general election would be called. How many politicians WANT to stand for re-election? ... Brexit stands. ... Parliament sits.
Or Falls!
Quoting Denandjo
With Teresa May now virtually confirmed as the new UK PM, where are the "Brexit" crew? All of the big guns of the "leave" campaign have now rapidly "left" the scene. Why have they abdicated, should be the question every "Leave" voter should be asking themselves? In my opinion it's simple: they can blame some one else when the UK population suffers declining living standards. What a bunch of "T*SS**S.
It takes a very different leader to win a war than that required to win the peace. Not a single one of the Leave camp would be capable of reuniting the country let alone the party since this topic has been so divisive, however a Remainer carrying out the will of the majority albeit reluctantly - now that is an entirely different story.
Quoting Denandjo
With Teresa May now virtually confirmed as the new UK PM, where are the "Brexit" crew? All of the big guns of the "leave" campaign have now rapidly "left" the scene. Why have they abdicated, should be the question every "Leave" voter should be asking themselves? In my opinion it's simple: they can blame some one else when the UK population suffers declining living standards. What a bunch of "T*SS**S.
Very good point.
Now for the future. Vote in parliament etc....
Do we think that politicians etc, undoubtedly rich and prosperous, will vote Brexit?
Just my twopence
Beware of robber banks (RB), bad advisors.
  •  Guest
  • | IP XX.XXX.46.242
What happens when the people who voted for Brexit realise that access to the Euro freetrade zone comes with free movement of labour and a large annual payment for the pleasure of being allowed in ,will any British PM knowing this invoke article 50? and in the case that there is no free trade deal and that the conquest of the green grassy "wide open " markets outside the EU might take time and that delay will carry the very real risk of very negative consequences. Did anyone explain the effect on the budget deficit on pensions and public services that such a recession would have ?
  •  Guest
  • | IP XX.XXX.48.180
Don't recall lawyers getting too upset when Major and Blair bypassed parliament to sign the EU treaties in 93 or 07
Quoting Denandjo
With Teresa May now virtually confirmed as the new UK PM, where are the "Brexit" crew? All of the big guns of the "leave" campaign have now rapidly "left" the scene. Why have they abdicated, should be the question every "Leave" voter should be asking themselves? In my opinion it's simple: they can blame some one else when the UK population suffers declining living standards. What a bunch of "T*SS**S.
Congratulations.

You just demonstrated you have zero grasp of British politics.

Let me break it down for you:

1- Boris, or Gove or Leadsome desperately wanted to be PM.

2- they resigned from the race because the reality was they had no chance of ever becoming PM because the vast majority of conservative part members support May - even many leave campaigners

3- some are likely to feature in the cabinet, so don't speak too soon

Read some fukking news, seriously
Quoting Guest XX.XXX.46.242
What happens when the people who voted for Brexit realise that access to the Euro freetrade zone comes with ....
Are you suggesting that only countries who agree to pay and become part of the organ can have a free-trade situation with the EU or EZ ?
Do you think the Americans would subscribe to such a situation ?


Quote
.... will any British PM knowing this... and that the conquest of the green grassy "wide open " markets outside the EU might take time .... Did anyone explain the effect on the budget deficit on pensions and public services that such a recession would have ?
Have you not been listening to the various campaigns in the past months ?
Would you advocate that a heroine addict continue to pay rather than experience the misery that accompanies giving up taking drugs ?
Negative consequences do not necessarily mean recession.
Carbon-Dioxide: the gas of life!
  •  Guest
  • | IP XX.XXX.231.143
wait until the British start negotiating trade agreements, that is what the referendum was all about.
They should just ignore these 1000 barristers who have nothing better to do than interfering with a democratic process. The people have spoken and have decided what Britain wants to do in terms of its relationship with EU and they should just get on with carrying out the wishes of the people.

Otherwise there is no end to it. No matter what decision they arrive at it there is ALWAYS another side that wants the opposite. What then? The whole country forever entangled in everlasting Referendum and never reaching a decision? That is DUMB!!

Enough is enough! You made a decision and now you just work with that decision. No matter what decision you make, if you play your cards right, you can still come out on top. It all depends on how you play your cards.

Britain has existed for over 1000 years, WAY longer than some EU. It's NOT all of sudden going to collapse because it decided to leave the monetary union and neither would EU without Britain. What if Britain has never joined EU in the first place like Switzerland? What then? EU is going to just fold because Britain is not part of it? If that's the case, then EU was going to fold anyway if one country leaving can make that much a difference. The answer is it would not have been and it is not now and it would not be for some time. All EU is doing is just pouting with resentment and bitterness like a jilted girlfriend being dumped by her boyfriend with whom she would've actually fine as just friends but now that he had been closer with her before and now has left her, she decides to hold a grudge against the guy instead of remembering and treasuring the good times that they had. And at the same time, EU wants to show to the rest of her boyfriends what would happen if any one of them chooses to leave her.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
Quoting Forexia
They should just ignore these 1000 barristers who have nothing better to do than interfering with a democratic process...
You, together with many other posters here, have missed the point entirely. Parliament is the only body that can make law, change law or repeal law, and since the UK's membership of the EU was ratified by an Act of Parliament, the only way to give legal effect to the Brexit vote, it is necessary for that Act of Parliament to be repealed by another Act of Parliament. To do otherwise would actually be an abuse of the democratic process. The said barristers, rather than interfering with the democratic process, are trying to uphold it.
It matters not how slow we are to learn, as long as we do not stop.
Quoting CloudRider
You, together with many other posters here, have missed the point entirely. Parliament is the only body that can make law, change law or repeal law, and since the UK's membership of the EU was ratified by an Act of Parliament, the only way to give legal effect to the Brexit vote, it is necessary for that Act of Parliament to be repealed by another Act of Parliament. To do otherwise would actually be an abuse of the democratic process. The said barristers, rather than interfering with the democratic process, are trying to uphold it.
Ah no membership of EU is governed by Article 50 of the Lisbon Agreement NOT by some Act. Britain is still a member of EU right now; it hasn't existed from EU yet so it's the EU law that decides. You can enact whatever Act you want, that's just internal in Britain.

You want to enact another Act of Parliament to make Britain exit from EU fine, then it has to be just a rubber-stamping passing of the bill just to exit from EU respecting people's wishes without any voting by any of the MP's because those same MP's have already voted on the same subject matter in the Referendum. For them to be allowed to vote again on the same subject, same topic would constitute voting fraud because the rest of the country does NOT get to vote again on the same subject matter and everybody is only allowed ONE vote, ONE voice with NO exceptions.

So those barristers still should be ignored.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
If parliament doesn't follow the result of a democratic vote I don't think we have enough police and armed forces to control an uprising of 17.5 million people
Quoting Forexia
You want to enact another Act of Parliament to make Britain exit from EU fine, then it has to be just a rubber-stamping passing of the bill just to exit from EU respecting people's wishes without any voting by any of the MP's because those same MP's have already voted on the same subject matter in the Referendum.
You are correct, but it is important to follow the correct process whatever that may entail.
Carbon-Dioxide: the gas of life!
If the correct parliamentary procedure is NOT followed, any decision will be left wide open to legal challenge and possibly be set aside. If the correct parliamentary procedure IS followed, then the will of the people may well be overturned anyway. We're damned if do and we're damned if we don't!

Forexia – MP's voted in the referendum on an individual basis. Any vote by them in parliament would be in their capacity as MP's. An entirely different matter. It would NOT be voting fraud.
It matters not how slow we are to learn, as long as we do not stop.
Quoting CloudRider
If the correct parliamentary procedure is NOT followed, any decision will be left wide open to legal challenge and possibly be set aside. If the correct parliamentary procedure IS followed, then the will of the people may well be overturned anyway. We're damned if do and we're damned if we don't!

Forexia – MP's voted in the referendum on an individual basis. Any vote by them in parliament would be in their capacity as MP's. An entirely different matter. It would NOT be voting fraud.
If on the same topic of the Referendum whether to stay or remain, yeah it's voting fraud and double jeopardy in judiciary setting regardless which capacity they are voting in. They can vote to their hearts' content but NOT on the topic of whether to stay or remain. That has already been decided. What they can vote on is how to exit, what kind of routes, methods, fashion, how to negotiate with EU, that they can vote on.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
Quoting Forexia
What they can vote on is how to exit, what kind of routes, methods, fashion, how to negotiate with EU, that they can vote on.
Wouldn't that require a parliamentary debate which by its very nature is available to the public or any comentator to view, and in so doing give away their negotiating hand to their opponents? Surely that would be the height of stupidity....
Quoting nbfx
Wouldn't that require a parliamentary debate which by its very nature is available to the public or any comentator to view, and in so doing give away their negotiating hand to their opponents? Surely that would be the height of stupidity....
There is more than one way to skin a cat. If there is no way to skin the cat, then rubber-stamp to pass another Act of Parliament to exit from EU just to satisfy the bloody "procedure". Bottom line, NO voting again on the same topic of staying or remaining in EU!!

People have already voted and have already decided, it's time to act on people's decision. To do so otherwise is not only going to destroy the whole democratic process of letting people deciding the whole fate of the nation but it will also destroy the credibility of Britain as a whole nation on the International stage. You do NOT want to be seen as a wishy-washy idiot that goes back on your words and at the same time betraying your own people's wishes.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
Quoting Forexia
If on the same topic of the Referendum whether to stay or remain, yeah it's voting fraud and double jeopardy in judiciary setting regardless which capacity they are voting in. They can vote to their hearts' content but NOT on the topic of whether to stay or remain. That has already been decided. What they can vote on is how to exit, what kind of routes, methods, fashion, how to negotiate with EU, that they can vote on.
I'm not talking about MP's voting in parliament on whether to stay or remain. That vote has taken place. What I'm talking about is MP's voting on a bill introduced to repeal the Act of Parliament which ratified the UK's membership of the EU in the first place, thus giving legal effect to the vote to leave. If this procedure is not followed, because the referendum was only advisory in nature and the result is not legally binding on the government, the referendum result is left wide open to legal challenge by those who voted to remain and could possibly be set aside. What happens then? I have no idea, but there would almost certainly be calls for a second referendum which would be hard to resist. Conversely, if the correct parliamentary procedure IS followed and a bill is introduced as described above, because a majority of MP's are known to have been in favour of remaining in the EU, what chance is there of such a bill being passed into law unless it is forced through on a three line whip? If such a bill were to fail, we would be back to square one with calls for a second referendum and we would have a full blown constitutional crisis on our hands. I know I'm portraying the worst possible scenario here, but it could happen. By the way, it is NOT possible to 'rubber stamp' an Act of Parliament. A Bill must be voted on and passed by both houses of Parliament before it becomes an Act of Parliament and takes legal effect.
It matters not how slow we are to learn, as long as we do not stop.
Unless we just do the USA way and shoot them!
Quoting CloudRider
I'm not talking about MP's voting in parliament on whether to stay or remain. That vote has taken place. What I'm talking about is MP's voting on a bill introduced to repeal the Act of Parliament which ratified the UK's membership of the EU in the first place, thus giving legal effect to the vote to leave. If this procedure is not followed, because the referendum was only advisory in nature and the result is not legally binding on the government, the referendum result is left wide open to legal challenge by those who voted to remain and could possibly...
This should be a rubber-stamping vote then. All those in favour of repealing the previous Act of Parliament of Britain being a member of EU, say "I"! "I"! Done! Act of Parliament repealed! Britain is leaving EU! If the people have already voted in the Referendum to leave the EU, what is there to debate about whether to repeal the previous Act of Parliament or not; it should be just to repeal. What is there for the "legal challenge"? What is there to challenge legally?

The second Referendum idea is just ridiculous!! If Theresa May, this new PM is smart, she would NOT entertain this idea at all. What if the second Referendum goes the other way with "Remain" being the majority and the "Leave" camp now doesn't like it, are you going to have a third Referendum when it's time to follow the "legal procedure" of repealing the Act of Parliament? And what if the second Referendum affirms the first Referendum results with the "Leave" camp still winning the majority, are you going to have still a third Referendum just to be sure? No matter how the Referendum is, there is ALWAYS going to be one side that's not going to like the result. What then? Britain is going to just keep on having Referendums forever? What about the lives of the British people and the people from EU? Are they ever going to move on or is Britain going to spend all the money it has just to keep on having Referendums while not doing anything else? Whoever thought of this additional Referendums are just sore losers right now.
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
Quoting Forexia
This should be a rubber-stamping vote then. All those in favour of Britain leaving EU, say "I"! "I"! Done! ....
No.....
"All those in favour of repealing the Act of <insert title and date> say I"
Carbon-Dioxide: the gas of life!
Quoting Exodus
No.....
"All those in favour of repealing the Act of <insert title and date> say I"
That's true. I should edit my comment. Done! Thanks
Make your losses in demo. Earn your profits live.
  •  Guest
  • | IP XX.XX.60.175
Trade agreements? What trade agreements? Switzerland has no trade agreements with the EU; Norway either. Neither does the US. The trade agreements amount to this; if we ship a product to your country, it has to abide by your rules. Anyone in the food import business in The US can tell you that. Want some Parm from Italy? It has to be processed in a FDA approved facility and inspected by an FDA approved inspector in Italy or it doesn't make the trip to New York. Want to sell a car in California? I don't care where it's manufactured, if it doesn't meet Cal standards, it doesn't get sold there. Trade agreements; what a laugh. All they are is a way for some political hacks to get around the rules so their corporate buddies can prosper and grease palms while the small guys gets hosed. Hey, sounds a lot like what Brussels does now, doesn't it?
  • New Comment
  •  Guest
  • | IP XX.XXX.48.243
Join FF
  • Story Stats
  • Posted: Jul 11, 2016 3:09am
  • Submitted by:
     Newsstand
    Category: Fundamental Analysis
    Comments: 57  /  Views: 11,348