diable rouge

To be fair Cat, as you yourself posted earlier, you do have 'other options' to remain here should FOM end, with those safety nets you weren't really voting against your own self-interest...

Cat, apologies for getting it wrong about your EU citizenship, what a tangled web you weave...:)

2200...

Mr Corbyn is being found out. His six tests for a Brexit plan are rightly dismissed as impossible to meet. His demand that the?prime minister take no-deal off the table rings hollow when he refuses to throw his weight behind a viable alternative. He is starting to look like just another politician gambling with people?s lives for his?own advantage. Part of an excellent piece in the FT...https://www.ft.com/content/a88bcee2-1d5d-11e9-b2f7-97e4dbd3580d

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > However, a dozen or so immigrants in south east > London is hardly a statiscally acceptable number > so I could be wrong. Plenty are worried such as this group...https://twitter.com/the3million Let's not forget Brits in the EU too. All citizens should've had their existing rights ring-fenced as part of the WA...

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > keano77 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Dropping the fee was welcomed but what our EU > > friends are still annoyed about is that they > have > > to apply not register. Applications could be > > refused. > > > > Post Windrush, you?d think the powers that be > > would know better. > > Im one of your EU friends. And I'm not annoyed in > the slightest. Of course, I don't speak for the > whole EU....so just consider me a case study. You don't speak for TheCat either, he's Australian...:)

Week 20 points... Week 20 table...

JoeLeg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well, so long as they pay to stay then it?s not > true. But as even JRM said this morning, that?s > grossly unfair and should not be happening. > If they don?t pay, then by definition they won?t > have settled status and will have to leave at some > point. I think the point DR (and Mogg) is making > is that it?s a pretty dishonourable way of going > about things in terms of people who have lived and > paid taxes here, to tell them they have to stump > up the cost of staying if they want to. > ?65 may not be much to many people, but the > principle is what matters here. Exactly, it's nothing to do with the now withdrawn cost (that's +?400m down the swanny in admin costs by the way), it's the principle of asking them to register in the first place, and the consequences if they don't should we Brexit...

From today, people who have lived in the UK working and paying taxes, some for decades, some having married UK citizens and having UK children, are losing their right to stay here in their homes, with their friends/families, and have to apply and pay for "settled status" or risk being deported after Brexit. How long before we hear a policeman in the street asking to see someone's 'papers'. I hope you're proud of yourselves Leave voters...

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > diable rouge Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > HP, that all relates to Building Regs, Sue is > > concerned about planning permission which is a > > separate issue. > > This Gov guide states that 'rebuilding' comes > > under development that requires permission... > > > https://www.gov.uk/guidance/when-is-permission-req > > > uired > > That then begs the question is what Sue's doing > > rebuilding or simply a repair? > > It always pays to call the planners and > discuss, > > and if they say PP is not needed, get it in > > writing... > > > The whole of my effing bay is to be rebuilt, and > as it's an insurance job I'm assuming they know > about PP and such. Don't assume anything, you will be responsible if it's wrong, not them...

HP, that all relates to Building Regs, Sue is concerned about planning permission which is a separate issue. This Gov guide states that 'rebuilding' comes under development that requires permission... https://www.gov.uk/guidance/when-is-permission-required That then begs the question is what Sue's doing rebuilding or simply a repair? It always pays to call the planners and discuss, and if they say PP is not needed, get it in writing...

100...

I regularly look at Roland's account to get a Leave voters' perspective on the mess, someone who actually understands the complexities of Brexiting rather than jingoistic sloganeering. He's said for a while that May's deal would die and that Brexit, like concepts often do, had failed. In Dec he started advocating for revoking A50 (see his pinned tweet). Sounds extreme and would anger the Brextremists, but I think it would be worth offering this option to Parliament as one of the options as to how we get out of this mess. Although I would welcome revoking A50, doing that alone would give the Brextremists ammunition to say Brexit had been stopped, the 'will of the people' thwarted etc, so rather than just revoking A50 it could have the proviso that Leavers go away and sort out exactly what type of Brexit they want, provide actual solutions to issues, not wishful thinking e.g. the Irish border. They can take as long as they need, then whatever they come up with, have a 2nd ref on it against remaining...

You can put in what is known as a 'hit and miss' staircase, takes up less room than a traditional flight of stairs and meets with Building Regs, which you will need... https://spiralstairs-direct.co.uk/space-saver-loft-stairs/mini-plus-space-saver-loft-staircase-light-beech.html?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI0JjMpsX63wIVKLftCh1IRQQdEAQYASABEgKWlfD_BwE

I reckon that's worth 5 bonus points... :)

Just joined, thanks for setting up. Who's Joe? I'm presuming your Aunt Ursula looks much younger than her age, so I will guess 90...

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I subscribe to your views. You come across as a > knowledgeable and intelligent person who has > reached a considered long term view on Brexit. BREXIT SUPPORTER SUPPORTS BREXIT SUPPORTER SHOCKER! Trinny, you do make me laugh...:)

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Becuase, a recession is a temporary hardship, and > this was a vote which I viewed through a 50+ year > lens. Depends how you define 'temporary'. We're still suffering the hardship of the 'credit crunch' recession of 10 years ago. A No Deal Brexit would compound that...

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...keep our ?49bn, get our dignity back, grasp the > opportunities that arise and do trade deals > elsewhere. Great idea Trinny, I can see you've really thought this through. Let's default on our financial commitments with the EU and strike up new financial commitments with other countries. What could possibly go wrong? Try getting a mortgage when you've previously defaulted on a mortgage. Good luck with that. > It is what the country voted for in the > referendum. But no, the Westminster elite want to > duck and dive and arrive at fudge. Except No Deal wasn't mentioned pre-referendum, quite the opposite in fact, the official Leave campaign said there would be a deal. What you write is a perfect example of what I wrote earlier in the week about Brexiters constantly moving the goalposts...

That's all well and good Gardenman, but how far should I cut back my Buddleia knowing there might be a cold snap coming, is the real dilemma. Are you going to post your useful tips this year?...

Week 20 fixtures... Saturday 19th January Wolverhampton Wanderers v Leicester City AFC Bournemouth v West Ham United Liverpool v Crystal Palace Manchester United v Brighton & Hove Albion Newcastle United v Cardiff City Southampton v Everton Watford v Burnley Arsenal v Chelsea Sunday 20th January Huddersfield Town v Manchester City Fulham v Tottenham Hotspur

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It wouldn't have made a difference - we have been > thwarted by lack of ability to negotiate a > position for UK and not surrender leverage. We > were in a strong position to leave and get a > decent deal. That ship sailed with May's red lines...rinse and repeat

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Peta Credin actually completely nails it. > > > 40364289?lang=en What utter, utter tosh, more unicorns shitting rainbows, except with an Aussie accent...:)

At least someone in No. 10 can see the funny side...

Trinnydad Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Two years ago there was talk of engaging highly > experienced trade negotiators from Canada who had > spent the previous 5 years negotiating with the EU > on a trade agreement. Instead we sent in a bunch > of raw recruits who were totally out manoeuvred by > Barnier. We already have a Canadian BoE chief, so > why not a trade negotiator. I'm not convinced having expert negotiators would've helped as there was no plan from the Brexiters. I don't think the EU outmanoeuvred the UK either, the EU have been transparent and consistent about their standpoint from day 1. It's what tends to happen when you negotiate with a rules based organisation, everything is there to see. The EU were never going to compromise their 4 freedoms. The problem has been May's red lines compromised those freedoms and subsequently boxed her in during the negotiations...