We're approaching the vinegar strokes as far as Brexit is concerned.

[Sir C]

If we actually leave the EU on 29th March I will eat something that's been frozen and then microwaved.

[Monty92]

If we actually leave the EU on 29th March I will eat something that's been frozen and then microwaved.

It's certainly going to be an interesting week, Clive.

I can honestly say I have not one f*ckity clue what's going to happen.

[Burney]

It's certainly going to be an interesting week, Clive.

I can honestly say I have not one f*ckity clue what's going to happen.

Nor me. It's such a gigantic cluster-fùck, I've given up even trying to speculate.

[Billy Goat Sverige]

If we actually leave the EU on 29th March I will eat something that's been frozen and then microwaved.

Is that because you won’t be able to buy any fresh produce? I think my mum and dad have already got their doomsday provisions at the ready.

[Monty92]

Nor me. It's such a gigantic cluster-fùck, I've given up even trying to speculate.

I thought you believed, given there is no majority for any deal on the table, that No Deal is the logical conclusion? :shrug:

[Sir C]

Is that because you won’t be able to buy any fresh produce? I think my mum and dad have already got their doomsday provisions at the ready.

:shrug: I'm not fussed, really. I'm pretty much self-sufficient here. My new chickens are delivering 2 eggs a day and, by September, I'll have apples and cherries aplenty. The EU can shove its fresh produce up its árse and fúck off while it's doing it.

[Burney]

I thought you believed, given there is no majority for any deal on the table, that No Deal is the logical conclusion? :shrug:

There's no getting around the fact that No Deal is the default by law. Assuming May's deal is defeated, it would take a statutory instrument to prevent us leaving on 29th March. The question is whether that is feasible logistically or politically.

[Burney]

:shrug: I'm not fussed, really. I'm pretty much self-sufficient here. My new chickens are delivering 2 eggs a day and, by September, I'll have apples and cherries aplenty. The EU can shove its fresh produce up its árse and fúck off while it's doing it.

I put my first early spuds in the other day, so I'll be grand.

[Sir C]

I put my first early spuds in the other day, so I'll be grand.

I'll swap you an egg for a rake of spuds.

[Burney]

I'll swap you an egg for a rake of spuds.

One egg? For an entire rake? You're taking the pìss, Michael!

[Monty92]

There's no getting around the fact that No Deal is the default by law. Assuming May's deal is defeated, it would take a statutory instrument to prevent us leaving on 29th March. The question is whether that is feasible logistically or politically.

I do find it incredible that even at this point you still think No Deal is remotely plausible.

Honestly, it does surprise me.

Legal default my hairy Hebrew ring piece.

[Sir C]

One egg? For an entire rake? You're taking the pìss, Michael!

Alright, two eggs.

Consider the joys of an egg, ffs!

[Burney]

I do find it incredible that even at this point you still think No Deal is remotely plausible.

Honestly, it does surprise me.

Legal default my hairy Hebrew ring piece.

It's plausible because it is currently enshrined in UK law and could happen by dint of the sheer incompetence of our government and legislators.

I find it incredible that you place such faith in their competence to stop it.

[Burney]

Alright, two eggs.

Consider the joys of an egg, ffs!

OK. Now you're talking.

Throw in first dibs on the next one of your chickens that dies and we've got a deal.

[Sir C]

OK. Now you're talking.

Throw in first dibs on the next one of your chickens that dies and we've got a deal.

Thus is civilisation rebuilt after the apocalypse. Barter. Spuds. Eggs. #capitalism

[Burney]

Thus is civilisation rebuilt after the apocalypse. Barter. Spuds. Eggs. #capitalism

:nod: It's a beautiful thing. :cry:

[Monty92]

It's plausible because it is currently enshrined in UK law and could happen by dint of the sheer incompetence of our government and legislators.

I find it incredible that you place such faith in their competence to stop it.

It's nothing to do with competence. The only way No Deal would ever have been plausible would have been if it was actively pursued by a leader in favour of it.

We know May would be able to get her deal through by holding a meaningful vote on 28 March. So it wouldn't be incompetence that leads to a No Deal, it would have to be by design.

[Burney]

It's nothing to do with competence. The only way No Deal would ever have been plausible would have been by design.

But we know May would be able to get her deal through by holding a meaningful vote on 28 March. So it wouldn't be incompetence that leads to a No Deal, it would have to be intentional.

We know no such thing I'm afraid, m. :shrug:

[Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult]

:nod: It's a beautiful thing. :cry:

No. It would be beautiful if you'd just decided to meet up and make eggs and chips together. Instead you just want to assign a monetary value to everything.

In the same way that raves get corrupted if you insist people pay a certain amount to attend.

[Monty92]

We know no such thing I'm afraid, m. :shrug:

We do. We know that with the live threat of a No Deal just hours away, and with amendments pushing for an extension of Article 50 having failed, she would win by well over 500 votes.

We do know that. You do know that :shrug:

[Sir C]

No. It would be beautiful if you'd just decided to meet up and make eggs and chips together. Instead you just want to assign a monetary value to everything.

In the same way that raves get corrupted if you insist people pay a certain amount to attend.

Egg and chips? You are addressing two culinary masters, g. Two kitchen ninjas. If the good lord gives us eggs and spuds, we're not going to make egg and chips. We are going to create!

[Burney]

We do. We know that with the live threat of a No Deal just hours away, and with amendments pushing for an extension of Article 50 having failed, she would win by well over 500 votes.

We do know that. You do know that :shrug:

That is clearly what she’s hoping for, yes. It’s far from certain to actually happen, though. And if it doesn’t, we have No Deal.

[IUFG]

Egg and chips? You are addressing two culinary masters, g. Two kitchen ninjas. If the good lord gives us eggs and spuds, we're not going to make egg and chips. We are going to create!

beaux oeufs avec pommes de terre ébréchées?

[Monty92]

That is clearly what she’s hoping for, yes. It’s far from certain to actually happen, though. And if it doesn’t, we have No Deal.

No! If it doesn't happen, we have an extension!

Why do you not see this?????? Argggggggggggggggh!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111!!! !!!!!

[Burney]

No. It would be beautiful if you'd just decided to meet up and make eggs and chips together. Instead you just want to assign a monetary value to everything.

In the same way that raves get corrupted if you insist people pay a certain amount to attend.

Pffff. If I corner the spud market and he corners the egg market, we’ll be rich...Rich, I tells ya! Rich beyond the dreams of sultans and potentates! Meanwhile the plebs will be selling us their nubile young daughters in return for the scraps from our plates. As it should be.

Get together and make egg and chips, ffs! You commies really have no clue, do you?

[Luis Anaconda]

That is clearly what she’s hoping for, yes. It’s far from certain to actually happen, though. And if it doesn’t, we have No Deal.

Yep - surely the last two/three years have taught people not to expect/second guess anything

[Burney]

No! If it doesn't happen, we have an extension!

Why do you not see this?????? Argggggggggggggggh!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111!!! !!!!!

You don’t understand the law, m. The law is not flexible here and as things stand it is clear and in the statute book that we leave the EU on March 29th. Between March 28th and March 29th, there is not the time to create a statutory instrument to delay Brexit. It’s not possible.
This blithe talk of delays is all very well, but the law is clear and unambiguous. Without another statutory instrument in place to stop it happening, we leave with or without a deal on March 29th.

[Monty92]

You don’t understand the law, m. The law is not flexible here and as things stand it is clear and in the statute book that we leave the EU on March 29th. Between March 28th and March 29th, there is not the time to create a statutory instrument to delay Brexit. It’s not possible.
This blithe talk of delays is all very well, but the law is clear and unambiguous. Without another statutory instrument in place to stop it happening, we leave with or without a deal on March 29th.

You can keep saying I don't understand, but your workings are exactly the same as mine.

March 28th comes and an extension is no longer possible (for reasons you outline). May holds one final meaningful vote (nothing to stop her doing so, assuming she hasn't been forceably removed by her own party by this point) and so you KNOW - you absolutely do KNOW - that the deal passes by an absolutely huge majority! :shrug:

[Burney]

beaux oeufs avec pommes de terre ébréchées?

There'll be no French talk in post-Brexit Britain, iufg. Anyone caught speaking French will be made to fight in The Thunderdome.

[IUFG]

There'll be no French talk in post-Brexit Britain, iufg. Anyone caught speaking French will be made to fight in The Thunderdome.

apportez-le, baiseur mère, etc

[Burney]

You can keep saying I don't understand, but your workings are exactly the same as mine.

March 28th comes and an extension is no longer possible (for reasons you outline). May holds one final meaningful vote (nothing to stop her doing so, assuming she hasn't been forceably removed by her own party by this point) and so you KNOW - you absolutely do KNOW - that the deal passes by an absolutely huge majority! :shrug:

You keep telling me what I know, but I don't know any such thing. For that to happen would require people and parties who (by that stage) will have rejected the self-same deal twice in Parliamentary votes to simply turn on a sixpence and accede to what will be seen as May's blackmail because it's the only deal on the table. You may be convinced that petty personal, party and doctrinal differences will be put aside and that that will definitely happen because it's the easiest thing all-round, but I am quite prepared to believe it may not.

[Burney]

Yep - surely the last two/three years have taught people not to expect/second guess anything

You'd have thought. :shrug:

[Monty92]

You keep telling me what I know, but I don't know any such thing. For that to happen would require people and parties who (by that stage) will have rejected the self-same deal twice in Parliamentary votes to simply turn on a sixpence and accede to what will be seen as May's blackmail because it's the only deal on the table. You may be convinced that petty personal, party and doctrinal differences will be put aside and that that will definitely happen because it's the easiest thing all-round, but I am quite prepared to believe it may not.

The vast majority in the house who oppose May's deal and No Deal would abstain, allowing the vote to pass without their finger prints on it. Obviously. :rolleyes:

[Burney]

The vast majority in the house who oppose May's deal and No Deal would abstain, allowing the vote to pass without their finger prints on it. Obviously. :rolleyes:

You are making a number of HUGE assumptions there.

I'm not saying that won't happen, you understand? I'm saying simply gaily ruling out the idea of it not happening is remarkably silly.

[Monty92]

You are making a number of HUGE assumptions there.

I'm not saying that won't happen, you understand? I'm saying simply gaily ruling out the idea of it not happening is remarkably silly.

Riiiiiiiiiight.

Your definition of an assumption is very, very different to mine.

[Herbert Augustus Chapman]

Riiiiiiiiiight.

Your definition of an assumption is very, very different to mine.

Well the pair of you never get anything to do with politics right. Berni has progressed in that he seems to have accepted he knows nothing and, as the old maxim says, he who knows he knows nothing, knows more than he who knows nothing.

[Luis Anaconda]

Riiiiiiiiiight.

Your definition of an assumption is very, very different to mine.
It is - he appears to know what it means :)

[Monty92]

It is - he appears to know what it means :)

:nod: I'm sure he assumes it will get dark tonight, too.

[Ash]

It is - he appears to know what it means :)

Like rain on your wedding day.