With the greatest of respect, the Government does not want a 'No Deal' but believes that it MUST be on the table in negotiations.Once it is removed it weakens the Government's hands in trying to get a new deal.There is no incentive for the EU to significantly amend the current deal - they are quite happy to see us continue to stay in month after month ploughing billions into their coffers.

At the end of the say, 17.4 million voted to leave, "leave means leave" and this 'circus' cannot continue.The electorate are bored and fedup with this whole issue.

I can't wait for a general election where we can vote this combination of internationalists and fifth columnists out.

Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Sep 2019 3.48pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

YOUGOV - Here's what the country's Brexit preferences look like when you ask people to choose from only the outcomes they think can still realistically happen:

No Deal - 21%
Boris Deal - 19%
Remain - 19%
Soft Brexit - 12%
2nd Ref - 10%
Delay - 5%
May Deal - 2%

'The electorate are bored and fed up with this whole issue'.

So they are, and revoking is the answer to their prayers.

It is the only power the UK has actually, to cancel.

The other options continue the angst for many years to come, if you are fed up with it now think how you will feel in 5 years.

Or perhaps 10.

Just to cheer you up....

Well for what it's worth I do think it's a more likely scenario than a 2nd referendum. It would cause uproar though, and the very same issues prior to Brexit would remain. I'm all for taking on board views across the board, but I would see that as being Soft Brexit territory or something along those lines.

Concerns about mass immigration and so on surely will only intensify if we remain. I do appreciate the argument of trying to change the EU from the inside, but how likely is that. Granted we can veto future changes to in from the inside but that doesn't change anything already in place.

There is or was perhaps an argument, while inside the EU, for trying to limit numbers by making the process very convoluted, paying whatever fines come our way but I don't actually think our government would adhere to that anyway. They quite liked the set up of having cheap labour while being able to blame the EU for it. Win-win.

Not that I'm saying that immigration factors in with you as an issue here. But not being able to have any top end limit or say in it as a nation, while there are issues such as housing and so on, was fairly central to how we ended up in this position to begin with. It's not an unreasonable thing to want as a nation and if the EU had offered more flexibility on that front we wouldn't have been in this position to begin with.

You know fuhrer (English spelling) just means leader or guide don't you? Even though they try to avoid it on its own It's still exists in modern German within some words.

It's funny because the Labour party is literally headed by two Marxists...Yet you want to describe Johnson....a neo liberal conservative with a Churchill fixation as 'fuhrer'.

Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Sep 2019 4.42pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)