They really have pretty much broken every promise they made to leave voters before the referendum. It's quiet sad in a way. Of course what's less sad is when it all goes tits up leave voters won't shout at the people who lied to them and then messed it all up, they'll shout at the people who told them the other lot were lying to them and would mess it all up.

There's still no plan on how they are going to process EEA citizens in the next couple years. At current rate it would take 47years to review everyone.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38658998

Once again. our government’s finest representative abroad says just the wrong thing, and Downing Street has to explain what he really means.

no broken promises with that report that is the reason i and others voted leave. that means the single market and everything else ...

maybe the Govt. could get Atos or Capita to review EEA citizens ...

Let's not even get into the '£350m a week for the NHS' thing shall we? We were lied to. OK, you personally may have made the decision you made in complete grasp of the facts (and good for you if you did), but that doesn't change the fact the Leave campaign lied through their teeth. And a lot of people believed them. And when those promises aren't delivered - which will happen, because some of them are impossible to deliver, let alone the ones they never intended to deliver on anyway - there will be a price to pay.

And while we're on it, let's also not get into the fact that the Leave campaign banged on about 'restoring the sovereignty of parliament', yet a crucial policy speech by the Prime Minister was made not in the house of commons, but to an invited audience of foreign diplomats and the world's press.

lets not get into who what where and when told porky pies in the referendum as i am more then happy to post the lies, damned lies and fiddled statistics from the remain side.

whether the money goes to the NHS or anywhere else within the UK is not important the importance of this money is that is no longer goes in any way shape or form to the EU. that is important.

it was a speech nothing more nothing less parliament will vote on the outcome of the negotiations not the speech ...

ps. if no deal is agreed or reached by the EU or the UK and/or excepted by either then we automatically move to WTO and exit the EU completely. far easier to do it now instead of wasting two years.

IIRC the leave campaigners where from Labour and Conservative parties. Why then, last night, was the a PPB from Labour blaming the Conservatives for the £350mill bus? Am I missing something or is it just the usual political [LIFTED] crap?

Dunno - maybe because one of the £350 million Bus occupants was Boris, and the other Gove? Boris is clearly a cabinet minster - his daily diplomatic larks in the Foreign Office and other distant lands are clear reminders that this “jolly buffoon” is clearly placing his finger on a pulse somewhere (just not THE pulse). He has the power to be able to push for this to be made real.


But bus wording was very carefully done, though. It didn’t really promise to give £350 million a week to the NHS - it says “let’s fund the NHS instead”. Enogh wriggle room to say “this isn’t a promise, it’s an aspiration”. Of course, people SEE this as a promise because it was in big letters on the side of a bus, and it’s likely that various Leave campaign staffers kind of made the message seem more like a promise.

However, THIS is a little more focussed, and you could argue that this was more of a promise than the message the bus carried. Oh, and there’s Boris, clearly endorsing the message by standing in front of it as part of his Leave duties.

yep, just the usual.
now lets get down to the real business. leaving the EU.

ps. all overseas aid should be stopped completely without exception ASAP. the money is needed at home ...

Overseas aid accounts for what, about 0.7% of GDP? Yes, it sounds like a lot of money when it's presented as £xxx million but in actual fact it's pretty small beer in terms of the countries overall expenditure.
Also, if your objective is reducing immigration then do bear in mind that one of the main things overseas aid is spent on is improving conditions abroad so all the horrible foreigners are more likely to stay in their own country (or at least a refugee camp where their lives are at considerably less risk than in their home country).

If anything, people who want to see a reduction in refugees and more general migration would be better of campaigning for MORE overseas aid no less of it.

Corbyn to call whip on Article 50.
That is, he's going to impose a whip in favour of the government motion. Which seems an... interesting thing for an opposition leader to do. And it's likely to upset a lot of party members and labour voters (labour voters were roughly 2/3 'remain' voters).

NOTE: He doesn't actually say he's going to whip it, but it rather seems to be implied.

Walking through Manchester Town centre, (and I'm sure this applies to pretty much every city in the land) and seeing people huddled in doorways, begging, makes me agree.

We can't afford to feed and house our own and yet we're spending god know many millions on "overseas aid". I'll stop now, before I go on a full on rant.

The way I look at it is this : if you had 20 quid in your pocket, would you give 14p to someone if it might make their life better? That's the proportion of UK government spending that goes on foreign aid. This is entirely beside the argument that if we help make the places migrants are coming from nicer, they're less likely to bother migrating in the first place. which may be true or may not, it's probably something that isn't definitively provable either way.

We do have people on the streets. We do have foodbanks. We do have pensioners who can't afford both food and heating. NONE OF THOSE THINGS ARE ANYTHING TO DO WITH FOREIGN AID. They are to do with the policies of a government that puts cuts to corporation and inheritance taxes as higher priority than social care. A government who talks in terms of 'strivers and scroungers' rather than just human beings.

We have enough money. We could look after everyone we need to here AND give some help to people abroad. We simply choose to elect people to govern us who don't give a [LIFTED].

but would you give them 12+ billion with an annual increase. any aid should be given in the form of goods, services and materials not cash. also i believe overseas aid should be limited to essentials only and only in the event of a disaster. the rest of the money can very easily be found uses for at home ...