Who would have thought. An attraction showcasing all that is good about Brexit attracts very few visitors.
What a waste.
What a waste.
Brexit humiliation
- Thread starter noseall
- Start date
Sponsored Links
Oddly, 238'000 people went to see this? Must have been foreigners. Probably curious French, Dutch or Germans. Boris said 'he was confused about what it was actually showcasing', no kidding. Nadine Dorries liked it though (titter).
- Joined
- 31 May 2016
- Messages
- 14,611
- Reaction score
- 2,188
- Country
First sign of madness - talking to yourself.
Sponsored Links
Unless I was reading it wrong, the way I read it, it shows the grasping EU in a bad light.
From Nosey's link:
"They continued: "For the UK still to be paying the EU £10bn per year demonstrates the nature of the EU beast. It also shows the damage inflicted on the country by the anti-democratic actions of the pro-Remain majorities in the Houses of Commons and Lords".
Was actually nothing to do with Brexit. It was to do with British creativity and they 'expected' 66 million visitors? The whole of the UK? Gedoutofit!
UK is paying over £10b a year in Brexit red tape
add in the Brexit cost of over £100b
what an absolute waste of money
My brother-in-law was paying quite a bit to his ex-wife after divorcing her. Cost a bit for a while but it’s all over now and both Mrs Mottie and her sister have just been repaid a sizeable chunk of cash that they loaned him now that he is finally free of his shackles. That’s how divorces work. It’s all going to plan.
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2022
- Messages
- 9,095
- Reaction score
- 691
- Country
did he have some benefit from the day he started the divorce ?My brother-in-law was paying quite a bit to his ex-wife after divorcing her. Cost a bit for a while but it’s all over now and both Mrs Mottie and her sister have just been repaid a sizeable chunk of cash that they loaned him now that he is finally free of his shackles. That’s how divorces work. It’s all going to plan.
No. He had major headaches and expense as do most people at the early stages of the divorce. Ask them all ten years on whether it would have been better to stay married because of the initial cost and legal wrangling and I doubt if you’ll find many that will say yes.
Did you bother looking to see why that is being paid. Did you wonder why the UK decided to continue working with the EU on some projects? Those require contributions.
No you post some misleading infantile farting instead.
Take it up with the newspaper, not me.
Well I assumed you believed it.The EU set up in some areas has defined time periods. That is likely to figure in continuing some payments but it seems that works both ways - EU projects here continue until the period ends but as I said this gov decided to remain in some projects. They are often expensive ones so cost needs to be spread between countries. They usually result in jobs in these countries or use of facilities by all. In some ways it's a method of matching the USA. One of the EU's aims.
Sponsored Links
