1949threepence

When you think about it, if Corbyn facilitates a soft deal going through, then he will look like the saviour, and May will have played right into his hands - whether by default or otherwise. I thought Rees-Mogg was at least an intelligent guy, but listening to what he said today about deliberately trying to sabotage EU initiatives if we do stand in the EU elections, I couldn't help thinking he was a bit of an idiot. Especially as he and his ilk have blown it as far as the original deal was concerned, which could have gone though to the relative satisfaction of the public, and possibly blown it for the conservative party as well

I'm no lawyer, but it sounds like a fair point, worthy of consideration. Or to look at it from a slightly different angle - if we had left on 29th March without a deal, nobody could have said that democratic principles had not been scrupulously observed. Parliament were unable to endorse the deal, so we leave without one, in accordance with the democratic will of the electorate.

No. I'm not referring to Chris or indeed to the vast majority of remain voters. Most people who voted remain would bow to the majority will. Such is the basis of democracy. I'm referring to a certain cohort on the left in this country, who almost from Day 1 of the referendum result, have persistently referred to leave voters in very derogatory terms. Intellectually challenged, typically. But also add on racist, extreme right wing, fascist scum etc etc. Not nice, extremely provocative, and definitely not accurate for the overwhelming majority. Surely you must have noticed? I'm not guilty of the same as I'm giving my opinion of their ideas, not of the people themselves, who I know nothing about. I make no pretence about that, unlike them, who claim to know the collective IQ of the 17.4 million leave voters. 100% agree with your last paragraph.

Did you receive a reply, Paddy? I note the coin is still advertised an F112.

It's a ludicrous accusation anyway, which, in line with much of the tripe spouted these days, makes zero logical sense. I'd say it was an attempt by the hard left to paint all brexiters in a certain light - you know the same old tired score, white, middle aged/elderly and male, with extreme right wing views, racist and of low intelligence. A lazy caricature so idiotic as to be unworthy of even the Beano.

Absolutely. There are so many shades of grey. Far more than 40 in fact. On the one hand, if you are in business, it would be insanity not to take advantage of major price rises. On the other you don't want to alienate your customers through transparently obvious sharp practice. So it's a matter of flexibility. Recognising market movements, but also not unreasonably inflating your prices to rip off levels. Not deliberately trying to take advantage of newbie collectors and so forth. Not lying about a variety or exaggerating a grade. If it was me, I might be open to offers, free with technical advice or pointing in the right direction if I didn't know, and maybe throw in the odd freebie extra now and again, especially for long standing customers. Like you, I'd want my customers to see me as a friend, as much as a trading contact. At the end of the day though, honesty and integrity aces all.

...and yet they have items on there which are - in my opinion at any rate - quite reasonably priced. Also, they are open to offers, which is sound business practice, especially for coins which aren't shifting...

I haven't done so far, but would do so if the ideal opportunity arose. As far as slabbing and slabbed coins, I buy the coin. If it comes slabbed I smash the slab open and free the coin. It's a shame that you have to pay a premium for the slab, but if you want the coin then you have to accept that.

If there is a long delay, and we have to field candidates for the European parliament, I can foresee a very low turnout. I know it's traditionally already low, but extraordinarily low this time. Same as the next general election.

The Cooper - Letwin not leaving without a deal bill. "Order....... The aye's to the right 315, the No's to the left 310, so the aye's have it, the aye's have it, unlock" What a surprise.

Perhaps not, but it would in due course. In any case the situation is extremely complex and full of uncertainty. However, now that May is in bed with Corbyn, so to speak, we are obviously going to see Brexit watered down much further, in order to secure Labour backing and finally get something agreed. This was the day Brexit was lost - mark it in your diaries. 3rd April 2019.

TM's deal means we would fully leave on 31.12.20 after a period of adjustment, assuming the backstop situation had been resolved. Sure, we could leave without a deal on 12th April, but the results would be unpleasant in the short term. The way things are headed now, means the brexiteers actually end up with a far worse situation from their point of view than if they had accepted her deal. If we stay part of the customs union it will strongly inhibit our ability to form new trading partnerships with third party countries outside the EU. The majority of parliament were never going to accept a no deal exit - ergo: May's deal was the nearest thing to a perfect compromise, which her side, including the DUP, could have got through despite Labour, had certain elements not been so bloody minded. Their call though, and this is now a perfect demonstration of the law of unintended consequences as far as they are concerned.

Actually it's good that May is now meeting with Corbyn. No time for the arch brexiteers within conservative ranks who are criticising her for doing so, as they should have voted for her deal. She's been left with no option as there is no agreement for any of the proposals so far. If we have a permanent customs union, then we know exactly which stubborn parties to blame. Their fault and theirs entirely, as we could have been leaving with a deal - not a perfect one, but an exit deal nonetheless. Blind unyielding idiots.

Because in this country it's far more usual to leave things until the last possible minute.

They'd been re-elected the previous year with a working majority. There was no real need to hold the referendum so early.

I agree with you on that one. It would have been sensible to wait a little longer as there was never any extreme urgency. Another thing - partially lost in the mists of time - that I've never quite understood, is this: If you remember, back on 22nd January 2013, Cameron said that if the Tories won the next election, (which under the Fixed term parliaments Act would be in 2015, which it was) there would be a referendum before the end of 2017. Yet it was actually called surprisingly early in mid 2016. If usual form had followed, the actual referendum would have been delayed until virtually the last minute. Maybe October or November 2017. I've often wondered why that was.

Except R. Ingram.

But that's what a referendum is - and some huge issues can only be decided by referendum.

Yes, in an ideal world every point of view would be taken into account. But the nature of a referendum is to take a snapshot view at a given point in time, from those who are able and willing to vote. That's their very essence. There was a referendum in 1975 to confirm us staying in the then Common Market. I don't imagine too much thought was given then to the 33% who voted against, nor to those who didn't bother voting. Nor to those too young to vote at that time, or to those (including me) who were not yet born. As far as those who for whatever reason decide not to vote when they could do, I've got no time. Their opinion is the least important as they have passed up their opportunity of their volition. For those of a younger demographic who feel their opinion is more important than anybody else's - sorry, no. Democracy is based on every vote being of equal value, with no vote or group more important than anybody else's. To stray away from that principle is to go down an extremely dangerous path. One which essentially compromises democracy and would cause deep resentment among some, and an artificial feeling of self importance among others. For those who were too young to vote in 2016, well hard luck. Again, a referendum takes that snapshot view at a given point in time. How else can it be done? In conclusion, we were told that the result of the referendum would be honoured, and people voted in good faith based on that. If that result was not to your liking, then in democratic spirit you should bow to the majority will. To now see the current shambles in parliament caused by a bunch of mainly remainer MP's manifestly hell bent on stopping brexit, is appalling. Puffed up with their own arrogant self importance, they clearly are quite happy to "piss all over" the majority of voters in that 2016 referendum. Not my expression by the way. I heard it today at work in connection with the same topic, and thought it was quite apt

That's obverse 2. So if it is reverse B, it's a F177.

Another looming issue concerns the possibility of it soon being too late to organise polling cards and stations in time for the EU elections if we do get an extension. On the news this morning (Radio 4).

Hmmm, their actions may have been within the letter of the law, but certainly not in the spirit of it.

Thanks gents. Some poor unsuspecting individual might well have fallen for that one. I wish auction houses would do their homework a bit more thoroughly. Seems they just accept the vendor's word for it.

I've only got one memory of Neil Kinnock, and that was when he tripped on the beach. Was it during the 1992 election campaign?

I'm not convinced this is a Freeman 112, 1882 No H, as touted by DNW. I don't think it's obverse 11 as the nose is not hooked. Thoughts?