It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
We already meet the criteria for joining and they will welcome us with open arms.
And so Attaran is suggesting that Canada take aim at U.S. drug patents.
The U.S. holds more pharmaceutical patents and other intellectual property licences than any other country. But that strength could become a vulnerability if Canada took action to suspend American patents on Canadian soil. Canadian companies would then be able to produce those drugs. "You hit us on tariffs, we hit you on patents," he said.
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: alldaylong
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: rhynouk
originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Freeborn
This is a major economic and constitutional change. People should be allowed a say on.The final outcome. A vote in 2016 should not be binding over what people want now.
But the process of leaving the EU would take 2 years from the moment article 50 was signed. Everybody knew that from day one.
While I agree times have changed, that doesn't mean you have another referendum.
People just have to except the result and work together to achieve it. No matter how much people moan and cry about it, it isn't going to change anyone's mind in the government. Tony Blair, Nick Clegg and John Major can swan around Europe all they want like a boyband, but it won't make any difference.
Why not have another referendum. Yet to hear any proper argument against it.
When David Cameron called the referendum, at no time did he state that a second referendum would be called to confirm the result of the first referendum.
I know that, you know that and everyone else knows that. You are arguing a lost cause.
David Cameron doesn't get to make that decision any more than you or I do.
David Cameron has said the British people must "have their say" on Europe as he pledged an in/out referendum if the Conservatives win the election
And the leave camp claimed we would still have access to the single market and no border with Ireland. Turns out remain was correct then.
Referendum
noun [ C ] UK /ˌref.əˈren.dəm/ US /ˌref.əˈren.dəm/ plural referendums or formal referenda formal plebiscite
A vote in which all the people in a country or an area are asked to give their opinion about or decide
an important political or social question:
2. A Member State which decides to withdraw shall notify the European Council of its intention. In the light of the guidelines provided by the European Council, the Union shall negotiate and conclude an agreement with that State, setting out the arrangements for its withdrawal, taking account of the framework for its future relationship with the Union. That agreement shall be negotiated in accordance with Article 218(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. It shall be concluded on behalf of the Union by the Council, acting by a qualified majority, after obtaining the consent of the European Parliament
originally posted by: alldaylong
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: alldaylong
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: rhynouk
originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Freeborn
This is a major economic and constitutional change. People should be allowed a say on.The final outcome. A vote in 2016 should not be binding over what people want now.
But the process of leaving the EU would take 2 years from the moment article 50 was signed. Everybody knew that from day one.
While I agree times have changed, that doesn't mean you have another referendum.
People just have to except the result and work together to achieve it. No matter how much people moan and cry about it, it isn't going to change anyone's mind in the government. Tony Blair, Nick Clegg and John Major can swan around Europe all they want like a boyband, but it won't make any difference.
Why not have another referendum. Yet to hear any proper argument against it.
When David Cameron called the referendum, at no time did he state that a second referendum would be called to confirm the result of the first referendum.
I know that, you know that and everyone else knows that. You are arguing a lost cause.
David Cameron doesn't get to make that decision any more than you or I do.
He did actually.
David Cameron has said the British people must "have their say" on Europe as he pledged an in/out referendum if the Conservatives win the election
www.bbc.co.uk...
www.bbc.co.uk...
ukandeu.ac.uk...
time.com...
www.telegraph.co.uk...
Want some more ?
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: ScepticScot
You still haven't answered my question, did you know that WTO rules were a potential outcome of leaving the EU?
I knew, the remain support leaflets told me about it.
I voted leave and democracy is following the will of the people.
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: ScepticScot
You still haven't answered my question, did you know that WTO rules were a potential outcome of leaving the EU?
I knew, the remain support leaflets told me about it.
I voted leave and democracy is following the will of the people.
Yes I did know which is one of the reasons I voted remain ( not the main one).
And if the will of the people has changed?
Again no argument for not having a second referendum.
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: ScepticScot
Enact the will of the people first then I'm all for future referendums about whatever.
#LeaveMeansLeave
...as you knew when you voted.
originally posted by: ScepticScot
Still not heard an argument against a second referendum.
originally posted by: Itisnowagain
originally posted by: ScepticScot
Still not heard an argument against a second referendum.
I argue against a second vote............
originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: Soloprotocol
We already meet the criteria for joining and they will welcome us with open arms.
Just more people and land for them to lord it over and exploit and manipulate.
originally posted by: CornishCeltGuy
a reply to: ScepticScot
No need to argue against something which ain't happening lol
TICK TOCK TICK TOCK...
originally posted by: ScepticScot
originally posted by: Itisnowagain
originally posted by: ScepticScot
Still not heard an argument against a second referendum.
I argue against a second vote............
Plead give an actual reason why? Genuinely can't see a single valid reason against.