This thread is currently locked.

:: New - Old :: Old - New

Pages: Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | Next |

Forum home :: Latest threads :: Search forums
The Comments
20 Feb 2016 13:35 by Mickyfinn Star rating. 1386 posts Send private message

These agreements do not have the same status as a treaty. I suspect you know that and are playing devils advocate.

The treaty based on this agreement will come after the vote. You cannot put the horse before the cart. If the UK votes out there would be no point in a treaty. An agreement is a political promise basically. Of course the cynics say the EU will renege on it but I very much doubt it. 

Cameron did well it is a great achievement in my view. The other leaders were pragmatic and realized the stakes were high.

Now the disinformation, lies, accusations, scar mongering and innuendos will start.  The press is partisan so you won’t find any truth there.

The UK can choose political or economic isolation or membership of a community that has furthered peace for fifty years. It’s an imperfect union, probably not fit for purpose but to leave it is to turn your back on our closest neghbours. Actions such as that have consequences.

Like 1      
20 Feb 2016 14:00 by ads Star rating. 3299 posts Send private message

Perhaps this article may assist in understanding the complexities associated with legal status....

The conclusion being 



The European Council will meet on 18 and 19 February, with the United Kingdom settlement on the agenda. It is expected that a final deal will be agreed there. I conclude that the only way in which the Draft Settlement can work in practice, is if it is not taken to be new treaty of EU or public international law. If it is such a treaty it will inevitably interfere with the constitutional architecture of the EU. It will create ambiguities that may end up in a constitutional crisis, especially since it opens the way for litigation concerning all types of banking regulation, which matters hugely for the United Kingdom.

In my view, the settlement will only work if it is considered by all parties to be legally binding only as an interpretive agreement under Article 31 of the Vienna Convention, and therefore does not even begin to challenge the treaty framework. This may be politically difficult for the Prime Minister, who has promised a legally binding agreement on the ground that it is a treaty. It is clear that “legally binding as a treaty” and “legally binding as an agreement relevant to interpretation” are not the same thing. But given the alternatives, this is the only reasonable way forward for the European Union. This also follows precedent, because it is the way in which European Court of Justice has spoken of a similar agreement in the past.

Of course, it is in the nature of the European Union as a creature of international law, that the masters of the treaties can decide otherwise. They do have the constitutional power to unsettle the constitutional architecture of the Union, undermine the process of Article 48 TEU and create a hopelessly confused and unstable banking union. It would be a terrible shame, though, if they did so without realising it

So the question remains is this agreement legally binding only as an interpretive agreement under Article 31 of the Vienna Convention and does it depend upon the 28 member states who came to this agreement to now collectively act in good faith if the UK remain in the EU?

Like 0      
20 Feb 2016 14:11 by hughjardon Star rating in Jaywick Sands. 421 posts Send private message

hughjardon´s avatar

Well looks like we are heading out the polls say today I for one will not be happy applying for a Visa to travel back and forth and all EU countries have the right to expel British Ex pats if they dont meet the new points test 

I am glad we never registered now and I bet a few of you wish you had followed our example

Love Hugh xx

Done the Spain thing Happier in the UK

Like 2      
20 Feb 2016 16:02 by Mickyfinn Star rating. 1386 posts Send private message


As you may be aware the actual status of anything to do with law or procedure is open to interpretation. That is especially true for anything European. Think of a room full of lawyers and advisors. Then ask them to reach a conclusion on one particular legal interpretation you will get a dozen differing answers. This ‘agreement’ is a first step in the direction the UK wants to travel. It’s a pragmatic political agreement only. The next step will be decided by that room full of lawyers, advisors and 'experts' and a dogs breakfast will result.

Then come endless arguments, potential ramifications and more summits until a final document is produced that may be a treaty or it may not. If it looks like a treaty, smells like a treaty and everyone calls it a treaty then it’s a treaty.

So the answer to your much asked question is……. Nobody yet knows.smiley

Like 0      
20 Feb 2016 16:07 by Mickyfinn Star rating. 1386 posts Send private message

Well looks like we are heading out the polls say today I for one will not be happy applying for a Visa to travel back and forth and all EU countries have the right to expel British Ex pats if they dont meet the new points test 

I am glad we never registered now and I bet a few of you wish you had followed our example

Love Hugh xx

Actually as I have posted under the Vienna Convention 1969 the opposite will apply. They who have registered as residents before the UK leaves will be able to retain and continue with their existing status and previledges. They who did not may be in difficulty.

Like 0      
20 Feb 2016 18:25 by ads Star rating. 3299 posts Send private message

Mickeyfinn (and those interested in the need to gain EU reform) are you aware of the Alter - EU campaign?

Have you seen this article:


ALTER-EU has for years called for clear and binding rules to end the continuing dominace of lobbyists representing commercial interests in the Commission's many advisory groups (the so-called expert groups) . This dominance can have devastating impacts. In the years before the financial crisis, the advisory groups that helped prepare EU banking regulation were captured by banking lobbyists, predictably resulting in the all too soft regulations that enabled the financial bubble that sparked the 2008 crisis. Still today the Commission refuses to introduce binding rules and we continue to see new examples of expert groups teeming with corporate lobbyists eager to shape draft EU legislation. 

The consistent refusal to take the kind of determined action needed to prevent corporate capture scandals reflects a flawed political culture in the Commission. Excessively close contacts and cooperation with big business lobbyists are considered natural and unproblematic, because large parts of the Commission see it as their mission to promote these interests. The EU's trade department, for instance, prepared a negotiation position in the TTIP talks with the US by actively seeking guidance from big business lobby groups, while other interests were largely ignored. The result: negotiations were launched towards a deal with the US including controversial investor-to-state courts (ISDS) and a regulatory harmonisation system that fits corporate interests but would have disastrous consequences for EU citizens. "


After ten years of ALTER-EU battling for transparency, ethics, accountability and democracy in EU decision-making, some progress has been made in the form of new rules and procedures. These rules have proved to be inadequate and the Commission has yet to learn the key message: half measures do not work. This is why there is still no genuine transparency nor any meaningful protection against conflicts of interest and why the capture of decision-making by vested economic interests continues unchecked. 

Change is desperately needed, at a time when public trust in EU institutions is reaching historic lows. The EU's recent prioritising of financial sector and multinational profit over the basic rights of citizens – the treatment of Greece being the most striking example - will only reduce trust levels further. 

..........Now, in the European Parliament, more than 180 MEPs are signed up to a pledge to “stand-up for citizens and democracy against the excessive lobbying influence of banks and big business”. We're a long way off what needs to be achieved but with enough public awareness over the years to come we can build enough pressure to get the meaningful change citizens so badly need.


Shouldn't the "In Campaigners" be bringing this to the forefront of their arguments in order to educate and convince voters that there is a mechanism to effect change but that it relies upon citizens to support such campaign organsiations as ALTER EU?

There is no doubt however also hidden agendas by Politicians wishing to remain "In" who have allegiances to these powerful lobby groups......

This message was last edited by ads on 20/02/2016.

Like 0      
20 Feb 2016 19:07 by Mickyfinn Star rating. 1386 posts Send private message

I agree with most of those sentiments ads. However I'm a political realist not a utopian. .

The way to get any change done in the EU is, as Richard Nixon so eloquently once said. "Get them by the balls first and their hearts and minds will follow"

I think Cameron did that this weekend and they moved...

The EU like so much in life is an imprefect organisation. It's a great lumbering giant with too many moving parts. However it's better there than not. It's better to be part of it and try to influence change from within than not at all.


This message was last edited by Mickyfinn on 20/02/2016.

Like 1      
20 Feb 2016 21:08 by tteedd Star rating in Hertfordshire & Punt.... 898 posts Send private message

David Cameron said at the election that he was going to demand reforms of the EU and protection from immigration. It amounted to a rather small slice of a cake that needs wholesale reforms.

In the event he asked for about a quarter of the slice and gained a few crumbs. These were given grudgingly in the hopes of conning the UK to vote to remain in the EU.

The crumbs may or may not be ratified. If they are they will go the same way as Mr Majors 'subsidiarity'.

I did not believe that Cameron would try Harold Wilson's 3 card trick again but he has. How can the UK ever be taken seriously if we want real reforms in the future? We will be told we have had two re-negotiations already. We will have no credibility.

Every British PM since we have been in has said that he/she will get the common agricultural policy reformed. This wasteful policy still consumes half the EU handouts (to mainly French and S European farmers). They have all failed.

The EU is a home for evermore politicians and tax free beaurocrats. Most politicians like it because it may provide a lucrative income for them if they leave parliament. Nobody knows what happens to vast sums of your money, that are beyond those that are knowingly miss-spent, because nobody is capable of auditing the accounts.

The scaremongers make wild claims about what will happen to us when we leave. They are bogus. The past and the present show us that the EU is of no benefit to us. The future can be in our oun hands if we leave. If we stay the future will be in the hands of the unelected commission.

With regard to recent remarks on this thread. If we leave it is far more likely that the Euro will flucuate in value than the pound as the European scales will tip in the direction of the southern economies and the steadying influnce of the City of London financial centre will be lost. But the Gaurdian is no lover of the city and would be happy for it to fail even if this means that the financial heart moves to Frankfurt.

Like 6      
20 Feb 2016 21:59 by hughjardon Star rating in Jaywick Sands. 421 posts Send private message

hughjardon´s avatar

Im with you ttedd sounds like you know your stuff all makes sense now out out out 

Time for change make BRITAIN great again

Love Hugh xxx

Done the Spain thing Happier in the UK

Like 0      
20 Feb 2016 23:07 by ads Star rating. 3299 posts Send private message

Oh for a trusted and independent source of FACTUAL information on all aspects and implications from which to make an educated judgement....

Like 0      
20 Feb 2016 23:51 by mariedav Star rating in Ciudad Quesada. 804 posts Send private message

Agreed, ads. The problem with this subject is that it seems to bring out the worst in people. Those who advocate IN seem to be relying on the fear factor whilst those advocating OUT seem to make up their facts to fit their ideas.

As I see it, nobody seems to know. Possibly because of a lack of information from both sides. One side says millions of jobs will be lost whilst the other says jobs will be created. There appear to be (I'll be polite) obfuscation from both sides but none are actually coming up with facts about either the in or out will affect us.

I like the post from tteedd but I also feel he has made things up. The pound to euro, for example. At the end of last year and the beginning of this, the pound was doing rather well at 1.43 because it looked like it was a slam dunk to the in crowd. Then the out crowd started doing better and the pound suddenly drops to 1.28 (with predictions of it going down to 1.25). The market hates uncertainty and tteed's opinion that the pound will do better on out is purely that, an opinion.

How about the CAP. Yes, we all know it costs a lot but he says France and S European farmers benefit. Well, looking it up, that is quite wrong. Yes, France gets the most and Spain second but Germany is third, However UK does rather well out of it as well (I hadn't realised the Queen gets 500 million euro a year from it). Also, whilst UK is a net contributor to the EU, only Germany and France are net contributors to the CAP. So, France actually pays more into the CAP than it gets.

I also think we had the original referendum under Ted Heath, not Harold Wilson. Harold signed us up (after he had been rebuffed as had Harold Macmillan) but the referendum to remain was under Heath.

I have also looked up other things because people tell us there is no benefit in EU membership. Really? Water quality and the great beaches and river clean ups we have had throughout Europe have come about by EU directives. The deregulation of the airlines giving us cheap flights have come about by EU directives. Telecomm deregulation ditto.

The outs also tell us that Europe needs us more than we need them because we export 46% to the EU and import 54%. They seem to imply that the 54% is the amount of goods the EU ships to us but it isn't. It is only 9% of the EU export market so UK is not as important as many try to make out. However, I do not believe we would lose that 46% of our exports because they will still want to buy it as much as we will still want to buy their stuff. So, again, is this just people making things up to prove their case?

The problem is, it is such an emotive subject that people will make things up to prove their case whether they are for in or for out. So, yes ads, we do need a BS free list of how either course will affect us but I doubt if we'll ever get it.

I'm with a previous poster. I like the freedom of movement and goods. I like being able to move back and forth with no customs checking on me and not having to pay duty on goods I receive from elsewhere. Yes, we pay more into the EU than we get out of it but I would like someone to explain if jobs do depend on membership and why they don't include financial services in the exports which would put us about level.

Funny old subject. I bet there are more spittle flecked keyboards when this subject comes up than on any other topic, anywhere.

Oh, edited to add

I forgot. I love the old canard about "not being audited". The have been audited and signed off for quite a few years. Despite the British press coming up with the lie, I looked at the actual auditors site which states they have been with caveats. At the last audit (2014) they were signed off with an error rate of 4.2% and the error rate has varied between 3 and 4.8% over the last 7 years, but still audited and signed off. It also compares that error rate with the US budget with an error rate of 5% and the UK welfare budget with an error rate of 5.8%.

So it seems it's perfectly OK to have high error rates but a lower one invokes spluttering and bile because of anti-EU feelings.

From a UK site

Not true. There is a persistent myth (reliably recycled every year by UK newspapers) that the European Court of Auditors has refused to sign off the EU’s accounts, but this is entirely false.

In the most recent audit year (2013), the Court gave a clean bill of health to the accounts for the seventh time in a row. This means every euro spent from the EU budget was duly recorded in the books and accounted for. Evidence

According to the European Court of Auditors, around 0.2% of the EU budget may have been subject to fraud. Any amount of possible fraud is unacceptable and needs challenging. But it’s worth noting that the figure of 0.2% is much lower than most national budgets




This message was last edited by mariedav on 21/02/2016.

Like 4      
21 Feb 2016 09:28 by Hephaestus Star rating in The Peak District Na.... 1257 posts Send private message

Just to clarify matters, Ted Heath was pm in 1973 when the UK voted to join the Common Market, whilst Harold Wilson was pm when the referendum to remain in or not led to a majority to stay in took place in 1975.

If the 'out's' were to to be victorious in June Cameron's position as pm would be untenable, perhaps this is why Boris Johnson is considereing whether to join the 'out's' now that Theresa May has decided to support the pm. I'm looking forward to discussing the matter with my 'left of Lenin' Jeremy Corbyn supporter mate who treats everything that Cameron says as a lie and believes every word that Corbyn utters, how is he going to tell the difference when they are both singing from same song sheet? wink

What does comes to mind is, will certain mp's who want out share a platform with Nigel Farage after calling him everything from a pig to a dog? Well my guess is that everything will be forgotton, as is the way when politics come into play. What I did find to be a little disconcerting is TV reference to which side celebrities will take, I suppose we must wait and see which platform Posh and Becks will adorn. frown     


This message was last edited by Hephaestus on 21/02/2016.


I'm Spartacus, well why not?

Like 0      
21 Feb 2016 09:29 by Mickyfinn Star rating. 1386 posts Send private message

If you are unsure about the issues in the in or out debate consider for a moment the personal politics of the personalities involved.

In the ‘out’ corner the leaders of their campaign seem to be a collection of rightist ministers and back benchers. UKIP is populated by people whose politics are at best quasi racist. Also the odd obscure Labour party worthy such as Frank Field.

For the ‘stay’ campaign you have the entire Liberal establishment, most of the Labour party and the majority of middle of the road one nation Conservative MP’s.

I realise this is perhaps a simplistic straw poll but it’s worth considering for a moment. If you happen to share the views of the right in UK politics then that’s fine. For the rest of us I see worrying signs they have other hidden agendas.

Like 0      
21 Feb 2016 10:03 by mariedav Star rating in Ciudad Quesada. 804 posts Send private message

Just to clarify matters, Ted Heath was pm in 1973 when the UK voted to join the Common Market, whilst Harold Wilson was pm when the referendum to remain in or not led to a majority to stay in took place in 1975.

Yes, sorry, I got them the wrong way round. Funny how the mind plays tricks as I was there when we last voted. I'd convinced myself Heath was PM when we had the vote.


Like 0      
21 Feb 2016 11:33 by GB45 Star rating in Wiltshire and holida.... 131 posts Send private message

Personally, I don't consider it helpful to judge the in/out debate on the personalities of the people involved in either camp.I would be in a quandry (or more of one) if I had to consider Jeremy Corbyn and George Galloway, neither of whom I would ever consider voting for. I would prefer to consider the issues involved. Unfortunately, that is very difficult for the out campaign as it's almost impossible to predict what would happen  and should I be voting anyway? I am 71 so perhaps I should leave it to younger people to decide their future, I had my vote.

I can fully understand that people living in Spain would probably prefer that the UK remained in, then nothing would change for them, or us really for that matter. Perhaps you can understand why some in the UK would like to leave. We live in a small, overcrowded island. In some areas it can take 3/4 weeks to get a doctors appointment, several months to be seen at a hospital. Our children find it difficult to afford suitable housing, there simply isn't enough to go round. Travel in our towns and on motorways is a nightmare..... I could go on but what's the point? I am not a little Englander just a realist. Strangly enough,a lot of my EU friends living in the UK feel the same. You could argue that our Government should have planned for the increase in population and acted accordingly. Unfortunately, they didn't see it coming,Tony Blair has a lot to answer for. Now, we have an opportunity to decide our future, for good or ill.

Like 2      
21 Feb 2016 13:41 by Mickyfinn Star rating. 1386 posts Send private message

I agree with GB45. This referendum will be decided by the young. Many younger people see their future opportunities in a multi ligual open Europe. Some older people tend to lament on the way Britain used to be and believe without the EU it will return to what they remember. It's significant that the 'out' brigade tend to be of the far right and left.

In the original referendum Enoch Powell and Tony Benn were on the same platform. Now we have Geoge Galloway and Nigel Farage together. What a combination.

Like 1      
21 Feb 2016 14:49 by Hephaestus Star rating in The Peak District Na.... 1257 posts Send private message


I agree with both you and GB45, however my son and his wife (both age 37) are committed Europeans, but getting them to vote on something like this is another matter, I reckon that our age group are practiced voters and theirs just aren't.


I'm Spartacus, well why not?

Like 0      
21 Feb 2016 17:11 by GB45 Star rating in Wiltshire and holida.... 131 posts Send private message

How right you are  Hep. My children, in their 40's are exactly the same. We have just been out to lunch with our son and daughter-in-law, also both committed Europeans. Before we left home my husband said "don't mention the referendum"!! I'm not sure where we went wrong as I don't think that they have ever voted. At least they can't moan if they don't get the result they want.

Like 0      
21 Feb 2016 17:25 by tteedd Star rating in Hertfordshire & Punt.... 898 posts Send private message

Exchange rate.

I would not try to forecast the future of the exchange rate. I just made a reasoned response to a contributor that said that the pound would only go down on exit. If I was able to forecast I would be as rich as Mr G Soros and can only assume that the other contributor has removed all his funds from the UK. A lower exchange rate however is good for exports.

EU accounts

The EU accounts are signed of by the EU court of auditors who have no independence (and no credibility). No independant audit had succeded in 19 years to 2014. It is not just the overall figures that should be looked at it is the contents. The miss-use of EU funds is staggering I have forgottom many miss-uses but you could start with Greece's claims for putting olive trees out of production and the total number of olive trees in Greece or the three hellicoptors bought for Spain that are reported to never have been used. When independent minded Danish and UK employees get involved in the audit they are sacked for doing their job. The last reported one was a lady sacked by our own Neil Kinnock.


Common Agricultural Policy

Britain puts about 27% in and gets 9% out. Which is hardly doing well as reported above. Despite having nearly as much agricultural land as Germany and more than Italy we get a fraction of the amount either do.


This message was last edited by tteedd on 21/02/2016.

Like 0      
21 Feb 2016 18:22 by Mickyfinn Star rating. 1386 posts Send private message

To understand the response of currency exchanges around the world to Brixit you need first to understand the complexities of global markets. Investment is key to job creation and currency strength. If investors around the planet think the UK will provide weaker growth outside the EU then they will withdraw their cash. Or not make any further commitments. In fact that uncertainty itself drives down currency values.

Markets hate uncertainty. Sterling will suffer losses until the referendum vote is clear. If it is to leave then parity with the Euro is almost inevitable for the two years it will take to resolve treaty issues before actual exit.

In short Brexit will be a disaster for Sterling and anyone living in the EU with a Sterling income. Personally I have a plan B. Move to somewhere, anywhere that uses Sterling. Except Britain of course. Gibraltar may be top of the list.☺

Like 0      

Pages: Previous | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | ... | Next |

This thread is currently locked.

Previous Threads

Renting - 2 posts
New law for private rentals in Andalucia - 110 posts
Questions for someone who lives in Corralejo, Fuerteventura. - 0 posts
Looking to buy in Hacienda del Alamo - 15 posts
new to forum - 10 posts
Form 210 non residential tax form - 1 posts
Part time self employment - 1 posts
Supreme Court- Law 57/68- Creditor´s meeting - 0 posts
Property to auction - 0 posts
Buying a car to keep in Spain... - 4 posts
Transfering car from UK to Spain How to do it - 14 posts
Moving to spain - 12 posts
Parking at Gatwick Airport - Discount Code - 0 posts
Holiday Rental Website - 0 posts
intercontinental hotel al torre golf opening? - 1 posts
Printed plan of Cala Mosca Development - 0 posts
For sale Ovation Balladeer LX electro acoustic guitar - 0 posts
Job and renting info please? - 6 posts
TV content from 'home' - 5 posts
Donald Trump - 61 posts
Looking for advice on which estate agent to use..... - 7 posts
Buying Travel Insurance whilst living in Spain - 6 posts
Law 57/68 claims - 25 posts

Number of posts in this thread: 7451

DISCLAIMER:  All opinions posted on these message boards are the opinion solely of the poster and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Eye on Spain, its servants or agents.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 | 150 | 151 | 152 | 153 | 154 | 155 | 156 | 157 | 158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162 | 163 | 164 | 165 | 166 | 167 | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 | 180 | 181 | 182 | 183 | 184 | 185 | 186 | 187 | 188 | 189 | 190 | 191 | 192 | 193 | 194 | 195 | 196 | 197 | 198 | 199 | 200 | 201 | 202 | 203 | 204 | 205 | 206 | 207 | 208 | 209 | 210 | 211 | 212 | 213 | 214 | 215 | 216 | 217 | 218 | 219 | 220 | 221 | 222 | 223 | 224 | 225 | 226 | 227 | 228 | 229 | 230 | 231 | 232 | 233 | 234 | 235 | 236 | 237 | 238 | 239 | 240 | 241 | 242 | 243 | 244 | 245 | 246 | 247 | 248 | 249 | 250 | 251 | 252 | 253 | 254 | 255 | 256 | 257 | 258 | 259 | 260 | 261 | 262 | 263 | 264 | 265 | 266 | 267 | 268 | 269 | 270 | 271 | 272 | 273 | 274 | 275 | 276 | 277 | 278 | 279 | 280 | 281 | 282 | 283 | 284 | 285 | 286 | 287 | 288 | 289 | 290 | 291 | 292 | 293 | 294 | 295 | 296 | 297 | 298 | 299 | 300 | 301 | 302 | 303 | 304 | 305 | 306 | 307 | 308 | 309 | 310 | 311 | 312 | 313 | 314 | 315 | 316 | 317 | 318 | 319 | 320 | 321 | 322 | 323 | 324 | 325 | 326 | 327 | 328 | 329 | 330 | 331 | 332 | 333 | 334 | 335 | 336 | 337 | 338 | 339 | 340 | 341 | 342 | 343 | 344 | 345 | 346 | 347 | 348 | 349 | 350 | 351 | 352 | 353 | 354 | 355 | 356 | 357 | 358 | 359 | 360 | 361 | 362 | 363 | 364 | 365 | 366 | 367 | 368 | 369 | 370 | 371 | 372 | 373 |
Our Weekly Email Digest

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More information here. x