Brexit

[rob_gould]

That is certainly the feeling in our household. A few years back it was the politician's expenses scandal, now it is completely ignoring the wishes of the people just like the bureaucrats in the EU. They should all be shot.

Cheers

Ian

Umm, my understanding is that new laws are written by civil servants in the European Commission (the unelected bureaurats which I assume you're referring to) but EU laws are actually passed by MEPs, who you, I and every other voting age citizen from every one of the member states has the right to vote in or out every five years. No new EU law is passed by anyone who's unelected.

Anyhow, I personally think that voting down May's deal was the right thing because what she'd negotiated was effectively many of the restrictions of being in the EU with none of the benefits.

Anyone who voted to leave, and is frightened of 'no deal' (which frankly we all should be), perhaps ought to consider whether the referendum question "leave the EU - yes or no" has turned out to be a tad simplistic perhaps.

Given the information which had surfaced over the last two years, the way to move forward should be a further decision about the terms on which the UK leaves. This perhaps shouldn't be a full public referendum but would be better handled by some form of Royal Commission, because the one thing that's patently clear in this entire debacle is that Parliament is utterly incapable of sorting this message out.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Given the information which had surfaced over the last two years, the way to move forward should be a further decision about the terms on which the UK leaves.

Referendum or parliament decision, whatever, is not an isolated matter; it's constrained by how much the EU is willing to give up.

 

[DaveP]

+1

What has happened in the UK can be summed up like this:-

We have been frustrated by the EU court in getting rid of Abu Hanza whilst having to pay his family benefits, this started the rot.

We have been inundated with foreign workers, which changed the character of the country too quickly and gave the impression there was nothing that could be done about it.  Merkel letting in 1.5M Muslims just before the referendum was the coup de grace...........................All this translated as loss of sovereignty to the public.

The data about what the consequences of leaving the EU would be did not appear in time for the referendum, but during last summer, this changed the minds of some leave voters and many members of parliament.  The EU made no sign that it understood or was aware of the mounting pressures its policies were causing in the UK, if it had helped Cameron before the referendum there would have been no Brexit.

Parliament has now got the initiative for sorting this mess out, but will not dump May, because Corbyn would lay the UK to waste.  We live in interesting times!

DaveP

 

[ruffrecords]

Today is the vote of confidence in the government which strangely May is expected to win. I guess I should not be surprised that the thieving bastards always look after number one; none of them wants a general election because they might loose their lucrative jobs.

May has always said it is her deal or no deal and I'll bet she says that a lot in the debate today because that way, if the wins the vote, she effectively has parliaments blessing for no deal.

Cheers

Ian

 

[DaveP]

Parliament will not vote for No Deal Ian, there are a majority of Remainers there.

DaveP

 

[ruffrecords]

Parliament will not vote for No Deal Ian, there are a majority of Remainers there.

DaveP

I agree but will they get the chance? Unless we revoke article 50 we leave at the end of March whatever the deal. Do you think the remainers next step is to invoke the Hilary Benn amendment and take control?

Cheers

Ian

 

[rob_gould]

Referendum or parliament decision, whatever, is not an isolated matter; it's constrained by how much the EU is willing to give up.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. 

I don't mean that more preferable terms can be cherry picked by the UK instead of May's current deal.

The choice would be May's deal (or some version of it), no deal or don't leave at all.

 

[rob_gould]

+1

What has happened in the UK can be summed up like this:-

We have been frustrated by the EU court in getting rid of Abu Hanza whilst having to pay his family benefits, this started the rot.

Anyone who voted leave because of benefits being paid to Abu Hamza's family should have a serious word with themselves about big picture vs little picture.

We have been inundated with foreign workers, which changed the character of the country too quickly and gave the impression there was nothing that could be done about it. 

EU foreign workers have been demonstrated time and time again to be net contributors to this country.  I wonder what the motivation is for the government to not be screaming that fact from the rooftops in order to convince the public about the reality of this, rather than feeding the fire of 'us and them'.

Merkel letting in 1.5M Muslims just before the referendum was the coup de grace...........................All this translated as loss of sovereignty to the public.

In Germany?  I'm not sure how this relates to Brexit?

The data about what the consequences of leaving the EU would be did not appear in time for the referendum, but during last summer, this changed the minds of some leave voters and many members of parliament.  The EU made no sign that it understood or was aware of the mounting pressures its policies were causing in the UK, if it had helped Cameron before the referendum there would have been no Brexit.

The EU's negotiating position has not changed since the UK announced that it was going to leave the EU.  I'm not sure how the EU can be held responsible for not shoring up Cameron's vanity project that backfired horribly when the UK did actually vote leave.  In fact I'd reverse your statement, and say that Cameron should have been responsible for providing the full facts of what leaving the EU actually meant before calling a referendum.  The utter irresponsibility of his unplanned actions are now plain to see.  No one knew what would happen because, we now know, no one had given the reality of a Leave vote actually happening the first moment's thought.

 

[DaveP]

Anyone who voted leave because of benefits being paid to Abu Hamza's family should have a serious word with themselves about big picture vs little picture.

You are right of course, but ordinary people don't know the big picture, only how it affects them.

EU foreign workers have been demonstrated time and time again to be net contributors to this country.  I wonder what the motivation is for the government to not be screaming that fact from the rooftops in order to convince the public about the reality of this, rather than feeding the fire of 'us and them'.

Again you are right, but when the character of a town they have known all their life changes dramatically, they don't like it.  We have no spare housing in the UK due to immigration.

In Germany?  I'm not sure how this relates to Brexit?

Freedom of movement means they could come to the UK.

In fact I'd reverse your statement, and say that Cameron should have been responsible for providing the full facts of what leaving the EU actually meant before calling a referendum.  The utter irresponsibility of his unplanned actions are now plain to see.  No one knew what would happen because, we now know, no one had given the reality of a Leave vote actually happening the first moment's thought.

That is not fair, he was democratically responding to the feeling in the country which is evinced by the referendum result.  That was a public "snapshot" of public feeling in 2016, a snapshot taken in 2019 would be different as we have all had a crash course in Brexit over the last few years.

The EU works at its best when it legislates for the consumer against telecoms, Amazon, Google, etc and for environmental and electrical standards.  Where it upsets people is over losing sovereignty over their everyday lives.  The "over liberalisation" of EU policies and Merkel in particular has been directly responsible for the rise of the far right in Europe, a much greater evil.

DaveP

 

[Script]

The choice would be May's deal (or some version of it), no deal or don't leave at all.

I deliberately left out the last option you name, as that would certainly feel like treason to some. Questions is: to how many now, in 2019, that the consequences are clearer --  as opposed to back then, when consequences were blurred, to say the least.

 

[abbey road d enfer]

Freedom of movement means they could come to the UK.

That would be devastating for the British, who are known to never go abroad and never impose themselves on foreign countries.
it is disturbing to see how the people of the countries who practiced colonialism are opposed to the arrival of foreigners at home.
I believe it's the same syndrom in France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain...

 

[DaveP]

That would be devastating for the British, who are known to never go abroad and never impose themselves on foreign countries.
it is disturbing to see how the people of the countries who practiced colonialism are opposed to the arrival of foreigners at home.
I believe it's the same syndrome in France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain...

I appreciate the sarcasm, but very recently we both discussed that there were 8% empty houses in France and only 0.8% empty in the UK, which is another way of saying that a small country is FULL UP, this is why freedom of movement hits the UK harder and why Brits make such a big deal about it, it's not rocket science.  The EU seems to ignore this reality because its head is filled with ideology rather than its results!

I have said this before, I moved to rural France for my retirement because it most resembles the England that I knew and loved.  I am not obliged  to embrace the change in the culture of my former home.  If people want to experience Bangladesh they need go no further than East London, If they want Pakistan they can go to Bradford.  If they want New York they can have all the Graffiti they want in London, If they want Chicago they can find all the Black-on-Black knife crime in every major UK city.  Having all this in my face day after day made me feel like a stranger in my own country.  Ironically, it feels better being an Englishman in France because one's attention is diverted by the completely new experiences, like empty roads, lack of litter, absence of graffiti and endemic politeness.  Oh and not forgetting  Les Gilets Jaunes, who take me back to 1789, I am waiting for the new  Robespierre to appear. :

DaveP

 

[zamproject]

I moved to rural France for my retirement because it most resembles the England that I knew and loved.  I am not obliged  to embrace the change in the culture of my former home.  If people want to experience Bangladesh they need go no further than East London, If they want Pakistan they can go to Bradford.  If they want New York they can have all the Graffiti they want in London, If they want Chicago they can find all the Black-on-Black knife crime in every major UK city.  Having all this in my face day after day made me feel like a stranger in my own country.  Ironically, it feels better being an Englishman in France because one's attention is diverted by the completely new experiences, like empty roads, lack of litter, absence of graffiti and endemic politeness.  Oh and not forgetting  Les Gilets Jaunes, who take me back to 1789, I am waiting for the new  Robespierre to appear. :

DaveP

I don't get it... in a non ideological... just philosophical question... why you consider yourself the right and abilities to change country and pass a border to have "better life" and deny the same right to other ?

What in the basic human right is different between you and a Syrian escaping war for a better place ?

Best
Zam

 

[cyrano]

I understood the UK is a magnet to refugees and opportunists because of a few reasons:

- No need to have an identity card in the UK
- Already a lot of different nationalities living in the UK
- It's very easy to start a business in the UK, even with false or dodgy identity.

Even if some of these are false, it's the belief that these are true that keeps attracting refugees. Simply the hope of a better life. With these refugees come the opportunists. The human traffickers and other criminals. No way to avoid them.

The most successful EU action to keep people in their country, was handing out bricks and mortar in Morocco. It was relatively cheap and relatively free from funds being abducted. Sometimes, solutions are simple. Today, that kind of action is vehemently being blocked by the right. And maybe it's too late. Maybe it can't be adjusted to, say, Syria?

Meanwhile, the Dutch govt has been found to be financing ISIS in Syria. By accident, of course. 55 million Euro went to the wrong camp. Several Dutch ambassadors to Syria knew what was wrong, but the govt wouldn't listen.

Over here, Syrian Christians can get into the country. Now we discovered that the Syrian Christian leader in Belgium who was cooperating with our right-wing minister of immigration to fasttrack the dossiers, was getting paid handsomely by the refugees. He's facing jail time for human trafficking now.

Just a few examples of how things are going wrong, even without a conspiracy, or evil intent.

We have to get rid of feelings like "immigrants are evil", or "the EU is evil". Or even "all politicians are bad". These don't help. They just make the gap wider.

To cite Tom Robinson: "If left is right and right is wrong"...

 

[ruffrecords]

I deliberately left out the last option you name, as that would certainly feel like treason to some. Questions is: to how many now, in 2019, that the consequences are clearer --  as opposed to back then, when consequences were blurred, to say the least.

Do you seriously think the average guy in the UK has any better idea now of the consequences than he did back in 2016?

We still hear nothing but FUD from both sides. All the last two years has done is convince the British public that their politicians are nothing but a bunch of self serving wankers.

Cheers

Ian

 

[ruffrecords]

That would be devastating for the British, who are known to never go abroad and never impose themselves on foreign countries.
it is disturbing to see how the people of the countries who practiced colonialism are opposed to the arrival of foreigners at home.
I believe it's the same syndrom in France, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain...

I think that is both unfair and inaccurate. The UK has always been a haven for minorities. It is not having foreigners in the country that anyone objects to it is the lack of control. And the thing that really annoys me personally was that when we joined the  European Economic Community (EEC) , freedom of movement meant anyone in the EEC who had a job interview in another country was free to go to it and, if they got the job they were entitled to reside there. It did not mean any EU citizen could up sticks and bugger off to another EU country just because they fancied a change. It is the change from an Economic Community to a European Union that many people dislike.

Cheers

Ian

 

[abbey road d enfer]

It is the change from an Economic Community to a European Union that many people dislike.

The restricted concept of Economic Community has shown its limits. Its lack of social unity perpetuates the phenomenon of attraction that leads to the influx of migrants from disadvantaged countries to countries where social policy is developed.
The idea of Union is that the smoothing of differences would diminish the flux inside Europe.
Indeed, it would not diminish the flux of migrants from countries outside the Union, but it is another issue.
According to (questionable) statistics, non-EU immigration in the UK is about 3x that from EU.
To my knowledge Indians, Pakistanese, Bangladeshi do not use the EU as a launching pad to migrate to UK; they probably fly or sail direct or via the Middle East...

 

[DaveP]

I don't get it... in a non ideological... just philosophical question... why you consider yourself the right and abilities to change country and pass a border to have "better life" and deny the same right to other ?

The treaties of the EU gave me the opportunity to move, I have no rights that I have earned personally except that I made myself poor by saving for my own personal pension, which the French are now glad to receive in Carre Four and Leroy Merlin.

What in the basic human right is different between you and a Syrian escaping war for a better place ?

One person is moving with their own resources that benefit the new state, the other is a refugee, but there is not much difference except the quantities involved.  The odd Anglais fits in here and there in France culturally without anyone noticing.  1.5M Syrians cannot be said to have a similar impact,  that number changes the culture overnight. 

DaveP

 

[JohnRoberts]

Looks like she gets another try....  good luck again/still.

Hopefully she has a stronger hand negotiating with Brussels knowing how the public feels (unless they want this to fail).

JR

 

[abbey road d enfer]

I appreciate the sarcasm, but very recently we both discussed that there were 8% empty houses in France and only 0.8% empty in the UK, which is another way of saying that a small country is FULL UP, this is why freedom of movement hits the UK harder and why Brits make such a big deal about it, it's not rocket science.  The EU seems to ignore this reality because its head is filled with ideology rather than its results!

I'm not so sure housing is a determining matter. If it was the case, there would be terrible rejection of migrants in Benelux and there would be very little in Poland,  France, and  Austria. All studies show that immigrant rejection is dominantly irrational. The differences between countries can most often be attributed to history and political manipulation.