Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party.

[nw1]

I've said it before, but I won't ever forgive Boris Johnson, Rishi Sunak and the Conservative party for giving away my right to live and work in the other countries in the EU, which was something I valued considerably and regret losing through no action of my own.

The reality may be that I'll spend the rest of my life travelling to countries I was formerly entitled to go to and, under new rules, will still be able to visit but under their permission and their conditions.

But, to me, this was my primary reason for voting to remain in the EU. I lost, and I'll live with it. But I won't forgive the people who won because of it. And I'll never vote for them again.

The hope is that if enough people perceive that their life is increasingly being made difficult, there is a chance that - while it's unlikely we'll rejoin - we will gradually move closer again. I suspect this ESTA thing will be many people's first experience of the downsides of Brexit, and will help swing popular opinion away from Hard Brexit.

I do hold out hope that a second Starmer term (e.g. 2029-34) might show moves in this direction, with the groundwork for better relations being laid in the first term.

Ironically a Trump win (with his isolationist policies), IMV, makes that more likely. The UK will not wish to be isolated from both the EU and the USA, I suspect. And Starmer and Trump will not be a natural fit (unlike say someone like Braverman and Trump, who could quite possibly get along).

 

[JGurney]

I've said it before, but I won't ever forgive Boris Johnson, Rishi Sunak and the Conservative party for giving away my right to live and work in the other countries in the EU, which was something I valued considerably

Yes, my thoughts exactly.

 

[uglymonkey]

I can't think of anything in this country that has got better since they came to power - everything is worse.

 

[nw1]

I can't think of anything in this country that has got better since they came to power - everything is worse.

I'm certainly convinced that the country is a worse place compared to immediately before the credit crunch.

It's not entirely the fault of the Tories but they do have a role. I think our problems in recent times have been a mix of international ones (credit crunch, Covid, high energy prices) and home-grown ones (austerity, Brexit).

 

[najaB]

I lost, and I'll live with it. But I won't forgive the people who won because of it. And I'll never vote for them again.

Which is why I hate the pejorative term "remoaner". We accept the result is what it was, and that situation is what it is. But that doesn't mean that we can't agitate to improve things.

It's not entirely the fault of the Tories but they do have a role. I think our problems in recent times have been a mix of international ones (credit crunch, Covid, high energy prices) and home-grown ones (austerity, Brexit).

Disagree. They aren't responsible for the external factors, but they are entirely responsible for their reactions to them.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I can't think of anything in this country that has got better since they came to power - everything is worse.

Well just spending about 5 seconds thinking about it, it comes to my mind that, since 2010 gay marriage has been legalised, and across much of the country cycling infrastructure has been much improved. Cycling in London where I live is massively better today than in 2010. Rail services are more frequent in many places, with quite a few new stations/lines opened, and information about late running/cancelled trains much easier to find out. Yes I know that's not much in the big scheme of things, but that's just based on a few seconds of thought. So it's really not true to say that everything is worse (even if you might legitimately say that a lot of things are worse).

 

[nw1]

Disagree. They aren't responsible for the external factors, but they are entirely responsible for their reactions to them.

Indeed, which is why I included austerity in the home-grown list. I do blame the Tories for that, mark my words. And Brexit, well I blame the Tories 100% for that, of course.

But, I don't blame the UK government (and certainly not Gordon Brown or Labour) for the credit crunch, even though it was fashionable so to do for a few years.

Well just spending about 5 seconds thinking about it, it comes to my mind that, since 2010 gay marriage has been legalised, and across much of the country cycling infrastructure has been much improved. Cycling in London where I live is massively better today than in 2010. Rail services are more frequent in many places, with quite a few new stations/lines opened, and information about late running/cancelled trains much easier to find out. Yes I know that's not much in the big scheme of things, but that's just based on a few seconds of thought. So it's really not true to say that everything is worse (even if you might legitimately say that a lot of things are worse).

To be fair Cameron's government wasn't 100% bad, and any improvements took place under Cameron - and Labour would have done them anyway. June 2016 was when the Tories really went to pot.

Rail services: not convinced about that at all. SWR, for example, offers a considerably worse off-peak service than at any time from around 1999 to 2019, and a peak service which is poorer than any time since 1967. For example, no xx39 Waterloo-Poole semi-fast any more, the first time there has been no semi-fast to Southampton since before May 1994. 3tph to Guildford, down from 4tph which was introduced in 1999, and with a 30-min gap (since 1995 there has been at least a 20-min interval off-peak to Guildford). Very few peak additionals out of Waterloo on the mainlines compared to the entire period from at least 1967 to 2019.

Many other TOCs (XC, Avanti) are also offering lower frequencies than they did at the start of 2010, and some have made silly and pointless decisions (such as XC skipping Brockenhurst for seemingly no good reason at all).

I will say the Elizabeth line is a major improvement. However I suspect that's largely at the behest of the Labour-controlled London government.

 

[najaB]

But, I don't blame the UK government (and certainly not Gordon Brown or Labour) for the credit crunch, even though it was fashionable so to do for a few years.

No, they weren't responsible for the credit crunch - lax regulation globally was the proximate cause - but they are responsible for their reaction to it. Which, all things considered, wasn't actually that bad.

 

[Gloster]

One thing that might affect the date of the election is the additional checks on imported foodstuffs that are due to start, if I understand correctly, from the end of this month. This is likely to fairly quickly push the rate of inflation up, so I can see the Conservatives choosing a date when it is only starting to come through to the consumer and the Conservatives can still refer to the old statistics. It is also likely to reduce the variety of food in the shops, although this may take longer to be obvious. They really want to avoid having to explain how this is a Brexit Bonus and why they have massively mishandled the preparation for these checks.

 

[jfollows]

To be fair Cameron's government wasn't 100% bad, and any improvements took place under Cameron - and Labour would have done them anyway. June 2016 was when the Tories really went to pot.

Agreed.
In 2010 I wanted a Conservative+Liberal coalition government and that's what we got, and I was generally happy with it, not least because the Liberal part constrained the more right-wing Conservatives.
In 2015 I wasn't unhappy with the result, but with the wisdom of hindsight I'm less happy about it now. I now blame Cameron for his lack of insight and his overconfidence, if he'd prevailed after the 2016 election I'm likely to have been happier about things since then.

One thing that might affect the date of the election is the additional checks on imported foodstuffs that are due to start, if I understand correctly, from the end of this month. This is likely to fairly quickly push the rate of inflation up, so I can see the Conservatives choosing a date when it is only starting to come through to the consumer and the Conservatives can still refer to the old statistics. It is also likely to reduce the variety of food in the shops, although this may take longer to be obvious. They really want to avoid having to explain how this is a Brexit Bonus and why they have massively mishandled the preparation for these checks.

For sure, but won’t the effects of this only drop out of annual inflation figures in a year’s time, which is too long to wait for the election?

 

[SteveM70]

Which is why I hate the pejorative term "remoaner". We accept the result is what it was, and that situation is what it is. But that doesn't mean that we can't agitate to improve things.

Absolutely

The hypocrisy of some of those in favour of Brexit is astonishing.

Pre-referendum:

- we don’t like the status quo so we’re campaigning for change
- if we lose narrowly we’ll seek a second referendum and carry on campaigning

Post-referendum:

- we won, you lost, deal with it, and if you campaign to change the new status quo we’ll call you a remoaner and accuse you of disrespecting the will of the people
- 52/48 is a compelling result and there’s no reason for a second vote

 

[nw1]

One thing that might affect the date of the election is the additional checks on imported foodstuffs that are due to start, if I understand correctly, from the end of this month. This is likely to fairly quickly push the rate of inflation up, so I can see the Conservatives choosing a date when it is only starting to come through to the consumer and the Conservatives can still refer to the old statistics. It is also likely to reduce the variety of food in the shops, although this may take longer to be obvious. They really want to avoid having to explain how this is a Brexit Bonus and why they have massively mishandled the preparation for these checks.

So I guess that might mean a June election, as autumn will be plenty of time for these to bite.

Why there is any need for these additional checks and charges is anyone's guess. I presume it's retaliation for similar EU checks.

 

[najaB]

I presume it's retaliation for similar EU checks.

Because Brexit was all about "taking back control" of our "strong borders". So they have to implement checks that are at least as robust as the checks our exporters face, otherwise what was the point?

 

[JGurney]

I presume it's retaliation for similar EU checks.

The EU is doing anything unusual to UK imports, just treating the UK like any other outside (non-EU) supplier. That is exactly what the Brexiteers wanted. To leave the EU and then retaliate against being treated as a non-EU country would be absurd.

 

[Enthusiast]

Brexiters might want to reflect on that observation: is that really what they wanted?

What I really wanted was for the UK to leave the EU. Not much else really mattered. The loss of the unfettered right to live and work in the EU was a certainty; the likelihood of requiring some sort of additional authorisation to enter the EU was very high (and I'm surprised it has not been implemented already). Anybody believing otherwise was foolish. I actually found it preposterous that 500-odd million people from 27 disparate countries had the inalienable right to pitch up in the UK, settle and work here, no questions asked. I found it equally preposterous that we could do the same. It's one of the principle reasons I voted to leave. It's still possible for UK citizens to live and work in the EU (as it is for them to do so in many other countries). The reverse is also true. You just have to ask, explain what you have to offer and be accepted, just as you do to settle in any normal country which does not open its borders to half a billion people.

The EU is doing anything unusual to UK imports, just treating the UK like any other outside (non-EU) supplier.

I expected nothing less.

To leave the EU and then retaliate against being treated as a non-EU country would be absurd.

I agree 100%. I voted to leave and was prepared to accept anything that ensued from it. I have no criticism of the EU. They are entitled to do as they wish in the best interests of their member nations. The difficulty I have with Rishi Sunak and the Conservative Party (to bring us back on track) is that they do not do likewise for the UK. The leaving agreement was absurd and the "Windsor Framework" negotiated by Mr Sunak's administration is ridiculous. The people of Northern Ireland have been sold down the river and over the falls. But that's because the current administration (and especially its Civil Servants), by and large, would rather Brexit had not happened. The idea that it did and we should get on with it - in the best interests of the UK - seems totally alien to them.

 

[najaB]

The people of Northern Ireland have been sold down the river and over the falls.

Strange that the people of Northern Ireland are, generally speaking, happy with the framework and the majority say that it gives NI a competitive advantage:

Respondents are evenly split on whether the Windsor Framework is positive (39%) or negative (39%) for Northern Ireland’s place in the UK internal market. Almost two thirds (65%) believe it provides a unique set of post-Brexit economic opportunities which could benefit Northern Ireland.

Source: Queen's University Belfast

In fact, polling in February of this year found a near two thirds supermajority in favour of re-joining the EU.

AS two years of Stormont collapse caused by Brexit tensions has ended, a new poll has found nearly two-thirds of people in Northern Ireland would vote to rejoin the EU.

The DUP’s objections to post-Brexit trading rules and the political turmoil that followed is over for now, but a LucidTalk poll for the Sunday Life and Belfast Telegraph found that if another referendum was held today – most people would face the upheaval of reversing Brexit.

Slightly over 3,200 people across Northern Ireland were asked for their views between February 9-12.

Weighted to reflect the population, 62% chose to rejoin, 35% to stay out while 3% were unsure or offering no opinion.

Source: Irish News

 

[bahnause]

The people of Northern Ireland have been sold down the river and over the falls. But that's because the current administration (and especially its Civil Servants), by and large, would rather Brexit had not happened. The idea that it did and we should get on with it - in the best interests of the UK - seems totally alien to them.

The problems with Northern Ireland were just as foreseeable as the loss of the FOM and the loss of the single market. Those who were in favor of Brexit were also in favor of a border in the Irish Sea. Nothing to do with ciliv servants.

 

[SteveM70]

I agree 100%. I voted to leave and was prepared to accept anything that ensued from it

Anything?

Even if untold damage was done to our economy?

 

[najaB]

Even if untold damage was done to our economy?

Or was a trigger for the breakup of the UK?

 

[edwin_m]

Strange that the people of Northern Ireland are, generally speaking, happy with the framework and the majority say that it gives NI a competitive advantage:

Source: Queen's University Belfast

In fact, polling in February of this year found a near two thirds supermajority in favour of re-joining the EU.

Source: Irish News

Will of the people!

Anything?

Even if untold damage was done to our economy?

This poster would appear to be willing to accept any price (for themself, and expect everyone else to do so too) for leaving the EU and all its arrangements. But this is clearly one end of the spectrum of opinion amongst people who voted to leave in 2016, and many who did so without such a strong conviction have since changed their minds.

 

[Cdd89]

The hope is that if enough people perceive that their life is increasingly being made difficult, there is a chance that - while it's unlikely we'll rejoin - we will gradually move closer again. I suspect this ESTA thing will be many people's first experience of the downsides of Brexit, and will help swing popular opinion away from Hard Brexit.

Is it not possible that it will do the opposite, and make people see the EU as a petty xenophobic and protectionist bloc, moreso than the UK which has no such "I-can't-believe-it's-not-a-visa" controls on friendly countries and indeed lets a lot of lower-risk countries straight through its ePassport gates?

I say this as (generally) supporter of the EU, and an EU passport holder (so it doesn't even apply to me) - but the ESTA has lowered my opinion of the USA, and I expect the same to apply to ETIAS wrt EU.

 

[takno]

Is it not possible that it will do the opposite, and make people see the EU as a petty xenophobic and protectionist bloc, moreso than the UK which has no such "I-can't-believe-it's-not-a-visa" controls on friendly countries and indeed lets a lot of lower-risk countries straight through its ePassport gates?

I say this as (generally) supporter of the EU, and an EU passport holder (so it doesn't even apply to me) - but the ESTA has lowered my opinion of the USA, and I expect the same to apply to ETIAS wrt EU.

Pretty unlikely since we're proposing to set up the same thing

 

[Ianigsy]

The problems with Northern Ireland were just as foreseeable as the loss of the FOM and the loss of the single market. Those who were in favor of Brexit were also in favor of a border in the Irish Sea. Nothing to do with ciliv servants.

Not quite - the Unionists’ red line was a border in the Irish Sea (isolating NI from Great Britain and bringing it closer to the Republic) and the Nationalists’ red line was a hard border on the island of Ireland. Add to that the tendency of some individuals to make things go bang when they don’t get their way and I’m amazed we haven’t had a major incident yet.

Personally I voted Remain, regret the loss of FOM and haven’t been back to the continent since 2017 in part because I’m ashamed. Ashamed of my country, ashamed to be related to several members of my family who were in UKIP and ashamed that the three hours I spent handing out Remain leaflets in Skipton market place achieved nothing. I’ve never really succeeded in any career that I’ve had, so it meant a lot to me that if I was ever made redundant from my current job, I could pitch up somewhere like Avignon with a suitcase and start again - my French is certainly good enough to do a basic office job. Now that’s gone and nothing has replaced it.

 

[317 forever]

Really wish Rishi would hurry up and announce the date of the election. Need to get the day after booked off from work!

I know what you mean.

Some of the worst headlines are those such as "November 14th or 21st". Well, which is it? (Not that they know yet).

It's just a nuisance for our annual leave, and to some extent other colleagues too, if we have to hedge our bets.

 

[bahnause]

Not quite - the Unionists’ red line was a border in the Irish Sea (isolating NI from Great Britain and bringing it closer to the Republic) and the Nationalists’ red line was a hard border on the island of Ireland. Add to that the tendency of some individuals to make things go bang when they don’t get their way and I’m amazed we haven’t had a major incident yet.

A hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland was never ever going to happen. That was obvious to any sensible person. There was no and there is no alternative to the border in the Irish Sea.

 

[317 forever]

The YouGov poll suggests labour will get around 400 seats, and Conservatives 155

For comparison in 1997 Labour got 418, Conservatives 165 (of 659 seats, there are now 650 seats).

What is more interesting is the country is divided regionally, Labour is not popular in South West, and bits of central southern England (and Lib Dem's are expected to win many of their projected 49 seats here). West Wales looks to be be 4 Plaid seats. Scotland is also unpredictable with Labour generally only getting seats in Central belt, never the Highlands. Labour also ignore Northern Ireland.

There seem to be quite a few dozen seats where 3 parties are showing 25% of the votes, so who ends up winning these could easily move around depending on one or two influencing events or gaffs that locally move votes by small percentages.

We could have a similar result to 1997 in terms of Tory seats saved and LibDem gains.

The most likely difference is that 10-20 subsequent Labour seats lost to the SNP could remain SNP.

So, a Labour majority around 150.

 

[nw1]

Is it not possible that it will do the opposite, and make people see the EU as a petty xenophobic and protectionist bloc, moreso than the UK which has no such "I-can't-believe-it's-not-a-visa" controls on friendly countries and indeed lets a lot of lower-risk countries straight through its ePassport gates?

I say this as (generally) supporter of the EU, and an EU passport holder (so it doesn't even apply to me) - but the ESTA has lowered my opinion of the USA, and I expect the same to apply to ETIAS wrt EU.

But the UK is implementing a similar thing: I actually saw a notice to that effect last time I was at an airport, i.e. in January. Later this year, I think.

Plus "we started it" of course. If we had had a Soft Brexit (or even had no referendum and remained in the EU), then we would not be affected by the EU ESTA in any case. So it's our responsibility to make amends, not the EU's.

For reasons I've already mentioned, like you I have a negative opinion of ESTA schemes in general. The US, or more specifically the Bush administration started it (probably as a kneejerk reaction to 9/11), and for a while it stayed there, but now it seems to be spreading round the western world.

I know what you mean.

Some of the worst headlines are those such as "November 14th or 21st". Well, which is it? (Not that they know yet).

It's just a nuisance for our annual leave, and to some extent other colleagues too, if we have to hedge our bets.

Hopefully it's November the nothing. We really don't want another silly winter election with terrible weather and little daylight. October at latest, I hope, and expect.

The EU is doing anything unusual to UK imports, just treating the UK like any other outside (non-EU) supplier. That is exactly what the Brexiteers wanted. To leave the EU and then retaliate against being treated as a non-EU country would be absurd.

But presumably the UK government is doing just that. The EU are imposing charges, so our government retaliates by doing the same. The EU is imposing an ESTA system, so our government retaliates by doing the same.

Back on topic this is one of many reasons, why, IMO, the Tories need to lose the current election and spend at least a decade out of power to regroup and become sane again. Indulging in pride- and ego-driven cold wars with our neighbours in an era of Putin and possibly Trump is a futile exercise.

In other Tory news I see Boris is sticking his oar in again, by coming out strongly against any attempts to suspend arms sales to the Israeli government. As a populist, this is a surprisingly partisan position for him to take on the matter given that the UK population as a whole is not similarly partisan.

Boris Johnson: Shameful to call for UK to end arms sales to Israel

Some MPs have urged the UK to reassess how it supports Israel after aid workers were killed in air strikes this week.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[najaB]

But presumably the UK government is doing just that. The EU are imposing charges, so our government retaliates by doing the same. The EU is imposing an ESTA system, so our government retaliates by doing the same.

I don't think it's a matter of retaliation. As I commented above, one of the stated aims of Brexit was taking back control of our borders. While this was largely taken to refer to people, it equally applied to trade in goods. The situation since we left the transition period has been that the EU continued to apply their pre-existing checks on imports from third-countries (us), while we have done little to no checks at all. Which has put our manufactures and farmers at a competitive disadvantage, and made the UK a smuggler's dream. This means that the government simply has no choice but to implement the same level of checks as the EU as an absolute minimum to level the playing field.

As to the ESTA-like system, I believe we were one of the main architects of it while we were in the EU, so again it would be an admission that the Brexit-emperor has no clothes if they didn't implement our own system, and that's without considering the afore-mentioned "taking back control". It simply wouldn't do if, as a result of Brexit, we had less-effective border controls over the entry of people than the evil EU.

 

[RT4038]

Which is why I hate the pejorative term "remoaner".

I think that works both ways - 'Brexiteer' or 'Remoaner' [pejorative \pih-JOR-uh-tiv\ adjective. : having negative connotations; especially : tending to disparage or belittle : depreciatory.]. Both need to stop, but probably won't in our generation.

We accept the result is what it was, and that situation is what it is.

If only. How much has there been in this forum alone on the whole question of what kind of majority should have been necessary, what assumptions should be made on opinion polls / those that didn't vote etc etc., what kind of Brexit was being voted for, how the result of the intermediate General Election should be interpreted, the list goes on. That isn't to say that people shouldn't have those opinions, but you are right - the situation is how it is.

But that doesn't mean that we can't agitate to improve things.

Quite right too, as with anything any individual does not like, and as with anything else there will be those opposing and that has to be coped with.

Absolutely

The hypocrisy of some of those in favour of Brexit is astonishing.

Pre-referendum:

- we don’t like the status quo so we’re campaigning for change
- if we lose narrowly we’ll seek a second referendum and carry on campaigning

Post-referendum:

- we won, you lost, deal with it, and if you campaign to change the new status quo we’ll call you a remoaner and accuse you of disrespecting the will of the people
- 52/48 is a compelling result and there’s no reason for a second vote

I don't see any real hypocrisy here - If Brexit had been defeated narrowly the Brexiteers would have campaigned for a second vote and would likely have been shouted down by those who wished to remain in the EU [not another referendum for a generation etc.]. And as we have seen with the Scottish Independence referendum, it would have been the Brexiteer's prerogative and right to carry on campaigning however. In exactly the same way, those who wish to rejoin can campaign to do so now - but don't expect those in favour of the UK outside of the EU to keep quiet in opposition either. Activists on both sides need thick skin!

 

[najaB]

I think that works both ways - 'Brexiteer' or 'Remoaner' [pejorative \pih-JOR-uh-tiv\ adjective. : having negative connotations; especially : tending to disparage or belittle : depreciatory.]. Both need to stop, but probably won't in our generation.

I'm not sure that Brexiteer is in quite the same category as Remoaner. To my mind, at least, a Brexiteer is someone who before the referendum refused to acknowledge that there would be any downsides (cf. constant references to "Project Fear". Too many of whom haven't changed their opinion in the slightest and continue to ignore/deny that there have been any downsides.

Remoaner is used by that kind of person to denigrate anyone who doesn't agree with them that Brexit has been an unmitigated success.

Hence I use the term 'Brexit supporter' to refer to people who have, at least, acknowledged that there have been some negatives and 'Brexiteer' to the ones who have their heads in the sand (or firmly ensconced in the distal end of their gastrointestinal tracts).