You'd need to strip out quite a bit of that, include quite a number of the MPs. One of the reasons why Labour's proposals for the north-east didn't get through was exactly that they were simply going to add in another layer of government, and that without any real powers or any real answerability. When English devolution does go further, it needs both.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...
- Thread starter ainsworth74
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Puffing Devil
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 2,766
I've stayed away from this thread for some time as it was getting nowhere. I thought it was worth throwing in the following analysis for anyone who thinks that Brexit will be anything other than a massive clusterfeck.
https://www.docdroid.net/m3YvOS5/brexit-truth-revised.pdf
Very sobering.
https://www.docdroid.net/m3YvOS5/brexit-truth-revised.pdf
Very sobering.
317 forever
Established Member
Indeed, even once we get a deal with the EU - presuming we even do - we will still have to start from scratch with the whole of the rest of the world. Countries outside the EU will all have the choice what kind of deal they agree with us. They will be allowed to maintain similar deals with us that they currently do through the EU, but will have no such duty to do so.
It would be very interesting to get a leaver's view on the referenced article. Not just an offhand dismissal of it but some reasoned comments on the major points made in the document. I suspect that there won't be any posted here because they haven't given any detail on what might happen in the last 2+ years.
muddythefish
On Moderation
- Joined
- 13 May 2014
- Messages
- 1,576
No he wasn't. Europe is an internal Tory party problem - asking the country to resolve it was cowardly and wrong
muddythefish
On Moderation
- Joined
- 13 May 2014
- Messages
- 1,576
Ludicrous
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 8,180
Totally off-topic; if Lancashire has to be spit up into four (Greater Man, Lancashire, Merseyside and Cumbria) in 1974 how does a county such as Herts survive when it constitutes a mix of medium-sized towns and villages and is bordered on one side by Greater London??
Nothing against Herts, I love smaller counties (although Hert's isnt particularly "small", but it doesn't seem financially beneficial??
Nothing against Herts, I love smaller counties (although Hert's isnt particularly "small", but it doesn't seem financially beneficial??
Unlike Lancashire, Hertfordshire did not contain significant parts of big conurbations before 1965, when Greater London was created, with only Barnet being transferred to Greater London. Although it was "lucky" to hang on to Watford and surrounding area as there is continuous urban area between Watford and Greater London.
Hertfordshire is one of the more populated of the non-metropolitan counties.
bramling
Veteran Member
That’s your opinion and you’re entitled to it, but it’s simply that.
bramling
Veteran Member
Why? We’re all U.K. citizens after all. What’s good for one is good for another.
And Hertfordshire’s population isn’t that far short of NI’s. Other counties are more-or-less on a par with NI, eg Kent and Essex.
All the fuss over Brexit thanks to a place the size of a county...
Last edited:
cactustwirly
Established Member
Have a look at East Berkshire, it's basically a stick shape, between Oxon/Bucks and Hants/Surrey.
West Berkshire, is a more reasonable size, but is very rural, and has more in common with Wilts than Bucks
Since when has 700,000 been "not far short"?
Puffing Devil
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 2,766
Never going to happen. That's why the thread was silent for days. Even the simple question of "How the country will benefit from Brexit is ignored". Because there is no benefit. Other than blue passports, made in France and subject to import duty.
You'll see the usual subjects happy to dig into the minutiae of the vote and irrelevant side issues of little substance, but the big issues backed with evidence - nothing. Nought. Nada.
Puffing Devil
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 2,766
And I'll just throw this from Gary Bainbridge as it sums up the whole "negotiation" process, in the language of bake-off.
Gary Bainbridge said:
muddythefish
On Moderation
- Joined
- 13 May 2014
- Messages
- 1,576
....while glossing over hundreds of years of turbulent Irish history, the GFA and the fact the Irish border problem might reignite the Troubles.
If you think that is comparable with Hertfordshire you're being deliberately and stupidly provocative.
bramling
Veteran Member
With respect, all of the above isn’t really my concern. Apart from having some degree of respect for those inhabiting NI, as with those elsewhere within the U.K., I have no real interests in NI. However simply on population terms, or even in landmass size, we are talking about somewhere basically the size of a large county. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to find that situation irritating, as is the fact that anything to do with NI so quickly ends up with the prospect of violence being mooted.
I think it's more likely this thread has gone silent because after two and a half years and 12,000 posts it's obvious to anyone there really is no point. You say people you disagree with can't explain their position. You've had two and a half years of people explaining.
You don't need to agree with other views, but to say nobody's explained those views is nonsense.
This thread died because it became a complete waste of time, sadly. Nobody on either side was going to persuade anyone on the other side to change their opinion. That's not what the conversation should have become, but - as in the country at large, it did.
muddythefish
On Moderation
- Joined
- 13 May 2014
- Messages
- 1,576
Brexit is about the future of the United Kingdom - which includes all its constituent parts, the clue is in the united in the title. You ought to do some background reading on Northern Ireland, its history and the Troubles in particular. It might make you think twice before pronouncing on subjects of which you are clearly very ignorant.
Bevan Price
Established Member
- Joined
- 22 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 7,342
I suspect that a lot of people voted exit because they believed the undeliverable promises and half-truths that were made by the pro-exit side, e.g.
(1) that the rest of the world would be queueing up to give UK super-generous trade deals, and that would include rest of EU.
(2) that after exit, there would be ££££ multi-billions to spare for spending on NHS, etc.
Normally, I would say that the result of a referendum should be final, and decide policy for generations. But I wonder if that should also apply if voters were influenced by the provision of incorrect facts about the available choices ?
Puffing Devil
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 2,766
Proves my point. Avoidance, never any substantive argument.
bramling
Veteran Member
Whatever the debate on the figures, fact is that we won’t be duty-bound to contribute to the EU’s budget. This makes a saving to the British public purse, as well as giving Britain control over where that money goes. The furore and publicity over the “divorce bill” has served to highlight to people just how much Britain does pay to the EU. So in that sense the remain side can’t have it both ways - complain that the leave side grossly exaggerated Britain’s contribution, and at the same time complain that the divorce bill is astronomical!
I would however have preferred not to have paid £1bn of public money for the DUP deal.
bramling
Veteran Member
Not interested. You yourself alluded to 100 turbulent years, and the prospect of the troubles re-igniting over the Irish border issue. As I said, we’re talking about an area comprising roughly the same population of some English counties - and that’s quite correct. So, to put it another way, a disproportionate amount of difficulty caused by a relatively small - in fact very small - subset of the population.
I do sympathise with the situation in NI, however I’m increasingly coming to the view that it’s NI that is the problem, not the rest of the U.K.
VauxhallandI
Established Member
If that little part of the UK with the troubles had been centred around your Barnard Castle would you still think the same?
bramling
Veteran Member
In all honesty, I'd find it an embarrassment.
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 4,923
Well it should be.
It should be up to those who want to leave to come up with a viable solution for doing so.
The NI issue was a bloody obvious one going into the referendum, so how on earth there wasn't a plan put forward by those suggesting we leave on how to deal with it?
Last edited:
bramling
Veteran Member
To be fair, the issue only became incendiary when the DUP became involved in propping up a U.K. government, which was well after the referendum.
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 4,923
It isn't exactly difficult to see what the idea of having a free travel area (the UK and Ireland) while one of them is in the EU and the other is not in the EU isn't exactly a simple issue to solve.
Of course, before the referendum we were told that we could potentially still stay in the single market / customs union etc so issues such as this were less pressing. But now we are being told that anything less than a clean break from Brussels wouldn't honour the referendum, then we have issues like this! It isn't difficult to foresee or understand. It is difficult to solve.
Howardh
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 May 2011
- Messages
- 8,180
Yes, the DUP complicate matters but even so if the UK and republic want an open border with free movement of people and goods across it; it simply won't wash with the EU as that is their border with a country that's left - and putting all the "troubles" to one side, one should ask why all the other EU members would want one of their own to have the advantage of CTA and FoM with the UK and they don't.
Also it would undermine the single market if one border was open and all the goods that require tariffs, duties and checks for legality/suitability on entering/leaving the EU simply cross unchecked.
Finally it throws wide open the phrase "control of our borders" when anyone who is in the EU can cross into Ireland using simply their ID card and then into the UK with zero checks, when the situation could arise at mainland ports (Heathrow, Dover etc) they could need greater checks eg visas??
So the natural answer is either abandon the red-lines on freedom of movement, or make the border "hard". IF we decide the latter we need volunteers to man those posts, preferably people who don't mind if a couple of balaclavaed gentlemen approaching them on a dark night who might be asking them the way. Or not.
Bramling there's a job for you there, mate - good pay and a change of scenery, can I pass on the application form to you??
AlterEgo
Veteran Member
No you wouldn’t. Don’t fall into the Englishman’s trap of thinking you’re any better than people who live in Northern Ireland. You aren’t.
- Status