EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Looking at the town areas of north-east Lancashire and areas to the northern part of Greater Manchester, you will see the present community implications of the decision made at high level that saw south Asian sub-continent cheap labour being seen as ideal for working in the Lancashire cotton industry in the years that followed on from the end of the Second World War and the subsequent break up of India into the two current states of India and Pakistan.

The majority of these immigrants were from poor country areas with very traditional Muslim values that imams had no trouble in ensuring that those were not weakened by any real community integration in the years that followed. I note that Pakistan has been in and out as a Commonwealth member state since its inception.

There are still reports circulating today that Sharia law courts are held in basement areas of properties in those communities.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

I know very few people that voted to remain (or will admit to it).
I know very few people that voted Conservative at the last election (or will admit to it).

Does that mean most remainers are also Conservative and most Conservatives are remainers?

Logically therefore, on the basis of my somewhat flawed statistics, the Conservative party should be fighting to remain in Europe (the institution/s not the geographical entity) and the Labour party should be fighting to leave.

Or do the political parties not represent the people that vote for them except when it suits?

What kind of exit do I want?

I want a return to the type of European Economic Community we were previously engaged with rather than a European super state.

I don’t understand why we can’t trade with other countries without jumping into bed with them socially and politically.

Nature always seeks to balance things out. In simple terms, freedom of movement cannot work. Taken to its logical conclusion the population of under developed countries will move to developed countries until things balance out. The developed countries will see a reduction in their standard of living as a result.

The unspoken question is, what kind of remain do the remainers want?

Status Quo? Increased integration? The Cameron deal?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I know very few people that voted to remain (or will admit to it).
I know very few people that voted Conservative at the last election (or will admit to it).

Does that mean most remainers are also Conservative and most Conservatives are remainers?

Speaking only for both my good lady wife and I, both in our 70s, we are both traditional Conservative voters who have never voted for any other party and both of us are proud to say that we voted Conservative at the last General Election and that both of us voted "Remain" in the referendum.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

They say it is not a result of Brexit, but you never know.

In a statement on the Toblerone Facebook page, the company said it had to make a decision between changing the look of the bars or raising the price. The move has resulted in the weight of the 400g bars being reduced to 360g and the 170g bars to 150g, while the size of the packaging has remained the same.

Companies will use any excuse to increase profits. They did it at the time of decimalisation, they will do it and blame Brexit uncertainty. Some of it will be genuinely increased costs, some opportunistic. If we had a free and independent press, supporting decent investigative journalism, they would root out the truth and present it to us. The companies trying it on would have to retreat (or take it on the chin), the genuine price rises / size reductions would be generally accepted.

As a better, longer term example. Whittards of Chelsea produce some rather nice hot chocolate. In recent years they have both increased the cost of the product and reduced the packed weight at the same time. Next time around I am sure Brexit will be the reason given.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Speaking only for both my good lady wife and I, both in our 70s, we are both traditional Conservative voters who have never voted for any other party and both of us are proud to say that we voted Conservative at the last General Election and that both of us voted "Remain" in the referendum.

And therein lies the problem. A political party, or movement, is an agglomeration of ideas, some of which their supporters / members support wholeheartedly, some less so.

It is said that people (generally) vote for the least worst option, rather than positively for any particular party. That would certainly be the case were I in the USA today!

The referendum was a very blunt instrument, with poor information presented by both sides. Wild claims about savings by the exit camp, project fear by the remain camp. But whose fault was that? I didn't decide to have the referendum, I didn't decide the question, I didn't decide the timing, I didn't decide the tone of the respective campaigns. At the strategic level certain people need to ask themselves some serious questions about their abilities. Then again Cameron went straight away to live the remainder of his life massively subsidised by the state whether he needs it of not (ex prime ministers allowance, office costs, security and the rest).

I was presented with a simple choice. Yes, no, or don't vote at all. Not much room for nuance there.

 

[DarloRich]

That's a bit unhelpful, silly and childish

Well perhaps if your sainted Tories invested in the public services we might be able to cope. That is the other elephant in the room.

very odd. Very odd indeed. Strange chap.

Odd again. Because everyone who voted remain lives in a gated community as some liberal elite separated from the rest. Perhaps there is a some kind of secret handshake. Small minded madness.

I don't vote Tory nor any of the mainstream parties. At the last GE I voted Independent. Besides, the Tories had to share power with the Liberal Democrats for five years - I am guessing that the way to go about investing in public services was something neither side could agree on. Anyway, Blair and Brown had 13 years to sort that out but failed (as Labour usually does).

As for Strange Chap - careful now...that's unhelpful, silly and childish

Small minded, maybe, but I wouldn't like my mind to be so open that my brain fell through. I don't know (nor really care) whether each and every Remainer lives in a gated mansion away from the working class (although I suspect not), but isn't it funny how most of the richer ones care more about themselves than the general good of the community? Vote Remain and we can import more Eastern Europeans who will work for less than the British workers... more money for us, less for them and balls to the great unwashed.

As somebody who came from a tough working class estate, I am not surprised that the working class stuck two fingers up at the Ballot Box and voted to Leave. It is actually funny to see the Remainers panicking that their way of life is now under threat, and that the gravy train is about to slam into the buffers.

If Remainers aren't happy, then Europe is but a train journey away.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Okay, fair enough - how would you police it then? (open question)

So no actual response to any points and the response you give is based on the standard right wing press/farageian sillyness. Do try to engage with the issues on some form of intellectual level.

Take the housing crisis. You blame that entirely on the immigrants. While that is a problem it is not the only problem, or I would say, even the main problem. As I said even with zero immigration we would still have a housing crisis.

Even with zero immigration we would still have problems with funding the NHS and public services.

Even with zero immigration we would still have a shortage of jobs because of the way the economy is balanced. Leaving the EU wont fix that. Leaving the EU wont make there be any more jobs in Sunderland or Darlington or Middlesbrough (All places i have lived - It was fairly tough there too)

it is far too easy to blame the immigrants for everything. The real issues are much more complex. Leaving the EU wont have an impact on immigration despite what Farageists might say.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The referendum was a very blunt instrument, with poor information presented by both sides. Wild claims about savings by the exit camp, project fear by the remain camp. But whose fault was that? I didn't decide to have the referendum, I didn't decide the question, I didn't decide the timing, I didn't decide the tone of the respective campaigns. At the strategic level certain people need to ask themselves some serious questions about their abilities. Then again Cameron went straight away to live the remainder of his life massively subsidised by the state whether he needs it of not (ex prime ministers allowance, office costs, security and the rest).

I was presented with a simple choice. Yes, no, or don't vote at all. Not much room for nuance there.

Exactly - the choice was poor and based on so much falsehood (on both sides) as to be almost pointless. The post referendum responses show few actually understood what the leave vote meant or what they were voting for.

Many people, like the poster above seem to think they have voted to chuck out all foreigners, close the borders and become more English. They voted for "sovereignty" then complained when sovereignty was asserted. They voted to control borders even though it is clear that wont be delivered as they want. They voted on foreigners missing the point trade deals will be tied to access. They voted against the human rights act while living with that protection and the improvements that act brought everyday! They voted against some kind of political elite missing the fact they were playing into the hands of a rich and powerful unelected elite. They bought Nige as a man of the people missing the fact he is the quintessential powerful elitist.

It is crazy and Team Leave were very keen to tap into that lack of education or political intelligence.

One thing is clear - the positive case for the EU was never made. For instance I can walk around my home town and point out roads and buildings built with EU money because the government wouldn't spend it on a dirty northern town.

The government wont replace that EU spending..................

 

[miami]

Fair enough, in part, but then how do you stop the advancement of Daesh in the UK/Continental Europe. France is on our doorstep and has been hit by terrorists hellbent on delivering a poisonous ideology of Sharia Law.

Did you miss the 80s and 90s when terrorists hellbent on conquering an unwilling population were blowing up the UK? Did you miss the 60s through 80s when the human race was at a very real threat of extinction? Did you miss the 40s when the nazis were on the march?

There are always challenges, but how will closing the drawbridge help? If those 1 million refugees wanted you dead, you'd be dead. If 1% of them wanted you dead, you'd be dead. Or would you like a Skittles analogy?

Migration to the UK can be capped

It can be capped, and migration from outside of the EU could be capped before. It wasn't. Our lord and master Theresa May failed to meet her own targets for out-of-europe immigration.

As we increase migration and reduce the number of jobs, we are creating major trouble - a friend of mine was recently told his position at Honda in Swindon is to be made redundant as a machine can do his job. It's not certain that he will get a new job straight away, and with Christmas around the corner that announcement could not have come at a worst time.

This is a major problem that is common across the world and nothing to do with being a member of the EU or immigration. As technology improves the number of jobs needed seems to increase, and has done for 150 years. While Buggy Whip manufacturers struggled, a whole new industry was born. While the typing pool vanished, a whole new industry was born. When taxi drviers vanish, new opportunities will arrive. The problem is moving people from old jobs to new jobs, and there's where a strong state, funded by lots of tax payers and few expensive unproductive pensioners and children, thrives. With the EU we imported tax payers (net contribution) and exported pensioners (net cost) to other countries.

90%+ non urban now... but in the future? I am aware that a lot of these areas are protected, but the point I am trying to make is that they may not always be protected. Laws can change and money can change hands. Just because we have a lovely country today does not always mean it will stay that way, and we must fight to keep the UK as a lovely country.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

OK, lets assume that the population doubles, and infrastructure increases correspondingly. We'd end up with a population of 130 million and 85% of the country would be a green and pleasant land. I suggest parking this item, accepting there is no current problem, and reviewing it when the population reaches 100 million.

Yes, and also they are paying the bigwigs at the top of the NHS far too much.

£200,000+ for a senior management role? Even Theresa May does not get paid that much as our PM.

Our PM is vastly underpaid compared with the business world.

Put the money where it should go - towards improving the services, recruiting more doctors and nurses etc. Also, why not bring back the Cottage Hospitals in villages and small towns?

I just hope that now we are Brexiting the £350m savings get sent towards improving the NHS - if not you might as well hand it over to Sir Branson of Pickles.

There are no £350m savings, there never were, even Farage admitted that. Sadly that lie led to the referendum result.


Your complaints confirm my suspicions. People are unhappy, the papers say blame EU/immigrants/muslims/terrorists, people therefore do that and avoid the actual reality which is a country that has failed to invest in itself.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

One thing is clear - the positive case for the EU was never made. For instance I can walk around my home town and point out roads and buildings built with EU money because the government wouldn't spend it on a dirty northern town.

Whenever this was pointed out vote leave would say "but with the £350m we could spend the money there ourselves, without unelected MEPs in Brussels telling us what to do"

Yes we *could* spend it, but history has shown, no matter the colour of the rosette, we won't spent it.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Exactly - the choice was poor and based on so much falsehood (on both sides) as to be almost pointless. The post referendum responses show few actually understood what the leave vote meant or what they were voting for.

I agree, subject to it being both sides who didn't actually know what they were voting for. Exiteers as to the type of exit, Remaineers to the type of remain.

As for having some kind of national / regional strategic planning, perhaps with intervention in the market to direct the locations of new develppment to poorly performing areas etc. Don't get me started on the failures of all governments (and the supporting civil service) of the past few decades. Even a few Milton Keynes type cities reasonably close to London would be a good start. I suppose HS2 will, potentially, achieve the same by bringing further flung cities closer, time wise, to London. Except my belief is that the jobs will remain in London and people will zoom out to the provinces rather than t'other way round. Not that either option does much for the 'remote' north east. Remote in the sense that it is fairly central when you consider Thurso to Dover!

 

[DarloRich]

I agree, subject to it being both sides who didn't actually know what they were voting for. Exiteers as to the type of exit, Remaineers to the type of remain.

Agreed - I voted remain on the basis that the case was not made to leave on any intelligent level.

I am no fan of the EU or how it operates but felt that I could not support voting to leave (and i considered it) based on the "facts" presented, the lack of a credible (or any) plan to leave or a system to mitigate the risks of departure.

 

[Antman]

There are no £350m savings, there never were, even Farage admitted that. Sadly that lie led to the referendum result.






OMG...................is this still being dragged up?

 

[Howardh]

There are no £350m savings, there never were, even Farage admitted that. Sadly that lie led to the referendum result.






OMG...................is this still being dragged up?

Well, it won't ever be forgotten.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Is anyone here going on the court's decision protest rally?

 

[Antman]

Well, it won't ever be forgotten.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Is anyone here going on the court's decision protest rally?

Obviously not by certain people!

 

[TheKnightWho]

There are no £350m savings, there never were, even Farage admitted that. Sadly that lie led to the referendum result.






OMG...................is this still being dragged up?

Someone in the thread who supports leave sincerely stated they believed we'd see those savings, and somehow it's being "dragged up" because you hate being reminded of how you bought into a campaign of lies and deceit.

I have a lot of respect for the intelligent Leavers on this thread like Baxenden Bank, but you're just ridiculous.

 

[burneside]

There are no £350m savings, there never were, even Farage admitted that. Sadly that lie led to the referendum result.






OMG...................is this still being dragged up?

I didn't vote leave because of an ambiguous statement on the side of a bus.

 

[Antman]

I didn't vote leave because of an ambiguous statement on the side of a bus.

Me neither and I can't really imagine that anybody else did but obviously the remoaners have got no other straws left to clutch at?

 

[WelshBluebird]

Me neither and I can't really imagine that anybody else did but obviously the remoaners have got no other straws left to clutch at?

Are you really denying that £350m a week savings was not at all a large part of the leave campaign? Really?
Sure I doubt anyone voted to leave JUST because of that, but it certainly would have played a part in the whole narrative.
An awful lot of the discussion was about "our money being sent to Brussels".

 

[Trog]

So you think Belgium or Germany doesn't care if a terrorist attack happens in the UK, do they?

Projecting your mistrust of foreigners onto other national governments makes little sense.

While no doubt they would prefer no one to be attacked, they would not be human if they did not think if only for a moment when hearing of a terrorist outrage. "Thank God it was not here."

Governments main objective is to get re-elected, they will therefore tend to act in their own national interest first, because that is where the votes are. If that means doing down a neighbour and they can get away with it they will. Where available a win-win situation may be gone for, but if it is going to be a win or lose situation they like our own government will want to be on the winning side as losing means less votes. Therefore they will not always have our best interests at heart, that is just the way the world works.

 

[TheKnightWho]

While no doubt they would prefer no one to be attacked, they would not be human if they did not think if only for a moment when hearing of a terrorist outrage. "Thank God it was not here."

Governments main objective is to get re-elected, they will therefore tend to act in their own national interest first, because that is where the votes are. If that means doing down a neighbour and they can get away with it they will. Where available a win-win situation may be gone for, but if it is going to be a win or lose situation they like our own government will want to be on the winning side as losing means less votes. Therefore they will not always have our best interests at heart, that is just the way the world works.

And I think "thank god it wasn't here" when I hear that terrorist attacks don't happen in Oxford. Should I campaign for becoming an independent city state?

You do know there are European elections, right..?

 

[GatwickDepress]

Are you really denying that £350m a week savings was not at all a large part of the leave campaign? Really?
Sure I doubt anyone voted to leave JUST because of that, but it certainly would have played a part in the whole narrative.
An awful lot of the discussion was about "our money being sent to Brussels".

If 350m was being diverted to the NHS, then you just know they'd be crowing about it from the rooftops...

 

[burneside]

If 350m was being diverted to the NHS, then you just know they'd be crowing about it from the rooftops...

Until we actually do leave we are still paying our full dues to the EU, so for now there is no money being diverted anywhere.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Governments main objective is to get re-elected, they will therefore tend to act in their own national interest first, because that is where the votes are. If that means doing down a neighbour and they can get away with it they will. Where available a win-win situation may be gone for, but if it is going to be a win or lose situation they like our own government will want to be on the winning side as losing means less votes. Therefore they will not always have our best interests at heart, that is just the way the world works.

Oddly enough, you've just given much of the rationale behind what I think is one of the strongest arguments in favour of having organizations like the EU: Yes Governments will tend to act in their own national interests - and sadly that inevitably can come at the expense of the wider interests of everyone on the continent/planet/some larger geographical area. That's why it's important to have some stuff subject to transnational organizations - to make sure that policies are decided in the broad interests of everyone, rather than having individual countries all fighting their own corners and virtually everyone ending up poorer as a result. That's an issue that I can't offhand recall ever being acknowledged by those who support Brexit .

 

[EM2]

As somebody who came from a tough working class estate, I am not surprised that the working class stuck two fingers up at the Ballot Box and voted to Leave. It is actually funny to see the Remainers panicking that their way of life is now under threat, and that the gravy train is about to slam into the buffers.

As someone who also came from the same background, I wonder what any Conservative Government has done for you, that makes you feel that you'll come out better off after this decision?
And as a supplementary question, once we finally leave the EU, what will you, as an individual, be able to do that you can't do now?

 

[DarloRich]

There are no £350m savings, there never were, even Farage admitted that. Sadly that lie led to the referendum result.






OMG...................is this still being dragged up?

Odd that it should come up. It wasn't like it was on a massive red bus or anything. Oh..............

 

[Antman]

Are you really denying that £350m a week savings was not at all a large part of the leave campaign? Really?
Sure I doubt anyone voted to leave JUST because of that, but it certainly would have played a part in the whole narrative.
An awful lot of the discussion was about "our money being sent to Brussels".

I'm sure that there was misleading statements from both sides as happens in most political campaigns.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I'm sure that there was misleading statements from both sides as happens in most political campaigns.

Total false equivalence.

Brazen lies immediately backtracked upon vs predictions that are already beginning to play out.

 

[Howardh]

I'm sure that there was misleading statements from both sides as happens in most political campaigns.

Correct. I'd use a stronger term than "misleading" though!!

Would be interesting what both sides would come up with now if we had the whole farce all over again....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Total false equivalence.

Brazen lies immediately backtracked upon vs predictions that are already beginning to play out.

That £350m/wk for the NHS might be true. Only problem is, the first payment will be in 2022 when Stirling's worth half what it is now....

 

[EM2]

European Parliament considers plan to let individual Brits opt-in to keep their EU citizenship
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...eep-parliament-live-move-abroad-a7405196.html

The European Parliament is to consider a plan that would allow British citizens to opt-in and keep their European Union citizenship – and its associated benefits – once the UK leaves the EU.

The proposal, which has been put before a parliamentary committee as an amendment, would grant the citizens of former member states the voluntary right to retain “associate citizenship” of the EU, such as after Brexit.

Associate citizens would be allowed to keep free movement across the EU as full citizens currently enjoy and would be allowed to vote in European Parliament elections, meaning they were still represented in Brussels.

The proposal could potentially give Brits who live and work across borders a workaround to the disruption caused by the Leave vote – and young people looking to flee an increasingly insular UK greater choice over where to move to.

Amendment 882 was proposed by Charles Goerens, a liberal MEP from Luxembourg. It will be considered by the European Parliament’s Constitutional Affairs Committee, which is drawing up a report with recommendations on “Possible evolutions of and adjustments to the current institutional set-up of the European Union”.

Brexit campaigners in Britain reacted with anger to the idea, arguing that it would discriminate against Leave voters and that it was “an outrage”.

The amendment suggests the provision of “European associate citizenship for those who feel and wish to be part of the European project but are nationals of a former Member State; offers these associate citizens the rights of freedom of movement and to reside on its territory as well as being represented in the Parliament through a vote in the European elections on the European lists”.

Though the British Government has been coy on what it wants Britain’s post-Brexit future to look like, it is likely that British citizens will lose the automatic right to live and work in the EU after Brexit.

This is because Prime Minister Theresa May has made clear that she would like to restrict freedom of movement from EU countries to the UK, a policy that would likely be reciprocated by the EU for British citizens.

Jayne Adye, director of the Get Britain Out campaign described the proposal as divisive and said it was “totally unacceptable” for British people to retain the advantages of EU membership.

“This is an outrage. The EU is now attempting to divide the great British public at the exact moment we need unity. 17.4 million people voted to Leave the EU on 23 June and as a result the UK as a whole will get Brexit,” she said.

“Brexit means laws which impact the people of the UK will be created by accountable politicians in Westminster. It is totally unacceptable for certain citizens in the UK to subject themselves to laws which are created by politicians who are not accountable the British people as a whole. Discriminating against people based on their political views shows there are no depths the EU will not sink to.”

Britain voted to leave the EU at a referendum in June but has not yet begun the negotiation process. The Government is currently embroiled in a legal battle over whether it can trigger negotiations using Royal Prerogative, without consulting Parliament.

 

[ainsworth74]

Sign me up.

 

[yorksrob]

It seems rather a kind hearted proposal to me. I don't see why leave voters should want to create an unnecessary obstacle to those who want to move (if the EU does adopt this proposal).

 

[TheKnightWho]

How would this discriminate against Leave voters..? They could opt in.

Opposing this is essentially forcing those who didn't support what you wanted to lose part of their identity to fuel your own. Pure selfishness. Then again "if I can't have it, nobody can" has been a running theme of certain people for the last 6 years or so...

The real reason they oppose it is because it completely undermines their own hate campaign against the EU. Pure impotent outrage.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

AImmaturity aside, if you listen to people like David Attenborough, his message on the problems of Global Population and the fact that Humans are depleting Earth's resources at an alarming rate rings true:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthnews/9815862/Humans-are-plague-on-Earth-Attenborough.html

Even if it were true, I'm rather curious to know how you think that leaving the EU could possibly have any beneficial impact on resource depletion. If anything, leaving the EU is likely to make it harder to solve the problem - because having Europe negotiate as a single organization makes it slightly simpler, and therefore easier, to negotiate worldwide treaties to tackle environmental issues.

The housing crisis only exists because we have too many people coming here,

That is simply not true. The housing crisis has been created over some decades by not building enough houses. 40-50 years ago we were building over 300K dwellings a year. Since the late 70s that's dropped to not much more than 100K (and yes, I would say, Thatcher's free market ideology did have a lot to do with that, although unfortunately Labour did little to fix it when they were in power). Sure immigration is going to add to the pressure, but it's certainly not the main cause. Also, don't forget that some immigrants work in the building and associated trades - which will tend to cancel out the effect that immigration has on housing pressure: Immigrants need houses but some of them will also build houses.