EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[Senex]

I guess it may turn out that we've all been lied to from each and every angle

Now why would that be absolutely no surprise?

 

[radamfi]

How long do you have to reside in Ireland to qualify for a passport on residency grounds?

A total of 5 years in the last 9 years

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/e..._an_irish_citizen_through_naturalisation.html

Have had a period of 365 days* (1 year) continuous reckonable residence in the State immediately before the date of your application for naturalisation and, during the 8 years preceding that, have had a total reckonable residence in the State amounting to 1,460 days* (4 years). Altogether you must have 5 years (5 x 365 days*) reckonable residence out of the last 9 years

Don't forget to account for leap years!

*You must add 1 day for any period which includes 29 February.

 

[Mvann]

Now why would that be absolutely no surprise?

Of course that's the case. Now the dust has started to settle we will get a better picture.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I think I'd need a particularly large shovel to dig out my relatives, since the 18th century all of mine have come from a 200 mile radius of the south east of England, even though my surname is supposed to be of Welsh origin with Irish and German branches, rather ironically

I feel it's all getting evermore academic now anyway, if it is true that the British Prime Minister cannot activate Article 50 without an act of Parliament, then I wouldn't attempt to hold my breath until it happens

I guess it may turn out that we've all been lied to from each and every angle

As I was back in 2013, I'm concerned that Ireland may change the rules if they see a really large influx.

 

[Rich McLean]

While that's the best option economically, I think those that think we can have a deal that accepts freedom of movement does so at their peril. A friend of mine who lives an area with a large number of EU citizens told me many people had had enough and voted leave, similarly my Dad also has a friend in an area with a Large number of EU citizens and said his son is working 100 mile away from that area at the moment along with some other people from that area and they all drove home on Thursday night to vote leave.

Certainly unrestricted freedom of movement I think will be unacceptable to the electorate, I voted remain but I also believe unrestricted freedom of movement cannot continue, of course the other side of that will be a poor trade deal with significant job losses but I think that will be that reality of what we will end up with.

Of course I know. The decision will be between no free trade and more control, or less control and Free Trade. Whatever decision they come to will be down to looking at what is most important. Keeping the majority of the electorate happy by ending Freedom of Movement at the expense of a trade deal, or upset a lot of people by going EEA to protect the economy and the banking sector. Either way, we lose out and it will be down to overall damage limitation

 

[ianhr]

I had been predicting that a slow economic decline might lag behind a period of political turbulence. However the latest News seems to imply that the result alone might have been the trigger for a meltdown even before anyone has had a chance to invoke Article 50, which T.May is saying she would not do until the end of the year anyway!

I have been amazed by the number of people who have admitted changing quite large sums of money into either Euros or Dollars last Thursday. Few people are loyal or patriotic when it comes to their own money. Even the nation's favourite fetish, the pound sterling, is no longer secure.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Hmm. Those are not very clever numbers for you to post. Let's check a few.

The proportion of the UK's population born abroad is 11.9% (2011).

Nuneaton's percentage of people born abroad is 6.6% (2014). Barely half the average.
Tamworth's foreign born population is 3.3%. Barely a quarter of the average.
Bolsover's foreign born population is 3%. Barely a quarter of the average.
Newcastle under Lyme's foreign born population is 6%. Barely half the average.

The areas you reference have experienced much less migration than average for the UK. People in those places might say they voted leave because of migration, but it's *not* migration into their town. Because there hasn't been much net migration into their town. Do you understand that point?

Refs:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...re-the-immigrants-This-map-will-tell-you.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign-born_population_of_the_United_Kingdom
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Yes. And yes (second time because the post is otherwise too short).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


So yet more lies.
Are there any numbers used by the brexiters that are actually accurate? Any examples are welcome! Come on guys, you must have one number you didn't make up.

By your own admission you are quoting figures that are six years old - try getting out more and visiting these towns. The surge has been in RECENT migration.

The question will always remain - why does a country with nearly 2 million people unemployed need mass immigration ?

No one has said any path will be easy but if you want to be ruled by the arrogant and out of touch Junckers and the EU then good luck to you - the majority of people in this country don't.

 

[Mvann]

Euros is probably not that surprising considering we are entering a holiday period. Dollars is a bit more surprising

 

[Mutant Lemming]

I'm far from happy that 37% voted in the current Government.

Had we used the 'first past the post' constituency system for the referendum how strong a majority would Leave have ?

 

[EM2]

The question will always remain - why does a country with nearly 2 million people unemployed need mass immigration ?

Because the 2 million people unemployed aren't willing to do the work.

 

[Mvann]

Because the 2 million people unemployed aren't willing to do the work.

Because there are certain jobs people don't want to do. This has always been the case. That's why we had immigration from the carabiean in the 1950s and 1960s. There are also certain jobs, like doctors and nurses that needed to be trained and that can't or hasn't been done quick enough.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Had we used the 'first past the post' constituency system for the referendum how strong a majority would Leave have ?

Not quite understanding what you mean. The 37% is, i believe, the % of the whole electorate that voted conservative, so the 52% leave vote is taken the same way. If you mean what % in terms of seats on a comparison basis, I think leave would be a lot higher, but I'd have to check on the figures and I'm not sure if the voting areas were done on the same constituency areas

 

[ainsworth74]

and I'm not sure if the voting areas were done on the same constituency areas

They weren't. It was done on a Local District basis (so basically Local Authority areas). Certainly it wasn't done on a constituency basis as there were only 382 voting areas compared to the 650 constituencies of the House of Commons!

 

[Mvann]

Sorry my error. It's not 52%. I think someone up thread said it was 37% of the electorate voted leave. If it was done on a seat by seat basis it was 270 seats leave and 129 remain. That's just under 68% leave. But that doesn't take into account the abstainers, those unable to get to the polling station, those that couldn't be bothered and the spoilt ballot papers

 

[TheKnightWho]

Sorry my error. It's not 52%. I think someone up thread said it was 37% of the electorate voted leave. If it was done on a seat by seat basis it was 270 seats leave and 129 remain. That's just under 68% leave. But that doesn't take into account the abstainers, those unable to get to the polling station, those that couldn't be bothered and the spoilt ballot papers

Doing it by constituency would be ridiculous, because the population sizes are totally off.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Had we used the 'first past the post' constituency system for the referendum how strong a majority would Leave have ?

I've no idea and not sure how it is relevant?

Someone asked me if I was happy with the true percentage of voters that brought us the last Government. I was just as unhappy with that percentage

 

[Mvann]

Doing it by constituency would be ridiculous, because the population sizes are totally off.

Well as there was no reason to do it by constituency, you are correct. But local authority size are not balanced either. Those figures above are academic really.

 

[Busaholic]

If you want to stop all this the answer is simple. Not sure wether a petition or legal action would be the best route, but the referendum was stated as non legally binding. Therefore the action of leaving the EU from just the result of that refurendum should not be happening. Anybody with better writing skills, feel free to rewrite, bulk out, use more discriptive words, be my guest.

I'll try to rise to the challenge. We have no written constitution in the UK so we (by that I mean Parliament) can enact all sorts of legislation which can be contradictory and badly drafted or, in the case of the legislation which led to the recent referendum so woolly it could have been proposed by the Sheep Conservation Society. Challenges can be made through our convoluted legal system, who are also called upon by the government to interpret from time to time, and, of course, at present European legislation and edicts can make aspects of UK law invalid or legally dubious, pending clarification.

So, as the result of the referendum are not legally binding on Parliament and, so far as I know, initiating our withdrawal from the EU has to start with a motion there, there is NOTHING preventing the Commons sitting on its hands and ignoring, or simply 'noting' this exercise in self-destruction. Given that approximately 75% of MPs stated their preference for Remain, the rational solution would be this and the nightmare could end before any more damage is done. Let us not forget all the reports/public enquiries that have been shelved or, in many cases, never officially published, to the detriment of the population. Let something that is to the benefit of the general population, even if some are too boneheaded to see it, happen for once.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Another conundrum, courtesy of Brussels.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36678222

Trade Commissioner, Cecilia Malmstrom, says that prior to formal Brexit the only negotiations that can take place would cover political and legal matters, not trade.

Under EU law, the bloc cannot negotiate a separate trade deal with one of its own members, hence the commissioner's insistence that the UK must first leave. It is also against EU law for a member to negotiate its own trade deals with outsiders, which means the UK cannot start doing this until after it has left the EU. Taken at face value, these rules mean the UK cannot conduct its own trade talks for up to two years - a fearsome challenge to any prime minister trying to deliver Brexit.

If this stands up then it would mean the UK having no choice but to trade with both the EU and everyone else under WTO rules from the day of Brexit until a new deal was both agreed and ratified. Canada has taken 7 years to agree a deal with the EU but will need another 12-24 months before it's ratified. The whole mess just seems to get worse and worse.

On the other hand it strikes me that we are in a similar position as occurred in 1939. For a number of months we were technically at war with Germany but nothing was actually happening while the military on both sides prepared for action. Likewise today the referendum has declared war but the action will only start once Article 50 has been invoked. What we have in the meantime is posturing in Brussels and turmoil among our political parties as they scramble to come up with some sort of plan.

 

[anme]

Another conundrum, courtesy of Brussels.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-eu-referendum-36678222

Trade Commissioner, Cecilia Malmstrom, says that prior to formal Brexit the only negotiations that can take place would cover political and legal matters, not trade.



If this stands up then it would mean the UK having no choice but to trade with both the EU and everyone else under WTO rules from the day of Brexit until a new deal was both agreed and ratified. Canada has taken 7 years to agree a deal with the EU but will need another 12-24 months before it's ratified. The whole mess just seems to get worse and worse.

This is extremely terrible news for the UK. *Extremely* terrible. If it indeed stands up, it means the UK will be trading with the world, including the rest of Europe, on WTO terms for years. This will be catastrophic for UK export industry. The only bright spot may be the weakening pound, which will make exports more competitive but at the cost of reducing quality of life for UK residents - the UK is a large net importer.

However, we should be aware that we are now in an unofficial negotiation phase, prior to the possible invoking of article 50. Everyone will be getting themselves into the best possible position for the talks to come and not everything that is said will necessarily come to pass. However, we already see that the rest of the EU holds all the cards and the UK holds none - this is exactly as predicted by everyone who actually thought about it for 30 seconds before the vote.

So what happens now? If it really does invoke article 50, I suspect a "special deal" will be offered to the UK, giving immediate EEA membership if the UK accepts the four European freedoms in full, including freedom of movement. Probably some of the UK's opt outs to certain treaties will be withdrawn (this is manifestly in the interests of the other 27 members). The new prime minister will have to choose whether to accept this, or condemn the UK to maybe a decade of isolation, and decades to recover any kind of trading position with the rest of the world.

But the leave voters thought of all this before they voted, right? It is exactly as predicted by those pesky experts.

 

[DarloRich]

But the leave voters thought of all this before they voted, right? It is exactly as predicted by those pesky experts.

We don't need experts we are taking back control! Hang on.............

 

[Senex]

But the leave voters thought of all this before they voted, right? It is exactly as predicted by those pesky experts.

Yet more evidence for just how dreadful the Leave campaign was. Lies and an appeal to the emotions alone, with no evidential base, and no attempt to examine or present to the electorate any of the inevitable huge complications that would follow an Out vote.

 

[anme]

I certainly hope we won't be sending any experts to the article 50 talks. I say we send Nigel Farage, Michael Gove, a belligerent fat man in a union jack suit and the most inbred bulldog we can find. What finer representatives of Great Britain could there be? Anyway, they will be the only people left after the rest of us get jobs as baristas and nannies in Warsaw or Bucharest.

I am reminded of this famous headline in the Sun - http://www.classicheadlines.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Kinnock-lightbulb.jog_.jpg.

BTW, interesting article on future prospects for the pound - both positive and negative: https://www.poundsterlinglive.com/gbp-live-today/5118-gbp-to-eur-and-current-account

 

[Groningen]

You can also sent Vera Lynn and a hooligan.

 

[SteveP29]

I suspect a "special deal" will be offered to the UK, giving immediate EEA membership if the UK accepts the four European freedoms in full, including freedom of movement. Probably some of the UK's opt outs to certain treaties will be withdrawn (this is manifestly in the interests of the other 27 members). The new prime minister will have to choose whether to accept this, or condemn the UK to maybe a decade of isolation, and decades to recover any kind of trading position with the rest of the world.

But the leave voters thought of all this before they voted, right? It is exactly as predicted by those pesky experts.

As I said last night when Melanie Phillips said much the same thing, why leave? what's the difference between that and now?
We could save all this ****ing about with extricating ourselves from the EU or just carry on, the end result seems to be the same, except for continued austerity and financial weakness if we continue to pursue an exit

 

[northwichcat]

FORTY EUROS hock:

That must be why the less educated and doddery old pensioners voted for Leave

You youngsters must have too much spare cash

So you do no longer have a passport because it costs over £70 for one?

 

[47802]

This is extremely terrible news for the UK. *Extremely* terrible. If it indeed stands up, it means the UK will be trading with the world, including the rest of Europe, on WTO terms for years. This will be catastrophic for UK export industry. The only bright spot may be the weakening pound, which will make exports more competitive but at the cost of reducing quality of life for UK residents - the UK is a large net importer.

However, we should be aware that we are now in an unofficial negotiation phase, prior to the possible invoking of article 50. Everyone will be getting themselves into the best possible position for the talks to come and not everything that is said will necessarily come to pass. However, we already see that the rest of the EU holds all the cards and the UK holds none - this is exactly as predicted by everyone who actually thought about it for 30 seconds before the vote.

So what happens now? If it really does invoke article 50, I suspect a "special deal" will be offered to the UK, giving immediate EEA membership if the UK accepts the four European freedoms in full, including freedom of movement. Probably some of the UK's opt outs to certain treaties will be withdrawn (this is manifestly in the interests of the other 27 members). The new prime minister will have to choose whether to accept this, or condemn the UK to maybe a decade of isolation, and decades to recover any kind of trading position with the rest of the world.

But the leave voters thought of all this before they voted, right? It is exactly as predicted by those pesky experts.

No that was just scaremongering, all you have to do is listen to the likes of Gove and Farage who say we can have access to the single market without accepting migration or making an EU contribution honest gov, because we are the 5th largest economy in the world and the Germans flog loads of cars to us.

Except of course our economy is vastly smaller than the combined EU economy and the Germans have probably worked out that many people are so obsessed with German cars in this country that they will buy them even with a tariff on them

Of course the other thing is the organisations most affected by this are not going to wait years while we sort ourselves out many will be making plans now, or already acting on them if they made plans beforehand.

 

[ExRes]

So you do no longer have a passport because it costs over £70 for one?

I never leave the country in case I can't get back in

 

[Mvann]

So the EU has taken 7 years to get an agreement with Canada plus up to 2 years to ratify with 28 member states having to get agree to it. Do you think it will take the same amount of time to get the uk and Canada one done. It probably will for a uk EU deal, but the Germans will want it done quicker with 760000 German jobs at stake according to the experts. I haven't seen any figures for other countries yet. So we do have some cards to play with. This is not just the uk versus the EU. It's the EU plus 27 countries.

 

[miami]

So the EU has taken 7 years to get an agreement with Canada plus up to 2 years to ratify with 28 member states having to get agree to it. Do you think it will take the same amount of time to get the uk and Canada one done. It probably will for a uk EU deal, but the Germans will want it done quicker with 760000 German jobs at stake according to the experts. I haven't seen any figures for other countries yet. So we do have some cards to play with. This is not just the uk versus the EU. It's the EU plus 27 countries.

It's not going to be fast for the EU, a lot of countries don't like us and will delay ratification.

We should be able to sort out trade deals with places like Canada and Austrailia in under a decade though. Austrialia-US trade deal only took 4 years. Of course this was before multilateral deals like TPP and TTIP became common.

Upon leaving the EU say Jan 1st 2019, we might have a couple of trade deals in place as early as Jan 2023!

 

[Mvann]

And as the EU does more trade with us than we do with them the pressure in the end will be them. And i bet it's the countries with least to loose will be the ones holding it up.