BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

joenobody

Surrey Commuter wrote:

sungod wrote:

the idea that the predominately right-wing, rich, powerful, scumbags who are all hot and sweaty for 'out' would ever restrict immigration is laughable

they want out of the eu to be free to further strip rights from people with no annoying restraint from eu/echr, or simply because they live in a fantasy world of empire that was already dying in the nineteenth century

either way, they will not suffer from the negative effects of brexit, they can afford to spout their nonsense

the immigration hoohah is simply pandering to the base tendency to hate the 'other', as they know it will get out that vote

if the vote is 'out', the low paying jobs will still be there, they will not pay more, they might even pay less, and they'll happily employ anyone they can get at those rates

the usa has strict controls, but every year huge numbers of locals lose their jobs to lower cost workers shipped in on h1b visas by large corporations - in some cases getting to train their replacements before being riffed - and of course the flow of migrants from the south, 'illegal' but happily employed in huge numbers because they'e cheap and will do the jobs the locals won't touch, which is why no state really wants to stop them, they love all those cheap labourers that they don't need to provide with even basic services, the new slaves

if uk governments of the last thirty years had spent more time engaging with the eu to fix some of the stupidity, playing the game exactly as the french do, we'd all be better off today, instead the very people whinging about it were the ones who failed to do it

the uk's problem isn't the eu, it's the gutless, hypocritical, self-serving , lying, log rolling, thieving, dogfuckers, of all parties, that run the country, together with the cosy revolving door into industry that has corrupted the senior civil service for so long

we don't need brexit, we need a revolution

this is not well put but I agree with the sentiment.

Indeed, the Leavers do seem to have an utopian view of the outcome of brexit, seemingly forgetting who's likely to be in charge in the event of brexit. The security of the NHS is a case in point.

A couple of points - the ECHR is separate to the EU so if we do brexit then we may well still be bound by it - I haven't seen any related mention of opting out of that (at least not as part of the brexit scenario). Also, accepting that correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation, UK GDP has generally increased since we joined the EU:



Yes, it was trending up anyway, but the rate increase significantly around then. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not. Either way it would be possible, using this data, to argue that we are better off today since joining...

ballysmate

mamba80 wrote:

Ballysmate wrote:

My vote is posted off.

Did you do a Wollaston ?

I stuck to IN.

Was genuinely undecided until Feb when I posted

viewtopic.php?f=40088&t=13060592


In April my view was

viewtopic.php?f=40088&t=13028650&start=540

Not changed since.

surrey_commuter

Mr Goo wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

If its a 1-3% win for the Leave, Cameron and the EU Commission will state that it is not decisive enough for the UK to exit and that we either vote again or forget it and carry on with EU. So all you out there that are so pro EU worry not and sleep tight, you'll still be a member of a nice cosy little club (for some).

Why did you state this as a fact?
Why did you not highlight the fact it is y8our opinion?
Why did you not give a source for your information?

Against some tough competition this is probably the stupidest thing I have read on this thread.

In my opinion. Happy now?

Btw. Do you talk to your other half, people or you kids like your responses? Or are you a faceless, loner 40s+ * that likes to hide behind a computer screen in your bedroom at mum and dads?

I will moderate my opinion to it being one of the dumbest things I have read. Why don't you explain what your opinion is based upon. Read your comment back - you are saying that the EU will say it is not decisive enough and force us to stay!!! the whole point of the referendum is that we have the unilateral right to opt out.

I think I can guess upon you you are basing your stereotype

This is MY OPINION. Nothing has been mentioned by either campaign about a very close result' ie; an EXIT win by 0.5%-3%. Given the Remain campaigns aggressive scaremongering, it is MY OPINION that the government, house of commons and the EU will intervene and declare that it was not decisive enough. Lets face it, if the UK does leave, then financially the EU as an organisation is financial screwed, given that one of the three nett contributors has decided to leave.
On the flip side if its a very close called Remain victory, the 'Democracy and Common Sense has Spoken' will be the declaration from Cameron and Osborne. And all the banks and financial institutions can rest easy. IN MY OPINION this is what the EU referendum seems to all be about for the Remain Campaigners.....The Banking Industry and The Banking Industry.
These are MY VIEWS, MY OPINIONS. MY OBSERVATIONS.

Are they right are they wrong?, who knows.
But do not insult me or anyone else on this forum or thread because of your London/Commuter/Metropolitan centric standpoint. There are plenty out there who want to leave, mostly outside London I WOULD THINK. Infact I have only met one person who is going to vote to Remain. Are WE ALL STUPID and poorly educated outside of London and Leafy Surrey?

I do not know where you live so how can I insult you based on that? you state opinions (which are wrong) as facts.

Anyway I will attempt to set your mind at rest by stating some undisputed facts - nobody has debated a close result because it is a binary question there will be a winner the margin is irrelevant. It is our unilateral decision to leave so the EU has no way of intervening.

Now in my opinion - if we vote OUT then the Brexiteers will not let the momentum slip and will want out asap. The IN movement will collapse in acrimony and there will be no opposition.

kingstongraham

ddraver wrote:

Living abroad gives you a much wider view of the world, and in particular gives you an outsiders view of your own country - something that Farage and a great deal of UKIP voters could do with.

Are you implying that Nigel doesn't speak to his own wife about this kind of thing?

ddraver

I'm not sure Nigel speaks to anyone about anything much...

but certainly having a foreign wife is no assurance of foreign experience

bompington

ddraver wrote:

I'm not sure Nigel speaks to anyone about anything much...

Oh, I bet he does. It'll be the listening bit he has problems with.

veronese68

bompington wrote:

ddraver wrote:

I'm not sure Nigel speaks to anyone about anything much...

Oh, I bet he does. It'll be the listening bit he has problems with.

Very good.

kingstongraham

ddraver wrote:

I'm not sure Nigel speaks to anyone about anything much...

but certainly having a foreign wife is no assurance of foreign experience

It surely helps give you an "outsider's view of your own country" though.

Plus he's definitely spent more time abroad than I have.

ballysmate

JoeNobody wrote:

Surrey Commuter wrote:

sungod wrote:

Stuff

this is not well put but I agree with the sentiment.

Indeed, the Leavers do seem to have an utopian view of the outcome of brexit, seemingly forgetting who's likely to be in charge in the event of brexit. The security of the NHS is a case in point.

A couple of points - the ECHR is separate to the EU so if we do brexit then we may well still be bound by it - I haven't seen any related mention of opting out of that (at least not as part of the brexit scenario). Also, accepting that correlation doesn't necessarily imply causation, UK GDP has generally increased since we joined the EU:



Yes, it was trending up anyway, but the rate increase significantly around then. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not. Either way it would be possible, using this data, to argue that we are better off today since joining...

You are confusing this referendum with party politics. If there is a Brexit vote, that would only be posible because Labour voters up and down the country voted for it.
And what's this, a NHS scaremongering story?

ddraver

KingstonGraham wrote:

ddraver wrote:

I'm not sure Nigel speaks to anyone about anything much...

but certainly having a foreign wife is no assurance of foreign experience

It surely helps give you an "outsider's view of your own country" though.

Plus he's definitely spent more time abroad than I have.

I'm not really sure that going to Brussels for free to whinge about people like him going to Brussels for free is really much of an experience...

joenobody

Ballysmate wrote:

You are confusing this referendum with party politics. If there is a Brexit vote, that would only be posible because Labour voters up and down the country voted for it.
And what's this, a NHS scaremongering story?

[me]slaps myself for being so silly[/me]

Sorry :oops:

pinno

I am genuinely concerned that Britain will vote to leave. I just hope that there will be a last minute panic from the Brexiteers as it is a step into the unknown and vote to stay.

The UK pays into the EU and that money gets distributed to the poorer EU countries and it contributes to raising the basic standards of living. If in the event of an exit, that contribution is now weakened, those states who are on the long road to a higher standard of living and stronger economies, is it fair to say that those inhabitants will be even more motivated to leave their countries and go to other European nations, including us?
It would be ironic that we would be inundated with applications and boat loads of rubber dinghies because the countries across the channel would have no constitutional reason for preventing them from coming across.

mamba80

^yep, folk need to realise this a one off, it aint a GE where you can change your mind in 5 years time, we can always have another referendum but we can never go back in, or if we ever could it ll be as a new member, no opt outs, rebates and we d be in the euro.

fwiw i m fairly certain we will vote to leave and it ll be the worst decision this country has ever made and it ll be that buffoon Camerons fault , he was an absolute moron to give a vote, just so he could remain PM.

anyone with 1/2 a brain (rules out most Politicians) can see so many will vote to leave on the transient that is immigration.

kingstongraham

mamba80 wrote:

^yep, folk need to realise this a one off, it aint a GE where you can change your mind in 5 years time, we can always have another referendum but we can never go back in, or if we ever could it ll be as a new member, no opt outs, rebates and we d be in the euro.

fwiw i m fairly certain we will vote to leave and it ll be the worst decision this country has ever made and it ll be that buffoon Camerons fault , he was an absolute moron to give a vote, just so he could remain PM.

anyone with 1/2 a brain (rules out most Politicians) can see so many will vote to leave on the transient that is immigration.

Personally, I always worry about democracy when I see what percentage of people don't know stuff on Pointless.

Only 94% of people could work out which European capital was known as "Roma" in its native language.

Bobbinogs

I can only assume that Cameron was badly advised going into this. The main driver behind the UKIP vote in the last election (which fueled the referendum promise as a last ditch carrot to avoid decisive swings in key marginals) was always immigration. Sure, money paid into the EU is always galling but I don't think most people really mind, let's face it, using £50-odd billion on the white elephant that is HS2 has hardly had anyone marching in the streets.

With hindsight, Cameron should have spent his first year either sorting out immigration or doing something that would fool the average punter (who is pretty dim) into thinking something was being done. Instead, the government have ensured that refugees' front doors that are the wrong colour (the doors, that is) are promptly painted, sending out all the wrong signals about priorities.

FWIW, I still think it will be an IN vote (although I am 100% voting OUT) but that there will be a rancorous feeling for decades. We seem to be one of the few (only?) countries within the EU who don't see ourselves as european and this referendum has probably ensured that attitude won't change for a long time.

mrfpb

Mr Goo wrote:

Are they right are they wrong?, who knows.
But do not insult me or anyone else on this forum or thread because of your London/Commuter/Metropolitan centric standpoint. There are plenty out there who want to leave, mostly outside London I WOULD THINK. Infact I have only met one person who is going to vote to Remain. Are WE ALL STUPID and poorly educated outside of London and Leafy Surrey?

According to a pollster (a Remain campaigner) on last nights Newsnight leafy Surrey is going to vote "Out"

Clip starts at 8:40 approx:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 ... t-08062016

pblakeney

mamba80 wrote:

....anyone with 1/2 a brain (rules out most Politicians) ....

Bobbinogs wrote:

....doing something that would fool the average punter (who is pretty dim) .......

So. In summary.
People with 1/2 a brain organised a referendum so dim voters could decide the Nation's future.
Doesn't fill me with hope..........

mrfpb

Yea! Let's slag off politicians. But we get them whichever way we vote.

coopster_the_1st

mamba80 wrote:

^yep, folk need to realise this a one off, it aint a GE where you can change your mind in 5 years time, we can always have another referendum but we can never go back in, or if we ever could it ll be as a new member, no opt outs, rebates and we d be in the euro.

However, so many on this board are basing their decision of where they sit based on the personalities of those running either campaign. The labour party are definitely running their remain campaign in a similar way to a GE highlighting the negatives of the current government in their remain argument.

mamba80 wrote:

fwiw i m fairly certain we will vote to leave and it ll be the worst decision this country has ever made and it ll be that buffoon Camerons fault , he was an absolute moron to give a vote, just so he could remain PM.

anyone with 1/2 a brain (rules out most Politicians) can see so many will vote to leave on the transient that is immigration.

If voting to leave is going to be the worst decision that the country has even made we would not be having a referendum. I'm realistic to know this. Those in power would not have given the electorate the choice if this was actually going to occur despite the fear messages they are now spreading if we leave. Not implementing a manifesto pledge is not that big an issue if it was for the greater good of the country especially when they know how weak their opposition is currently(and labour would not be calling for the Tories to implement their referendum pledge).

Try viewing the referendum with this view rather than the apocalyptic scare story side and see what results you come out with.

Bobbinogs

mrfpb wrote:

Yea! Let's slag off politicians. But we get them whichever way we vote.

I think we could start a new thread just on that...but no one would be bothered to post! I think politicians are generally despised throughout the country, certainly I have yet to meet anyone who has anything other than complete contempt for them. It was always bad but I think the expenses scandal just about did it in terms of irreparable damage. Paying back the stolen money didn't fix anything.

mrfpb

Bobbinogs wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

Yea! Let's slag off politicians. But we get them whichever way we vote.

I think we could start a new thread just on that...but no one would be bothered to post! I think politicians are generally despised throughout the country, certainly I have yet to meet anyone who has anything other than complete contempt for them. It was always bad but I think the expenses scandal just about did it in terms of irreparable damage. Paying back the stolen money didn't fix anything.

And yet we keep getting comments on individuals such as Cameron, Farage and Boris as if their personalities or behaviour determines the value of EU membership.

I put out a Facebook request recently to ask if my friends could name our EU commissioner without Googling, but they can't. I also asked of they wanted Dimitris Avramopulous to have more say in EU law than the UK government 0 again no reply. Mr Avramopulous is the EU commissioner for migration.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06kc0zp

You would expect that as the person responsible for drawing up policy on migration for 28 countries at this time, he would be all over the news, but no. We have no idea really who makes the policies we live by.

kingstongraham

mrfpb wrote:

Bobbinogs wrote:

mrfpb wrote:

Yea! Let's slag off politicians. But we get them whichever way we vote.

I think we could start a new thread just on that...but no one would be bothered to post! I think politicians are generally despised throughout the country, certainly I have yet to meet anyone who has anything other than complete contempt for them. It was always bad but I think the expenses scandal just about did it in terms of irreparable damage. Paying back the stolen money didn't fix anything.

And yet we keep getting comments on individuals such as Cameron, Farage and Boris as if their personalities or behaviour determines the value of EU membership.

I put out a Facebook request recently to ask if my friends could name our EU commissioner without Googling, but they can't. I also asked of they wanted Dimitris Avramopulous to have more say in EU law than the UK government 0 again no reply. Mr Avramopulous is the EU commissioner for migration.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b06kc0zp

You would expect that as the person responsible for drawing up policy on migration for 28 countries at this time, he would be all over the news, but no. We have no idea really who makes the policies we live by.

Who is the equivalent in the UK civil service?

mrfpb

Theresa May - the elected MP chosen as Home Secretary - who sets policy for the Home Office civil servants to implement. Yes, the civil servants can be quite directive in their "Guidance" but there is a clear democratic mandate in place which is currently overidden by the decisions made by the EU commission.

At the risk of repeating myself, UK law (and devolved Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish laws) are made by elected bodies. EU laws are made by the appointed commission and scrutinised by the elected parliament. In the EU, the elected body can't originate policy or law - it all originates with the commission.

Another current news story for you: If the EU don't like the laws our parliament make, they can take away our EU voting rights, they are threatening to do this to Poland

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36429325

kingstongraham

mrfpb wrote:

Theresa May - the elected MP chosen as Home Secretary - who sets policy for the Home Office civil servants to implement. Yes, the civil servants can be quite directive in their "Guidance" but there is a clear democratic mandate in place which is currently overidden by the decisions made by the EU commission.

At the risk of repeating myself, UK law (and devolved Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish laws) are made by elected bodies. EU laws are made by the appointed commission and scrutinised by the elected parliament. In the EU, the elected body can't originate policy or law - it all originates with the commission.

Another current news story for you: If the EU don't like the laws our parliament make, they can take away our EU voting rights, they are threatening to do this to Poland

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36429325

Just to be clear, when you say the laws are "scrutinised" by the elected parliament, that means "review, propose amendments, and either block or vote to approve". And by elected parliament, you mean both the directly elected European parliament and the elected representatives of the 28 countries.

So the decisions are not made by the commission, they are proposed.

mrfpb

Just to be clear, when you say the laws are "scrutinised" by the elected parliament, that means "review, propose amendments, and either block or vote to approve". And by elected parliament, you mean both the directly elected European parliament and the elected representatives of the 28 countries.

Yes, but the power to actually propose new laws lies with the EU commissioners - the commissioners are appointed not elected (at least not by the a popular vote by their country)*. The elected parliament can't propose new laws or policy in the way that UK members of Parliament can. For example most MEPs do not want to travel to Strasbourg once a month to vote on laws that are written in Brussels, but the system prevents them from changing this because the French veto this at Commission level.

In the UK system lawmaking powers lie primarily with the elected MPs/Cabinet. The House of Lords has it's reach restricted by the Parlaiment Act and the Queen, as Head of State also has her powers restricted to an advisory role to the PM and the "rubber stamping" of the Queens Speech and legislation that has been through parliament.

*Most UK commissioners get the job after being rejected by the UK electorate (like Chris Patten or Roy Jenkins) or having to resign from the front bench due to failure or scandal (Neil Kinnock and Peter Mandelson)

mrfpb

Just to be clear, I don't believe the UK system is perfect or that the EU is wholly corrupt (given that both contain people motivated by self interest mixed in some measure with genuinely altruistic people who want to achieve positive change), only that the UK system is more democratically accountable and transparent than the EU system.

I can't describe myself as a 100% leave campaigner - maybe 75%, but I think we have given the EU the opportunity to change in this process and they have said no.

laurentian

For what its worth, I think politicians and campaign activists on both sides of the debate should hang their heads in shame.

Somewhere there are figures, readily available, that should tell us all what percentage of our taxes go to the EU and a breakdown of how that money is spent (perhaps primary schools in Portugal, perhaps dentist training in Munich). That would enable me to decide whether I consider that value for money on fiscal or altruistic grounds.

Somewhere there is the real, factual, amount of money that we have paid to EU but I hear vastly differing sums depending on which side's argument we are listening to.

Somewhere there are bone fide figures on how many immigrants have arrived here, how many work and pay tax and how many are living some "Life of Riley" on benefits.

Somewhere there are facts that should be presented to us without spin or openness to interpretation.

Given the facts I, as a 50 plus year old bloke of average intelligence, should be able to make an informed choice but I have absolutely zero chance of that happening in what, I am told, is the biggest decision of my political life.

That I can't do this is a tragic indictment of modern politics and those involved should be thoroughly ashamed.

AndyEd

Personal insults will be removed and repeat offenders will be banned from this point going forwards. In political matters above all else it is simple to draw the line between attacking the post and attacking the poster.

Generalisations based on belief system, gender, ethnicity or place of birth are also not permitted on these boards.

People who have got hot under the collar please take a step back from the keyboard and come back later. Nothing political will be resolved on these boards, they are not for this purpose.

Andy

mrfpb

Somewhere there are figures, readily available, that should tell us all what percentage of our taxes go to the EU and a breakdown of how that money is spent (perhaps primary schools in Portugal, perhaps dentist training in Munich). That would enable me to decide whether I consider that value for money on fiscal or altruistic grounds.

This gave a decent overview of the way the EU spends - despite what people say I think the BBC achieved a good balance here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07c2scm

Certainly more constructive than the weekly shouting match on Question Time. I didn't see the others in the series, but if this is anything to go by, they are worth watching - they did one on immigration, others may be able to comment on it.

Each episode also has a blog of "Live at the time" postings that highlight the main arguments within the program, which you can read if you don't want to watch the whole hour.

laurentian

Thanks!