EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[mmh]

As somebody said above, maybe a new centre party would emerge. It's hard to see who would have sufficient attraction to lead it to electoral success, but the alternatives of Hard Left or Hard Right might provide an incentive. However, there's a huge amount of latent loyalty to both the main parties, and it would require a gigantic threat to persuade enough of their traditional supporters that it was time to vote for something entirely different.

It's an interesting one. Both parties have the problem that they're trying to be everything to all people, and failing miserably. The traditional supporters of both are pro-leave, so neither will propose not leaving, or postponing it - the fallout in their heartlands would be collosal, and the only guaranteed beneficiary of people deserting either party would be UKIP. None of these people will change to vote for the LibDems - they'll make small gains in the remain voting metropolitan areas at most.

 

[northwichcat]

The traditional supporters of both are pro-leave

Are they? Liverpool and Manchester voted overwhelming to remain in the EU. Liverpool must be the city with the highest proportion of Labour support in the UK (85.7% of voters in Liverpool Walton voted Labour at the last election compared to 55.5% in Sunderland Central.)

 

[mmh]

Are they? Liverpool and Manchester voted overwhelming to remain in the EU.

I'd say they are. The general voting pattern was leave, with the exception of
- Scotland
- London and some affluent parts of the home counties
- Liverpool and Manchester

There was no correlation between traditional party allegiance and the results.

(I've deliberately not included Northern Ireland, where the vote very much was split along party allegiance / unionism / nationalism, which is why I think it's a little misleading when it's simplisticly claimed that "Northern Ireland voted to remain")

 

[northwichcat]

I'd say they are. The general voting pattern was leave, with the exception of
- Scotland
- London and some affluent parts of the home counties
- Liverpool and Manchester

There was no correlation between traditional party allegiance and the results.

That was the opposite of what you claimed before. You were previously making out traditional voters of both Labour and Conservative voters are pro-leave.

(why I think it's a little misleading when it's simplisticly claimed that "Northern Ireland voted to remain")

Yet you're happy to use simplistic information for England. If Cheshire East had still been 3 separate boroughs the borough of Macclesfield would have labelled an area which voted remain, yet as it's now part of Cheshire East it's been labelled a leave area due to a high number of votes for leave 20 miles south in Crewe & Nantwich.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

Are they? Liverpool and Manchester voted overwhelming to remain in the EU. Liverpool must be the city with the highest proportion of Labour support in the UK (85.7% of voters in Liverpool Walton voted Labour at the last election compared to 55.5% in Sunderland Central.)

In the case of Liverpool, there's been quite a bit of funding from the EU on certain projects, and even then the result was just 58.2% in favour of Remain, which I personally would've expected to be much higher. Still kind of heavily in favour of course, but I wouldn't go as far with overwhelming. Even so, there is also a strong anti-Conservative political climate here, so this is a case where you could pretty much run an Elephant for Labour and they would still do better than the Tories. Funnily enough though, I imagine the Elephant would be the quietest one in Parliament...

 

[mmh]

That was the opposite of what you claimed before. You were previously making out traditional voters of both Labour and Conservative voters are pro-leave.

It's not the opposite at all. I'm saying you can't correlate a leave vote with being a supporter of either party. As I said, the pattern was that, with the exceptions I mentioned, areas you'd consider both Labour and Conservative heartlands voted to leave.

Yet you're happy to use simplistic information for England. If Cheshire East had still been 3 separate boroughs the borough of Macclesfield would have labelled an area which voted remain, yet as it's now part of Cheshire East it's been labelled a leave area due to a high number of votes for leave 20 miles south in Crewe & Nantwich.

Well, I thought at the time and still do that ideally no results per counting district should have been given, it was a national referendum and the only two reasons to do so were logistical, so local authorities could run the polling stations and counts as they're used to, and so we could have the usual results-coming-in-overnight show for the media rather than a single declaration the next day from Manchester. If we hadn't we wouldn't have had two years of people trying to extrapolate things from figures which aren't there.

But that did happen, and as a result we've got figures which show that most areas voted to leave, and the closeness of the result was influenced by some of the most heavily populated areas not doing.

 

[Bromley boy]

You were suggesting a style of 'negotiation' which hasn't been seen in a western European country since 1945 where existing agreements with other countries would be torn up if they refuse to accept being dictated to. You also haven't answered my question about whether your proposal would be nothing more than a threat or whether you'd actually go through with it if the EU didn't give in.

Well I’m fed up to the back teeth of this country being dictated to by the arrogant, intransigent EU, particularly when we are bankrolling the bloody thing. That gives us a rather large bargaining chip - a point you seem to be overlooking.

I answered your question in my first post on the matter where I said the government would have to have meant it.

There’s nothing wrong with negotiating robustly - as I said above if you go into any negotiation knowing you are not prepared to walk away, you’re immediately on the back foot.

What I'm saying about a war with Spain almost certainly won't happen but that's because actually going through with your proposal would only happen under a party like the EDL or Britain First and they won't be delivering Brexit, UKIP might use it as a threat but I doubt even UKIP would actually go through with it.

As noted above the situation with Spain/Gibraltar has been the same for around 300 years with no war resulting from it. This is why it’s ludicrous to suggest leaving the EU may trigger a war - you’re simply scaremongering.

Theresa May has recently revealed a proposal, which if accepted will see Britain getting exactly what you voted for without going to the extreme method you proposed. I don't know why you are such a bitter winner. It seems delivering the Brexit as result of the EU referendum result isn't enough for you, despite all your posts telling those who voted remain that they have to accept Brexit even if they don't like it because that's what we voted for. You can't have it both ways.

Again, you clearly haven’t actually read what I’ve writren in the above posts. I’ve said I hope this represents a way forward.

That doesn’t change the fact that I think the negotiations should have been handled a lot more robustly.

 

[Howardh]

Everyone except the Brexit hard-liners seems to have ruled out a no-deal hard Brexit; on the grounds that there's no preparation, no infrastructure, no planning in place that you would need immediately...and that's not even mentioning the Irish Border. If they'd preapared for a default position of zero from the word go then that might still be an option, but nobody on the Brexit side could be bothered....so now it's simply sitting down and waiting for what the EU will force us to accept - if anything, as it now knows there can't be no deal. No deal menas no extra transition time of course.

It's a complete botch-up of a job and instead of Brexiteers going on about "we won, how horrible the EU is blah blah" they should have got off their backsides and prepared for ground zero from, well, before the referendum. Suits me as a remainer, we can just sit back and watch all the goings on with a little smile.

 

[northwichcat]

There’s nothing wrong with negotiating robustly - as I said above if you go into any negotiation knowing you are not prepared to walk away, you’re immediately on the back foot.

But your proposal wasn't just 'no deal.' It was no deal and an immediate breach of a contract which we contributed to writing the terms of. (2 years notice to leave is required.) You also claimed we wouldn't send them any more money with immediate effect but you didn't say anything about returning money which we've received from the EU - I guess you weren't planning to do that. You're talking about doing something that will create the biggest conflict in Europe in many years. Brexit can be delivered without creating the biggest conflict in Europe in years but not if it was done your way.

As noted above the situation with Spain/Gibraltar has been the same for around 300 years with no war resulting from it. This is why it’s ludicrous to suggest leaving the EU may trigger a war - you’re simply scaremongering.

The situation has not been the same for 300 years. Something called the aeroplane was invented which means the benefit to Spain of another country defending Gibraltar is now practically non-existent. Also if we piss off 28 European countries I doubt Spain will think "Oh well Britain helped us to end the Spanish War of Succession" like they did when they signed the Treaty of Utrecht. 96% of those in Gibraltar want to remain in the EU and since the vote Spain has been talking about joint sovereignty being part of the Brexit deal citing how many of those in Gibraltar want to remain in the EU as evidence for it being a good idea.

That doesn’t change the fact that I think the negotiations should have been handled a lot more robustly.

You're complaining about the way Brexit is being delivered now some progress has finally been made despite your almost daily posts telling people who voted remain to respect the 'will of the people' and stop moaning if they don't like something about Brexit. That is hypocrisy at the highest level.

 

[mmh]

It's a complete botch-up of a job and instead of Brexiteers going on about "we won, how horrible the EU is blah blah" they should have got off their backsides and prepared for ground zero from, well, before the referendum. Suits me as a remainer, we can just sit back and watch all the goings on with a little smile.

That's an attitude I really don't understand, but it seems quite common. Why would you get pleasure from the negotiations being a shambles? Britain getting a bad deal? Things that neither leavers nor you want? So you can take a "told you so" approach when the chaos you feared happens? I don't get it.

I didn't vote for the current government. I'm not impressed with the progress or what appears to be the current state of affairs. Do I want them to implement a balls-up though? Of course not, I want them to do everything they can and more to get the best outcome they can. Then I'll decide if I want to try and vote them out again come the next election.

 

[nlogax]

It's a complete botch-up of a job and instead of Brexiteers going on about "we won, how horrible the EU is blah blah" they should have got off their backsides and prepared for ground zero from, well, before the referendum. Suits me as a remainer, we can just sit back and watch all the goings on with a little smile.

No smile here. I just want the outcome from this (still dire) national decision to be as least harmful as possible. There's no joy in watching Brexiteers get it wrong..we're *all* going to suffer if this process goes tits up.

 

[mmh]

The situation has not been the same for 300 years. Something called the aeroplane was invented which means the benefit to Spain of another country defending Gibraltar is now practically non-existent. Also if we piss off 28 European countries I doubt Spain will think "Oh well Britain helped us to end the Spanish War of Succession" like they did when they signed the Treaty of Utrecht. 96% of those in Gibraltar want to remain in the EU and since the vote Spain has been talking about joint sovereignty being part of the Brexit deal citing how many of those in Gibraltar want to remain in the EU as evidence for it being a good idea.

The invention of the aeroplane has even less to do with Spain and Britain arguing over Gibraltar than it does to with the EU. What is all this nonsense anyway? There is not going to be a war. Why do you seem to want there to be one?

 

[Howardh]

Why would you get pleasure from the negotiations being a shambles? Britain getting a bad deal? .

The pleasure will be Britain having a deal which means we're all-but-still-in the EU. Therefore we can carry on as before, we may not be paying as much in, which is good I suppose, but we will have no say in the running of the EU and will have to tow the line but won't have the say.

We will have done the one and only thing suggested by the referendum...left the EU. The fact we move in next door....

 

[Howardh]

There is not going to be a war. Why do you seem to want there to be one?

I didn't wnat a war before the Falklands but we flaming well had one. Ditto Iraq. Just because we don't want doesn't mean it won't happen.

 

[northwichcat]

The invention of the aeroplane has even less to do with Spain and Britain arguing over Gibraltar than it does to with the EU. What is all this nonsense anyway? There is not going to be a war. Why do you seem to want there to be one?

I don't want a war but @Bromley boy has the bizarre idea we can breach contracts we have with other countries, including Spain and everything will be fine. History has taught us military conflicts can't be ruled out if we take such an utterly stupid approach, especially when there's already political differences which haven't properly been resolved.

 

[radamfi]

Any suggestions as to what a "mobility framework" will mean in practice?

 

[Howardh]

Any suggestions as to what a "mobility framework" will mean in practice?

"Mobility" is the easy bit! As for framework - could be asking people when they show their passport "Are you here as an EU tourist?" "Yes", "Thank you, next please" or the alternative "Are you here as an EU looking for or taking work?" "Yes", "Thank you, next please"

 

[Bromley boy]

I don't want a war but @Bromley boy has the bizarre idea we can breach contracts we have with other countries, including Spain and everything will be fine. History has taught us military conflicts can't be ruled out if we take such an utterly stupid approach, especially when there's already political differences which haven't properly been resolved.

Your rants above boil down to childish, badly informed, scaremongering. The only person talking about wars is you!

You’ll find the invention of the aeroplane rather pre dates the existence of the EU (what does that have to do with anything anyway?!).

You’ll also find that international treaties are rather different to contracts. We are one of the few net contributors to the EU which rather puts paid to your nonsense about “screwing over” other countries - it’s this country that is being screwed over.

You also clearly don’t understand how negotiations work.

What was that about an utterly stupid approach?

 

[Bromley boy]

"Are you here as an EU looking for or taking work?" "Yes", "Thank you, next please"

Or how about:

“Here looking for work... You mean you have no job to go to?
Well it’s straight back onto the aeroplane with you, then!”.

The same situation as exists in most countries world wide.

 

[radamfi]

Or how about:

“Here looking for work... You mean you have no job to go to?
Well it’s straight back onto the aeroplane with you, then!”.

The same situation as exists in most countries world wide.

But maybe EU citizens will still be allowed to take up jobs in the UK without having a work permit.

 

[Bromley boy]

But maybe EU citizens will still be allowed to take up jobs in the UK without having a work permit.

I have no issue with that - but I would much rather people entering the country for the purposes of work have a job to go to when they arrive.

Above all they need to make a contribution:
whether that’s bringing skills we lack; financial investment; or similar.

 

[EM2]

I have no issue with that - but I would much rather people entering the country for the purposes of work have a job to go to when they arrive.

Above all they need to make a contribution:
whether that’s bringing skills we lack; financial investment; or similar.

We've always had the option of booting people out that don't make a contribution. We've just never bothered to do it.

 

[Howardh]

Or how about:

“Here looking for work... You mean you have no job to go to?
Well it’s straight back onto the aeroplane with you, then!”.
The same situation as exists in most countries world wide.

Unless they say "no, I'm here on holiday" (although they are actually looking for work) then what would you do? It's difficult enough as it is seeking out the rest-of-the-world's working illegally already and deporting them; suddenly in one fell swoop we've made the situation worse (and far more expensive).
Of course that's the situation today to some extent, isn't the rule that an EU can stay for 3 months but if they've no job and can't support themselves they CAN be removed? Same difference?? The problem is the uK never seems to deport anyone - NOT the fault of the EU!!!
And what of all those EU's legally in the Republic who will be crossing the border into the UK unchallenged?
The answer would be not to bother asking at immigration (how you tell a worker from a tourist I don't know) and simply make it illegal to employ anyone without a NI number or EU permit. No need for immigration officials to be involved at airports/ports holding everyone up - let employers check for validity and if they accept an unregistered worker then punish them.

 

[Bromley boy]

We've always had the option of booting people out that don't make a contribution. We've just never bothered to do it.

Thats true. To be honest immigration isn’t a key concern of mine, and didn’t really influence my decision to vote leave, although I would like to see it better controlled.

Most EU immigrants I’ve come across want to work hard and better themselves. I’m more concerned about non EU immigration, abuse of student spousal visas, addressing long term unemployment in the U.K. etc.

 

[Bromley boy]

The answer would be not to bother asking at immigration (how you tell a worker from a tourist I don't know) and simply make it illegal to employ anyone without a NI number or EU permit. No need for immigration officials to be involved at airports/ports holding everyone up - let employers check for validity and if they accept an unregistered worker then punish them.

Isn’t the answer a bit of both?

The latter policies you mention smack of the hostile environment policy - in addition to things like requiring landlords to verify their tenants’ right to reside in the country, before granting them a lease over a property.

Common sense, you would think, but even that is seen as controversial in 2018 U.K!

 

[Howardh]

Thats true. To be honest immigration isn’t a key concern of mine, and didn’t really influence my decision to vote leave, although I would like to see it better controlled.

Most EU immigrants I’ve come across want to work hard and better themselves. I’m more concerned about non EU immigration, abuse of student spousal visas, addressing long term unemployment in the U.K. etc.

That latter sentence is, of course, nothing to do with the EU except (before people point it out) they could accept migrants from outside the EU and then place (dump) them with us. Example...refugees. After Brexit do we completely turn our backs on those willing to lose their lives crossing the seas in search of a better life in the EU?

 

[Howardh]

Isn’t the answer a bit of both?

The latter policies you mention smack of the hostile environment policy - in addition to things like requiring landlords to verify their tenants’ right to reside in the country, before granting them a lease over a property.

Common sense, you would think, but even that is seen as controversial in 2018 U.K!

I must admit, although offering it as a suggestion, I'm uncomfortable with turning landlords and employers into virtual immigration officials; firstly as I believe it's not their job to be an unpaid immigration official and also knowing that some will pay their *hidden* and illegal workers in cash (below legal rates obviously) so the problem doesn't go away fully.

Currently r/e the EU as everything's "above board" there should be no need for hidden workers, but EU or not - unscrupilous employers will "hide" workers away to pay them less - and we lose out on tax too. Not easy, I admit.

But I think it's better than having long queues at airports and hoping incomers are "honest".

 

[Bromley boy]

That latter sentence is, of course, nothing to do with the EU except (before people point it out) they could accept migrants from outside the EU and then place (dump) them with us. Example...refugees. After Brexit do we completely turn our backs on those willing to lose their lives crossing the seas in search of a better life in the EU?

By the time they reach the U.K. they are no longer refugees by the UN definition.

The current lunatic policy of the EU costs lives by encouraging more to make the dangerous crossing! It also encourages people trafficking.

In my view rescue ships should be picking them up and returning them to their point of origin.

Don’t forget, there are approximately 5 billion people in the world who would like to live in Europe/the U.K! We simply cannot accommodate them all.

 

[Bromley boy]

I must admit, although offering it as a suggestion, I'm uncomfortable with turning landlords and employers into virtual immigration officials; firstly as I believe it's not their job to be an unpaid immigration official and also knowing that some will pay their *hidden* and illegal workers in cash (below legal rates obviously) so the problem doesn't go away fully.

I suppose the logic underpinning it is that, if you are in the business of renting out property or employing people, you owe certain responsibilities over and above the “man on the Clapham omnibus”.

Currently r/e the EU as everything's "above board" there should be no need for hidden workers, but EU or not - unscrupilous employers will "hide" workers away to pay them less - and we lose out on tax too. Not easy, I admit.

I wouldn’t be so sure about that! Free movement of workers has enabled exploitation of EU workers in the U.K. - it’s very easy to fly a load of polish workers on, pay them less than minimum wage for jobs that unemployed Brits would turn their noses up at.

An equally acute problem, which attracts less attention, is the employment abuse of EU nationals — particularly those from eastern Europe — who are fully entitled to work in Britain.

https://www.ft.com/content/43daccd0-410d-11e5-9abe-5b335da3a90e

Research commissioned by the Latvian embassy in London has shown that some unscrupulous employers are paying less than the minimum wage, charging exorbitant rents and sometimes even withholding migrants’ passports.

 

[Howardh]

By the time they reach the U.K. they are no longer refugees by the UN definition.

The current lunatic policy of the EU costs lives by encouraging more to make the dangerous crossing! It also encourages people trafficking.

In my view rescue ships should be picking them up and returning them to their point of origin.

Don’t forget, there are approximately 5 billion people in the world who would like to live in Europe/the U.K! We simply cannot accommodate them all.

Greta in thoery, but don't many come across without any kind of documentation, so if they are asked where they came from they might well reply "Bromley, UK"!! It's a world/UN problem that can only really be solved by ploughing money into where they really came from, so they have a future, and to somehow stop flaming wars. If John Lennon couldn't then we've no hope...

Leaving or staying in the EU won't solve it one bit. As I said, it's for the world to find a solution.