That won’t happen. It’ll be killed by ERG by tomorrow’s breakfast.This looks interesting, the Government are apparently looking towards a Swiss-style relationship with the EU, according to The Sunday Times:
Tomorrow's Papers Today - UK Front Pages - Latest Newspaper Headlines
All of UK's Tomorrow's Front Pages ✅ Updated Daily between 7PM - 11pm ✅ The Mail, Express, Times, Guardian and many more Proudly supporting #buyapaperwww.tomorrowspapers.co.uk
View attachment 124018
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Brexit matters
- Thread starter Xenophon PCDGS
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
brad465
Veteran Member
That was my initial thinking too, also some of the top grifters are getting unsurprisingly outraged (including Farage, despite touting such a relationship in the past) and they'll try and bolster Reform UK to steal prospective Tory votes and make defeat even harsher.
Nicholas Lewis
Established Member
Sunak been smart maneuvering ERG into the cabinet so they will have to resign if they don't like it.
At the end of the day we need to trade effectively with European markets what we have now is inefficient and just losing us trading opportunities and that will cost jobs and lower GDP the Tories need growth it if we are to have any chance of providing a decent society for the populous. Also Sunak is being smart he can see that he needs to be in Starmers space to stand any chance of heading him off at the GE and this would steal their line about making brexit work for the people.
At the moment, I think the ERG has lost a lot of its power and influence. That makes now the perfect time to do something. Rishi might be pro-Brexit and mix with others that are, but I think he also has some common sense and can't just continue with something that is now so visibly not working you can't cover up with 'Ukraine' or 'Covid' forever.
It also means Kier Starmer will get hit hard too, by trying to go along with Brexit despite how obvious a disaster it is. Labour should have been suggesting this before, as now any support will look like a U-turn.
If such a deal was implemented quickly, and there's a short-term uplift, and Rishi can look like a strong leader and hero, this might just make the Tories re-electable.
317 forever
Established Member
Yes, the progress of the Alliance does show how the GFA is now out of date or even flawed. Suppose the Alliance have the 2nd largest number of seats, and the #1 and #3 parties are the leading Nationalist or Unionist party (regardless of which way round), the Agreement automatically shuts them out.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Although probably too complicated for many voters, I think we could have benefitted had referendum question been designed whereby people could vote number 1, 2 and 3 to these 3 options
1. Remain
2. Leave the EU but stay in the SM and CU
3. Leave altogether
If people only liked one option they cast give their #1 vote and no #2 vote.
Had no option gained a majority of #1 votes, the #2 votes would be distributed to produce a winner. Given that plenty of Leave voters were against EU membership due to immigration but still favoured free trade with the EU, I reckon the compromise option 2 would have won. (Admittedly there are drawbacks with being, in a sense, rule takers not rule makers but that's beside the point here).
Last edited:
GS250
Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 1,031
But the single market means freedom of movement of which was arguably the prime reason for the brexit vote?
I'm not currently convinced restoring some freedoms would assist in the present situation anyway. Some suggest Eastern Europeans would fill the hospitality sector gaps but this is naive. Why on Earth would you come to work in the UK for low wages coupled with the now extortionate cost of living? 10-15 years ago the UK was seen as an attractive proposition. However...EU citizens, especially Poles we're heading home because they had worked out they were being mugged off. This a few years before the brexit vote even. There are hospitality staff shortages in the EU in any case.
Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't Poland issued a temporary tax on returning ex pats? This in an attempt to retain it's workforce.
I'm not currently convinced restoring some freedoms would assist in the present situation anyway. Some suggest Eastern Europeans would fill the hospitality sector gaps but this is naive. Why on Earth would you come to work in the UK for low wages coupled with the now extortionate cost of living? 10-15 years ago the UK was seen as an attractive proposition. However...EU citizens, especially Poles we're heading home because they had worked out they were being mugged off. This a few years before the brexit vote even. There are hospitality staff shortages in the EU in any case.
Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't Poland issued a temporary tax on returning ex pats? This in an attempt to retain it's workforce.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Remaining in the single market would basically force us to keep freedom of movement, so I doubt anyone voting for Brexit because of immigration concerns would vote for your option 2. The implications of having to follow EU rules without any say over them would probably have severely depressed how many people would vote for that option. So I'd say it's hard to predict which way a referendum based on those options would have gone - I could well imagine any of the three options winning. I do though agree that that would have made for a more sensible referendum. It would also have given the Government a much clearer idea of the path, so in the event of 2 o4 3 winning, it could have nicely avoided much of the couple of years arguing about what kind of Brexit we were going for.
Most people were concerned about the migrants arriving by boat than people coming from Poland etc.
Leaving the EU didn't change that, or if anything made the problem worse because obviously we always had control of our own borders.
And we also gave things to EU citizens that other EU states didn't, so we never had to be as generous as we were. Obviously we still had to pay the minimum wage to people and abide by employment law, but I mean more about the benefits system.
The problems we suffered were down to OUR Government and now we're 'free of the EU' it has become incredibly obvious. In a way, the Tories need a closer relationship with the EU to hide the problems. Even the papers have stopped with the stories about the EU punishing us, as people realise that we're being treated like any other country not part of the EU.
Doing a deal that still doesn't make us part of the EU, so we can still have our 'sovrentee', just needs to be sold carefully to the public. It's hilarious that Nigel Farage is getting upset when he wanted a Swiss-style deal from the start, as did so many others.
Leaving the EU didn't change that, or if anything made the problem worse because obviously we always had control of our own borders.
And we also gave things to EU citizens that other EU states didn't, so we never had to be as generous as we were. Obviously we still had to pay the minimum wage to people and abide by employment law, but I mean more about the benefits system.
The problems we suffered were down to OUR Government and now we're 'free of the EU' it has become incredibly obvious. In a way, the Tories need a closer relationship with the EU to hide the problems. Even the papers have stopped with the stories about the EU punishing us, as people realise that we're being treated like any other country not part of the EU.
Doing a deal that still doesn't make us part of the EU, so we can still have our 'sovrentee', just needs to be sold carefully to the public. It's hilarious that Nigel Farage is getting upset when he wanted a Swiss-style deal from the start, as did so many others.
GS250
Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 1,031
I'm not so sure about that. Wage suppression in certain sectors was blamed rightly or wrongly on EU (mostly Eastern) migrants. The irony being that those from places like Poland and Hungary were not happy when FOM was extended to Romania and Bulgaria!!
At least British businesses were quick to raise wages when we left the EU, so British people could finally earn what they were worth.
I get that some people might have been upset, such as plumbers, decorators and electricians, where there was suddenly a lot more competition and not the usual wage structure (indeed, a lot of the work is carried out cash in hand and off the books) but people must have been foolish to think we'd suddenly see huge pay rises once there were fewer workers.
I know there were some exceptions, like lorry drivers, albeit with one off bonuses to entice people rather than massive per-hour increases, but for the most part we now have loads of vacancies and existing workers made to cover multiple roles and work much harder for less.
Meanwhile, the Government was hoping to push forward to make changes that would make things worse for workers and allow companies to get even cheaper labour from outside the EU, and tell existing 'natives' that they better accept the same, or less, money because they can easily be replaced.
It seems such plans may be delayed now with a change of PM and the evidence showing they can't hope to push through such changes now a lot of the workforce have shown they've had enough and are willing to strike - with the majority of the public backing it.
That and a Government almost certain to lose the next election, so having to be a little more pragmatic.
I don't know what will happen, but I think we're bound to be seeking to rejoint he EU within the next 5-20 years, and that will start with frictionless trade and freedom of movement.
(Linked image is a chart using ONS data [source] showing the whole economy seasonally adjusted total pay)
Not really seeing any jump here... I guess they didn't.
GusB
Established Member
I think it was wrongly blamed on EU migrants. The fault for wage suppression lies solely with businesses which, rather than invest in their employees, think they can get away with paying poverty wages. Those very same businesses are the ones who are feeling the pinch now because the "native" population aren't prepared to live cheek-by-jowl in shoddy accommodation for months on end.
If you want to discourage migrant workers, let's deal with our own inability to recognise that workers, regardless of the actual job they do, deserve decent working and living conditions.
edwin_m
Veteran Member
And any gain after leaving the EU has been wiped out by higher inflation, partly arising from leaving the EU...View attachment 124053
(Linked image is a chart using ONS data [source] showing the whole economy seasonally adjusted total pay)
Not really seeing any jump here... I guess they didn't.
class ep-09
Member
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 634
That , and foreign inward investment collapsing after 2016 meaning lost value of the pound , meaning higher inflation as UK buys most of stuff denominated in dollars / euros .
Who’d invest in the UK if it does not have free access to the SM / EU ?
Annetts key
Established Member
Ironically, U.K. companies that trade with the E.U. ARE investing, but in opening distribution or other facilities in E.U. countries… Mainly to overcome the problems with importing and exporting materials and goods to/from the U.K.
Wasn't it said immediately after the referendum that the meagre majority would disappear (all other things being equal) over a few years because the demographic of the leave vote relying on over 65s? I can't find a figure for all over 65s but two thirds of the over 75s die every years so that's about 330,000. The 65+ vote was 36% remain 64% leave so it's reasonable to assume that the majority decreases by at least 92,000 per year, without many other leavers realising that they didn't get what they voted for.
GS250
Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 1,031
I agree with this. However it was inevitable the availability of cheap labour would cause the majority of employers to rub their hands with glee, push up the profit margin and effectively prevent any kind of progression for their existing staff. I know several who were told quite bluntly that they could easily be replaced for even less of a salary so to be grateful for what they were getting paid.
I'll reference something of a fiasco at the Harvester on Saturday evening. Yes, I know its hardly the epitome of fine dining but they are clearly struggling to recruit. The on duty manager was barely 20 but to be fair to him was everything the stereotype of young British types aren't. Was whizzing about, dealing with complaints, working his proverbial backside off. Yet dare I say he's on just above minimum wage. Some of his co workers were sadly very much the stereotype. They clearly didn't want to be there (nothing wrong with that) but at least give your employer and the customer a sense that you do. The duty manager was a decent young chap who told me that they had advertised for staff in several countries but that response was virtually zero. Its got to the point where minimum wage and a £800 p/m rent for a box room is no longer seen viable. A contrast to a 4* hotel in Bournemouth that treats is staff well and does give small bonuses. Virtually all of their staff had a badge of their nationality and are told to wear it proudly. This included Ukraine, India, Brazil and Kenya. They are probably living on site which helps recruit too. However they are never under staffed and treat their employees well. Maybe a bit of a lesson there.
Snow1964
Established Member
There was an interview which I saw on local TV fairly recently and the boss of whatever company it was was basically saying apart from sixth formers and students in holidays, cannot easily get anyone to work at minimum wage. Simple reason was can’t afford accommodation too if paid that low.
Brexit killed Eastern Europeans choosing to work here, and saving to send money home. Can now get similar wages or much cheaper accommodation in other countries, so with difficult admin since Brexit unlikely to come back.
Now clear that lack of staff is holding back or decreasing size of UK economy. So much so British companies are apparently setting up factories and distribution in EU, and will no doubt be able to reduce their UK Corporation Tax in years to come by moving profit centres.
So that will be more Brexit driven loss of tax in long term.
Brexit killed Eastern Europeans choosing to work here, and saving to send money home. Can now get similar wages or much cheaper accommodation in other countries, so with difficult admin since Brexit unlikely to come back.
Now clear that lack of staff is holding back or decreasing size of UK economy. So much so British companies are apparently setting up factories and distribution in EU, and will no doubt be able to reduce their UK Corporation Tax in years to come by moving profit centres.
So that will be more Brexit driven loss of tax in long term.
GS250
Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 1,031
They were starting to head off before the brexit vote was even a thing. Some of the problems that have now exploded above the surface were boiling away even 10 years ago. Again, the almost arrogant assumption amongst British employers that they can just carry on paying bare minimum to the hands of grateful Eastern Europeans are long over. If it was worth working here then they'd happily fill out visas etc. It's not a case that they can't be bothered. If you had the chance to work in another country and earn a lot more I'm sure a good few hours on a visa application wouldn't really be a problem would it?
We've reached a point where its simply become too expensive to live in the UK unless you are earning a reasonable amount or are willing to live to a very poor standard in a crowded house.
REVUpminster
Established Member
It's a big assumption as people are becoming 65+ all the time and then assume they will all be Remainers. If the assumption was true, why did Boris win an election, and not Labour, Liberals, Greens or enough for a coalition of them.
Because First Past the Post is a flawed system. In that 2019 election there was a majority that voted for parties which were varying degrees of anti-Brexit. But the way that FPTP works means that the party which won less than half the vote was rewarded with a crushing majority of the seats.
Peterthegreat
Established Member
Because it's first past the post. The Tories got 42.4% of the vote.
GS250
Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 1,031
Also....people change their views as they mature. They see the longer term consequences of actions. It's perfectly healthy to be idealistic when you are young.
Gloster
Veteran Member
An alternative, and I write as someone over sixty who, I hope, does not take such an attitude, they become more concerned with their own short-term comforts and less bothered about the long-term interests of all. We all should be idealistic when we are young, but we shouldn’t decline into selfish smug self-satisfaction as we get old.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
No - clearly smug self-satisfaction isn't the way to go. But that's not remotely the only path you can take away from idealism. The other path is the realisation that many of your idealistic ideals from when you are younger actually don't work in practice, and that it's better to be pragmatic and focus on things that actually will work, even if they don't sound as idealistic or as emotionally appealing.
(That's getting a bit away from Brexit, other than an obvious connection that, to my mind at least, freedom of movement is a perfect example of one of those idealistic things that sounds very appealing (who in their right mind wouldn't in principle want to let people live wherever they like?), but which it turns out doesn't really work well in the real World).
GS250
Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2019
- Messages
- 1,031
I actually think the opposite applies as far as the older people I know goes. All they care about are their children or grandchildren. On the contrary, some younger people, especially those young professionals that live in cities baulk at the idea of having to pay more taxes.
If that was the case, why is no-one else following us out of the door of the EU or at least Schengen?
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Perhaps because no other countries encountered the problem of everyone wanting to move to their country, to the point where numbers were just unsustainable, to the extent that happened in the UK?
Every country is after all different and unique. It's perfectly possible that something that works for - say - Italy or Poland doesn't work for the UK.