Brexit matters

[Berliner]

The UK also had the right to apply restrictions on those 450 million people (which itself is a misleading number as it includes the UK and Irish population, who of course have the right to live here regardless of the EU and also includes many millions who are non EU residents who dont necessarily have FOM rights) but chose never to do so. The only time the UK bothered to apply any kind of restriction on people was when Romania and Bulgaria joined the EU. It's also worth pointing out that the UK at all times had the right to deport law breaking EU citizens, and often did. I know as in a previous job I often dealt with deportees in person. We could also stop people entering as we were not part of Schengen.

I do find it bizarre that so many people were so scared of immigration they decided to go nuclear and remove so many of thier own rights in order to fix a problem we didn't have in the first place.

 

[AlterEgo]

All EU countries have the “dilemma” of 450mil people being “allowed “ to move to their countries .
Many of them being much more attractive places to live and work than UK .
Yet 95%+ people of the EU prefer to stay , where they were born , which means that the worries about “uncontrolled “ immigration are pile of BS.

You’ve nearly demonstrated why the free movement of labour and travel argument is such a non starter. Very few people take up that right and don’t care if that right is removed from them.

 

[birchesgreen]

You’ve nearly demonstrated why the free movement of labour and travel argument is such a non starter. Very few people take up that right and don’t care if that right is removed from them.

Well i don't think that follows necessarily. There are lots of things you are the right to do, but don't actually do. It doesn't mean you want that right taken away. Its a dangerous road to go down.

 

[AlterEgo]

Well i don't think that follows necessarily. There are lots of things you are the right to do, but don't actually do. It doesn't mean you want that right taken away. It’s a dangerous road to go down.

The right was conditional and transactional “you can have the right to live and work in a couple of dozen countries as long as they can have the same rights to move to your country to live and work”.

This is people saying “ok well I won’t use that right so I’ll be ok to vote to end it, if it stops uncontrolled ex-Eastern Bloc immigration”.

I have many citizen rights I don’t use but I can’t think of many which are conditional and transactional in this way.

 

[AM9]

But that was OK as it was the brexiteers' project fear. It appealed to the xenophobes as that falsehood persuaded enough little Englanders to sway the vote to bring in the landslide 51% majority.

 

[edwin_m]

The recent influx of people in rubber boats has nothing to do with Brexit.

The agreement allowing easier return of immigrants to France was a casualty of Brexit.

 

[JamesT]

The agreement allowing easier return of immigrants to France was a casualty of Brexit.

Though I’m not sure how much difference that has actually made in practice. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...fall-in-returns-of-boat-arrivals-since-brexit says:

Just five people who made the perilous journey from northern Europe have been returned so far this year, the home affairs select committee was told. In the previous year, when the UK was part of an EU returns deal, 289 such arrivals were deported, the minister said.

When you’re looking at 10s of thousands coming in a year, returning a few hundred is lost in the noise.

 

[Annetts key]

The problem with trying to restrict people from moving around on the world’s surface, is that you are trying to stop human migration that has happened ever since humans could walk.

Far better to have a proper organised, responsible and respectful official system than throwing money at a problem that can never be ‘fixed’.

As long as people who move to the U.K. abide by our laws and respect our systems and can contribute to our society (e.g. by becoming self employed or getting a job), I don’t much care where they come from.

Our current system just drives the people who want to come here to use illegal methods, and criminals benefit. While the individuals put there own life at risk. That’s a stupid system.

 

[duncanp]

Another thought regarding the present mess of Brexit is that the Leave campaign focused on immigration as one of their aspects.

My own thoughts are that it is not necessarily an immigration problem we have, but a racism problem.

For example, below is a list of some unsavoury events (it is not exhaustive):

1) The present points system used in Australia (mentioned many pages back) according to an academic study done circa 2010-12 (this appeared in the Metro rag) found that it was a racist policy as it discriminated against and did nothing for the indigenous population - the Aborigines (who were displaced and had land consficated when we invaded, took over, and carved up areas by drawing straight lines on the map.

2) The New Cross fire in which there were several fatalities of black people. Nobody has been sent to jail today, even though there were two white new Nazis that were seen nearby.

3) The passing of Dorothy Croce in Brixton in 1985, who was suffering from cardiac problems when the Met cops burst into her home without warning. This was the catalyst for the riots that started soon after.

4) The murder of Stephen Lawrence which resulted in a damning report branding the Met as having "institutionalised racism" in its ranks.

5) The beating up of the lawyer Aamer Anwar in Ashton Lane, Glasgow by two white cops from the former Strathclyde Police because he is of Asian descent. The beating was so severe that Anwar had to spend time in hospital recovering from the beating.

6) Cecil Rhodes who was involved in the diamond trade and slavery in Africa, where the locals hardly saw a penny of the proceeds. (part of South Africa where we invaded and took over, and established white rule).

7) The wearing of Nazi Swastika armbands by Steve Severin and Siouxsie Sioux of Siouxsie and the Banshees. They have never given a satisfactory explanation, other than "everyone else was doing it at the time" in regards shocking the government.

8) Eric Clapton's racist rant and diatribe when he "performed" at a show in Birmingham in the mid 1970s, where he used both the "c" and "w" words (rhymes with moon and dog respectively) to describe black people, and stated that he "did not want them to just leave the building, but to leave the country". This (combined with David Bowie's recent comments at the time) is what led to the Rock Against Racism movement.

9) Andrew Brons and/or Nick Griffin from the BNP stated that Theo Walcott should not be playing for England as he is not pure white.

10) The Crown Jewels that will be used for the coronation of Charlie next year were robbed from India, when we invaded and took over. Elected representatives in India, Pakistan, maybe Bangladesh still have to pledge allegiance to the British monarch, even though they are also head of a non native religion (Church of England).

Again, the above is not exhaustive.

I admit that I am of the view that it is not an immigration problem we have, but rather concerningly a racism problem.

I don't doubt that we have a racism problem in the UK, but it is not related to whether we are members of the EU. (or its predecessors the EEC and EC)

Many of the examples you quote are after the UK joined what was then the Common Market.

I also don't doubt that racism is the reason why some people support Brexit, but it is by no means the main motivation for many people.

I don't think it is racist to want to have some reasonable and fair controls on immigration either.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The problem with trying to restrict people from moving around on the world’s surface, is that you are trying to stop human migration that has happened ever since humans could walk.

That's kinda true, but the other side is that if you don't have any constraints at all, then you start to damage stability, community cohesiveness, and also strain infrastructure in any community that experiences very high migration rates - and community cohesiveness is also extremely important. In the end, community cohesiveness and letting people go where they want to are both important, and you have to find some kind of balance between the two - which unfortunately the EU was not willing to do.

As long as people who move to the U.K. abide by our laws and respect our systems and can contribute to our society (e.g. by becoming self employed or getting a job), I don’t much care where they come from.

I would totally agree with that - and I suspect very few people in the UK, other than some with extremist views would disagree with it - with a proviso that 'respect our systems' should also include, respect our customs and way of life - including for example things like free speech, tolerance, equal rights for men and women, etc..., as well as a willingness to learn English (and to be clear, if I went to live abroad, I would expect to make the same efforts in respect of whatever community I had gone to live in).

But the problem is - that wasn't really the EU system because the EU system placed no requirement for people to respect (or even to learn anything about) the systems or way of life etc. in whatever country they had moved to under freedom of movement.

Our current system just drives the people who want to come here to use illegal methods, and criminals benefit. While the individuals put there own life at risk. That’s a stupid system.

You could argue exactly the same was true for the EU system - which was to basically allow almost-complete freedom within the EU, while putting up huge barriers to anyone outside the EU, resulting in large numbers of people seeking to enter the EU illegally.

 

[AlterEgo]

The problem with trying to restrict people from moving around on the world’s surface, is that you are trying to stop human migration that has happened ever since humans could walk.

Far better to have a proper organised, responsible and respectful official system than throwing money at a problem that can never be ‘fixed’.

What would that look like in the current regime? I know you’re an open borders fan but I don’t think you’ve ever explained how that would ever work.

As long as people who move to the U.K. abide by our laws and respect our systems and can contribute to our society (e.g. by becoming self employed or getting a job), I don’t much care where they come from.

So, given immigration has not abated whatsoever, and the UK is now much more “colour blind” where immigration is concerned, has Brexit been good in that respect? The EU made it super easy to employ people from overwhelmingly white, Judeo-Christian countries inside Europe where people looked and thinked like us.

Is an increase in immigrants from places like Pakistan and Nigeria therefore beneficial in your view? We now have more diversity than ever when it comes to immigration - plus it’s (somewhat) controlled, and I cannot see how that in itself is a bad thing, regardless of the rest of the mess of Brexit.

 

[Annetts key]

I’ve never said that the E.U. had all the correct policies, systems or answers. But in many, many ways, brexit was a backwards move.

If, as a country and as a society we wish to move forward, going backwards is not exactly helping. That’s my point.

If we are outside the E.U., we have very little influence on it, unlike when we were in it and therefore both the government and the MEPs had some influence.

But the most annoying thing is that the Conservative government and their “friends” in the newspapers blamed everything on the E.U. especially when the vast majority of problems in this country are down to failures of our own government. Look at recent events…

 

[Berliner]

I’ve never said that the E.U. had all the correct policies, systems or answers. But in many, many ways, brexit was a backwards move.

If, as a country and as a society we wish to move forward, going backwards is not exactly helping. That’s my point.

If we are outside the E.U., we have very little influence on it, unlike when we were in it and therefore both the government and the MEPs had some influence.

But the most annoying thing is that the Conservative government and their “friends” in the newspapers blamed everything on the E.U. especially when the vast majority of problems in this country are down to failures of our own government. Look at recent events…

We have absolutely no influence on the EU now. We are an external, very lose trading partner who has been nothing but hostile towards the block and is constantly threatening to unilaterally tear up deals We previously agreed to.

When we were in the EU I don't think it's was promoted to us in the UK (probably deliberately) quite how much influence we had. There is very little legislation that one can point to which was actually opposed by the UK and in so many cases we had the power to veto what we didn't like. We had the rather unique position of being one of the leading members, a greatly respected member and yet we still had the ability to cater the whole thing to our own needs.

 

[Bald Rick]

I think it’s safe to say that following the next general election, we will have a much closer relationship to the EU.

 

[Berliner]

I think it’s safe to say that following the next general election, we will have a much closer relationship to the EU.

I would hope so, but then I remain to be convinced Starmer is going to mend those bridges. He'll need to run a campaign/produce a manifesto that is not too Europe-friendly as it'll put off those who still think Brexit is a good idea and he seems scared of that chunk of voters. Then again, he's already lost my vote due to his point-blank refusal to "allow" a second independence vote or work with my nation's democratically elected party of government. If he was to either support that, say he'll work with the SNP, or promise a full return to the EU, he'd at least get my attention, but as it stands, I have no reason to support Labour and I see them simply as tories in another colour.

 

[Bald Rick]

I would hope so, but then I remain to be convinced Starmer is going to mend those bridges. He'll need to run a campaign/produce a manifesto that is not too Europe-friendly as it'll put off those who still think Brexit is a good idea and he seems scared of that chunk of voters. Then again, he's already lost my vote due to his point-blank refusal to "allow" a second independence vote or work with my nation's democratically elected party of government. If he was to either support that, say he'll work with the SNP, or promise a full return to the EU, he'd at least get my attention, but as it stands, I have no reason to support Labour and I see them simply as tories in another colour.

Can’t see him working with the SNP, as he knows that means Indyref#2, and a good chance that they’ll not get in again. Much more likely he’ll work with the Lib Dems, which will mean at the very least a much closer relationship with the EU, and possibly even another referendum on the subject. Which I suspect, now, would be to rejoin.

 

[Berliner]

Can’t see him working with the SNP, as he knows that means Indyref#2, and a good chance that they’ll not get in again. Much more likely he’ll work with the Lib Dems, which will mean at the very least a much closer relationship with the EU, and possibly even another referendum on the subject. Which I suspect, now, would be to rejoin.

The Lib Dems don't appear to be particularly pro-Europe either.

What is it that scares English parties so much about the SNP or indyref 2? Has anyone actually asked English voters if they care? Indeed none of my English family (Labour voters) would bat an eyelid if the SNP was part of some deal to get Labour into power, nor indeed would they care much if we left the UK. In fact most of them seem to think Strugeon would be a better PM than anyone either party can come up with and think England is crying out for someone like her. Either way, Labour can no longer rely on their own Scottish seats to get them into power as the support for them up here has all but evaporated and that is mainly in part due to them siding with the tories at every opportunity. Same can be said for the Lib Dems.

 

[Falcon1200]

Far better to have a proper organised, responsible and respectful official system than throwing money at a problem that can never be ‘fixed’.

What would that look like in the current regime? I know you’re an open borders fan but I don’t think you’ve ever explained how that would ever work.

I would agree with Annetts key's point, but also question how such a system would work in practice? Presumably we are talking about people applying to move to the UK through an official channel, but how and from where? What system would allow people fleeing war, famine etc to make such an application?

 

[duncanp]

The Lib Dems don't appear to be particularly pro-Europe either.

In fact most of them seem to think Sturgeon would be a better PM than anyone either party can come up with and think England is crying out for someone like her.

I can't think of many English people who would want Sturgeon as Prime Minister, given her questionable record in running Scotland.

 

[GusB]

I can't think of many English people who would want Sturgeon as Prime Minister, given her questionable record in running Scotland.

I wouldn't say her record has been questionable, but if you happen to live South of the border you're only ever going to read stuff that says so.

 

[Falcon1200]

I can't think of many English people who would want Sturgeon as Prime Minister, given her questionable record in running Scotland.

Indeed, the multiple failings of her administration are dismissed in the desperate quest for independence. And, should it ever happen, Scexit will make Brexit look like a walk in the park!

 

[duncanp]

I wouldn't say her record has been questionable, but if you happen to live South of the border you're only ever going to read stuff that says so.

And if you happen to live North of the border BBC Scotland and the Scottish press will fawn all over her, making like the sun shines out of her backside.

Just google "Scottish Ferry Fiasco", and the current state of the NHS and education systems in Scotland, all of which are Ms Sturgeon's responsibility.

 

[GusB]

And if you happen to live North of the border BBC Scotland and the Scottish press will fawn all over her, making like the sun shines out of her backside.

Just google "Scottish Ferry Fiasco", and the current state of the NHS and education systems in Scotland, all of which are Ms Sturgeon's responsibility.

You've just illustrated your complete and utter ignorance of the situation! The BBC and the Scottish press are very much anti-SNP and certainly do not make out that the sun shines out of her backside. I'd really like to know how you reached that conclusion.

I'm not going to suggest that everything is perfect here; show me a country where it is! The NHS has its challenges, as it does elsewhere in the UK. I'm not sure that education is that big of a problem and as for the ferries - well, I would probably agree with you on that one.

Bringing the discussion back on topic, if you want a government to criticise, you should look no further than the one that implemented a hard Brexit and introduced trade barriers that do nothing but hurt our exports to our nearest neighbours and have agreed trade deals that could potentially harm our domestic producers. Removal of freedom of movement hurts our agriculture and tourism industries because we can't get the people in to do the work; jobs that local people are reluctant to do because a) they're poorly paid and b) insecure due to the seasonal nature.

This isn't an issue that's unique to Scotland either; it affects the whole of the UK.

 

[REVUpminster]

The UK had no influence on the EU. If Germany or France did not like any proposal then it doesn't get through. Did we have any influence on Germany getting cheap gas from Russia undercutting fellow members.

 

[edwin_m]

Though I’m not sure how much difference that has actually made in practice. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...fall-in-returns-of-boat-arrivals-since-brexit says:

When you’re looking at 10s of thousands coming in a year, returning a few hundred is lost in the noise.

Going from a few hundred down to a handful does show that Brexit has made a difference. Also the potential immigrants and the traffickers see that the agreement has lapsed and they are less likely to be returned to France, which will encourage more to make the attempt.

How is the UK stopping Channel crossings and what are the legal routes to the UK?

The government says "stopping the boats" is a key political priority, but how is it going about it?

www.bbc.co.uk

As at 3 October [2022], the total for the year to date stood at 33,573.
This is the highest number since these figures began to be collected in 2018.
In 2021, the total was 28,526 people, while in 2020 it was 8,404.

The EU transitional arrangements ran out in early 2021.

 

[AlterEgo]

I would agree with Annetts key's point, but also question how such a system would work in practice? Presumably we are talking about people applying to move to the UK through an official channel, but how and from where? What system would allow people fleeing war, famine etc to make such an application?

There are already systems in place regarding simply moving to the UK, it’s the asylum system that isn’t working - either for the seekers or the UK. It’s broken.

 

[alex397]

The UK had no influence on the EU. If Germany or France did not like any proposal then it doesn't get through. Did we have any influence on Germany getting cheap gas from Russia undercutting fellow members.

That is, of course, completely untrue.

We had quite a privileged position within the EU. We had a lot of influence on many of the EU laws, despite the government and media trying to pretend they were all forced on us by Brussels.

 

[najaB]

You’ve nearly demonstrated why the free movement of labour and travel argument is such a non starter. Very few people take up that right and don’t care if that right is removed from them.

The fact that I don't make use of a right is no justification for taking that right away from you.

 

[Berliner]

You've just illustrated your complete and utter ignorance of the situation! The BBC and the Scottish press are very much anti-SNP and certainly do not make out that the sun shines out of her backside. I'd really like to know how you reached that conclusion.

I'm not going to suggest that everything is perfect here; show me a country where it is! The NHS has its challenges, as it does elsewhere in the UK. I'm not sure that education is that big of a problem and as for the ferries - well, I would probably agree with you on that one.

Bringing the discussion back on topic, if you want a government to criticise, you should look no further than the one that implemented a hard Brexit and introduced trade barriers that do nothing but hurt our exports to our nearest neighbours and have agreed trade deals that could potentially harm our domestic producers. Removal of freedom of movement hurts our agriculture and tourism industries because we can't get the people in to do the work; jobs that local people are reluctant to do because a) they're poorly paid and b) insecure due to the seasonal nature.

This isn't an issue that's unique to Scotland either; it affects the whole of the UK.

Quite! the BBC is vehemently anti Independence and is at best lukewarm to the SNP and the Scottish media, in general, is the same. Yet, for all their apparent terrible failings and the relentlessly negative media, the SNP continues to ride high in the polls, win elections and enjoy membership the other parties could only dream of. That itself speaks volumes. Nicola has lasted nearly 10 years now and doesn't appear to show any concrete signs of stepping down, has not had any major personal scandals, never acted morally questionable either, and has seen off countless leaders from other parties and PMs, yet she still leads a party that has managed toa void tearing itself apart. Yes, there are problems here but I refuse to believe anyone would look at Scotland and say it's a worse state than anywhere else in the UK, or that the SNP are somehow worse than the Tories, for example. Nothing and nowhere is perfect, least of all Scotland, but the difference between how the government of the UK and the Scottish government conduct themselves is night and day.

The fact that I don't make use of a right is no justification for taking that right away from you.

This is what some people seem to struggle with. They think because they or relatively few used the FOM right, that it was an irrelevance, something disposable, not to be valued. It was extremely valuable to those who used it and I feel utterly heartbroken for the future generations of Brits who have the worst citizenship in Western Europe as it won't let them have the chance to fully experience their own continent as easily and freely as previous generations could. Younger people have had so much snatched away from them, not just FOM, but access to ERASMUS and countless other EU projects and schemes aimed at opening up their own continent to them. They have gained absolutely nothing tangible in return. None of us have.

 

[VauxhallandI]

Quite! the BBC is vehemently anti Independence and is at best lukewarm to the SNP and the Scottish media, in general, is the same. Yet, for all their apparent terrible failings and the relentlessly negative media, the SNP continues to ride high in the polls, win elections and enjoy membership the other parties could only dream of. That itself speaks volumes. Nicola has lasted nearly 10 years now and doesn't appear to show any concrete signs of stepping down, has not had any major personal scandals, never acted morally questionable either, and has seen off countless leaders from other parties and PMs, yet she still leads a party that has managed toa void tearing itself apart. Yes, there are problems here but I refuse to believe anyone would look at Scotland and say it's a worse state than anywhere else in the UK, or that the SNP are somehow worse than the Tories, for example. Nothing and nowhere is perfect, least of all Scotland, but the difference between how the government of the UK and the Scottish government conduct themselves is night and day.

This is what some people seem to struggle with. They think because they or relatively few used the FOM right, that it was an irrelevance, something disposable, not to be valued. It was extremely valuable to those who used it and I feel utterly heartbroken for the future generations of Brits who have the worst citizenship in Western Europe as it won't let them have the chance to fully experience their own continent as easily and freely as previous generations could. Younger people have had so much snatched away from them, not just FOM, but access to ERASMUS and countless other EU projects and schemes aimed at opening up their own continent to them. They have gained absolutely nothing tangible in return. None of us have.

She got away with breaking her own covid restriction nonsense didn't she? I didn't hear any reports of the Scottish media ripping into her for it?