EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[Bromley boy]

Who elects MEPs that represent us? We do.
Who selects European Commissioners that represent our country? The Government that we elect. And even then they have to be ratified by the European Parliament.
So that's surely as democratic as Westminster, where we elect MPs and they form a Government and select the Lords?

No - it simply isn't.

Again I don't think you're appreciating the difference between a puppet EU "parliament" that doesn't originate its own legislation and what we have in the uk. The commissioners, who originate legislation, are appointed by member state governments but they are supposed to act in "European interests" rather than national interests of "their" member states, and indeed swear an oath to this effect.

It's almost the opposite of the UK approach where the unelected Lords have little power these days to originate legislation. The modern constitutional reality in the UK is that the elected chamber is the main originator of legislation with the upper house acting more as a check and balance.

I can completely understand the practical economic arguments for wanting to remain in the EU but trying to make out it is as democratic as the UK system is simply untenable, in my view.

That would be fine if it was just an economic trading block but it's now a great deal more than that.

 

[Howardh]

Im afraid the above post is scaremongering/tosh. That certainly isn’t the “just” of it, whatever that means! It’s nothing to do with taking away rights, it’s about saying any such rights should be made by the elected U.K. government, not by faceless bureaucrats in Brussels.

You've taken my right, and that of your beloved countrymen, of freedom of movement. How much clearer can I put it - you've taken away my right, my freedom. We take freedom away from those committing crimes. Apart from watching ITV 2 once, I've committed no crime, yet my freedom's been taken away from me. It's not scaremongering, it's not tosh, it's real, it's tangible. it's solid.
You
have
taken
away
my
freedom.
Although I wasn't around in Hitler's time, even HE failed to do what you did with one cross (well, 17 ruddy million of them). Thanks, bud.

 

[Bromley boy]

You've taken my right, and that of your beloved countrymen, of freedom of movement. How much clearer can I put it - you've taken away my right, my freedom. We take freedom away from those committing crimes. Apart from watching ITV 2 once, I've committed no crime, yet my freedom's been taken away from me. It's not scaremongering, it's not tosh, it's real, it's tangible. it's solid.
You
have
taken
away
my
freedom.
Although I wasn't around in Hitler's time, even HE failed to do what you did with one cross (well, 17 ruddy million of them). Thanks, bud.

Long session in the pub tonight, was it?

 

[Domh245]

But the reason why AV didn't get through partly lay down to the lies of the No campaign. They depicted it as a case of whoever gets in third place is the winner by having an advert where a horse came third in the race but won. They also had someone try to explain it to a classroom but everyone got confused, even though they were teaching it incorrectly. They were basically complicating the whole thing and making it out to be something it wasn't. It's like having a creationist teach evolution: they don't understand it or blissfully refuse to acknowledge it's true nature because of their own agenda.

They also had some fairly bs adverts, "we can't afford a fairer system, look at these pictures of babies and soldiers instead!"

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

They also had some fairly bs adverts, "we can't afford a fairer system, look at these pictures of babies and soldiers instead!"

Good lord. I thought I'd saw the silliest of it...

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

You've taken my right, and that of your beloved countrymen, of freedom of movement. How much clearer can I put it - you've taken away my right, my freedom. We take freedom away from those committing crimes. Apart from watching ITV 2 once, I've committed no crime, yet my freedom's been taken away from me. It's not scaremongering, it's not tosh, it's real, it's tangible. it's solid.
You
have
taken
away
my
freedom.
Although I wasn't around in Hitler's time, even HE failed to do what you did with one cross (well, 17 ruddy million of them). Thanks, bud.

So you may have to apply for a VISA because you might no longer be entitled to freedom of movement. That's it! You haven't lost your freedom to post your opinion on this forum, you haven't lost your freedom to go on the internet, you haven't lost your freedom to vote, and you most certainly haven't lost your freedom to compare leave voters to Hitler. Also, I think many people would disagree with you when you implied that Hitler failed to take away people's freedom. The Nazis banned political parties as soon as they got in, and that was just the start of it! All that's happened with you is that you might have to apply for a VISA to move to another country in future, but then Brexit might be stopped beforehand in the case of a second referendum. This is not comparable at all to the atrocities committed by the Nazis, so perhaps a little perspective is in order.

 

[Bromley boy]

Do not worry, I won't hold it against you. But the thing is, AV isn't that complicated, especially compared to other forms such as Single Transferable Vote and such. AV would simply be listing your candidates in order of preference, and if nobody gets enough first preference votes the candidate with the lowest gets eliminated, and then the round starts again until one candidate can get at least 51%. It might not be the first choice of everyone, but it's a candidate most people can agree on.

In fact, in local elections and the French Presidential election, they didn't even bother with rounds, they just sent the two highest candidates to the next round and got rid of everyone else. It's not difficult, especially if you kept it to voting for MPs. Labour and Conservatives are only opposed to this system because it wouldn't help them, they benefit from FPTP, while the Lib Dems, SNP and Greens etc. would benefit from it and are more in favour of it. You wouldn't bite the hand that feeds you, and as such the two main parties wouldn't even think of introducing anything else.

But the reason why AV didn't get through partly lay down to the lies of the No campaign. They depicted it as a case of whoever gets in third place is the winner by having an advert where a horse came third in the race but won. They also had someone try to explain it to a classroom but everyone got confused, even though they were teaching it incorrectly. They were basically complicating the whole thing and making it out to be something it wasn't. It's like having a creationist teach evolution: they don't understand it or blissfully refuse to acknowledge it's true nature because of their own agenda, no matter how wrong they are.

As for the Swiss system, it's a direct democracy, but it doesn't end at voting. If legislation gets more than 50,000 signatures opposing it, a referendum is ran, and the fate of the legislation rests upon the voters. They even rejected EU membership through referendums, and in fact they also tried to impose a quota on EU migration. Nevertheless, it didn't work because it would violate the bilateral treaties it currently holds with Brussels, which included the free movement of people. Switzerland is basically ran by the people, so much that it doesn't actually have a head of state and is one of the few directorial republics left in the world.

I'll be honest as well, though I originally voted to leave the European Union, and am still very much Eurosceptic, I don't think the referendum was done for the right reasons. Not to mention, it divided my family a bit, and I am in fact the only one in my household who voted that way. So to be sat there watching the results in the morning when everyone was displeased wasn't the most comforting feeling in the world. What would I do now? I'd spoil the ballot paper, because the team behind our negotiations are frankly rubbish, but I do not like the European Union, and I also refuse not to vote. Least spoiling can be seen as expressing distaste for the system.

The trouble with AV is it takes a lot of explaining and doesn't jump of the page as something that would increase engagement with politics. I could imagine it might lead to some unintended consequences and produce a "least worst" option which is something nobody really wants.

Yes it is an issue that divides families - my family pretty equally down the middle - ironically the better informed politically amongst us are the ones who voted for leave which is contrary to the popular view. The side who voted remain did so purely because they don't want to the economy to tank and house prices to fall - not because they like the EU. Fair enough. I'm concerned about that as well.

What does annoy me is the fashionsable view that everyone who voted leave is thick and morally inferior to those who voted remain.

In fact it's very rare to find anyone who knows much about the EU at all, or has anything good to say about it, which is scary given how much power it now has...

 

[Bromley boy]

So you may have to apply for a VISA because you might no longer be entitled to freedom of movement. That's it! You haven't lost your freedom to post your opinion on this forum, you haven't lost your freedom to go on the internet, you haven't lost your freedom to vote, and you most certainly haven't lost your freedom to compare leave voters to Hitler. Also, I think many people would disagree with you when you implied that Hitler failed to take away people's freedom. The Nazis banned political parties as soon as they got in, and that was just the start of it! All that's happened with you is that you might have to apply for a VISA to move to another country in future, but then Brexit might be stopped beforehand in the case of a second referendum. This is not comparable at all to the atrocities committed by the Nazis, so perhaps a little perspective is in order.

I'm assuming that post is tongue in cheek/he's had a few. Comparing leave voters to the nazis seems more than a little provocative otherwise.

And of course Hitler was rather in favour of European integration, he unified much of it by invading it. He'd have been a remainer for sure

 

[EM2]

No - it simply isn't.

Again I don't think you're appreciating the difference between a puppet EU "parliament" that doesn't originate its own legislation and what we have in the uk. The commissioners, who originate legislation, are appointed by member state governments but they are supposed to act in "European interests" rather than national interests of "their" member states, and indeed swear an oath to this effect.

Who originates legislation in this country (in the main)? Is it the ordinary backbench MP, or is it the cabinet selected by the Prime Minister?
Does that cabinet act in "UK interests" or do they act in the constituency interests of "their" constituencies?

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

I'm assuming that post is tongue in cheek/he's had a few. Comparing leave voters to the nazis seems more than a little provocative otherwise.

Thankfully, that isn't common on the forums from what I've seen. Everyone usually has well structured arguments and is willing to properly engage in debate without resorting to name calling. I've even learned a few things myself, and it's good to get a perspective on things from people of different backgrounds. It's certainly made me reconsider my stance on votes for sixteen year olds, though as far I have not changed my mind just yet. You seem to have a harder time than I do though I must say

 

[Bromley boy]

Who originates legislation in this country (in the main)? Is it the ordinary backbench MP, or is it the cabinet selected by the Prime Minister?
Does that cabinet act in "UK interests" or do they act in the constituency interests of "their" constituencies?

Backbench MPs can originate legislation, most is originated by the government. But that government is composed mainly of elected MPs and is formed by the party that has won the most seats in a general election.

The government acts in the interests of the UK which is absolutely fine by me. What I don't want is laws imposed from abroad which are made by those not acting in the best interests of the UK but in the best interests of a (rapidly failing) bloated political vanity project.

 

[Bromley boy]

Thankfully, that isn't common on the forums from what I've seen. Everyone usually has well structured arguments and is willing to properly engage in debate without resorting to name calling. I've even learned a few things myself, and it's good to get a perspective on things from people of different backgrounds. It's certainly made me reconsider my stance on votes for sixteen year olds, though as far I have not changed my mind just yet. You seem to have a harder time than I do though I must say

That's fine by me I enjoy arguing! My views are not the fashionable/accepted left wing views prevalent on this forum and I try to deal in facts and analysis rather than soundbites .

In fairness the majority of contributors, particularly on the political threads, seem well informed and advance well reasoned arguments.

I agree the pleasure in debating these topics is reflecting on your own views and gaining an alternative perspective.

 

[Howardh]

I'm assuming that post is tongue in cheek/he's had a few. Comparing leave voters to the nazis seems more than a little provocative otherwise.

And of course Hitler was rather in favour of European integration, he unified much of it by invading it. He'd have been a remainer for sure

No it's not tongue-in-cheek at all. I have lost my right to live, work and possibly retire without fuss or bother in any EU country. As someone approaching my sunset years, the plan was to downsize here, and long-term rent (7 - 9 months) somewhere warm and sunny, and flip between the two with ease, without visas, without hindrance. Now I haven't got a bloody clue what's in store. I read the details of that ETIAD scheme and the parts that applied to me suggested I will be restricted to something like 90 days wherever I choose. That's not 90, leave, come back the day after, stay another 90; that's 90 out of the whole year - and it's not just one Schengen country, it's the lot. OK if it turns out to be 180 that's not so bad - but I read 90 and I'd be happy if someone could alert me that it's changed. But I'm fuming. It is a right - the right of abode as and when I choose - which looks like it's going.

I hope I'm wrong, and I hope that post-Brexit it's virtual remainity. But right now I doubt it, and I'm fuming. Worked hard, saved hard to spend my sunset years in the sunset as I choose, and it looks like I'm gonna have time restrictions, complicated access to medical care and goodness knows what else, and I'm just a tourist; not someone who wants to live/work in the EU permanently.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

in fact it's very rare to find anyone who knows much about the EU at all, or has anything good to say about it, which is scary given how much power it now has...

I know it might seem late to respond to this, but quite honestly I can't think there's much good to say about the European Union. But at the same time I don't think anything different can be said about our Parliament aside from the fact we elect those who propose and create legislation. I'd disagree that Parliament acts in the interest of the UK, because if that were the case I don't think some people would've voted leave because they felt like they had been not listened to and left behind for too long. It's impossible to really cater for everybody in the country, as with being in the EU where it isn't possible to cater to 28 (soon to be 27) member states. If it did, we wouldn't be facing this massive change.

But would leaving help? I'd say that was up to the individual. Choosing uncertainty is good when you think the alternative is certain collapse or destruction, because while it could be worse, it could be better. The problem is, both these scenarios are only a possibility, though one of them will end up a reality, we just don't know which. Even some Remain voters don't think the EU is perfect, and some of them were even critical free movement. It just wasn't enough for them to justify taking a chance on leaving, and really there's nothing wrong with that. But this issue, regardless of it's outcome, has revealed the huge division of this country and will do so for many years. We could have a second referendum tomorrow and vote to stay, the divisions will still exist.

 

[Howardh]

I know it might seem late to respond to this, but quite honestly I can't think there's much good to say about the European Union. But at the same time I don't think anything different can be said about our Parliament aside from the fact we elect those who propose and create legislation. I'd disagree that Parliament acts in the interest of the UK, because if that were the case I don't think some people would've voted leave because they felt like they had been not listened to and left behind for too long. It's impossible to really cater for everybody in the country, as with being in the EU where it isn't possible to cater to 28 (soon to be 27) member states. If it did, we wouldn't be facing this massive change.

But would leaving help? I'd say that was up to the individual. Choosing uncertainty is good when you think the alternative is certain collapse or destruction, because while it could be worse, it could be better. The problem is, both these scenarios are only a possibility, though one of them will end up a reality, we just don't know which. Even some Remain voters don't think the EU is perfect, and some of them were even critical free movement. It just wasn't enough for them to justify taking a chance on leaving, and really there's nothing wrong with that. But this issue, regardless of it's outcome, has revealed the huge division of this country and will do so for many years. We could have a second referendum tomorrow and vote to stay, the divisions will still exist.

The voice of reason! As a total Remainer I'll be the first to admit the EU isn't perfect, neither is Parliament, neither is my local council. Faults in every system - show me one that's faultless. But there are times when it's better the devil you know. If we knew exactly where we end up before the referendum, hey, I might have voted Brexit. But we had a choice of knowing where we were, like it or not, or the total unknown, a place that only Greenland has ever been to.

If we'd had the negotiations first, and the result was better than OK, it might have got my vote. But trips in the dark without a map, torch or compass, and being led down the path by hard-line Tories...no. No way.

 

[Bromley boy]

No it's not tongue-in-cheek at all. I have lost my right to live, work and possibly retire without fuss or bother in any EU country. As someone approaching my sunset years, the plan was to downsize here, and long-term rent (7 - 9 months) somewhere warm and sunny, and flip between the two with ease, without visas, without hindrance. Now I haven't got a bloody clue what's in store. I read the details of that ETIAD scheme and the parts that applied to me suggested I will be restricted to something like 90 days wherever I choose. That's not 90, leave, come back the day after, stay another 90; that's 90 out of the whole year - and it's not just one Schengen country, it's the lot. OK if it turns out to be 180 that's not so bad - but I read 90 and I'd be happy if someone could alert me that it's changed. But I'm fuming. It is a right - the right of abode as and when I choose - which looks like it's going.

I hope I'm wrong, and I hope that post-Brexit it's virtual remainity. But right now I doubt it, and I'm fuming. Worked hard, saved hard to spend my sunset years in the sunset as I choose, and it looks like I'm gonna have time restrictions, complicated access to medical care and goodness knows what else, and I'm just a tourist; not someone who wants to live/work in the EU permanently.

Well, bully for you!

I happen to value preservation of the parliamentary democracy I live in more than I value your self interested ability to sun yourself during your retirement (and guess what, you'll be able to do that after Brexit just as easily - do you really think Spain and Greece are going to turn the tap off on UK expats?)

I would also observe that, as someone in your Sunset years, you should be mature enough not to compare leave voters to Hitler. That comment isn't in keeping with reasoned debate and just made you look rather silly.

 

[EM2]

The government acts in the interests of the UK which is absolutely fine by me.

Even though that could be detrimental to where you live, or to you personally?

What I don't want is laws imposed from abroad which are made by those not acting in the best interests of the UK but in the best interests of a (rapidly failing) bloated political vanity project.

But you're happy for laws to be imposed from Westminster which are made by those (possibly) not acting in the best interests of your community?

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

No it's not tongue-in-cheek at all. I have lost my right to live, work and possibly retire without fuss or bother in any EU country. As someone approaching my sunset years, the plan was to downsize here, and long-term rent (7 - 9 months) somewhere warm and sunny, and flip between the two with ease, without visas, without hindrance. Now I haven't got a bloody clue what's in store. I read the details of that ETIAD scheme and the parts that applied to me suggested I will be restricted to something like 90 days wherever I choose. That's not 90, leave, come back the day after, stay another 90; that's 90 out of the whole year - and it's not just one Schengen country, it's the lot. OK if it turns out to be 180 that's not so bad - but I read 90 and I'd be happy if someone could alert me that it's changed. But I'm fuming. It is a right - the right of abode as and when I choose - which looks like it's going.

I hope I'm wrong, and I hope that post-Brexit it's virtual remainity. But right now I doubt it, and I'm fuming. Worked hard, saved hard to spend my sunset years in the sunset as I choose, and it looks like I'm gonna have time restrictions, complicated access to medical care and goodness knows what else, and I'm just a tourist; not someone who wants to live/work in the EU permanently.

I would also observe that, as someone in your Sunset years, you should be mature enough not to compare leave voters to Hitler. That comment isn't in keeping with reasoned debate and just made you look rather silly.

Now I do agree that comparing leave voters to Nazis is silly, but I am now genuinely sympathetic towards this person. I can only imagine how gut-punching it must've felt to have worked hard all your life, planning for your sunset years and having a great deal of hopes for them, only for it to be compromised and given a great deal of uncertainty by a simple act of democracy. They're right to be angry really, and though I do think comparing the leave voters to Nazis was a bit silly, I think I'll retract my earlier comment about the need for perspective. I'm not the most mature person, but I'll admit when I've made a mistake. Perhaps, Howardh, you could accept my apologies for jumping to conclusions? Besides, I think I've already shown them that not everyone who voted leave was a mindless bigot and such.

 

[Bromley boy]

Now I do agree that comparing leave voters to Nazis is silly, but I am now genuinely sympathetic towards this person. I can only imagine how gut-punching it must've felt to have worked hard all your life, planning for your sunset years and having a great deal of hopes for them, only for it to be compromised and given a great deal of uncertainty by a simply act of democracy. They're right to be angry really, and though I do think comparing the leave voters to Nazis was a bit silly, I think I'll retract my earlier comment about the need for perspective. I'm not the most mature person, but I'll admit when I've made a mistake. Besides, I think I've already shown them that not everyone who voted leave was a mindless bigot and such.

Well I have sympathy for their situation too, I just think much of what they've written in their posts is doom-laden scare mongering. People managed to retire abroad before the EU existed and they will do so again when we have left.

It's interesting to note the majority of people in that age group voted for leave, so would disagree with his perspective.

I am also concerned about the possible economic consequences of Brexit - what sane person wouldn't be - but my concern is mainly for working age people and families as they could be most affected by it - although I happen to believe it won't be anything like as bad as the remain camp led us to believe during the referendum campaign.

 

[Bromley boy]

Even though that could be detrimental to where you live, or to you personally?

But you're happy for laws to be imposed from Westminster which are made by those (possibly) not acting in the best interests of your community?

Yes because if I don't like the laws passed I at least have a voice at the ballot box. I'm not saying the UK system is perfect but I reckon it's pretty good.

Can you honestly not see any distinction between the EU and the UK in terms of democratic accountability, despite all of the above discussion?

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

Well I have sympathy for their situation too, I just think it's doom-laden scare mongering. People managed to retire abroad before the EU existed and they will do so again when we have left.

It's interesting to note the majority of people in that age group voted for leave, so would disagree with his perspective.

I am also concerned about the possible economic consequences of Brexit - what sane person wouldn't be - but my concern is mainly for working age people and families as they could be most affected by it - although I happen to believe it won't be anything like as bad as the remain camp led us to believe during the referendum campaign.

I think the uncertainty is just really worrying for them. I sincerely hope they'll be able to get what they wish for in the end, or at least as good as they can get. Indeed the majority of people of said age group voted leave, but of course as you most likely know (I'd be very surprised if you didn't!) that the age of a person doesn't shape their politics. If I'm not mistaken, that would be a form of identity politics, and we both know how sick of that we truly are! You know I'm right there don't you, Bromley?

I won't really disagree with you on the outcome of Brexit, only because I don't know. You have your reasons to believe it won't be as bad as the Remain camp made it out to be, and I respect your right to believe in those reasons. Nothing wrong with a little faith in your country, after all it's what partially what helped get us through two world wars. Surprisingly even, World War II veterans interviewed in a video by Vice a while back were split on the issue. I know this might surprise you, but it was actually an unbiased coverage! I know right?!

 

[HSTEd]

Leavers deprived remainers of their freedom of movement in the same way anyone banning anything or voting to restrict something take away their fellow citizens right to have or enjoy it.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

Leavers deprived remainers of their freedom of movement in the same way anyone banning anything or voting to restrict something take away their fellow citizens right to have or enjoy it.

Not every Remain voter was a fan of freedom of movement, and not every Leave voter wanted to see it off (albeit a small minority in that case). Let's also not pretend that freedom of movement is good in every way, because it has it's problems. While free movement is a two-way street, some countries are poorer than others, so there'll be a bigger influx of people moving from one country to another than vice versa. Why move from a well and rich country to somewhere that's poor and deprived? Furthermore, immigration does have an impact on wages to a certain extent. A report done by the Bank of England found that a 10% rise of foreign-born workers in lower paid service jobs was associated with a near 2% fall in average pay for those jobs, when focusing on particular regions. Is that down to free movement? It could very well be, and it likely does play a part.

 

[Bromley boy]

Leavers deprived remainers of their freedom of movement in the same way anyone banning anything or voting to restrict something take away their fellow citizens right to have or enjoy it.

Well that isn't true. We haven't left yet, so nobody has been deprived of anything, and we don't yet know what alternative arrangements will be reached.

Many people believe wholesale free movement isn't a good thing and I'm inclined to agree - I've spoken to quite a few ex builders who have left the trade and joined the railway because they could no longer afford to raise a family in the UK while competing with Eastern European labourers living five to a room sending money home...

Of course the latte drinking, left wing intelligentsia in Islington have no regard for such matters, as they only affect thick working class oiks...

Freedom of movement isn't a huge issue for me personally but I can see how it has become a problem in some industries.

 

[EM2]

Yes because if I don't like the laws passed I at least have a voice at the ballot box. I'm not saying the UK system is perfect but I reckon it's pretty good.

Can you honestly not see any distinction between the EU and the UK in terms of democratic accountability, despite all of the above discussion?

And that voice you have also determines which commissioner represents you.
When it comes down to it, every country in the EU has a veto, which they can use as they see fit. I see no way of a constituency, or group of constituencies, vetoing a law passed in Westminster.

 

[EM2]

Many people believe wholesale free movement isn't a good thing and I'm inclined to agree - I've spoken to quite a few ex builders who have left the trade and joined the railway because they could no longer afford to raise a family in the UK while competing with Eastern European labourers living five to a room sending money home...

Which is why the EU permits existing member states to place restrictions on movements of citizens of new member states for seven years. It's not the EU's fault that the UK decided not to.

Of course the latte drinking, left wing intelligentsia in Islington have no regard for such matters, as they only affect thick working class oiks...

I wasn't aware that drinking milky coffee made you a member of the intelligentsia.

 

[Bromley boy]

And that voice you have also determines which commissioner represents you.
When it comes down to it, every country in the EU has a veto, which they can use as they see fit. I see no way of a constituency, or group of constituencies, vetoing a law passed in Westminster.

Well, no, because the commissioners don’t represent me, or the U.K. at all, they represent the EU’s best interests.

Well we have seen how seriously the EU takes dissent with the passage of the Lisbon Treaty. A single veto is pretty meaningless when the same proposition will simply be tweaked and represented.

I’ll ask you again - can you honestly not see any problems with the EU system versus the U.K. system and why many people may want out of the EU?

 

[Bromley boy]

Which is why the EU permits existing member states to place restrictions on movements of citizens of new member states for seven years. It's not the EU's fault that the UK decided not to.

I wasn't aware that drinking milky coffee made you a member of the intelligentsia.

No it was the fault of the Labour government at the time who wanted to maximise immigration in order to change their electorate to their own benefit - and deliberately downplayed the likely number of arrivals - as has been subsequently admitted.

The point I was making (evidently lost on you) was that the “Champagne socialists” who champion ideas such as free movement are frequently not in a position where they personally have to deal with the consequences.

 

[EM2]

I’ll ask you again - can you honestly not see any problems with the EU system versus the U.K. system and why many people may want out of the EU?

No, I can't see any problems.

 

[EM2]

No it was the fault of the Labour government at the time who wanted to maximise immigration in order to change their electorate to their own benefit - and deliberately downplayed the likely number of arrivals - as has been subsequently admitted.

So not the EU's fault, but something that you're blaming them for.

The point I was making (evidently lost on you) was that the “Champagne socialists” who champion ideas such as free movement are frequently not in a position where they personally have to deal with the consequences.

Ah, we've gone from milky coffee to fizzy wine.
For what it's worth, I think free movement is a great idea, and every handyman, builder, scaffolder, electrician and plumber that I've dealt with in the past ten years has been English. And that includes the eight years that I lived in the borough with the lowest percentage of white British residents in the UK.