EU Referendum: The result and aftermath...

[bramling]

Even Michael O'Leary has admitted his no flights from Britain claim was nonsense, but please folks carry it on, it'll make for an "entertaining" six months at least!

The “no flights” thing is an emotive distraction.

Even if we did end up with the absolute worst case of flights having to be turned back mid-air and people stranded at point of origin, this is still only a transitional issue. Not a good long-term reason not to have Brexit.

 

[underbank]

Europe has divided the Tories for decades.

It's also divided Labour and the libdems too. None of the 3 main parties are fully in favour nor fully against the UK's membership of the EU. That's why we're in this mess. The main parties should have sorted themselves out about 20 years ago into Pro and Anti parties. It would have created another 1 (or maybe 2) main parties. We wouldn't have needed a referendum as leaving (or at least diverging away from) the EU could have been a party manifesto issue. Over the last 20 years, we've got sucked into it more, without any public consultation.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Conservatives are being accused of messing it up but this is because of having to keep changing sticks. This is the result of the EU demanding rather than negotiating

They are in the stronger position. Why should they not? Really, they are being generous by offering anything; they could close the borders and refuse to trade with us if they wanted, and there is in one way a very strong argument that that is in fact what they should do, as for years and years we have been making increasingly unreasonable demands of them.

 

[underbank]

The “no flights” thing is an emotive distraction.

Even if we did end up with the absolute worst case of flights having to be turned back mid-air and people stranded at point of origin, this is still only a transitional issue. Not a good long-term reason not to have Brexit.

Same with mobile roaming charges - another almost irrelevant issue for most that seems to have reached epic proportions.

 

[bramling]

The Conservatives are being accused of messing it up but this is because of having to keep changing sticks. This is the result of the EU demanding rather than negotiating and not helped by Remainers, including some in Mrs May's own party, who won't accept the result of the Referendum and putting as many obstacles as they can in the way to try and overturn the result. The campaign for a people's referendum is merely another way of trying to stop Brexit but none of those campaigning will actually admit it. Kier Starmer's words seem to be designed to force another General Election.
All this might well have been avoided if there had been a referendum 30 + years ago at the first hint of the Common Market turning into a political union.
I want rid of the present Government as many many more do but unfortunately there is no electable alternative at the moment.

I think this sums things up quite neatly.

We have two things going on at home:

1) The remain side disrupting the process by trying to water down Brexit, at times into things which are not reconcilable - for example remaining in the single market but this conflicts with a widely held desire to end free movement.

2) Labour’s muddle and lack of clarity - which seems to be partly due to their own party splits over the issue, and partly because trying to bring the Conservatives to their knees gives Corbyn and company a route to power, with the Brexit process being collateral damage.

I think the second of those could ultimately prove extremely damaging, in several different ways depending on what happens over the next few months.

I don’t think anyone on the leave side expected the EU to be anything other than firm and intransigent - that’s one of the reasons we want to leave!

 

[underbank]

they could close the borders and refuse to trade with us if they wanted

That isn't even remotely possible given the enormous amount of exports into the UK from EU based companies. It would damage the EU just as much, if not more, than it would damage the UK.

 

[Kite159]

Whatever deal gets reached will most likely be voted down by Labour in their attempts to force an election, even if is the best possible deal.

 

[bramling]

Whatever deal gets reached will most likely be voted down by Labour in their attempts to force an election, even if is the best possible deal.

Ultimately I think Labour would need to be careful with that strategy, although I don’t doubt you’re right that this is what is being at least considered.

It could provoke a highly damaging rift, and seriously alienate their non-London core vote. Of course Corbyn wouldn’t care if it gets him into power, but I think it would leave a very messy longer term legacy.

There’s also the chance it could backfire on Corbyn if people see it as a cynical attempt to get into power. I wouldn’t say it’s at all a given that Corbyn could outright win any election - despite the current government being understandably unpopular, I think many see Labour as being potentially worse. Middle England will be horrified watching the news this week seeing snippets from the Labour conference, and I suspect many would hesitate, even last minute in the privacy of the polling booth, at some of the implications of a Corbyn government.

 

[dosxuk]

That isn't even remotely possible given the enormous amount of exports into the UK from EU based companies. It would damage the EU just as much, if not more, than it would damage the UK.

How do you work that out? We export about 40% of our goods and services to other EU countries. They export about 8% of theirs to us. In the event of a closed border, we would lose 40% of our export income, they would lose 8% - how on earth would that be worse off for them?!

 

[Bletchleyite]

That isn't even remotely possible given the enormous amount of exports into the UK from EU based companies. It would damage the EU just as much, if not more, than it would damage the UK.

It really, really wouldn't. It would cause some damage to start with, but the EU are much bigger than us and will weather the storm.

 

[birchesgreen]

It really, really wouldn't. It would cause some damage to start with, but the EU are much bigger than us and will weather the storm.

Plus of course they already have trade deals in place with the likes of Japan to compensate.

 

[EM2]

I wonder what the WTO tariff is on passports? Because if we do end up with no deal, then we'd have the irony of the new French-made blue passports, that cannot be imported to the UK, because a no deal Brexit means that no trade agreement will be in place, to allow the blue passports to enter the UK.

 

[AM9]

How do you work that out? We export about 40% of our goods and services to other EU countries. They export about 8% of theirs to us. In the event of a closed border, we would lose 40% of our export income, they would lose 8% - how on earth would that be worse off for them?!

It's bizarre, the number of times that leavers (both professionals and social media posters) have made the statement that the EU would lose more than the UK if all trade between the two was stopped. Given that the EU27's population is nearly 7 times as large than the UK's, the damage to each person in the EU27 would average out as €863 vs a whopping €4721 for every adult and child in the UK. Even allowing for differences of income withing some EU economies, that certainly doesn't look like EU populations coming off worse. Both sides of the negotiatons know that of course.
Of course an average family of four would be pleased at 'taking back control' of their family income even if it has shrunk by over £10000 in the process.

 

[PHILIPE]

It's bizarre, the number of times that leavers (both professionals and social media posters) have made the statement that the EU would lose more than the UK if all trade between the two was stopped. Given that the EU27's population is nearly 7 times as large than the UK's, the damage to each person in the EU27 would average out as €863 vs a whopping €4721 for every adult and child in the UK. Even allowing for differences of income withing some EU economies, that certainly doesn't look like EU populations coming off worse. Both sides of the negotiatons know that of course.
Of course an average family of four would be pleased at 'taking back control' of their family income even if it has shrunk by over £10000 in the process.

Project Fear

 

[muddythefish]

I respect Cameron for having the guts to hold the referendum. I completely disrespect him for taking it for granted the result would swing his way and then going off in a sulk when it didn’t.

Cameron deserves no respect whatsoever. He caved in to the party's right wing. UKIP were never going to hit the Tory vote that much. The referendum was totally unnecessary and having a binary FPTP vote reckless in the extreme. A 60/40 vote either way and no one would have argued. Cameron has accused this country untold damage economically and in our international standing and will probably go down as one of the most disastrous PM's in British history

 

[muddythefish]

I don’t think anyone on the leave side expected the EU to be anything other than firm and intransigent - that’s one of the reasons we want to leave!

Why should they be anything but firm ? They hold all the cards

 

[PHILIPE]

Cameron deserves no respect whatsoever. He caved in to the party's right wing. UKIP were never going to hit the Tory vote that much. The referendum was totally unnecessary and having a binary FPTP vote reckless in the extreme. A 60/40 vote either way and no one would have argued. Cameron has accused this country untold damage economically and in our international standing and will probably go down as one of the most disastrous PM's in British history

It was right to call a Referendum but unfortunately it was 30+ years late

 

[bramling]

Cameron deserves no respect whatsoever. He caved in to the party's right wing. UKIP were never going to hit the Tory vote that much. The referendum was totally unnecessary and having a binary FPTP vote reckless in the extreme. A 60/40 vote either way and no one would have argued. Cameron has accused this country untold damage economically and in our international standing and will probably go down as one of the most disastrous PM's in British history

As it was UKIP polled 12.6% of the vote in 2015. I’d say that in itself was more than enough to be worried about. As it happens many of these votes seem to have come from disaffected Labour voters, but no one thought that at the time.

There was still a mindset at the time that an overall majority for the Conservatives was almost an impossibility. So every vote really did count.

 

[Ianno87]

It was right to call a Referendum but unfortunately it was 30+ years late

The option simply described as 'Leave' was far too simplistically presented, with the benefit of much hindsight. Frankly, we're still working it out....

It should have been badged as two referenda:

1) Shall the UK explore the idea of leaving the EU without committing to do so?
If Yes then work up a proposal/terms for a deal/offer then...
2) On those terms, do you agree with triggering Article 50 to start the process of leaving the European Union?

Unfortunately Cameron just assumed Remaim would win and didn't worry with the detatils of what Leave might look like...

 

[muddythefish]

Unfortunately Cameron just assumed Remaim would win and didn't worry with the detatils of what Leave might look like...

Pure arrogance on his part by someone who has had everything handed on a plate all his life. He's never known what it's like to lose at anything and assumed he would win. He won't be affected by the Brexit fallout either - he's got an offshore trust fund that he forgot to mention when he declared "we're all in this together".

 

[Muttley]

Why should they be anything but firm ? They hold all the cards

Only while we're putting in a third of the cash. As soon as we stop bankrolling their fifth(?) Reich they'll be in dire trouble.
Roll on a nothing is agreed till everything is agreed no deal.

 

[birchesgreen]

Fifth Reich? Blimey shouldn't you be doing your homework?

 

[nidave]

Only while we're putting in a third of the cash. As soon as we stop bankrolling their fifth(?) Reich they'll be in dire trouble.
Roll on a nothing is agreed till everything is agreed no deal.

You know someone is really clutching at straws and cant create a coherent argument when the Nazi references come out.

 

[dosxuk]

Project Fear

If this is just some nonsense designed to scare, it'll be easy to refute.

The floor is yours...

 

[EM2]

Only while we're putting in a third of the cash. As soon as we stop bankrolling their fifth(?) Reich they'll be in dire trouble.
Roll on a nothing is agreed till everything is agreed no deal.

The UK contributes approximately 13.5% of the EU budget. Germany contributes 19%.
You're talking tripe.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/316691/european-union-eu-budget-share-of-contributions/

This statistic shows the EU Member States' share of total contributions to the European Union budget in 2016. While most of the EU countries contributed shares between 0.07 percent (Malta) and 1.83 percent (Denmark), there were only four Member States, namely France, Italy, Germany and the United Kingdom (UK), which reached contribution shares greater than 10 percent. Together, these four countries make up over 60 percent of all contributions, with Germany contributing the largest single proportion with 19 percent. UK net contributions to EU budget shows fluctuation in the amount the UK has paid to the EU over recent years. According to government forecasts UK contributions to the European Union budget are expected to increase each year until 2022. An overall rise is also expected in UK public sector receipts from European Union budget.

 

[bramling]

The UK contributes approximately 13.5% of the EU budget. Germany contributes 19%.
You're talking tripe.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/316691/european-union-eu-budget-share-of-contributions/

13.5% is still a fair bit though, especially as 100 divides by 28 roughly equals 3.6%. I know we get some back through regional funds, but I’m sure that 13.5% will be missed.

 

[radamfi]

13.5% is still a fair bit though, especially as 100 divides by 28 roughly equals 3.6%. I know we get some back through regional funds, but I’m sure that 13.5% will be missed.

The UK is roughly 15% of the EU GDP so it sounds like we are underpaying. And what about the additional economic activity and increased tax generated by being part of the single market?

 

[AM9]

Project Fear

As no quick reply has been given to dosxuk's post #11634, I offer the following calculation to help you understand:
The UK has a population of around 65million* and the 27 EU countries have a total of about 442 million*
The UK exports about £616 billion total of which £274billion* goes to the 27 other EU countries
The 27 EU countries export about £341billion* to the UK.

Now here is the arithmetic:
if the UKs exports of £274billion are lost, the average cost to each of the UK's 65million population is £274,000,000,000 divided by 65,000,000 is £4215.38
similarly, if the 27 EU countries' combined exports to the UK of £341billion are lost, the average cost to each of the 27 EU countries' 442million population is £341,000,000,000 divided by 442,000,000 is £771.49​

Please note, the above results (in bold) show that UK citizens will be financially worse off than the rest of the EU.
Hopefully you can now see how the drivel put out by politicians about the EU being worse-off that the UK in the event of a no-deal is a pure lie. So sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "project fear" might be fashionable amongst leavers, but it doesn't change the facts that the population of the UK will pay dearly for their wishes to 'bring back control'. so the EU has the upper hand by a factor of 6 times.
If there is a no-deal, it won't be the Rees-Moggs of this country who lose out, - they have admitted that their riches will be squirreled off overseas. Ordinary people (and their children) will pay the price of the daft decision that by a small majority vote in a nonsense referendum has led the country into.

* all of the above figures are given and explained at: https://fullfact.org/europe/uk-eu-trade/ and more detailed links on that page show where each of the figures are drawn from.

 

[nidave]

13.5% is still a fair bit though, especially as 100 divides by 28 roughly equals 3.6%. I know we get some back through regional funds, but I’m sure that 13.5% will be missed.

Wow is that all you think about... money???

I shall repeat what I said previously

But what does it get back - considering there are now thousands more civil servants who are being hired and will 10's of thousands more will need to be hired which were not needed.
Plus the government has to pay for setting up a local version of what was EU wide departments and shared systems / resources - how many billions are needed for these - like the billions which will need to be spent on a upgrading the new customs systems. Its not as black and white as you are making out. Pooling resources which then have to be set up by the UK government is going to cost the country 10's of billions then there is the ongoing running costs which were shared between the EU countries. Now we have to pay for it all ourselves.

the estimate is £2000-£4000 more needed per person per year. So yea - tell me again how we have gotten nothing from the EU other than spending (approx) £110 per person per year that we currently spend.

 

[bramling]

Wow is that all you think about... money???

I shall repeat what I said previously

The point I’m trying to make is that one-eighth of the EU’s total budget contribution is not insignificant.

Indeed the fuss over the “divorce bill” would seem to suggest the EU would have some degree of a hole in its finances if we don’t pay it.