Brexit What Happens Next Thread ---multiple merged threads.

[Peter Hun]

5 hours ago, XswampyX said:

The population of Sunderland is over 250,000 and 7,000 of them know they are to be replaced by foreign workers at some point.

What do they have to fear?

The ratio is 5:1 indirect to direct jobs will be lost. So 35 k jobs out of about 100k workers. On top will be the increased tax burden which will be painful.

I guess 'horrors of economic blackspots' from 1980 TV have faded from memory.

Edited October 7, 2016 by Peter Hun

[Richmond]

6 minutes ago, Chunketh said:

I think most people (myself included) expect the result of a referendum to be honoured. Then again, these are politicians we are talking about!

However, in this case my complaint would relate to article 50. I accept that we are leaving, I dont accept that the government has the right to invoke A50 without the consent of parliament. How we do this is as important as the act of leaving itself. It needs reasoned debate so the correct choices are made.

So seeing as they 'have' to invoke article 50, what do you see parlement debating? The timing? The deal we want with Europe post article 50? And how do you see them not exposing our hand/weaknesses in advance of negotiations?

Or are you looking just for it to be 'rubber stamped' so that it has gone through due process?

[Peter Hun]

20 minutes ago, Richmond said:

So seeing as they 'have' to invoke article 50, what do you see parlement debating? The timing? The deal we want with Europe post article 50? And how do you see them not exposing our hand/weaknesses in advance of negotiations?

Or are you looking just for it to be 'rubber stamped' so that it has gone through due process?

The only thing May can claim she has authority to perform is invoke A 50. Everything else has to be approved by Parliament. 

[FrenchLondon]

10 hours ago, hotairmail said:

The main reason they can't give FOM up is because of the glaringly missing 5th 'f'....fiscal transfers/union. FOM is, along with deflationary depression, the only valves left in the common currency area.

Well, populist German point of view is rather ...  ...

"enough of this transfer union!"

Indeed, populist parties are attracting voters with these kind of claims...

 

My point of view is rather different. 

U.K. and Germany have highly profited from the EU... Anyway, I totally understand brexit voters. What's good for the economy must not necessarily be good for the people. I wonder what will happen next if economy goes down. German newspapers like FAZ and Handelsblatt are making the forecast of a big crisis.

[FrenchLondon]

And if I make any mistakes, I would rather be happy to get some help

 

[Futuroid]

Well, looks like Francois took the same "talking tough" workshop as Theresa:

Hollande demands tough Brexit negotiations
https://www.ft.com/content/5f84e4c4-8c17-11e6-8aa5-f79f5696c731

And the pound is now down to US$1.24!

[FrenchLondon]

16 hours ago, the gardener said:

Germany and France really are running scared aren't they?

Call their bluff. Hard Brexit.

We won't be excluded from the single market in such an event since the EU will break up.

We hold all the cards and they know it, hence the bluster.

 

As I am French and German I would like to add something.

Honestly, I don't think they are scared. It's rather disappointment - it's a total political failure (of every politic in every country). This vote didn't come out of nowhere..l

(And of course, brexit voters were right.) 

I think hard brexit means in the German interpretation actually sharp restriction to the markets. German newspaper reported that May didn't bother and preferred instead stopping immigration. As German politics always put the economy first, this is rather difficult to understand for them.

I am not sure if this German interpretation is what she actually meant. .. but the order and the "but" suggested it? 

 

Quote

 

"I want it to give British companies the maximum freedom to trade with and operate within the Single Market – and let European businesses do the same here.

But let’s state one thing loud and clear: we are not leaving the European Union only to give up control of immigration all over again. And we are not leaving only to return to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. That’s not going to happen." 

 

 

[Chunketh]

9 hours ago, billybong said:

It's been mentioned before but one of the points made was that the referendum was debated in Parliament before the referendum and it was emphasised then that the decision was going to be made by the people via the referendum and Parliament voted in favour of it.  There was plenty of debate before the referendum.   By all means send the decision back to Parliament to rubber stamp it.

Incidentally although the 1975 was post legisative in that Britain had already entered the Common Market via legislation it was also non binding.  So I guess if that vote had gone against the Common Market they would have reneged on it - actually like 2016 they only allowed the vote because they were extremely confident of getting their own way.  This time the vote upturned their apple cart so it's renege on it time. 

Also to me the 2016 referendum being post legislative means that Britain got a belated vote (belated like 1975) on the sovereignty grab.  Sovereignty grab as a result of legislative treaties like the Maastricht Treaty etc.  Britain should have been given a referendum in a more timely and less deceptive manner but that didn't suit the VIs because they knew they would never get the British people's approval for the treaties because of the sovereignty grab.

The terms and conditions of the referendum itself was debated, not the course of action in the case of either outcome. Given there are a multitude of ways to leave, parliament needs to debate which one we take. a 52/48 split is hardly indicative of "lets take the nuclear option".

[canbuywontbuy]

2 minutes ago, FrenchLondon said:

German newspaper reported that May didn't bother and preferred instead stopping immigration. As German politics always put the economy first, this is rather difficult to understand for them.

Maybe German newspapers and politicians put economics before uncontrolled immigration, but according to recent local elections in Germany, German voters don't.

[Chunketh]

1 hour ago, Richmond said:

So seeing as they 'have' to invoke article 50, what do you see parlement debating? The timing? The deal we want with Europe post article 50? And how do you see them not exposing our hand/weaknesses in advance of negotiations?

Or are you looking just for it to be 'rubber stamped' so that it has gone through due process?

It's a tricky one really. On one hand we don't want to give too much away, on the other I don't expect a government that has not described what it would do in the result of an out vote and therefore having no mandate to unilaterally decide the country's fate.

I expect them to table a number of desirable outcomes, debate them and then take a vote. Despite my personal views on this, none of those options should be remain as the electorate has actually spoken. That said, they still need to pick the least bad option.

[canbuywontbuy]

Chunketh, I don't seem to recall the British public rubber stamping/having a say over FOM when it was introduced in 1993? Remember also that the parliament are supposed to represent the people and ensure democracy takes place. 

[FrenchLondon]

9 minutes ago, canbuywontbuy said:

Maybe German newspapers and politicians put economics before uncontrolled immigration, but according to recent local elections in Germany, German voters don't.

Indeed you are right 16% extremist right wing is a lot - but the outcome is always a more leftist government. I lived in Berlin and the ex-communists die Linke got 16%. This was rather astonishing.

What an irony, isn't it? 

I assume that the majority  of the people are (still) on the left side. 

(This is subject to change, if more terrorist attacks happen of course ... October feast e.g. lost half of its visitors because of the fears of terrorist attacks.) 

Party of Merkel has lost as much voters as never before...

[canbuywontbuy]

18 minutes ago, FrenchLondon said:

Indeed you are right 16% extremist right wing is a lot - but the outcome is always a more leftist government. I lived in Berlin and the ex-communists die Linke got 16%. This was rather astonishing.

What an irony, isn't it? 

I assume that the majority  of the people are (still) on the left side. 

(This is subject to change, if more terrorist attacks happen of course ... October feast e.g. lost half of its visitors because of the fears of terrorist attacks.) 

Party of Merkel has lost as much voters as never before...

I was referring to this:- https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/04/mecklenburg-vorpommern-german-anti-immigrant-party-strong-regional-election-exit-polls-merkel

[Chunketh]

1 hour ago, canbuywontbuy said:

Chunketh, I don't seem to recall the British public rubber stamping/having a say over FOM when it was introduced in 1993? Remember also that the parliament are supposed to represent the people and ensure democracy takes place. 

And the no result describes the multitude of options available along with each persons preference?

Didn't think so

[canbuywontbuy]

1 minute ago, Chunketh said:

And the no result describes the multitude of options available along with each persons preference?

I don't understand this sentence.

[Chunketh]

1 minute ago, canbuywontbuy said:

I don't understand this sentence.

Ok we got a narrow leave vote. Now we have a government, that has not previously described what it would do in the event of a leave vote (that means it has no mandate) taking the most extreme form of leaving.

Not even all the leave voters will support this, so how is it representative of the population as a whole? It isn't. 

[canbuywontbuy]

8 minutes ago, Chunketh said:

Ok we got a narrow leave vote. Now we have a government, that has not previously described what it would do in the event of a leave vote (that means it has no mandate) taking the most extreme form of leaving.

Not even all the leave voters will support this, so how is it representative of the population as a whole? It isn't. 

Most of the parliament (let alone government) lied and bullied the public into voting remain through Project Fear.  The public resisted the propaganda enough to vote Leave.  There was no manifesto on the voting paper for remain or leave. Even if there was, who believes politicians? You've having a laugh! Manifesto after manifesto gets broken.  The referendum was a single chance for the public to have a say on something fundamental and they voted they way they did - knowing that politcians are liars anyway and so you vote with your conscience and own sensibility, and whatever will be will be.  That is democracy in action.  It doesn't always go your way, but you either respect the result or you disrespect democracy. 

[canbuywontbuy]

Given the unrelenting intensity of Project Fear's propaganda, and the fact that Remain was the status quo option, 52/48 is a resounding victory for Leave.  A good number of remain voters only voted remain out of fear (Project Fear won them over).  If it was a fair fight, Leave would have gotten 65%+. 

[spyguy]

2 hours ago, Futuroid said:

Well, looks like Francois took the same "talking tough" workshop as Theresa:

Hollande demands tough Brexit negotiations
https://www.ft.com/content/5f84e4c4-8c17-11e6-8aa5-f79f5696c731

And the pound is now down to US$1.24!

An EU leader is always going to claim tough terms, whether they mean it or not.

 

[Chunketh]

2 minutes ago, hotairmail said:

Although the headline promulgated is 52:48, in reality, in the political world it is far wider.

Ignoring parts of the UK where nationalist issues dominated, the result was 54%:46% in England and Wales. A clear majority in EVERY REGION of England and Wales outside London. Pretty decisive.

Then we find the only functioning national political party's supporters voted 58%:42% in favour of Leave.

And 96% of UKIP...actually a big voter base to go at that is badly under represented by first past the post. And the Tories ARE going for it, in order to cement themselves in power for a generation or more.

A couple of other interesting points to note is that Labour supporters were on a par with the SNP regarding support for Remain - contrary to all the spin against Corbyn. The Labour voters were lost to their cause before Corbyn came along, under the leadership of the Blairites.

 

http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/

This exit poll really tells you all you need to know as to why this referendum is being taken so seriously by the Tories and their strategies re immigration and UKIP, when the headline touted in the media is only a marginal 52:48.

 

Ok even if you use the 54/46, there is still no mandate to a hard exit. The question was not on the paper.

1 minute ago, canbuywontbuy said:

Given the unrelenting intensity of Project Fear's propaganda, and the fact that Remain was the status quo option, 52/48 is a resounding victory for Leave.  A good number of remain voters only voted remain out of fear (Project Fear won them over).  If it was a fair fight, Leave would have gotten 65%+. 

Why not just call both campaigns project ********? They both were.

[Futuroid]

1 minute ago, spyguy said:

A UK leader is always going to claim tough terms, whether they mean it or not.

 

I've fixed that for you.

[Chunketh]

1 minute ago, Futuroid said:

I've fixed that for you.

I am hoping that's what our PM (got that makes me want to puke) is doing, something tells me its not though.

[Futuroid]

1 hour ago, Chunketh said:

I am hoping that's what our PM (got that makes me want to puke) is doing, something tells me its not though.

I think you might be on to something (not the puking), Uncle Phil gave a little too much away yesterday:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-06/hammond-says-britain-still-open-for-business-amid-brexit-nerves

"In a Bloomberg Television interview on Thursday during his first trip to New York’s Wall Street as finance minister, Hammond said Prime Minister Theresa May’s administration isn’t pursuing a so-called hard Brexit, recognizes the value of the country’s finance industry and will continue to welcome high-skilled foreigners."

[FrenchLondon]

Dear canbuywontbuy (interesting nick-name btw),
the land of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern is not representative for Germany. These Länder (among them Saxony) suffer from high unemployment; people with higher degrees have left to find better jobs elsewhere and on top of this immigration rate in these Länder is very low:  2%. So objectively, there is no reason to vote for them. To be honest, I fear much more for other lander where suddenly cheap workers taking up jobs from local population will be available.
Most immigrants don't have higher degrees and they won't bring the economic miracle Merkel has promised, it's actually estimated that the cost of their integration will be much higher than the economic benefits. And this pushes people to vote against Merkel. http://www.faz.net/aktuell/wirtschaft/integration-kein-zweites-wirtschaftswunder-durch-fluechtlinge-14409618.html
Even when people want other people to get out - there is always an economic argument behind. It's just the way we think. 

Don't get me wrong - last year, I have volunteered to teach German on my free weekends - but one of the members in my class flew in from Dubai. He was even proud of his cleverness. I kind of felt naive and even abused. I must admit, I stopped teaching them. It's not rational and I should have done better and get over it - but I didn't and I still don't. 

 On the other hand, I was astonished when I saw the stats about migration in the U.K.  from EEA. They don't take away as much jobs as I would have thought And if so, it's only jobs with higher degreees. That's a difference towards Germany where the poorest people fear immigrants with no education.
Put differently, I think you can not compare immigration taking up lower paid jobs and European immigration with higher degrees towards the U.K..
In my mind, it's especially the lower paid jobs that must be prevailed for local population in order to keep social peace.
 In the U.K. nowadays everybody has at least a bachelor degree even if the job didn't need such a degree some years ago. In my mind this really throws working class out of jobs because of the difficulties of access towards higher education for working class.  

 And I have quite a thought for my dear British friends in Southern France. People voting for Brexit did not even think about their fellows. My British friends are going to loose everything: they can't really sell their properties in Provence because the market is down, they can't exchange euros towards pounds because of the exchange rate and they will be thrown out in case of hard brexit.
So I still wonder if the hole Brexit debate wasn't more a class fight among British - but I don't know?Actually I like to prefer to interpret Brexit like this because it's not racist. And I have told you about my own struggle with this. I don't want to be racist mpbut I don't want immigrants making a mock of my goodwill to help. 

[Chunketh]

56 minutes ago, Futuroid said:

I think you might be on to something (not the puking), Uncle Phil gave a little too much away yesterday:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-06/hammond-says-britain-still-open-for-business-amid-brexit-nerves

"In a Bloomberg Television interview on Thursday during his first trip to New York’s Wall Street as finance minister, Hammond said Prime Minister Theresa May’s administration isn’t pursuing a so-called hard Brexit, recognizes the value of the country’s finance industry and will continue to welcome high-skilled foreigners."

He actually comes over as quite thoughtful, that is a bit of a shock