Brexit: Uniting the Country Since 31/01/2020

[Elizabeth]

How could that be possible with no floor space left because of the dumps already left by remoaners from previous Marr interviews

[Lancasterclaret]

How could that be possible with no floor space left because of the dumps already left by remoaners from previous Marr interviews

You'll have to provide evidence for that Ring.....sorry, Elizabeth

Evidence is always where you get caught out mate.

[AndyClaret]

He could have come on, done a dump in the middle of the floor and walked out and you two would still think he'd done well.

Marr beat him to it, I would have like his brexit policy to come under scrutiny, but Marr went for clicks and likes instead.

[Elizabeth]

There will be plenty of evidence for you to chew over a week Thursday

[Paul Waine]

It's gone like this: Rome 1957 > Maastricht (1992) > Lisbon (2007) with each building on the last.

The second two of these are what concreted in the neoliberalism. For ever. They were conceived and implemented in an age when 'everyone' assumed the markets had all the solutions. They are virtually impossible to undo. I suppose a shift even further towards the belief in free markets with another treaty building on the existing ones is possible (though very unlikely, considering the continent-wide EU sceptisism since the 2008 crash), but to actually undo, and take a step back towards something approximating to EEC, is practically impossible. These treaties were designed to be permanent, the only way out is to leave.

Hi If it be your will, I've got to congratulate you on your analysis and understanding of the EU. I'm in strong agreement with you in your understanding.

On the other hand, I'm a bit disappointed that several of the "remain voices" have shown that they don't really understand the EU.

As posted above, UK Gov't 2008/09 bailed out RBS and HBOS - by getting Lloyds to buy the latter. EU imposed "state aid" sanctions on both these banks. RBS were supposed to sell off some branches - I think they called it Williams and Glynns - but there were "no takers." So, instead RBS has to pay money to the new "challenger" banks, including the likes of Metro - that don't appear to know how to calculate their capital requirements and need to pay the Chairman's wife to "interior design" all their bank branches. And, Lloyds managed to spin off and then sell off TSB to Sabadell - a small Spanish bank, most of us had not previously heard off - leading to the IT disaster when Sabadell/TSB separated their IT systems from Lloyds. But, these actions were required by EU sanctions, so that's all OK.

Meanwhile, many European banks continue to have their own "challenges" - including Deutschebank and Commerzbank - without mentioning Ireland, Italy, Greece and others...

I've argued before, the first reform I'd look for in the EU is to complete the Lisbon Treaty.... write all the bits that would apply if any member state elected Article 50 and set in process the steps to leave. A Treaty that does not define what would happen if..... is not really a proper treaty. (I've no idea why no one noticed that at the time).

A complete Lisbon Treaty, including Article 50, "section 1.02" (if "1.01" is "you can leave") would state what happens: how would "obligations" be settled, what would the obligations be for "net contributors" and what would they be for "net recipients;" what would the relationships be after leaving, such matters as travel, airlines, road haulage, "visitors" health care, university students, research, security, policing, data protection.....

Then there would be a section about future trading relationships: would WTO be the choice, or customs union or single market or would (various forms of) FTA be possible?

Maybe there'd be something specific about the borders between member states? Maybe there'd be something about respecting each member state's territory - and overseas territories.

Sort that lot out and we'd all have saved ourselves June-2016 to somewhere in the distant future....

Maybe, if Lisbon Treaty was complete re Article 50, maybe the UK wouldn't have voted to leave, because maybe the EU wouldn't have been travelling in a direction that results in many - and not just in the UK - having doubts about the direction.

For the avoidance of doubt, I'm not a supporter of JC and socialism.

[aggi]

I see the plan is to put the withdrawal agreement before parliament again in a few weeks (possibly with nothing having changed). I guess the Euro Elections may have provided something of a guide to the country's sentiment by then but I can't see it going through.

[Lancasterclaret]

I see the plan is to put the withdrawal agreement before parliament again in a few weeks (possibly with nothing having changed). I guess the Euro Elections may have provided something of a guide to the country's sentiment by then but I can't see it going through.

Guess May is hoping that the Euro election shocks to both Lab and Cons mean that they will be keener to push it through.

Thing is, national elections Lab vote is holding up, while the Conservatives is collapsing in both Euro and National.

At least this will kill it finally though

People like me who back this as a compromise now have to be realistic, and realise that some people are never going to compromise and vote accordingly.

[RingoMcCartney]

EU migration still in 100s of thousands.

So much for "The toxity of Brexit"

Remoaner Lies.

[RingoMcCartney]

Employment has reached record levels.

"There will be an immediate and protracted recession if Britain votes to leave the EU" George Osborne and the Treasury. June 2016

"Confidence will evaporate overnight, should the country vote Leave" former labour Chancellor Alistair Darling. June 2016

We were told -

"A vote to leave would be like putting a nuclear bomb under the British economy" David Cameron. June 2016

"The stock market will crash"

"Unemployment will rise by upto 850,000 18 months after any vote to Leave. HM TREASURY

These were all held up as " evidence" that voting leave would be bad for Britain.

When they've been proven to be bare faced lies. The Remoaner attempt at a "get out of jail card free , card" is the pathetically glib reply. "Erm, they were just predictions. Forecasts. Assumptions that haven't materialised yet!!"








Remoaners- just don't understand the difference between "evidence" and "conjecture"

[RingoMcCartney]

As predicted the Brexit debate is boiling down to 2 distinct camps.

Remoaners -self confidence lacking types who want to believe in discredited economic forecasts, demanding a second referendum while claiming they accept and respect the 2016 referendum result.
















And people who believe if you live in a democracy , then expressions of it have to be implemented. Not simply paid lip service to.

[nil_desperandum]

EU migration still in 100s of thousands.

So much for "The toxity of Brexit"

Remoaner Lies.

Someone failing to check facts again I see.
Net EU immigration under 60,000
https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RingoMcCartney]

Someone failing to check facts again I see.
Net EU immigration under 60,000
https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Someone failing to see i didn't specify net or total.

"An estimated 202,000 citizens from other EU countries immigrated to the UK in the year to September 2018"


https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nice try.


"If we vote to Leave, you can expect a "Brexodus of the brightest and best British workers.

"Expect 10,000s of jobs to go from the City of London as banks prepare for brexit and move there offices abroad"

More lies presented as "evidence" rather than the "conjecture" it clearly was.

QUESTION - WHEN DID REMOANERS EVIDENCE MORPH INTO " JUST PREDICTIONS THAT HAVEN'T MATERIALISED YET"?

ANSWER - WHEN TIME PROVES THEY WERE CONJECTURE BASED ON LIES.

[nil_desperandum]

Someone failing to see i didn't specify net or total.

"An estimated 202,000 citizens from other EU countries immigrated to the UK in the year to September 2018"


https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-migration-and-uk/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nice try.

What a ridiculous reply in an attempt to cover for your error / exaggeration. Obviously the only way you can calculate immigration is by net figures.
Did Burnley lose by 2 goals or 3 on Sunday? It will obviously be recorded as a -2 GD.
What you should be focusing on, if immigration concerns you, is the vastly higher number of immigrants from outside the EU which is rising from its previously high level
From the article I linked:

Estimated non-EU net migration, meanwhile, is 261,000 a year—the highest level recorded since 2004. It has been almost consistently higher than EU migration for decades.

And if that concerns you - just wait until we have a "no deal" brexit and try to make trade deals with countries like India who have openly said that free trade will rely upon free movement.

[CrosspoolClarets]

What is a fact is that net migration to the U.K. in the year to June 2018 was over 300,000 (most non EU but more and more EU people still come to live here).

It does beg the question, where does this end? Hundreds of thousands of people (net) every single year, year after year, adds up to a heck of a lot of people, changing communities forever.

There are obviously good and bad points to it, only a halfwit would deny there are both, but there isn’t a single sign of a reversal in these figures.

[RingoMcCartney]

Obviously the only way you can calculate immigration is by net figures.

It's not if you're talking about total new arrivals. Which is why my claim of 100s of thousands is correct.

"An estimated 202,000 citizens from other EU countries immigrated to the UK in the year to September 2018"

Did Burnley lose by 2 goals or 3 on Sunday? It will obviously be recorded as a -2 GD.

But not if the question was how many did we score in total?

Huff n puff all you like. The predicted cliff edge fall in immigration due to the "toxity of Brexit" has been proved be just another in a long line of pre referendum remoaner lies.

And you can argue the toss about net or total figures till the cows come home , should you so wish. But admit it. What really irks remoaners, like you, is people like me pointing out what have been proven to be lies that the remain side spouted and still spout.

Net/total? Fill yer boots on your own.

However.


Remainer lies? Bang to rights.......

[RingoMcCartney]

QUESTION -Has there been a ‘Brexodus’ of EU citizens since the referendum?

Published: 19th Dec 2018

Around 3.7 million people living in the UK are citizens of another EU country. That’s about 6% of the UK population, according to the latest figures covering the year to June 2018.

That compares to 3.4 million in the year before the EU referendum. Overall, the EU citizen population in the UK has gone up by an estimated 35,000 in the last 12 months, an increase of 1%. Between 2016 and 2017, the number increased by 240,000, an increase of 7%

ANSWER - IT WAS ANOTHER REMOANER LIE

.https://fullfact.org/immigration/eu-citizens-brexodus/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[nil_desperandum]

It's not if you're talking about total new arrivals. Which is why my claim of 100s of thousands is correct.

"An estimated 202,000 citizens from other EU countries immigrated to the UK in the year to September 2018"

.

So essentially by your method of calculating the population of the UK will always rise, since even if at some point those leaving the country outstripped the number coming in, you would only record those who arrived, and ignore those leaving.
As I said it's a ridiculous argument, but no doubt you'll try to justify and continue it with someone for pages and pages. Anyway, it won't be me.
Maybe Elizabeth will agree with you?

[aggi]

Someone failing to see i didn't specify net or total.

He has a point, he only said migration so the 150k who left the UK can be added to that total too.

(Admittedly some may think the net EU immigration dropping to a third of the pre-referendum levels and the absolute EU immigration falling by almost a third would be an indication that EU immigration is dropping by very large amounts.)

[aggi]

What is a fact is that net migration to the U.K. in the year to June 2018 was over 300,000 (most non EU but more and more EU people still come to live here).

It does beg the question, where does this end? Hundreds of thousands of people (net) every single year, year after year, adds up to a heck of a lot of people, changing communities forever.

There are obviously good and bad points to it, only a halfwit would deny there are both, but there isn’t a single sign of a reversal in these figures.

Indeed. I'm pretty sure we've discussed it before but what we're doing is exchanging immigrants who have a positive, or neutral at worst, impact on the economy for those who have a negative impact on the economy.

You will have seen that plenty of the "remoaners" on here have long had the view that any fall in EU immigration will be made up by non-EU immigration. It looks like the stats are starting to match up to that.

[RingoMcCartney]

So essentially by your method of calculating the population of the UK will always rise, since even if at some point those leaving the country outstripped the number coming in, you would only record those who arrived, and ignore those leaving.
As I said it's a ridiculous argument, but no doubt you'll try to justify and continue it with someone for pages and pages. Anyway, it won't be me.
Maybe Elizabeth will agree with you?

1. Huff n puff about net / total on your own. As said previously, I said "immigration" stop pretending there were caveats.

2. Immitation is the sincerest form of flattery. Who ever Elizabeth is he/she is not me.

Anyway I'll leave you argue with yourself as you attempt to rewrite what I said and try and frame your initial come back as being correct.

While your doing it though.


Has there been the, promised by the remainers, "Brexodus"

Yes or no?

[nil_desperandum]

He has a point, he only said migration so the 150k who left the UK can be added to that total too.

I predict that there's zero chance that the person to whom your post was directed will get that, and if he / she does you'll soon be accused of pedantry.
(Anyway, by your figures -Total EU migration over 350,000 - wow, that's probably the figure Boris will choose to use, and no doubt some will be convinced.)

[nil_desperandum]

1. Huff n puff about net / total on your own. As said previously, I said "immigration" stop pretending there were caveats.

Now, are you sure? I think we've been here before.

[RingoMcCartney]

Now, are you sure? I think we've been here before.

Why are you dragging this argument , that you've clearly lost, out?

I said -

EU migration still in 100s of thousands.

So much for "The toxity of Brexit"

You made the school boy error of posting a Full Fact link that included the quote-

"An estimated 202,000 citizens from other EU countries immigrated to the UK in the year to September 2018"


"202,000"= "100s of thousands". FACT

Accept you're wrong. It's no biggy.

Now, the "Brexodus" we were promised.

Has it happened?


Yes




Or





No?

[aggi]

How long until he spots it I wonder?

[RingoMcCartney]

How long until he spots it I wonder?

Is it fair to describe 202,000 as 100s of thousands?

Yes Or no?

How long before you admit it is I wonder?

[aggi]

Is it fair to describe 202,000 as 100s of thousands?

Yes Or no?

How long before you admit it is I wonder?

What relevance does 220,000 have to your original statement?

[RingoMcCartney]

What relevance does 220,000 have to your original statement?

It means it was true.

So, I ask you yet again.

Is it fair to describe 202,000 , as 100s of thousands?

Yes


Or



No?

[nil_desperandum]

I'm afraid that I have to go out now, but this has the potential to be a classic Ringo thread. Enjoy your evenings.

[aggi]

It means it was true.

So, I ask you yet again.

Is it fair to describe 202,000 , as 100s of thousands?

Yes


Or



No?

First of all I need to understand why you keep bringing this 202,000 figure up. How does it tie in to your original post?

[RingoMcCartney]

I'm afraid that I have to go out now, but this has the potential to be a classic Ringo thread. Enjoy your evenings.

You just cannot bring yourself round to admitting that there are, as I said, 100s of thousands of EU citizens still coming to the UK.

Dispelling the myth created by remoaners prior to the referendum that voting to leave would show how racist and toxic a leave vote would be.

You can't and won't accept facts.

There are more eu citizens living in the UK now, compared to before the referendum

So much for "Brexit toxity" and the, promised by remoaners, "Brexodus"

You get yourself out.

It , conveniently, means you can avoid answering a simple yes/no question , but means you can be added to the increasingly long list of message board Remoaners who simply can't accept old Ringo has got the better of them!

[SGr]

Brexit has well and truly consumed some people on here. Dread to think what it'll do to some when we actually leave/if A50 were to be revoked

[RingoMcCartney]

First of all I need to understand why you keep bringing this 202,000 figure up. How does it tie in to your original post?

No. You already understand. You've had several opportunities.

See above for clarity.


Have a great evening ladies.

[aggi]

How long until he spots it I wonder?

Never seems to be the answer.

[Elizabeth]

My turn now.

Been reading an article today which basically says it's all going to come down to a vote between No Deal and No Brexit.

I thought at the time that as long as its not going to be decided by MPs and this current rabble can't be removed by a general election, I would reluctantly settle for that.

I'm unsure who wrote 'The long and winding road' but they must have had Brexit in mind.

[Greenmile]

I'm unsure who wrote 'The long and winding road'...

You’re trying too hard now.

[Elizabeth]

The last poster to use exactly those words went on to have a classic burnout on this board shortly after, much to others amusement. I doubt he will be allowed to forget this over the coming weeks.
You might be luckier as I have neither the time or inclination at the moment to run circles around you also.

[martin_p]

The last poster to use exactly those words went on to have a classic burnout on this board shortly after, much to others amusement. I doubt he will be allowed to forget this over the coming weeks.
You might be luckier as I have neither the time or inclination at the moment to run circles around you also.

You’re not even trying not to be Wrongo now.

[aggi]

Looks like the cross-party talks have ended with no agreement. If the reports are correct that May didn't want to compromise on the red lines then this was pretty inevitable from the start.

Just need May's deal being voted down and a tory leadership contest now to waste even more time until the next deadline.

[tiger76]

Looking more likely by the week that the choice will a no-deal or revoking A 50,if MP'S are forced to they will revoke A 50 before allowing a no-deal,this is something for the ERG to bear in mind when the next HOC vote happens.

[AndrewJB]

Having that referendum three years ago is looking like the stupidest thing this country has ever done. Waste of money, and time, and succeeded only in dividing the country even more without even the remotest possibility of a positive outcome. If we end up not leaving, or if we end up leaving without a deal, a significant portion of the population will be left feeling betrayed either way. Well done David Cameron, you tactical genius. What a political masterstroke.

[aggi]

The Spectator's take on Brexit, the Conservative Party and swivel-eyed loons.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/05/t ... yed-loons/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In 2016, David Cameron held an EU referendum he and most of his team believed was unnecessary and unwise, in no small part because of the pressure on him and his MPs exerted by Conservative members. He lost that referendum in part because he could not persuade enough of his party to support him and his campaign to remain in the EU. Some of the Conservative MPs who supported Leave did so not because they wanted to leave the EU but because they believed supporting Leave was the best way to curry favour with the Conservative membership.

Cameron’s successor, Theresa May, began her premiership by setting out red lines on Brexit that dictated a far, far sharper separation from the bloc than anyone on the Leave campaign had suggested during the referendum campaign. She did so not because she believed this was in the country’s best interest – she had voted Remain, after all – but because she believed that was necessary to satisfy a number of political constituencies including a Conservative membership she (at the time, anyway) cherished.

In 2018, she negotiated an exit deal with the EU that fell short of those red lines but still far exceeded the dreams and promises of Leavers just two years before. That deal thrice failed to pass the House of Commons, in part because it was opposed by Conservative MPs who privately regarded it as perfectly acceptable but did not dare support it for fear of sanction from Conservative members.

Later this year, it seems likely that those same Conservative members will choose Theresa May’s successor. The perceived need to appeal to their preferences on Brexit has persuaded several otherwise sensible MPs to claim that they do not fear and even embrace the prospect of leaving the EU without an exit agreement in place.

In short, the Conservative members fixated on Europe above all else have won. They got their referendum, got their Brexit and soon they’ll quite likely get their prime minister.

[AndrewJB]

The Spectator's take on Brexit, the Conservative Party and swivel-eyed loons.

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/05/t ... yed-loons/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

In 2016, David Cameron held an EU referendum he and most of his team believed was unnecessary and unwise, in no small part because of the pressure on him and his MPs exerted by Conservative members. He lost that referendum in part because he could not persuade enough of his party to support him and his campaign to remain in the EU. Some of the Conservative MPs who supported Leave did so not because they wanted to leave the EU but because they believed supporting Leave was the best way to curry favour with the Conservative membership.

Cameron’s successor, Theresa May, began her premiership by setting out red lines on Brexit that dictated a far, far sharper separation from the bloc than anyone on the Leave campaign had suggested during the referendum campaign. She did so not because she believed this was in the country’s best interest – she had voted Remain, after all – but because she believed that was necessary to satisfy a number of political constituencies including a Conservative membership she (at the time, anyway) cherished.

In 2018, she negotiated an exit deal with the EU that fell short of those red lines but still far exceeded the dreams and promises of Leavers just two years before. That deal thrice failed to pass the House of Commons, in part because it was opposed by Conservative MPs who privately regarded it as perfectly acceptable but did not dare support it for fear of sanction from Conservative members.

Later this year, it seems likely that those same Conservative members will choose Theresa May’s successor. The perceived need to appeal to their preferences on Brexit has persuaded several otherwise sensible MPs to claim that they do not fear and even embrace the prospect of leaving the EU without an exit agreement in place.

In short, the Conservative members fixated on Europe above all else have won. They got their referendum, got their Brexit and soon they’ll quite likely get their prime minister.

I can't argue with any of this, but perhaps add the pervasive influence of print media - which I think has held the Conservative Party in thrall, and informed the thinking of many in the voting public (perhaps this was partly responsible for the huge divide between the young - many of whom don't read these rags - and the old - many of whom don't get their news from anywhere else). The scrapping of Leveson Part 2 was a massive favour from the government to these papers (as well as being a shameful betrayal of Cameron's solemn promise to the victims), and illustrates how closely aligned they are.

[Elizabeth]

The austerity programme by the governing Conservatives was the biggest factor in my opinion for 17.4 million UK citizens voting to leave the UK. I don't think it would have happened without the severe hardship forced on so many vulnerable people.
We can argue all day about the rights and wrongs of holding the referendum, and I have already commented that I think it was a mistake, but what we are left with now is an argument on what is democracy.
The Brexit Party have argued it is not about what is left or right but what is right and wrong. They have undeniably appealed to the public, gaining the largest support of any party in the forthcoming European election. It remains to be seen whether this changes the way Parliament has so far voted.

[evensteadiereddie]

Thank God Ringsting/Elizabeth is just plain bonkers and not dangerous.

[AndrewJB]

The austerity programme by the governing Conservatives was the biggest factor in my opinion for 17.4 million UK citizens voting to leave the UK. I don't think it would have happened without the severe hardship forced on so many vulnerable people.
We can argue all day about the rights and wrongs of holding the referendum, and I have already commented that I think it was a mistake, but what we are left with now is an argument on what is democracy.
The Brexit Party have argued it is not about what is left or right but what is right and wrong. They have undeniably appealed to the public, gaining the largest support of any party in the forthcoming European election. It remains to be seen whether this changes the way Parliament has so far voted.

I agree that Tory austerity was a major factor in provoking people to vote leave. And as I've said above, I agree with you that the entire referendum was a mistake - in my opinion of a massive scale.

So what is your point about democracy?

[Elizabeth]

Once again eddie has nothing useful to contribute.

I support, like the Brexit Party, that we need to put the principles of Trust, Honesty and Integrity at the heart of our democracy.

As recent times have demonstrated, we need a new future to fix Politics.

I think the European election will show that I am not on my own. Millions of remain voters feel like this while the 17.4 million leave voters feel betrayed by failing MPs who have defied them.

[Devils_Advocate]

I am not on my own

Sufferers of Dissociative Identity Disorder usually aren't

[Elizabeth]

I thought you might have changed your posting name by now. You have been discredited so often.

[Bordeauxclaret]

I thought you might have changed your posting name by now. You have been discredited so often.

Ha.

That’s quite funny.

[Elizabeth]

Time to wine down now