More post brexit referendum good news!!!!

[Lancasterclaret]

Ok, another one

Workers rights protected ultimately by the legislation of the EU (ECJ)

Going to be the same when we leave, or a worse (assuming the current government)?

[Darthlaw]

I'd be intrigued for a second referendum just to see what the Remain party line would be.

My vote would be for one of the following:

'We know we called you racist idiots, uneducated and little Englanders but any chance you want to join our side?'

'Yeah... about that punishment budget, economic meltdown and WW3... Any chance you've changed your mind?'

'Remain - Just checking...'

[Sidney1st]

Ok, another one

Workers rights protected ultimately by the legislation of the EU (ECJ)

Going to be the same when we leave, or a worse (assuming the current government)?

Would those be the same rights they've stated will be enshrined into UK law?
Can't be can it?

I mean it's the nasty Tories who're going to strip them all away and take us back 30-40 yrs in regards to workers rights....

[Sidney1st]

JIT in car parts deliveries Sid

will that be affected by us not being in the single market or more importantly, the customs union?

Yes or no

Yes for EU, no to the rest of the world to a degree *edited*

Incase you're wondering though I ship around the world and it's not that difficult to get stuff around the world and our sales have gone up by a good amount year on year.
So getting stuff into the EU won't be that difficult and most car manufacturers purchase parts from outside of the EU anyway.
Even the likes of JLR and MOPAR get some of their stuff from the likes of China and India.

[Lancasterclaret]

I know you do Sid, which is why I asked!

So there is going to be an affect regarding JIT with the EU, so that is going to require a "deal".

Experts are going to have to work that kind of stuff out, and over all sectors.

The main point I'm making is that there will be an effect on the industries, which could (notice I use the word "could", rather than the more realistic "will") affect prices, jobs etc etc

Point is that we can predict quite a bit with the available evidence, so to dismiss it all as "we'll probably be allright" and that its impossible to tell isn't actually the case.

[Lancasterclaret]

I'd be more intrigued to what a much more informed populace would make make of the "leave" arguments as well Darth now you mention it!

[Sidney1st]

I know you do Sid, which is why I asked!

So there is going to be an affect regarding JIT with the EU, so that is going to require a "deal".

Experts are going to have to work that kind of stuff out, and over all sectors.

The main point I'm making is that there will be an effect on the industries, which could (notice I use the word "could", rather than the more realistic "will") affect prices, jobs etc etc

Point is that we can predict quite a bit with the available evidence, so to dismiss it all as "we'll probably be allright" and that its impossible to tell isn't actually the case.

I know there will be changes in prices and shipping duties both in and out of the country etc.
I'm also expecting our government to deal with all of that as it's their job.
I also believe that's part of the next round of negotiations now Ireland and the payments are sorted.

Will there be job cuts?
No idea as yet, but I suspect there won't be at our place because the EU isn't our biggest customer base.

As a side note prices increase most years for things across the UK and most people don't really notice.
All businesses tend to do is pass on the costs where possible and try to find a cheaper supplier to increase their margins.

[Bordeauxclaret]

I'd be intrigued for a second referendum just to see what the Remain party line would be.

My vote would be for one of the following:

'We know we called you racist idiots, uneducated and little Englanders but any chance you want to join our side?'

'Yeah... about that punishment budget, economic meltdown and WW3... Any chance you've changed your mind?'

'Remain - Just checking...'

I wonder what Leave would say in the same circumstances.

“Yeahhhhhhhhh about that whole bus thing......”

[Sidney1st]

I wonder what Leave would say in the same circumstances.

“Yeahhhhhhhhh about that whole bus thing......”

Lots of egg on faces for both sides.

All the lies and hysteria would make another referendum amusing to watch.

[aggi]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42420829

Interesting

I wonder if its a ploy to make the EU do the same? In our very weak hand, its our best card so be interesting to see what results from this

Possibly, but also safeguarding a large number of jobs that could potentially be lost if the UK forced the European banks to set up subsidiaries and they decided it was less hassle to continue in Ireland or Frankfurt or similar.

[randomclaret2]

"a whole bunch of professions " ...sheer poetry Councillor Cox

[RingoMcCartney]

The new DB office is replacing 3 or 4 existing London offices from what I hear. They are also likely to shift jobs to Frankfurt.

There are a lot of people who work in financial services and associated businesses who aren't super rich bankers (the vast majority in fact). It does contribute a significant amount to GDP and UK tax revenue though (about 12.5% I seem to remember).

You haven't really explained why the EU has caused all these manufacturing jobs to be lost, correlation doesn't always imply causation.

There is a romantic image that the golden era of UK business was when we were manufacturing. There is still a very large focus on it (hence you starting this thread) given it isn't a huge sector of the UK economy. I'm not quite sure what your point is re: AMS Neve, a small, UK company with a very small turnover (on a global scale) having its products used around the world is pretty much the romantic image I'm referring to.

Not counting time spent in the UK I spend more time working out of Europe than I do in it, there is a significant difference in regulatory restrictions out of Europe compared to dealing within it. Getting rid of this and starting again doesn't seem the best way to increase our areas of influence. We also sit a much further way down the chain of priorities for a deal when trying to make a deal by ourselves rather than as a bigger bloc.

I wouldn't be surprised if German companies do have advance notice of future regulations, but given the multi-European nature of those boards I would suspect that it is the same for other nations in the EU as well. Fortunately we'll soon be shot of that kind of advantage.

Your main issue seems to be that areas of the UK have suffered, particularly with the greater emphasis on service sector industry in the UK and its focus in the south-east and I don't disagree with this. What I don't understand is how the EU is being blamed for UK government policy that has resulted in that imbalance, it isn't that big an issue in other EU countries so how has the EU caused it in the UK?

"There are a lot of people who work in financial services and associated businesses who aren't super rich bankers (the vast majority in fact). It does contribute a significant amount to GDP and UK tax revenue though (about 12.5% I seem to remember). " - It doesnt have to be an either or choice though does it. Why not help the country bebalance economically and many of those bottom 65 in Alan Milburns Opportunities and prospects Report could thrive at the SAME time as London and the South East has done for the last 40 odd years while in the EU.

"There is a romantic image that the golden era of UK business was when we were manufacturing. There is still a very large focus on it (hence you starting this thread) given it isn't a huge sector of the UK economy. I'm not quite sure what your point is re: AMS Neve, a small, UK company with a very small turnover (on a global scale) having its products used around the world is pretty much the romantic image I'm referring to.

Why do Remoaners keep referring to making things as "Romantic". In many instances of manufacturing, its far from "romantic". Its often heavy, physically demanding toil. However, as can be seen from German manufacturing it can be very financaily rewarding. Both, for the nation and the individuals, their families and towns the live and work in. I fail to see anything "Romantic" about that what so ever. The Germans certainly dont describe having a strong manufacturing base as "romantic" do they?!

"There is a significant difference in regulatory restrictions out of Europe compared to dealing within it. Getting rid of this and starting again doesn't seem the best way to increase our areas of influence. We also sit a much further way down the chain of priorities for a deal when trying to make a deal by ourselves rather than as a bigger bloc."

- Given that we are starting from a point of identical rules and regs, with the EU. A deal should not be any whare near as complex as the Canadian one, where they were NOT setting out from a point of being identical. More importantly, going forward. When the EU signs a MRA with another country - limited to standards and safeguards - it accepts a foreign jurisdiction 'rules'. When the EU signs up to globally agreed rules - finance for example - it impliments rules it didnt fully design. The UK will be no different in accepting other countries rules after Brexit, than the EU is now.

"Not counting time spent in the UK I spend more time working out of Europe than I do in it"

You are internationally mobile. Millions of Britons are not. Perhaps your world view is coloured by an EU that you have personally benefited from. Millions of Britions feel they have not benifited in any way shape or form. Ask the 1000s previously employed in our once proud fishing industries. now decimated thru EU memebership and its Common Fisheries. I dont blame you, and its only natural that you should base your opinion of EU membership on your own personal experience. But do not deny others, who have an entirely different experience, to hold a different opinion. In particular, and im not for one minute accusing you of it. But simply writing off their opinion because they're "uneducated" is as unpalitable as it is sinister. Incidentally, there's a massive difference between "uneducated" and intelligence. George Osborne is highly "educated", however..............

"I wouldn't be surprised if German companies do have advance notice of future regulations, but given the multi-European nature of those boards I would suspect that it is the same for other nations in the EU as well. Fortunately we'll soon be shot of that kind of advantage."

- I dont see any "advantage" of being in a club we're net contributors to, where one particular member, constantly, gets preferential and beneficial treatment. Perhaps the new deals we'll be able to negotiate independently,with the 85% of the globe that is not the EU, will give us new advantages. Do you think they'll be more opportunity to gain economic advantages by dealing with 85% of the globe that is not the EU, or the 15% that is the EU? i know where my money would go.

"Your main issue seems to be that areas of the UK have suffered, particularly with the greater emphasis on service sector industry in the UK and its focus in the south-east and I don't disagree with this. What I don't understand is how the EU is being blamed for UK government policy that has resulted in that imbalance, it isn't that big an issue in other EU countries so how has the EU caused it in the UK?"

Well the voting patterns of the British People, not in an exact science way, but generally. Suggests that the closer you get to London, the stronger the Remain vote gets. Generally. So i speak with some confidence that many people, probably you included, agree that EU membership has been fabulous for London. London certainly does. London is one of the main centres for finance, If not THE epicentre of global finances. The position of the City of London in relation to Parliamnet and democracy is one the needs scrutinising. Anybody interested in politics should Google "The rememberencer" http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ki ... ut-1874811" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; But thats for another day) In my opinion, the EU grand supranational plan, was for-

Germany to do the manufacturing
France to the farning and agriculture
UK to do the money
Southern states do the holidays
Scandanavia you do porn ( I jest!)

But looking at it, thats what has happened. And regardless of whatever Party has been in Government for tha last 40 0dd years, the one constant has been the EUs plan, and our membership of the EU. Thatcher will be remebered for decimating the coal industry and many many more. But who was in office when MG Rover and 6000 jobs went with it? who was in office the Michelin Plant in Burnley and the 1000 jobs went. Labour. Spotted the pattern yet Aggi? Who ever was in. We were in the EU. Slavishly adhereing to its grand plan. I may be wrong but just look at the number of manufacturing lobs that have been lost while weve been in the EU. Look at how the finance sector (London!) has boomed. Tony Bliar proudly boasted of a "post industrial Britian". Pity he didnt ask the British worker for their permission before doing it. We were told that, "metal bashing is a thing of the past" (as if manufacturing is ONLY metal bashing). Well, the Germans didnt think so, did they!?

And you ask, "the imbalance isn't that big an issue in other EU countries so how has the EU caused it in the UK?"

-A very very simple answer. The likes of Ireland, Holland, Austria, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Belgium, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Italy, Bulgaria, luxemburg and even France etc etc., EITHER, had a manufacturing economy that was miniscule compared to Britians, therefore had little manufacturing to lose in the first place. So no inbalance took place. Or, they were Net Beneficiaries of EU funding. ( We'll take the pain as long as the money keeps rolling in)

Britain has had the very wosrt of both worlds. Its seen its manufacturing base neglected and consciuosly dismantled, particulary in areas like Burnley. While paying for the privilege of it. as massive net contributors to the EUs Grand Plan.

[Lancasterclaret]

So, our decline in manufacturing is because of a fiendish EU plan, backed by southerners to destroy the north?

Got it, Its Game of Thrones for the 21st century.

[RingoMcCartney]

I'd be intrigued for a second referendum just to see what the Remain party line would be.

My vote would be for one of the following:

'We know we called you racist idiots, uneducated and little Englanders but any chance you want to join our side?'

'Yeah... about that punishment budget, economic meltdown and WW3... Any chance you've changed your mind?'

'Remain - Just checking...'

Id like to ask Remoaners a very straight forward question.

We go back to the referendum in June 2016. We've had around a year of endless debate on the pros and cons of EU membership. We've had claims and counter claims. We've had live TV debates. We've had leaflets through the door. We've had TV referendum broadcasts for Leave and Remain. The Government has sent a booklet to every house hold in the nation. Basically we've done it to death, its dominated pretty much every aspect of British life for months. Every body Knows the question on the Ballot paper is Leave or Remain in the UK. The wording in the Ballot paper has been approved by the electoral commission. As was the booklet. No ambiguity. And the referendum was approved by Parliamant's MPs by a ratio of 5 to 1. The house of Lords also gves its approval.

Then the result is comes in. 17,400,000 voted REMAIN 16,100,000 voted LEAVE. Remain accurately boast that its the single biggest, democratic, vote given to any party or single issue in the history of UK politics.

But then, the political class, the mainstream media, with the odd exception, and the very same MPs who voted, by a ratio of 5 to 1. Then turn round and say,

"BUT WHAT KIND OF REMAIN DID YOU MEAN? IT WASNT ON THE BALLOT PAPER. DID YOU MEAN A "HARD" REMAIN OR A "SOFT" REMAIN?

So I now ask all Remoaners on the UTC messageboard to be honest, when I ask the question -

"If Remain had won the referendum. Would you aceept a Remain that saw, the ending of Free Movement of People, coming out of the Single Market and the ending of the role of the ECJ in UK law. But we were still "Remaining" and paying fees.?

Cos thats exactly the flip side, of what the side that did actually win the referendum are are being expected to swallow.

If you voted Remain and Remain had won. Would you accept a "Soft Remain"?

[RingoMcCartney]

So, our decline in manufacturing is because of a fiendish EU plan, backed by southerners to destroy the north?

Got it,

You clearly havent.

[UpTheBeehole]

So, our decline in manufacturing is because of a fiendish EU plan, backed by southerners to destroy the north?

Got it, Its Game of Thrones for the 21st century.

Don't forget the woman from across the water with her prehistoric sidekicks also gets a big say in it all

[Damo]

Don't forget the woman from across the water with her prehistoric sidekicks also gets a big say in it all

Merkel?

[UpTheBeehole]

Merkel?

[nil_desperandum]

Id like to ask Remoaners a very straight forward question.

If you voted Remain and Remain had won. Would you accept a "Soft Remain"?

You'd have to define what you mean by a "soft remain", but if as the term suggests, you mean remain in the EU but ditch the bits that we don't like, then I would think that all the remainers on this board would be genuinely ecstatic.
It has to be acknowledged of course, that we already had a rather looser arrangement with the EU than any other state, with exemptions from a whole raft of things, and vetoes on major issues going forward, but to answer your question directly you would need to clarify what your "soft remain" actually meant.

[RingoMcCartney]

Hi Ringo, I think you are wrong in some respects about Greece and Iceland.

Iceland - their banking failures were privately owned Icelandic banks that used Iceland's sovereign credit rating to borrow money and then lend and invest in other countries. I guess you remember ISave, Kaupting (sp?) and one or two other Icelandic banks that offered great savings rates in UK and elsewhere. Iceland let these banks go bust, their shareholders lost all their money. I don't know (can't remember) if the Icelandic government has covered those banks external debts to depositors in the UK and elsewhere. Initially, the UK government bailed out the UK based depositors - and later asked for the Icelandic government to repay them.

Greece - it wasn't a failure of Greek banks, it was Greek government debt - because the Greek government borrowed heavily, taking advantage of the low euro interests rates (rather than much higher drachma interest rates) - because all countries in the Eurozone were (mistakenly in my view) believed to have the same credit rating as the strongest countries, Germany and a limited number of others. Yes, many bankers, including Deutsche Bank reached the conclusion that Greece as a member of the Eurozone, was as creditworthy as Germany. Banks are often a lot more optimistic about the prospects of their loans getting repaid than is shown to have been merited after the events.

Goldman Sachs is involved in the "scandal" of Greece being in the euro - but not in the way you suggest. The EU/Brussels was responsible for assessing the economic situation of the member states and determining if they qualified to join the euro. Whatever assessments GS made would be for their own internal purposes...

Hiya Paul, thanks for responding. I take on board your valid point that the make up of the respective nations debts was fundamentaly different. But I was more conerned in highlighting the approach to solving their respective debt. Rather than the causes of it.

Iceland had the benefit of not being shackled by Brussels (Berlin). It gave the decision as to whether or not to burden generations of Icelanders, not yet born, with that debt, in the form of a referendum. The result of which they duly honored. The results of thinking and acting independently of the "advice" they were given by the OECD IMF and those nice chaps at Standards and Poors. Lead to a dramatic economic turnaround in Icelands fortunes. So much so that the Icelandic Government were able to pay large chunks of it folks mortgages debt. Jeremy Corbyn could only dream of such a thing!

Compare that to the Greek side, in the EU, Bullied by the Troika and the finger wagging Kamp Kommandant, Wolfgang Schoeble, the convicted IMF boss, Christine Lagarde. You know the rest Paul.

Isnt it notable that many of the Left Remainers pointed, with glee, to the proclomations of the IMF, and its Chief, when the IMF said Brexit would be bad for the UK. Theyre also very concerned with tax avoidence by multinationals, righylt so. They dont seem to over concrened that Lagarde pays no tax on her £298,675 annual salary. Apparently becasue its an "international salary" meens she needn't conern herself with having to fill in ger tax return. doesnt seem to concern the Left Remainers either for some reason.

I also feel you underestimate the roll of Goldman Sachs in Greece's entry into the EU, to be honest. Greece managed to keep within the strict Maastricht rules for eurozone membership largely because of complex financial deals created by the investment bank which critics say disguised the extent of the country’s outstanding debts. Perhaps the Eu was basing its asessments for the reports and opinions of the Banksters?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 81926.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Goldman Sachs helped the Greek government to mask the true extent of its deficit with the help of a derivatives deal that legally circumvented the EU Maastricht deficit rules

http://www.spiegel.de/international/eur ... 76634.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Perhaps we can agree that the combination of Goldman Sachs tenticle's, being all over well and truelly cooked Greek books, and the unbridled enthusiasm for the EU to expand its empirical ambitions. Lead to the unmitigated financial basket case that Greece became? Either way, I cant imagine that large numbers of the beleagured Greek folk wont be having their mortgage debt cut, like their, fortunate to be out of the EU's shackles, Iclandic cousins.

[Lancasterclaret]

Well to be fair Ringo, you've tailored your analysis of the problem so it 100% nails your view of the EU.

I'm thinking that manufacturing was on its arse well before we joined the EU, and the country as a whole was struggling.

I think you are completely ignoring the effect of globalisation and growth of other economies around the world, who could do what we could do better and cheaper.

The manufacturing we've kept we excel at, but to suggest we can somehow reboot our economy to the extent that you are thinking is up there with the biggest Brexit fantasies.

[RingoMcCartney]

You'd have to define what you mean by a "soft remain", but if as the term suggests, you mean remain in the EU but ditch the bits that we don't like, then I would think that all the remainers on this board would be genuinely ecstatic.
It has to be acknowledged of course, that we already had a rather looser arrangement with the EU than any other state, with exemptions from a whole raft of things, and vetoes on major issues going forward, but to answer your question directly you would need to clarify what your "soft remain" actually meant.

I did put what "Soft Remain" would mean in the post to be fair but here it is again-

Your side gets 17,400,000 and leave gets 16,100,000. So Remain wins.

Would you aceept a Remain that saw, the ending of Free Movement of People, coming out of the Single Market, and the ending of the role of the ECJ in UK law. But we were still "Remaining" and paying EU fees.? Thats a "soft Remain"

Or would you when you voted Remain for expect a "hard remain"? No change what so ever?

[UpTheBeehole]

I did put what "Soft Remain" would mean in the post to be fair but here it is again-

Your side gets 17,400,000 and leave gets 16,100,000. So Remain wins.

Would you aceept a Remain that saw, the ending of Free Movement of People, coming out of the Single Market, and the ending of the role of the ECJ in UK law. But we were still "Remaining" and paying EU fees.? Thats a "soft Remain"

Or would you when you voted Remain for expect a "hard remain"? No change what so ever?

That doesn't sound anything like a Remain of any type, never mind soft.

[Lancasterclaret]

Again, a "hard remain" is us joining schengen and the Euro.

Status Quo* is fine with the most remainers though!

*not the band!

[Lancasterclaret]

Good to know that the EU stand against facism and attempts for governments to subvert the rules of law

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... ing-rights" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Lancasterclaret]

God damn that "Project Fear" eh?

https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... CMP=twt_gu" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[RingoMcCartney]

Well to be fair Ringo, you've tailored your analysis of the problem so it 100% nails your view of the EU.

I'm thinking that manufacturing was on its arse well before we joined the EU, and the country as a whole was struggling.

I think you are completely ignoring the effect of globalisation and growth of other economies around the world, who could do what we could do better and cheaper.

The manufacturing we've kept we excel at, but to suggest we can somehow reboot our economy to the extent that you are thinking is up there with the biggest Brexit fantasies.

"you've tailored your analysis of the problem so it 100% nails your view of the EU."

Do you expect me to tailor my analysis so it nails 100 % of someone elses view?! I'll let them do that.

"I'm thinking that manufacturing was on its arse well before we joined the EU, and the country as a whole was struggling."

Your thinkings wrong then. Well paid manufacturing jobs were commonplace as were genuine apprenticeships. ("you could walk out of one job, cross the raod and get another" was common. Ask anybody old enough next home game). A married mans wage was usually good enough to provide for his family, have a couple of holidays a year and there be know need for his wife to work. Certainly not full time any way. Zero hours contracts had not been invented, and leaving university meant you would get a well paid job, and afford to buy your own place, when, "the country as a whole was struggling" and "the country as a whole was struggling".

"I think you are completely ignoring the effect of globalisation and growth of other economies around the world, who could do what we could do better and cheaper.

Germany manages to ignore "globalisation and growth of other economies", just fine, somehow doesnt it.

"The manufacturing we've kept we excel at, but to suggest we can somehow reboot our economy to the extent that you are thinking is up there with the biggest Brexit fantasies.

Growing our existing manufacturing base, back to somewhere where it was pre EU to compliment other secors of the economy is not "somehow reboot ing" it. Its not an either or choice, when should have BOTH to help diversify our economy and stop the over reliance of it being on finance and services.

"who could do what we could do better and cheaper." -

As economies around the world mature, the cost of production there increases. We are already seeing a return of UK production in areas such as fashion. Where clothes and shoes can be manufactured at a profit in the UK and in many cases command a premium because the "Made in Britian" table carries such gravitas, respect and high regard. I know many on the Remoaner side dont appreciate it but hey ho....And why does it have to be done "Cheaper"? Why not follow the German example. An example that I still beleive in - not the cheapest, the best, made in Britain.

[NCClaret]

[quote="RingoMcCartney"]Id like to ask Remoaners a very straight forward question.
We go back to the referendum in June 2016. We've had around a year of endless debate on the pros and cons of EU membership. We've had claims and counter claims. We've had live TV debates. We've had leaflets through the door. We've had TV referendum broadcasts for Leave and Remain. The Government has sent a booklet to every house hold in the nation. Basically we've done it to death, its dominated pretty much every aspect of British life for months. Every body Knows the question on the Ballot paper is Leave or Remain in the UK. The wording in the Ballot paper has been approved by the electoral commission. As was the booklet. No ambiguity. And the referendum was approved by Parliamant's MPs by a ratio of 5 to 1. The house of Lords also gves its approval. Then the result is comes in. 17,400,000 voted REMAIN 16,100,000 voted LEAVE. Remain accurately boast that its the single biggest, democratic, vote given to any party or single issue in the history of UK politics. But then, the political class, the mainstream media, with the odd exception, and the very same MPs who voted, by a ratio of 5 to 1. Then turn round and say, "BUT WHAT KIND OF REMAIN DID YOU MEAN? IT WASNT ON THE BALLOT PAPER. DID YOU MEAN A "HARD" REMAIN OR A "SOFT" REMAIN?

We wouldn't have even got to the last bit about what type of 'Remain' did you want!! If 'Remain' had been the vote - regardless of the margin can you imagine the outcry if those from 'Leave' had talked and machinated about overturning the referendum??

[RingoMcCartney]

That doesn't sound anything like a Remain of any type, never mind soft.

Exactly!!

Thats my point!!

A Remain that sees, the ending of Free Movement of People, coming out of the Single Market, and the ending of the role of the ECJ in UK law. But we we're still "Remaining" and paying EU fees. Is a Soft Remain cos its essentially Reamining in name only.

Likewise.

A Leave that DOESNT see, the ending of Free Movement of People, coming out of the Single Market, and the ending of the role of the ECJ in UK law. But we were still "Leaving" and paying some EU fees.Is a soft Leave cos its essentially Leaving in name only.

Seems a lot of you Remaoners arent that keen to answer the question so far.

[aggi]

"There are a lot of people who work in financial services and associated businesses who aren't super rich bankers (the vast majority in fact). It does contribute a significant amount to GDP and UK tax revenue though (about 12.5% I seem to remember). " - Why not help the country bebalance economically and many of those bottom 65 in Alan Milburns Opportunities and prospects Report could thrive at the SAME time as London and the South East has done for the last 40 odd years while in the EU.

"There is a romantic image that the golden era of UK business was when we were manufacturing. There is still a very large focus on it (hence you starting this thread) given it isn't a huge sector of the UK economy. I'm not quite sure what your point is re: AMS Neve, a small, UK company with a very small turnover (on a global scale) having its products used around the world is pretty much the romantic image I'm referring to.

Why do Remoaners keep referring to making things as "Romantic". In many instances of manufacturing, its far from "romantic". Its often heavy, physically demanding toil. However, as can be seen from German manufacturing it can be very financaily rewarding. Both, for the nation and the individuals, their families and towns the live and work in. I fail to see anything "Romantic" about that what so ever. The Germans certainly dont describe having a strong manufacturing base as "romantic" do they?!

"There is a significant difference in regulatory restrictions out of Europe compared to dealing within it. Getting rid of this and starting again doesn't seem the best way to increase our areas of influence. We also sit a much further way down the chain of priorities for a deal when trying to make a deal by ourselves rather than as a bigger bloc."

- Given that we are starting from a point of identical rules and regs, with the EU. A deal should not be any whare near as complex as the Canadian one, where they were NOT setting out from a point of being identical. More importantly, going forward. When the EU signs a MRA with another country - limited to standards and safeguards - it accepts a foreign jurisdiction 'rules'. When the EU signs up to globally agreed rules - finance for example - it impliments rules it didnt fully design. The UK will be no different in accepting other countries rules after Brexit, than the EU is now.

"Not counting time spent in the UK I spend more time working out of Europe than I do in it"

You are internationally mobile. Millions of Britons are not. Perhaps your world view is coloured by an EU that you have personally benefited from. Millions of Britions feel they have not benifited in any way shape or form. Ask the 1000s previously employed in our once proud fishing industries. now decimated thru EU memebership and its Common Fisheries. I dont blame you, and its only natural that you should base your opinion of EU membership on your own personal experience. But do not deny others, who have an entirely different experience, to hold a different opinion. In particular, and im not for one minute accusing you of it. But simply writing off their opinion because they're "uneducated" is as unpalitable as it is sinister. Incidentally, there's a massive difference between "uneducated" and intelligence. George Osborne is highly "educated", however..............

"I wouldn't be surprised if German companies do have advance notice of future regulations, but given the multi-European nature of those boards I would suspect that it is the same for other nations in the EU as well. Fortunately we'll soon be shot of that kind of advantage."

- I dont see any "advantage" of being in a club we're net contributors to, where one particular member, constantly, gets preferential and beneficial treatment. Perhaps the new deals we'll be able to negotiate independently,with the 85% of the globe that is not the EU, will give us new advantages. Do you think they'll be more opportunity to gain economic advantages by dealing with 85% of the globe that is not the EU, or the 15% that is the EU? i know where my money would go.

"Your main issue seems to be that areas of the UK have suffered, particularly with the greater emphasis on service sector industry in the UK and its focus in the south-east and I don't disagree with this. What I don't understand is how the EU is being blamed for UK government policy that has resulted in that imbalance, it isn't that big an issue in other EU countries so how has the EU caused it in the UK?"

Well the voting patterns of the British People, not in an exact science way, but generally. Suggests that the closer you get to London, the stronger the Remain vote gets. Generally. So i speak with some confidence that many people, probably you included, agree that EU membership has been fabulous for London. London certainly does. London is one of the main centres for finance, If not THE epicentre of global finances. The position of the City of London in relation to Parliamnet and democracy is one the needs scrutinising. Anybody interested in politics should Google "The rememberencer" http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ki ... ut-1874811" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; But thats for another day) In my opinion, the EU grand supranational plan, was for-

Germany to do the manufacturing
France to the farning and agriculture
UK to do the money
Southern states do the holidays
Scandanavia you do porn ( I jest!)

But looking at it, thats what has happened. And regardless of whatever Party has been in Government for tha last 40 0dd years, the one constant has been the EUs plan, and our membership of the EU. Thatcher will be remebered for decimating the coal industry and many many more. But who was in office when MG Rover and 6000 jobs went with it? who was in office the Michelin Plant in Burnley and the 1000 jobs went. Labour. Spotted the pattern yet Aggi? Who ever was in. We were in the EU. Slavishly adhereing to its grand plan. I may be wrong but just look at the number of manufacturing lobs that have been lost while weve been in the EU. Look at how the finance sector (London!) has boomed. Tony Bliar proudly boasted of a "post industrial Britian". Pity he didnt ask the British worker for their permission before doing it. We were told that, "metal bashing is a thing of the past" (as if manufacturing is ONLY metal bashing). Well, the Germans didnt think so, did they!?

And you ask, "the imbalance isn't that big an issue in other EU countries so how has the EU caused it in the UK?"

-A very very simple answer. The likes of Ireland, Holland, Austria, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Belgium, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Italy, Bulgaria, luxemburg and even France etc etc., EITHER, had a manufacturing economy that was miniscule compared to Britians, therefore had little manufacturing to lose in the first place. So no inbalance took place. Or, they were Net Beneficiaries of EU funding. ( We'll take the pain as long as the money keeps rolling in)

Britain has had the very wosrt of both worlds. Its seen its manufacturing base neglected and consciuosly dismantled, particulary in areas like Burnley. While paying for the privilege of it. as massive net contributors to the EUs Grand Plan.

It doesnt have to be an either or choice though does it.

No, my point was that I can't see manufacturing being the solution to the growing inequality. It isn't big enough and I can't see any strategy to make it large enough to deal with the current inequality.

Why do Remoaners keep referring to making things as "Romantic". In many instances of manufacturing, its far from "romantic". Its often heavy, physically demanding toil.
I don't disagree that actual manufacturing work isn't romantic, I've done enough of it to know that it is hard work. The romantic comment is in relation to how people look at the industry as whole (a bit like getting misty eyed about football in the 80s whilst ignoring the facilities, violence and racism) and how it is something that could save the UK economy.

Perhaps your world view is coloured by an EU that you have personally benefited from. Millions of Britions feel they have not benifited in any way shape or form.
Perhaps it is, although most of my major clients are UK or US based. The majority of studies though (and I know you're not keen on such a thing) suggest that the areas most susceptible to significant economic downturn, those most reliant on EU trading, are those disaffected areas you refer to.

I dont see any "advantage" of being in a club we're net contributors to, where one particular member, constantly, gets preferential and beneficial treatment. Perhaps the new deals we'll be able to negotiate independently,with the 85% of the globe that is not the EU, will give us new advantages. Do you think they'll be more opportunity to gain economic advantages by dealing with 85% of the globe that is not the EU, or the 15% that is the EU? i know where my money would go.

So you think a standards board made up of people and industries from throughout the EU only brief Germany on these things and everyone else misses out?

Nothing stops us trading with the other 85% at the moment. I guess the other side of that question is will we be able to negotiate a better deal as part of a bloc that represents 15% of world GDP or as a country that represents 2% of world GDP. Who will be higher on the list and have more leverage when it comes to these deals? (I know Paul Waine likes deals where everyone wins but I am a little more cynical than him).

Well the voting patterns of the British People, not in an exact science way, but generally. Suggests that the closer you get to London, the stronger the Remain vote gets. Generally. So i speak with some confidence that many people, probably you included, agree that EU membership has been fabulous for London. London certainly does.
And you ask, "the imbalance isn't that big an issue in other EU countries so how has the EU caused it in the UK?"

Referring to imbalance here I meant geographic imbalance, not business sector. Very, very few countries are so economically dominated by one city as the UK is and I don't see how this can be blamed on the UK.

Exactly what has the EU done that depressed manufacturing in the UK and is holding it down. You're showing correlation but absolutely no causation, you even reference a British Prime Minister, not the EU. This is where your argument falls down unless you have an explanation.

My view is that a lot of the old British manufacturing, particularly in the area of mas-production, just became too expensive to sell. We are still good at highly-skilled engineering (look at F1 for instance) but cannot compete at the chepaer end of the market. The strong pound has been slightly to blame but more important has been increasing living standards with a matched increase in wages, increasing material costs as more have to be imported, a more global economy (us joining the EU happened to coincide with China opening up to free trade for instance) and a change in the world in general (some of the biggest companies in the world are now Google and Facebook which don't output anything physical). What are your reasons for the EU causing the fall in UK manufacturing, this is the question you haven't answered.

[RingoMcCartney]

Exactly. Remoaners know full well, if only they could bring themselves to admit it. That if Remain won, there would be no talk od a "SOFT Remain" or a "HARD Remain" That would be it for at least ANOTHER 40 odd years. Probably for ever.

[quoonbeatz]

I did put what "Soft Remain" would mean in the post to be fair but here it is again-

Your side gets 17,400,000 and leave gets 16,100,000. So Remain wins.

Would you aceept a Remain that saw, the ending of Free Movement of People, coming out of the Single Market, and the ending of the role of the ECJ in UK law. But we were still "Remaining" and paying EU fees.? Thats a "soft Remain"

Or would you when you voted Remain for expect a "hard remain"? No change what so ever?

i wouldn't accept those exact terms but i'd absolutely recognise that there had to be some compromise as around half the country wanted out.

the quickest win would be controlling immigration, which we can already do, we don't need to leave the eu to do it.

given how many people voted mainly on that issue, it would satisfy a decent proportion of leave voters.

certainly wouldn't leave the single market as i'm not in the business of self harming the economy, plus when you consider all the prominent leave campaigners who said we could stay leave but still stay in the single market, i don't think there would be too many people who had a problem with that.

ECJ hardly impacts us anyway so its not a big deal. we still make our own laws.

what it boils down to is that we all have to recognise that there needs to be compromise. the country was split by the vote and the wishes of both sides have to be taken into account. if the attitude of the leave lot was more about conciliation and compromise, they'd have a lot more support. the whole brexiteer (and the government's) attitude of 'we won so f you, we'll do what we want' doesn't help anything or anyone.

[Sidney1st]

The attitude of the remainers is better is it overall?

Turtle thinks leave voters are stupid because they didn't have Uni degrees therefore their research was flawed.

[ablueclaret]

We do love to stand alone as some little imperial superpower.
The great thing about being part of the EU is that we were part of something bigger than ourselves where we had to behave and learn from others.
Splendid isolation was fine when countries fought one another at the slightest whim, but now with the growing threat of environmental disaster the time for collective action has never been greater.
Keeping Britain France and Germany together in a political unit was hugely beneficial and it is that political stability which will be the greatest loss. We see now in the US the dangers of a country seeing itself as above and beyond the rest with little or no political restraint available. A return to isolated nationalism spells as it always has done trouble.
Churchill would be horrified to think we have learnt nothing from two world wars.

[Lancasterclaret]

Christ on a bike, I'm in 100% agreement with ablue

[quoonbeatz]

The attitude of the remainers is better is it overall?

Turtle thinks leave voters are stupid because they didn't have Uni degrees therefore their research was flawed.

i can only peak for myself sid, i don't know whether the attitude of remainers is better overall - to paraphrase you, remain hasn't won yet so we don't know what would happen.

generalising is a dangerous thing, its partly why there's so much animosity over this.

[quoonbeatz]

yep, abc is spot on.

[RingoMcCartney]

We do love to stand alone as some little imperial superpower.
The great thing about being part of the EU is that we were part of something bigger than ourselves where we had to behave and learn from others.
Splendid isolation was fine when countries fought one another at the slightest whim, but now with the growing threat of environmental disaster the time for collective action has never been greater.
Keeping Britain France and Germany together in a political unit was hugely beneficial and it is that political stability which will be the greatest loss. We see now in the US the dangers of a country seeing itself as above and beyond the rest with little or no political restraint available. A return to isolated nationalism spells as it always has done trouble.
Churchill would be horrified to think we have learnt nothing from two world wars.

"A return to isolated nationalism"

How is wanting to trade with the whole wide world,"Isolated nationalism?"

[RingoMcCartney]

i wouldn't accept those exact terms but i'd absolutely recognise that there had to be some compromise as around half the country wanted out.

the quickest win would be controlling immigration, which we can already do, we don't need to leave the eu to do it.

given how many people voted mainly on that issue, it would satisfy a decent proportion of leave voters.

certainly wouldn't leave the single market as i'm not in the business of self harming the economy, plus when you consider all the prominent leave campaigners who said we could stay leave but still stay in the single market, i don't think there would be too many people who had a problem with that.

ECJ hardly impacts us anyway so its not a big deal. we still make our own laws.

what it boils down to is that we all have to recognise that there needs to be compromise. the country was split by the vote and the wishes of both sides have to be taken into account. if the attitude of the leave lot was more about conciliation and compromise, they'd have a lot more support. the whole brexiteer (and the government's) attitude of 'we won so f you, we'll do what we want' doesn't help anything or anyone.

"controlling immigration, which we can already do, we don't need to leave the eu to do it."

I agree we can already do it on paper. But, I believe that in practical terms, and more importantly, the cost of the process of repatriating potentially millions of migrants, makes it near impossible. Otherwise why would Governments of Both Labour and Tory not have alraedy done it? All the opinion polls show that when asked, around 70 odd % think immigration levels are too high.

"certainly wouldn't leave the single market " So thats a red line for you. As a Leave voter me too! Only when I voted Leave, I listened to Cameron and his lot when they said that voting leave meant the single market .

"ECJ hardly impacts us anyway so its not a big deal. we still make our own laws.

- I disagree. As a leave voter, I believe the British Supreme Court she be just that.

So fair play for answering, but I think its fair to say that if Remain had won, you'd not be willing to have as "Soft Remain" as Leavers are being expected to accept a Soft Brexit.

[aggi]

I agree we can already do it on paper. But, I believe that in practical terms, and more importantly, the cost of the process of repatriating potentially millions of migrants, makes it near impossible. Otherwise why would Governments of Both Labour and Tory not have alraedy done it? All the opinion polls show that when asked, around 70 odd % think immigration levels are too high.

If it is too costly at the moment how will it be cheaper when we're out of the EU? We'll still need the same border controls, records, immigration officials, etc

Personally I think this is one of the areas where Cameron cocked up pre-referendum. We could have used existing rules to limit the number of EU migrants in the UK who could not support themselves and, although it may not have been worth it financially, it would have been a good PR exercise with a strong message of "We've listened to you, we're going to get rid of those EU migrants who can't pay their way". I think that would have been sufficient to sway the vote the other way.

[Sidney1st]

If it is too costly at the moment how will it be cheaper when we're out of the EU? We'll still need the same border controls, records, immigration officials, etc

Personally I think this is one of the areas where Cameron cocked up pre-referendum. We could have used existing rules to limit the number of EU migrants in the UK who could not support themselves and, although it may not have been worth it financially, it would have been a good PR exercise with a strong message of "We've listened to you, we're going to get rid of those EU migrants who can't pay their way". I think that would have been sufficient to sway the vote the other way.

I've never understood why the focus has only ever been on EU migrants when we get a large number of unskilled workers from outside the EU rocking up in the UK and taking up the low paid jobs.
Those are the ones that also need dealing with but for some strange reason they hardly get a mention and we definitely didn't need to leave the EU to deal with them.

[UpTheBeehole]

I've never understood why the focus has only ever been on EU migrants

Because the referendum was on leaving the EU

[Sidney1st]

Because the referendum was on leaving the EU

I know that, but the EU migrants I know tend to be solid workers don't take advantage of the benefits system or pop out hordes of children etc.
I tend them preferable to many born and bred british people I've met over the years.

[RingoMcCartney]

If it is too costly at the moment how will it be cheaper when we're out of the EU? We'll still need the same border controls, records, immigration officials, etc

Personally I think this is one of the areas where Cameron cocked up pre-referendum. We could have used existing rules to limit the number of EU migrants in the UK who could not support themselves and, although it may not have been worth it financially, it would have been a good PR exercise with a strong message of "We've listened to you, we're going to get rid of those EU migrants who can't pay their way". I think that would have been sufficient to sway the vote the other way.

"If it is too costly at the moment how will it be cheaper when we're out of the EU?"

By ending Free movement of People, and starting a sensible managed immigration policy and having controls of the numbers coming in. Something like an Australian or Canadian style immigration policy. Where you need to secure a job in one of the specified areas, that the Government feels it needs to source from immigrants, and prove that you are not going to be a financial burden on the State.

[aggi]

"If it is too costly at the moment how will it be cheaper when we're out of the EU?"

By ending Free movement of People, and starting a sensible managed immigration policy and having controls of the numbers coming in. Something like an Australian or Canadian style immigration policy. Where you need to secure a job in one of the specified areas, that the Government feels it needs to source from immigrants, and prove that you are not going to be a financial burden on the State.

But the administrative cost will be the same which is the issue with not implementing it at the moment.

[Lancasterclaret]

How is that going to be cheaper?

[nil_desperandum]

"If it is too costly at the moment how will it be cheaper when we're out of the EU?"

By ending Free movement of People, and starting a sensible managed immigration policy and having controls of the numbers coming in. Something like an Australian or Canadian style immigration policy. Where you need to secure a job in one of the specified areas, that the Government feels it needs to source from immigrants, and prove that you are not going to be a financial burden on the State.

So by your own description it will cost more than now, since we don't currently pay to police or administer all that. Whatever we do will cost us money, but it's surely cheaper to apply the rules that we currently have?
Whether net immigration overall is a financial burden on the state is of course an entirely different matter, but one I don't have time to go into now.
(I'll see where this thread has got to when I return tomorrow!)

[Tall Paul]

"A return to isolated nationalism"

How is wanting to trade with the whole wide world,"Isolated nationalism?"

We can, and do, do that now.

[RingoMcCartney]

We can, and do, do that now.

Not on the basis of deals that we've negotiated our selves we cant. Because we arent allowed to while we're in the EU.

[Lancasterclaret]

So how can countries in the EU do it then?

Oh, they have trade deals that they have negotiated as a block of 27 countries, rather than just one.