More post brexit referendum good news!!!!

Caballo · Post by **Caballo** » Fri Jan 26, 2018 6:29 pm

Sidney1st wrote:In regards to zero hour contracts, personally they need stopping but neither Labour or Tory have been interested in dealing with them.

Agree 100%. I've still yet to meet one of those employees who are oft sited by politicians as wanting a zero hours contract.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:58 am

Some interesting stuff here https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng ... ll-results" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;?

A second referendum would be a lot closer than many remain voters think I suspect.

Interesting that those who will be most affected by the future of Brexit, those under 65 and particularly those under 34, are those most against it. It feels like this should be taken into account somehow but I'm not really sure how you can do that democratically.

I'm surprised that "The North" is pro-remain, I'd have thought it would have come out slightly pro-Brexit.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:11 am

I heard Prof John Curtis a week or two ago saying that many of these polls do not adequately weight for the turnout in the referendum, as opposed to, say, a normal election. I thus treat them with caution.

Curtis today says this poll is very little changed from others in the last year, no clear swing. The question of a second referendum is a bit of a strange question because people answer based on their current presumption of what the deal may be, which is unclear. I would agree though it would again be very close, and all it would do regardless of the result is worsen divisions.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:13 am

aggi wrote: I'm surprised that "The North" is pro-remain, I'd have thought it would have come out slightly pro-Brexit.

According to the survey 64% of Labour voters support remain. Most Labour voters are in the North aren't they?
Conversely most Conservative ("leavers") are in the South and Midlands (except London).

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 1:17 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:According to the survey 64% of Labour voters support remain. Most Labour voters are in the North aren't they?
Conversely most Conservative ("leavers") are in the South and Midlands (except London).

A majority of labour constituencies voted leave, they piled up remain votes in london.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 1:49 pm

claretandy wrote:A majority of labour constituencies voted leave, they piled up remain votes in london.

I'm only basing it on the current survey Andy. It says that 64% of Labour voters support remain and that quite a significant majority in the north would vote remain now.
The referendum and any future vote isn't based on constituencies. How's your point relevant to it?

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 1:56 pm

42% of Labour voters in the north voted Leave.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 2:21 pm

Which means more than half voted remain.

Agree with the sentiments that these divisions are not going to be healed by a second referendum, they will only be healed by a deal that suits as many people as possible.

So that should be the priority, but it clearly isn't enough for the uber brexiteers.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 2:28 pm

If it isn't going to be enough for Uber Brexiteers then it probably won't be enough for Uber remainders.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 2:46 pm

Uber remaining is wanting the euro and the EU army and there are quite simply, none of them.

When the country is split like it is, then compromise is needed, or we will lose far more from this than just trade and prosperity.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 4:55 pm

I know we need a middle ground, I'd like there to be one but it won't stop tossers from either side complaining for years afterwards.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:00 pm

This remain voting Journalist gets it.

BennyD · Post by **BennyD** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 5:05 pm

UpTheBeehole wrote:Wage rises are non-existent, inflation is pushing vital goods out of many's reach. Bankruptices and insolvencies are at very high levels.

And here you are, arguing the toss over **** all.

Have a look at what you're doing to yourselves you pigheaded idiots.

Wow! I reckon we should take your flexibility on the matter and use it as an example of how behave within the context of this discussion. Ok here goes; you’re a c*nt.

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:20 pm

Quite possible the most factual comment on here

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 6:45 pm

RingoMcCartney wrote:What Gove actually said was "we don't need experts to tell explain what sovereignty is"

He was right.

Doesn't stop people partly misquoting him to suit their agenda though I guess.....

Not sure where you got your quote from (he may have said that as well), but Gove’s full “experts” quote was ...

“"I think that the people of this country have had enough of experts with organisations from acronyms saying - from organisations with acronyms - saying that they know what is best and getting it consistently wrong, because these people - these people - are the same ones who got consistently wrong."

The dashes are where the interviewer interrupted / spoke over him (as opposed to him speaking like Trump). Video below.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Qw276pOBgSU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

So I’m not convinced anyone’s misquoted him to suit their agenda, unless you did in your post above, Ringo.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:36 pm

The problem with all these stats about Labour voters voting Remain in the north, is that they aren't true. The opinion polls before the election said Labour voters would vote remain, the opinion polls afte rthe vote said that Labour voters did vote remain, the opinion polls now say that Labour voters would vote remain. And yet the strongest Labour constituencies in the north were also the strongest leave voters.

How did Burnley get 66% leave if the Labour voters were strongly remain? All the other parties would have to have come out almost 100% leave, and the polls don't say that of the Liberals, you can be sure.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 7:59 pm

Labour voted 42% Leave in the north, 58% Remain. That’s the best estimate based on a 33,000 person sample asking who voted what. It seems fair. Not sure about the relevance though. Most of that will still be urban city dwellers like most of the 50,000 students around me. More in common with the south than the north.

However, the 52% of British folk who voted Leave did so, undeniably, to leave the single market and customs union. Both sides campaigners spelt that very fact out at the time. We can argue about buses and Treasury negativity, but those two statements were made clearly by all main players for all to hear. It was on the Government’s leaflet. It was coming out of Boris’s gob. Thus that is what we must do, repeat, must do.

After that, the softest Brexit we can seems fair.

That to me seems like sticking hard to the red lines apart from paying a bit to access (not be a member of) the single market without MAJOR customs controls or tariffs, and potentially allowing a more flexible migration compared to the rest of the world (but still controlled). We could also sign a treaty not to become a tax haven by keeping CT above (say) 15%, and we could guarantee security cooperation. We could agree some areas (but not all) where we wouldn’t diverge in a regulatory sense in returns for the customs arrangements. In the future I wouldn’t rule out reentering a different EU with an “outer ring” of countries not in the Euro. In other words, what we signed up for in the 1970s.

None of that sounds unreasonable, nor impossible. It is tough, but fair, offers plenty to both sides, and if the EU say “shove it” then shove it we do. All I ask for is a PM capable of playing tough but fair. What is clear is that it cannot be our current PM, and that feeling appears to be growing. I wouldn’t rule out a Remain voter who has seen the light, like Williamson the new Defence Sec. By admitting about his affair this weekend, he seems to be getting his dirty washing out there ahead of time, so seems poised.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 8:57 pm

dsr wrote:
How did Burnley get 66% leave if the Labour voters were strongly remain? All the other parties would have to have come out almost 100% leave, and the polls don't say that of the Liberals, you can be sure.

No one has claimed that the majority of Labour voters in Burnley voted to remain. The poll is representative of the north as a region.
However, it is possible to construct a mathematical case that over 50% of those who voted Labour in the 2015 election voted remain.
Labour voters in Burnley at the 2015 election numbered less than 15,000, so it's quite possible, (though I suspect not highly likely), that 7,500 of them voted remain.
Conservative and UKip voters could potentially have cast over 12,000 "leave" votes, so when you add on the other 7,000 Labour voters it still gives almost 20,000 votes, more than enough to achieve the 66 - 34 % leave majority.
Of course I haven't added in all the Lib Dem voters, but even if every one of them voted remain - which wouldn't have been the case, then "Leave" would have comfortably won.
So even if we assume that quite a few Conservatives voted "remain", it's perfectly possible that the majority of Labour voters in Burnley voted to remain. (i'm guessing that 99.9% of Ukip voters might have voted to leave!).

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 9:46 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:...However, the 52% of British folk who voted Leave did so, undeniably, to leave the single market and customs union. Both sides campaigners spelt that very fact out at the time. We can argue about buses and Treasury negativity, but those two statements were made clearly by all main players for all to hear. It was on the Government’s leaflet. It was coming out of Boris’s gob. Thus that is what we must do, repeat, must do...

That’s a lie, and I’m struggling to give you the benefit of the doubt that you don’t know it’s a lie.

Yes, “Project Fear” may have said we would be leaving the SM&CU, but you didn’t believe anything else they said so why believe the one bit that suits your agenda now?

Here’s Boris...

https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-brita ... KKCN0ZC13W" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I can’t be bothered finding reports of similar views espoused by the likes of Messrs Hannan, Farage, Banks et al, but we both know they’re out there.

I’m sure you can find loads of Leave campaigners saying the exact opposite, but that just shows that no one really knew exactly what type of Brexit they were voting for (or against). You can’t convince me that all 52% wanted to leave the SM&CU and I think it’s pretty dishonest of you to try to convince anyone.

There’s a difference between inaccurately predicting the future, as the remain campaign may have done (Project Fear and all that) and misrepresenting the past / present as you and others try to do with statements like “the 52% of British folk who voted Leave did so, undeniably, to leave the single market and customs union”

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 9:57 pm

So 48% still didn't vote to leave, and then get shafted because 52% did?

Crosspool is an uber Brexiteer, along the lines of Dan Hannan.

If you really believe that his Brexit will deliver prosperity for the whole of the UK, then quite simply you have no understanding at all about economics.

We can't match China, we can't match Singapore, we can't even match our European neighbours in terms of productivity.

I've absolutely no time at all for May, but at least she is attempting to listen to both sides of this, and after 18 months of asking Brexiteers for something concrete she can get behind has finally decided that its all ******** and its worth the risk of short term damage to her but at the gain of long term advantage for the country.

The funny thing about all of this is that the more the uber Brexiteers push for a full departure, the more likely it is that we won't leave as more and more commentators and (dare I say it) EXPERTS start to question them and ask for more than the banal assurances we've had so far. That will only increase as support for the 2nd referendum grows, as no one is quicker than sensing the "will of the people" than politicians and those who thrive off politics.

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:08 pm

Looks like you didn’t dare say it, Lancs

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:11 pm

Argh, left out the crucial bit. Added it now!

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:19 pm

nil_desperandum wrote:No one has claimed that the majority of Labour voters in Burnley voted to remain. The poll is representative of the north as a region.
However, it is possible to construct a mathematical case that over 50% of those who voted Labour in the 2015 election voted remain.
Labour voters in Burnley at the 2015 election numbered less than 15,000, so it's quite possible, (though I suspect not highly likely), that 7,500 of them voted remain.
Conservative and UKip voters could potentially have cast over 12,000 "leave" votes, so when you add on the other 7,000 Labour voters it still gives almost 20,000 votes, more than enough to achieve the 66 - 34 % leave majority.
Of course I haven't added in all the Lib Dem voters, but even if every one of them voted remain - which wouldn't have been the case, then "Leave" would have comfortably won.
So even if we assume that quite a few Conservatives voted "remain", it's perfectly possible that the majority of Labour voters in Burnley voted to remain. (i'm guessing that 99.9% of Ukip voters might have voted to leave!).

A mathematical case, yes. But not a serious one.

If you assume every conservative voter, every UKIP voter, and every voter who didn't vote in the general election but did in the referendum, ALL voted for Brexit and ZERO voted for remain, and you also assume that your 42% of Labour voters voted for Brexit, then that would mean 54% of Liberals and Greens voted for Brexit. Were the Liberals and Greens so much more favourable to Brexit than Labour? The polls don't say so. Therefore, the polls are wrong, one way or the other, and if they're right about Labour voters then they are grotesquely wrong about Liberals.

Obviously if you make the figures more realistic by allowing that some Tories and some of the extra voters voted Remain, then the Liberal Brexit bias gets even larger. It didn't happen. The reason most of the polls were wrong about the result, even the exit polls, was because the traditional Labour-supporting areas like Burnley were strong Brexit voters; the pollsters read the other constituencies correctly, but they read the Labour north wrong.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 10:43 pm

dsr wrote:A mathematical case, yes. But not a serious one.

More than just a mathematical possibility. By 2015 much of the core Labour vote in Burnley had defected to UKip, Birtwistle, or even the Conservatives, (or in fact didn't vote at all). I don't think it's necessarily pure fantasy to suggest that something in excess of 7,000 Labour voters in Burnley voted remain. (7,000 isn't a lot you know in the grand scheme of things).
I doubt we will ever be able to get a figure for this, but it's interesting to speculate.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:03 pm

If 58% of the 2015 Labour voters voted Remain, that's 8,672 votes out of 14,392 Remain votes, with 43,246 total votes cast.

This means that the other 5,720 Remain voters came from the Tory, Liberal, UKIP, and Green voters plus the don't knows, and that group combined voted 80% for Brexit - even though almost half of them were Liberal voters. This did not happen.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:38 pm

Greenmile wrote:That’s a lie, and I’m struggling to give you the benefit of the doubt that you don’t know it’s a lie

Very kind of you Greenmile.

There’s so much daft Remain stuff on here tonight that I don’t know where to start. I’m off to my beloved France in 6 hours so I must be brief.....a great place with great people, like most of the EU.

This is Gove confirming we leave the single market.

https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151 ... af20d5575e

Hannan I don’t consider a major player, never being elected into proper office. Lancs may believe I am an Uber-Brexiteer like him, but Hannan has always wanted to stay in the single market because he doesn’t give a toss about ordinary northern folk, he just wants to maximise trade (though that could be unfair on him, he does have a unique background and perspective on poverty). I think we have to cap migration because the strong feelings are ripping the UK apart (and not just the UK). That means leaving the single market sadly. If I was doing this just for the economics I would just leave the customs union.

This is Project Fear talking about leaving the single market, saying nobody else has managed to negotiate staying.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... the-uk.pdf

We must get the different Leave views in a room, agree a consensus, and then try to get some Remain views on board too, but without it being a Remain victory. That means reconciling the Rees-Moggs (leave both), the Hannans (leave the CU) and the nuances of each. If you get into hard and soft Brexit you also have to get into hard and soft Remain (the hard boiled EU fully integrated with an EU Army and Finance Minister, or the soft and runny EU as we have it now). Both options have a multitude of possibilities, but Leave won - soft Remain didn’t. Soft Leave doesn’t equal Soft Remain. Listening to May and Davis (and some of you lot) you would think it did.

I’m not even going to rise to Lancs accusing me of economic incompetence - I’ll just let my 3 economics qualifications (on top of my 5 finance ones) speak for themselves and get off to bed.....

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sat Jan 27, 2018 11:39 pm

dsr wrote:If 58% of the 2015 Labour voters voted Remain, that's 8,672 votes out of 14,392 Remain votes, with 43,246 total votes cast.

This means that the other 5,720 Remain voters came from the Tory, Liberal, UKIP, and Green voters plus the don't knows, and that group combined voted 80% for Brexit - even though almost half of them were Liberal voters. This did not happen.

Why are you quoting 58%? I'm obviously basing the slim mathematical possibility on 50.1% of Labour voters voting to remain - so that's 7,475 votes, so, (coincidentally), about 50% of the number of remain votes.
I'm not convinced that there would have been significantly more than 7,500 Conservative or Birtwistle supporters who would have voted "remain".
But Burnley in any case is not representative of the north in general. It had just almost the highest leave percentage of any constituency in the North West.
I suppose the point that I am trying to make is: that it's quite possible that Labour voters were the largest group within the remain voters in Burnley.
I don't think that a lot of Gordon Birtwistle's supporters were what one might describe as typical pro-EU Liberals, and this was proved in 2017 when his vote share halved at the Gen Election. I strongly suspect that most of the 6,000 votes he lost between 2015 and 2017 were disillusioned Brexiteers. W

Greenmile · Post by **Greenmile** » Sun Jan 28, 2018 1:40 am

Greenmile wrote:I’m sure you can find loads of Leave campaigners saying the exact opposite, but that just shows that no one really knew exactly what type of Brexit they were voting for (or against).

CrosspoolClarets wrote:This is Gove confirming we leave the single market.

https://www.ft.com/content/0c5c74bc-151 ... af20d5575e

Greenmile wrote:Yes, “Project Fear” may have said we would be leaving the SM&CU, but you didn’t believe anything else they said so why believe the one bit that suits your agenda now?

CrosspoolClarets wrote:This is Project Fear talking about leaving the single market, saying nobody else has managed to negotiate staying.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... the-uk.pdf

Remember, the statement you made which I’m disputing was that “the 52% of British folk who voted Leave did so, undeniably, to leave the single market and customs union.” and “those two statements were made clearly by all main players for all to hear.”

I’m not sure your opinion of Daniel Hannan (would you not consider Farage and Banks “major players” either?) or your economics qualifications (you sound a bit like one of these damned “experts” to me) have any bearing at all on the veracity or honesty of those statements.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sun Jan 28, 2018 8:13 am

Enjoy your break Crosspool

Just a quickie though, Dan "no one is talking about leaving the single market" Hannan is now Dan "we must leave the single market" Hannan.

The difference?

Well, he said the first one BEFORE the referendum and the SECOND one after the referendum, you know, after people had voted.

In other news, I don't think anyone will be shocked to learn that the EU gravy train (a nice common brexiteer slogan) is now being replaced by Tory grandees in a Brexit one instead if you read the Sunday Telegraph article.

claretandy · Post by **claretandy** » Sun Jan 28, 2018 9:53 am

Lancasterclaret wrote:So 48% still didn't vote to leave, and then get shafted because 52% did?

Crosspool is an uber Brexiteer, along the lines of Dan Hannan.

If you really believe that his Brexit will deliver prosperity for the whole of the UK, then quite simply you have no understanding at all about economics.

We can't match China, we can't match Singapore, we can't even match our European neighbours in terms of productivity.

I've absolutely no time at all for May, but at least she is attempting to listen to both sides of this, and after 18 months of asking Brexiteers for something concrete she can get behind has finally decided that its all ******** and its worth the risk of short term damage to her but at the gain of long term advantage for the country.

The funny thing about all of this is that the more the uber Brexiteers push for a full departure, the more likely it is that we won't leave as more and more commentators and (dare I say it) EXPERTS start to question them and ask for more than the banal assurances we've had so far. That will only increase as support for the 2nd referendum grows, as no one is quicker than sensing the "will of the people" than politicians and those who thrive off politics.

Your savior Jezza just ruled out a second referendum and the Norway option on Marr, good solid brexiteer is Corbyn !

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Sun Jan 28, 2018 10:51 am

Corbyn is nothing whatsoever to do with me.

His members want one though, and if he's as democratic as he says he is then he'll have to change his policy.

But as I don't think he's as democratic as he likes to portray, then I don't think he will.

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Sun Jan 28, 2018 1:43 pm

claretandy wrote:Your savior Jezza just ruled out a second referendum and the Norway option on Marr, good solid brexiteer is Corbyn !

That's partly because the Norway option simply isn't an option for us. We have very little in common with Norway, whose economy is dominated by oil.
Any deal will have to be bespoke, though it might mirror Norway in some respects.
No political leader who is hoping to be elected will advocate a 2nd referendum until it is politically expedient to do so. Once either Corbyn or the next leader of the Tories believe that it's a vote winner, (and the tabloid press tell them it is),then it will be in their manifesto.

CrosspoolClarets · Post by **CrosspoolClarets** » Sun Jan 28, 2018 5:54 pm

Lancasterclaret wrote:Enjoy your break Crosspool

Just a quickie though, Dan "no one is talking about leaving the single market" Hannan is now Dan "we must leave the single market" Hannan.

The difference?

Well, he said the first one BEFORE the referendum and the SECOND one after the referendum, you know, after people had voted.

In other news, I don't think anyone will be shocked to learn that the EU gravy train (a nice common brexiteer slogan) is now being replaced by Tory grandees in a Brexit one instead if you read the Sunday Telegraph article.

Thanks Lancs, I will.

I didn’t hear Hannan talking about leaving the SM, I thought him, Farage and Banks were advocates of staying in it. I don’t consider any of them big players, but I accept they played a key role to a degree. I wouldn’t be surprised if they had flip flopped a bit, and to be fair, may have turned a 50/50 into a 52/48. Most Leave voters (Tories and Labour manufacturing towns) are firmly to be out, and have been for years, but a few may have been swayed. Of no doubt though is that we are a mainly Eurosceptic country (even many Remainers are Eurosceptic).

Not a fan of UKIP, nor MEPs like Hannan, and in truth not a fan of the Tories either. That a few irrelevant Tory clowns have snouts at the trough comes as no surprise, and for the record Labour would be no different, just maybe with an added dose of hypocrisy.

bfcjg · Post by **bfcjg** » Sun Jan 28, 2018 7:29 pm

Just watching a programme on C4 and as always mps seeing how much they can personally make out of Brexit. Really is disgusting.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Sun Jan 28, 2018 10:57 pm

CrosspoolClarets wrote:Thanks Lancs, I will.

I didn’t hear Hannan talking about leaving the SM, I thought him, Farage and Banks were advocates of staying in it. I don’t consider any of them big players, but I accept they played a key role to a degree. I wouldn’t be surprised if they had flip flopped a bit, and to be fair, may have turned a 50/50 into a 52/48. Most Leave voters (Tories and Labour manufacturing towns) are firmly to be out, and have been for years, but a few may have been swayed. Of no doubt though is that we are a mainly Eurosceptic country (even many Remainers are Eurosceptic).

Not a fan of UKIP, nor MEPs like Hannan, and in truth not a fan of the Tories either. That a few irrelevant Tory clowns have snouts at the trough comes as no surprise, and for the record Labour would be no different, just maybe with an added dose of hypocrisy.

I don't think Farage was ever in favour of staying in the single market, because the single market has a lot more connotations than free trade with the EU. The single market has major restrictions on trade with the rest of the world, and that's specifically was Farage was opposed to. Free trade with the EU, yes, definitely; single market, no.

Walton · Post by **Walton** » Sun Jan 28, 2018 11:19 pm

dsr wrote:I don't think Farage was ever in favour of staying in the single market, because the single market has a lot more connotations than free trade with the EU. The single market has major restrictions on trade with the rest of the world, and that's specifically was Farage was opposed to. Free trade with the EU, yes, definitely; single market, no.

Watch this

https://youtu.be/0xGt3QmRSZY

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Sun Jan 28, 2018 11:40 pm

Switzerland aren't in the single market, Norway are. It's not just Farage and friends that are a bit fuzzy about details. Assuming those clips are from the immediate run-up to the referendum - none of them are dated, so far as I can see - then they didn't do their homework very well.

When I was voting it was with the definite view that we were coming out of the single market. I'm very much in favour of free trade; the single market is very much opposed to it.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 7:52 am

https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/alexsp ... ssion=true" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Sigh, imagine being daft enough to argue with people for something you don't even understand yourself, especially if you are one of the people elected to do the best for the country

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:37 am

dsr wrote:Switzerland aren't in the single market, Norway are. .

This from our own governments website:
"Switzerland is neither an EU nor EEA member but is part of the single market - this means Swiss nationals have the same rights to live and work in the UK as other EEA nationals."
https://www.gov.uk/eu-eea" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
From the EU website:
"Switzerland's economic and trade relations with the EU are mainly governed through a series of bilateral agreements where Switzerland has agreed to take over certain aspects of EU legislation in exchange for accessing the EU's single market."
So - according to the EU, perhaps not "officially / technically in the Single Market, but a member in everything but name, and accepting free movement in exchange for it?

UpTheBeehole · Post by **UpTheBeehole** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:38 am

Will dsr ever get anything right?

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:40 am

DSR big issue is that he is quite happy to assume he won't be picked up on stuff like this, which he shares with Brexit politicians.

The difference here is that on here it gets picked up, whilst in the main, the Brexit argument goes unchallenged by the vast majority of the British media.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:49 am

Nonetheless, Switzerland is not in the single market. If it was, it wouldn't have the right to make trade agreements with other countries. Having access to the single market isn't the same as being in it. Even some of your own side are willing to accept that.

https://infacts.org/briefings/swiss-option/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:53 am

There is a difference between being in the single market, and having access to I. The main one being able to pursue your own trade agreements with other countries.
There may be some concessions that come with that, in Switzerland's case they have immigration quotas.

Fairly simple to understand that, even if you have no wish to

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:06 am

Immigration quotas?

Is that being in Schengen is now called in Brexiteer land?

Fairly simple to understand, even if you have no wish to!

nil_desperandum · Post by **nil_desperandum** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:13 am

Damo wrote: There may be some concessions that come with that, in Switzerland's case they have immigration quotas.

Fairly simple to understand that, even if you have no wish to

Well I - for one - don't understand it. What quotas for EU nationals are your refering to?

Sidney1st · Post by **Sidney1st** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:24 am

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/directdemo ... d/42715214" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting read about the votes that took place in Switzerland, that don't appear to have been acted upon for whatever reason.

What can be done to stop immigration?
That’s the dilemma that Switzerland has faced for the past three years. Faced with Brussels’ refusal to negotiate the free movement of people accord, the Swiss parliament opted in favour of a “light” national preference solution that Europe would find digestible instead of “ceilings and annual quotas”. This says Switzerland must do everything it can to tap the local labour force, for example advertising jobs at regional job centres, before recruiting outside Switzerland. If these actions are insufficient, the government can resort to more restrictive measures, but without quotas. But this option only partially conforms to the constitutional article approved by voters.

It would appear that the EU won't budge on certain things, so the UK will need to decide what they do and don't want in regards to immigration from the EU.

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:29 am

switzerland doesn't have immigration quotas.

fairly simple to understand that, even if you have no wish to.

Damo · Post by **Damo** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:36 am

Ok, the free movement of persons.
Don't address my actual point though will you.

Switzerland are free to persue trade agreements of their own outside of the EU trading bloc, whilst still having access to the single market

*Edit to change spellcheck fail on persue, before any remoaners address that as opposed to my point

quoonbeatz · Post by **quoonbeatz** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:56 am

there's nothing new to address there.

switzerland's deal for access is pretty crap and wouldn't suit us at all.

Lancasterclaret · Post by **Lancasterclaret** » Mon Jan 29, 2018 11:01 am

We told you that you had ignored the fact that Switzerland was in Schengen when you said it had "immigration quotas".

Not a big lie in the context of Brexit, but still a pretty big whopper.