|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Oct 24, 2020 20:29:05 GMT
You seem to give a shit Red. It seems to have got right under your skin, more than anyone that I am aware of. Nice to see you're back in the mood for discussing Brexit on the Brexit thread, John! I'm certainly interested to see if all things that mattered so much to Brexiteers back then are still so important. Seems reasonable. Immigration certainly seems not to be. Odd that. Personally, like waga, I'm pleased that the rather unsavoury focus on immigrants that helped to produce a Leave majority appears to no longer be such an issue. But it does make you wonder why it was such a vote winner at the time...almost like a large swathe of the population was played. I'm sure the Brexiters on here for whom immigration was never an issue will agree that this bloke was/is a nasty twat and could never use their democratic vote to support him www.diggitmagazine.com/articles/nigel-farage-immigration
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 24, 2020 20:41:28 GMT
Nice to see you're back in the mood for discussing Brexit on the Brexit thread, John! I'm certainly interested to see if all things that mattered so much to Brexiteers back then are still so important. Seems reasonable. Immigration certainly seems not to be. Odd that. Personally, like waga, I'm pleased that the rather unsavoury focus on immigrants that helped to produce a Leave majority appears to no longer be such an issue. But it does make you wonder why it was such a vote winner at the time...almost like a large swathe of the population was played. I'm sure the Brexiters on here for whom immigration was never an issue will agree that this bloke was/is a nasty twat and could never use their democratic vote to support him www.diggitmagazine.com/articles/nigel-farage-immigrationI think Nigel is ok , myself. He seems to be saying what a few people are thinking on some issues. Mid you, it's not really about the personalities.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 24, 2020 20:53:17 GMT
Nice to see you're back in the mood for discussing Brexit on the Brexit thread, John! I'm certainly interested to see if all things that mattered so much to Brexiteers back then are still so important. Seems reasonable. Immigration certainly seems not to be. Odd that. Personally, like waga, I'm pleased that the rather unsavoury focus on immigrants that helped to produce a Leave majority appears to no longer be such an issue. But it does make you wonder why it was such a vote winner at the time...almost like a large swathe of the population was played. As I say , Brexit really seems to have got to you, seeing as how you say that hardly anybody gives a shit. Oh, I'm extremely interested in the relevant issues around Brexit, just not really your agenda....I think you brought something up about Stoniers, Turners and PMT buses....or something to do with buses. My agenda? It's Brexit, John, and all the fallout from it. Seems reasonable to continue to be interested in the biggest constitutional change facing the country for decades. I didn't say that nobody gave a shit about Brexit, did I, John! I said it's interesting how immigration has gone from being such a critical influence on people's desire to vote Leave to something people don't seem to give so much of a shit about these days. Almost as if they were manipulated at the time on the issue, but now it's not quite so important to influencing a vote, and might in fact have some impact on profits, that it'll quietly recede as an issue! Never mentioned Stoniers, Turners and PMT buses, John, is this another Leonardo's ear moment?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 24, 2020 20:59:54 GMT
As I say , Brexit really seems to have got to you, seeing as how you say that hardly anybody gives a shit. Oh, I'm extremely interested in the relevant issues around Brexit, just not really your agenda....I think you brought something up about Stoniers, Turners and PMT buses....or something to do with buses. My agenda? It's Brexit, John, and all the fallout from it. Seems reasonable to continue to be interested in the biggest constitutional change facing the country for decades. I didn't say that nobody gave a shit about Brexit, did I, John! I said it's interesting how immigration has gone from being such a critical influence on people's desire to vote Leave to something people don't seem to give so much of a shit about these days. Almost as if they were manipulated at the time on the issue! Never mentioned Stoniers, Turners and PMT buses, John, is this another Leonardo's ear moment? You did say something about buses , as I seem to recall....you're right I can't remember what it was but it seemed important to you.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 24, 2020 21:00:06 GMT
I couldn't agree more, waga. Funny how much the subject was used to produce a Leave majority at the time though, isn't it. Yet, just a few years later, we're back to no-one really giving a shit anymore. Brexit in microcosm essentially! I have always been in favour of immigration it has brought about so much good to the country Though not over found of those Scandinavian French fellows that turned up in the mid ten hundreds Haha, they have got a lot to answer for!
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 24, 2020 21:03:32 GMT
My agenda? It's Brexit, John, and all the fallout from it. Seems reasonable to continue to be interested in the biggest constitutional change facing the country for decades. I didn't say that nobody gave a shit about Brexit, did I, John! I said it's interesting how immigration has gone from being such a critical influence on people's desire to vote Leave to something people don't seem to give so much of a shit about these days. Almost as if they were manipulated at the time on the issue! Never mentioned Stoniers, Turners and PMT buses, John, is this another Leonardo's ear moment? You did say something about buses , as I seem to recall....you're right I can't remember what it was but it seemed important to you. You must be referring to the £350m a week for the NHS. I think that was on a bus! I guess that was just a laugh, although Dom Cummings credited it with winning a good few votes for Brexit! I can see you rapidly losing interest in Brexit again in a mo, John...
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 24, 2020 21:06:08 GMT
You did say something about buses , as I seem to recall....you're right I can't remember what it was but it seemed important to you. You must be referring to the £350m a week for the NHS. I think that was on a bus! I guess that was just a laugh, although Dom Cummings credited it with winning a good few votes for Brexit! I can see you rapidly losing interest in Brexit again in a mo, John... I'm not sure what it was Red, but I know it seemed to upset you
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Oct 24, 2020 21:09:54 GMT
Piece of news which flew under the radar in the last couple of days... Net migration targets have been abandoned by the government after it ditched the £35,800 salary cap. Instead the cap will be lowered to £25,600. Unskilled migrants earning just £20,480 will also be allowed to settle in Britain and become citizens. Critics claimed the changes had been sneaked in without consultation. I wonder if those Brexiteers who had reducing immigration as one of the main drivers for voting Leave (and it was the main reason at the time, regardless of the revisionism we've seen since) are feeling a little 'played'. Unlikely, I suppose. Despite it being such a massive vote winner at the time, no-one ever mentions immigration these days. Funny how it's gone from being so critically important to 'meh' in four years! Let's hope any imminent deal doesn't equally water down sovereignty in the same way! Good job I reckon they should drop the salary cap to £15,000 for certain rolls certainly around the care sector There never has been anything wrong with people wanting to come to this country to work and add to society This seems another myth as I've said many times not bothered about immigration as long as people come to contribute thats fine with me, the people who made a big thing about immigration on here never actually said they wanted no immigration, they all said they wanted to control immigration and for the Uk to decide how many people come in not exactly third reich is it ? As for the change supply and demand will mean at times certain professions are needed more so entry to the uk can be made easier for them, I think this how the majority of immigration systems across the world they dont require freedom of movement for barista's.....
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 24, 2020 21:13:05 GMT
You must be referring to the £350m a week for the NHS. I think that was on a bus! I guess that was just a laugh, although Dom Cummings credited it with winning a good few votes for Brexit! I can see you rapidly losing interest in Brexit again in a mo, John... I'm not sure what it was Red, but I know it seemed to upset you Just continuing to be interested in the biggest constitutional change facing the country for decades, John. Seems reasonable. If you choose to see that as being upset, that's your personal interpretation, that's fine. Are you ready to discuss what your idea of a successful Brexit would look like yet, John, or still a bit reluctant?
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 24, 2020 21:17:37 GMT
Good job I reckon they should drop the salary cap to £15,000 for certain rolls certainly around the care sector There never has been anything wrong with people wanting to come to this country to work and add to society This seems another myth as I've said many times not bothered about immigration as long as people come to contribute thats fine with me, the people who made a big thing about immigration on here never actually said they wanted no immigration, they all said they wanted to control immigration and for the Uk to decide how many people come in not exactly third reich is it ? As for the change supply and demand will mean at times certain professions are needed more so entry to the uk can be made easier for them, I think this how the majority of immigration systems across the world they dont require freedom of movement for barista's..... Interesting. I remember one of the strongly held arguments for "taking back control" over immigration was to drive wages up for British workers by preventing foreign workers from doing jobs for less money and thereby taking work away from British workers. Seems the Tory govt has removed that prospect. Cant say I'm surprised. Always struck me as sitting very uncomfortably with a govt seeking to reduce costs and maximise profitability wherever possible, even if the dog whistle message of reducing immigration played well.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 24, 2020 21:19:16 GMT
I'm not sure what it was Red, but I know it seemed to upset you Just continuing to be interested in the biggest constitutional change facing the country for decades, John. Seems reasonable. If you choose to see that as being upset, that's your personal interpretation, that's fine. Are you ready to discuss what your idea of a successful Brexit would look like yet, John, or still a bit reluctant? No need to discuss it, I'm happy with my criteria, and have stated it many times. I've no real need to try to win points on here to make me feel better, I'd prefer to see a successful UK in tune with what the electorate wanted.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 24, 2020 21:23:03 GMT
Just continuing to be interested in the biggest constitutional change facing the country for decades, John. Seems reasonable. If you choose to see that as being upset, that's your personal interpretation, that's fine. Are you ready to discuss what your idea of a successful Brexit would look like yet, John, or still a bit reluctant? No need to discuss it, I'm happy with my criteria, and have stated it many times. I've no real need to try to win points on here to make me feel better, I'd prefer to see a successful UK in tune with what the electorate wanted. We're just discussing the subject, John, or at least trying to. So, to go back to the question you didn't fancy dealing with a few days back, how will you know if a successful Brexit has been delivered, in your eyes? What will the criteria be?
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 24, 2020 21:25:10 GMT
No need to discuss it, I'm happy with my criteria, and have stated it many times. I've no real need to try to win points on here to make me feel better, I'd prefer to see a successful UK in tune with what the electorate wanted. We're just discussing the subject, John, or at least trying to. So, to go back to the question you didn't fancy dealing with a few days back, how will you know if a successful Brexit has been delivered, in your eyes? What will the criteria be? I refer you to my previous answers
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 24, 2020 21:30:09 GMT
We're just discussing the subject, John, or at least trying to. So, to go back to the question you didn't fancy dealing with a few days back, how will you know if a successful Brexit has been delivered, in your eyes? What will the criteria be? I refer you to my previous answers Indulge me, what would be a successful Brexit, in your eyes. You must have an idea, you're very vocal on the subject. Why so coy? I'm just interested in discussing it with you on the Brexit thread on the forum. No abuse, no name-calling, no insults from me, unlike others, just curious to know your thoughts...
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 24, 2020 21:34:49 GMT
I refer you to my previous answers Indulge me, what would be a successful Brexit, in your eyes. You must have an idea, you're very vocal on the subject. Why so coy? I'm just interested in discussing it with you on the Brexit thread on the forum. No abuse, no name-calling, no insults from me, unlike others, just curious to know your thoughts... Nah ,sorry Red, I'm waiting to see what emerges as we approach December 31st, and then I might comment on different aspects as they emerge. I don't want to go around in circles again, thanks for the offer. Don't forget to put the clocks back.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 24, 2020 21:38:53 GMT
Indulge me, what would be a successful Brexit, in your eyes. You must have an idea, you're very vocal on the subject. Why so coy? I'm just interested in discussing it with you on the Brexit thread on the forum. No abuse, no name-calling, no insults from me, unlike others, just curious to know your thoughts... Nah ,sorry Red, I'm waiting to see what emerges as we approach December 31st, and then I might comment on different aspects as they emerge. I don't want to go around in circles again, thanks for the offer. Don't forget to put the clocks back. That's a bit odd, John. Thought you'd have a fairly good idea already of what constitutes Brexit in your eyes, rather than leaving it to see what transpires, as Brexiteers get quite upset when anyone suggests they might not have known exactly what they were voting for...
|
|
|
Post by bigjohnritchie on Oct 24, 2020 21:40:09 GMT
Nah ,sorry Red, I'm waiting to see what emerges as we approach December 31st, and then I might comment on different aspects as they emerge. I don't want to go around in circles again, thanks for the offer. Don't forget to put the clocks back. That's a bit odd, John. Thought you'd have a fairly good idea already of what constitutes Brexit in your eyes, rather than leaving it to see what transpires, as Brexiteers get quite upset when anyone suggests they might not have known exactly what they were voting for... I do, done it before on here
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 24, 2020 21:47:15 GMT
That's a bit odd, John. Thought you'd have a fairly good idea already of what constitutes Brexit in your eyes, rather than leaving it to see what transpires, as Brexiteers get quite upset when anyone suggests they might not have known exactly what they were voting for... I do, done it before on here Excellent, save yourself the bother of retyping and quote it for me if you would...
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Oct 24, 2020 22:21:40 GMT
The Reasons I Support Brexit This Brexit thread has been dominated by constant reference to the economic and trade aspects of the UK leaving the EU. Since we have now left, but still have to determine our trading relationship with the EU, this subject continues to dominate the thread and little discussion is given to all the many other reasons for leaving the EU. You could come to think that trade with the EU was the only thing that matters, which I believe is wrong. I have listed below the reasons why I supported our leaving. I have split my comments into three posts. POST A 1. Sovereignty. When the UK joined the European Economic Community (EEC), then referred to as the "common market" it was primarily to join a free trading group of nations. Most of us ignored the warnings about loss of sovereignty or believed that it was acceptable given the economic benefits of membership. During the subsequent decades however there has been a steady erosion of individual countries self-governance by a succession of treaties that have lead to more and more power being centralised in Brussels. The key issue is EU law, formerly known as Community law that is a system of law that penetrates inside the member states and takes precedence over national laws in the domestic courts of the individual countries. This fact might in itself be acceptable but for the fact that the EU law is not made democratically and different countries have differing legal ideologies and concepts of what is fair or justice. Now that the UK is a sovereign nation again our future governments can pass our own laws instead of regulations implementing EU directives. Naturally if we agree treaties with other nations such as trade agreements we should comply with those regulations we have freely entered into. In reality this means that future UK governments can determine UK foreign policy and not be tied to EU foreign policy, establish trade agreements with non EU countries, set immigration laws, decide on what aid the UK regions require, set tax policy, decide on aid to farming, industry, sports, and the arts, etc., set our own competition rules, human rights, environment and food standards, health and safety standards, equality standards, employment law, and those other matters that have been dictated by the EU in the past. Naturally there will be some losses depending on what the final agreed relationships with the EU are, but there are no sensible reasons why the UK could not agree many of the reciprocal rights with the EU which existed when the UK was a full member, such as travel, security, policing, etc. Naturally one would hope that future UK governments authorise at least the same regional aid as has been the case in the past,with control of that finance divested to the regions. Aid for farming can be directed more to where there is greater potential growth like wine production, and to those aspects of farming that have been impaired by environmental regulations such as oil seed rape production, with farmers provided with government funding assistance in crop rotation. metro.co.uk/2019/05/28/british-wine-industry-is-one-of-the-fastest-growing-in-the-world-9700544/www.fwi.co.uk/arable/osr/the-drastic-action-growers-can-take-to-save-oilseed-rape2. Democracy. There is supposed to be ‘double democracy’ in the EU – represented by the European Council and the European Parliament – but the reality is that the EU is run by the unelected bureaucrats of the European Commission who run rings around ministers from national governments as well as EU parliamentarians. In the UK parliament any member can introduce a bill for parliament to pass or reject, and there is, over time, an alternation of political parties in government who can pass laws to improve welfare or improve the economy, depending on its priorities, or change laws introduced by previous governments. The European Commission is the sole EU body that proposes legislation and it is all in one direction, namely ever closer union towards a united states of Europe. Scant regard is given to individual peoples' wishes and indeed this ethos is encouraging separatist movements in a number of member states which could ultimately lead to the demise of the union. The UK government is presently in the hands of Boris Johnson, and the USA is ruled by Donald Trump. Both of them have supporters, but most people can draw comfort from the fact that eventually they will leave power and be replaced with leaders with different views. There is no such opportunity to remove the Eurocrats. Edit 10.5.2021 Quotation deleted I am pleased that the UK has left an organisation that actually removed the elected officials of other countries and installed their own Eurocrats. What happened to rule by the people? I wonder what Thomas Paine's reaction would have been? www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/11/european-greece-technocratsHow can anyone want to be in such a rotten undemocratic organisation.?
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Oct 24, 2020 22:23:18 GMT
The Reasons I Support Brexit PART B 3. Legal Ideology The ideology of the EU extends beyond the steady progression towards the end objective of political unity by the stream of new legislation to the purposive nature of EU law, which allows the European Court of Justice to interpret the wording of EU laws in line with the European Commission’s intentions. This is contrary to the UK legal tradition where judges not only make decisions based on acts of parliament but will also consider cases decided by other judges and courts, i.e. precedents. Another issue is the EU legal convention that everything is prohibited unless it is permitted, which requires constant appeals to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to grant permission. This contrasts with the English common law tradition where everything is permitted unless it is prohibited. Unlike the French legal system, the English legal framework is in general terms, based on jurisprudence or case law. The English legal system of common law is the basis of the legal structure of many English speaking countries from England to Australia. The French legal system, however, is based on civil law meaning that it is codified and it originates from Roman law, the Napoleonic Code. The legal system in France can seem foreign to us, whilst the concept that a law that has never been written down is still considered a law can be very confusing to the French. In my opinion, having an excessive amount of law with rules for everything leads to contempt for the law as exemplified by the current morass of rules relating to controlling the pandemic. Is it any wonder that the French workers (lorry drivers, fishermen, yellow coats) have such contempt for law and order? It takes a pretty big issue for the British to take to the streets like the inner city riots in Thatcher's day. From my personal experience of working for a French company and having a French boss in Paris, if he gave me an instruction to do something which I disagreed with, thought was wrong, or would not work/succeed and I refused, he would get hopping mad and lose his temper. But if I said "OK" and went away and did nothing, he was "all right" with that and accepted my explanation later for not doing what he had instructed. It's a cultural difference, I believe, where the British want to get the rules straight and clear and will then abide by them, but some other nations don't bother too much about the letter of the law and adopt what they consider a common sense approach to obeying a rule. I'm not saying one is right and the other wrong, Personally I find the "clip-board" mentality of many British ("job's worth") officials infuriating; what I am saying is nations legal ideology differ. It is inevitable that there could be many occurrences where the decision of the ECJ will not be fair or justice in the eyes of a British citizen. 4. EU Mismanagement. Mismanagement by political leaders is something the British are pretty good at! But at least they are our political leaders and can be removed at an election and replaced. Many Europeans would consider that a weakness in our government system with policies chopping and changing with changes in government parties. Personally I think it is a strength in our democracy and reflects the changing mood and opinion of the citizens. As has already been stated the EU is managed in effect by an unelected bureaucracy that is continuous control. There is the farcical arrangement of the European parliament moving backwards and forwards (pre-pandemic) between Brussels and Strasbourg. Moves to stop this in the past have failed, but this is at least one success of the virus! Take the EU budget: 40% goes to farmers, mostly to the richest farmers with the largest farms. Yet agriculture accounts for only 1% of GDP across the EU. The Common Agricultural Policy encourages overproduction. We used to have wine lakes and butter mountains. Now we have the surplus production being dumped in overseas markets. An example is the dumping of tinned tomatoes in Africa, in particular Ghana, which leads to a significant distortion to the local market and a reduction in the income of Ghanaian tomato farmers. news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/2823015.stmThere have been examples in the past of CAP funding going to the food processing industry, not farmers. 34% of the EU budget goes to regional aid, which is a far more worthy cause. Many countries that have joined the EU need redevelopment, notably Spain, post Franco. But how much of this aid is really to recompense the damage the EU structure does to the very nature of these poorer regions due to the adoption of a common currency and the centralization of commerce in the major economies of Germany, France, and of course till now the UK? Is it healthy for east and south Europeans to have to leave their homelands to find work and despite this suffer high levels of unemployment particularly among young people? Is this the "European Dream"? www.europeanceo.com/finance/southern-europe-continues-to-struggle-in-the-wake-of-the-sovereign-debt-crisis/Probably the largest single mismanagement that the EU is guilty of is the introduction of the Euro. The concept of a a common currency across a group of countries whose economies were so disparate that the operation of a single monetary policy with a single Euro zone interest rate was inevitably going to lead to a pattern of booms and busts in the peripheral states when the interest rate is set to meet the needs of core economies, such as Germany. In addition, the way in which exchange rates were fixed at the start of monetary union resulted in Germany joining at too low an exchange rate, while the peripheral countries joined at too high an exchange rate. This inevitably led to the mainly northern members of the Euro zone, especially Germany, building up large trade surpluses and the southern members, such as Italy and Spain, building up corresponding deficits. This, in turn, has encouraged capital flight from Italy and Spain to Germany by savers fearful of the solvency of their banks. The deficits building up in the Euro zone will implode eventually . In the meantime, the southern member states are stuck in a permanent Japanese-style deflation trap. Many key Euro zone banks are in very serious financial difficulties. All this is the inevitable consequence of an obsession for the move to a single united states of Europe. uk.reuters.com/article/us-banks-m-a-breakingviews/breakingviews-europes-bank-ma-wave-will-sweep-mediterranean-idUKKBN2611QWwww.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/business/european-banks-coronavirus.htmlThe fact that the UK is not in the Euro zone might seem irrelevant, particularly as we have now left the EU, but as the Europhiles keep telling us, the EU is our biggest single trading partner and we are very dependant on it for trade in both directions. When the Euro zone eventually breaks up, or splits as it will inevitably do, it could be damaging to our economy. All the more reason for the UK to spread our dependency on the rest of the world where most of our trade already is. As for EU corruption the problems are serious. I would not be concerned that much, but for the fact that prior to us leaving, a large amount of the financing of this mismanagement is paid for by the British tax payer. While the UK was a member of the EU it paid a total of half a trillion pounds Sterling at today's prices. www.euronews.com/2020/01/27/the-brief-corruption-still-a-major-issue-in-european-unionwww.nytimes.com/2019/11/03/world/europe/eu-farm-subsidy-hungary.htmlwww.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/27/david-cameron-loses-jean-claude-juncker-vote-euWe have our own corrupt politicians in the UK, but they eventually get exposed and some have been sent to gaol.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Oct 24, 2020 22:25:56 GMT
The Reasons I Support Brexit
PART C
5. Trade.
And so to the subject that dominates the Brexit agenda. When Britain joined the EEC in 1973, the countries that now make up the EU accounted for over a third of the world economy. Today it less than a fifth. Obviously, developing economies grow faster than advanced ones, but the EU has also been comprehensively outperformed by the English speaking countries in the world as well as the obvious candidates like China, India, and other BRIC countries, and the tiger economies. It is a fact that although still small Africa now boast some of the fastest growing economies in the world and Europe is the slowest growing continental economy in the world. The UK enjoyed an expansion of trade with the EU after joining in the 1970s, but since 1993 trade with EU has grown by a miserable 1%, while trade with the rest of the world has grown by well over double that amount (nearly 3%). That none EU trade is with over a 100 countries under World Trade Organisation rules.
The EU has stated that over 95% of future world growth will be outside of the EU. Only 5 of the top 20 world economies are now in the EU and that number will drop further, as will the EU share of the world economy. This trend is never going to be arrested as demographics will drive further change. Rising life expectancy, declining fertility of Europe's ageing population will mean that Europe's present 7% share of the world population will decline to 4% by the year 2100. There may have been significant economic benefits of joining the European fold in the 1970s, but not in this century.
Because the UK sells more to the rest of the world than the EU it is penalized by the EU's Common External Tariff. Switzerland enjoys free trade with the EU but has been free to establish trade agreements with China and other growing economies.
Regrettably the trade balance with the EU is a huge negative £60-70 billion per annum, which is mostly in goods, not services. The goods deficit is in fact nearly £100 billion p.a. It may be UK citizens choice to buy, German cars, French food and drink, and Italian white goods and furniture, but is is not healthy that the UK depends so much on a few other countries, particularly essential items like pharmaceuticals from Germany. We need to be firstly more self sufficient, and secondly spread our dependence on more countries, not the core EU countries.
The EU claims to be a free trade area, but it is a fundamentally protectionist trading bloc or customs union. Big business lobbies Brussels for more regulations to make it more difficult for small companies to enter the market and compete. Food processing companies have received CAP money. The EU freely admits that its ‘precautionary principle’ – which impedes innovation in life sciences and the technology sectors – is used as ‘disguised protectionism’. The EU Customs Union imposes more than 13,000 tariffs on imported goods. As a result, EU consumers are paying an average of 17% above world prices on food. There is a tariff on shoes for example to protect Italy from shoes manufactured in the Far East. I won't list the other >13,000 tariffs here!
The Single Market is a single protectionist zone where regulations are harmonised and all goods and services produced must satisfy these regulations whether or not they are sold in other member states.
Only 8% of UK companies trade with the EU – accounting for around 12% of Gross Domestic Product – yet 100% of UK regulations have been determined in Brussels, including the 92% of UK companies that do not trade with the EU. Just because the UK leaves the EU does not automatically mean we will lose those exports to the EU, which many Europhiles repeatedly infer.
There will undoubtedly be difficulties in leaving the EU free trade zone, particularly if some people chose to be silly. There will be shortages, like the sugar crisis in the 1970s when the UK joined the EEC. But they will all be surmountable and future UK generations will be grateful we have left.
-----------------------
I have said that I expect it could take a generation for the full economic benefits of leaving to materialise but the most important benefits of sovereignty, democracy and justice will be far more immediate. As for mismanagement we will only have ourselves to blame instead of Brussels and our politicians will be denied that excuse for their failings.
End
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Oct 25, 2020 7:35:43 GMT
Where did you get that from, Coke, it looks like an interesting read? I think the emphases on the economy and trade are fair enough, since they are potentially far more likely to have material impacts on people's lives over some significant time. It's interesting that immigration is virtually forgotten about these days, when it played so strongly, critically in fact, at the time. To my mind, that just goes to show how much the area was just a convenient, if effective, dog whistle, playing on the baser motivations of people. You hear almost nothing about it these days, aside from the occasional, ongoing, quietly dropped out watering down of previously sacrosanct new controls and standards. Similarly, "sovereignty" (increased or decreased) will make very little actual difference to people's lives too, as almost 50 years of being a member has demonstrated. Again it plays well but how much actual difference does it make? As we can all see, it won't stop poor governments being elected which will do far more damage than the EU ever did or will. But, yes, they can be voted out. I think you're right in that poor governments, and especially the right, since they have traditionally been most euro-sceptic, will no longer be able to blame the EU for all the country's ills. It'll be interesting to see who they pass the blame onto next! So, to me it seems fair enough to focus on what will actually impact on people and that's trade and the economy. I suspect a deal will be cobbled together and sold as a great deal for both sides shortly, but you never know. I hope so, otherwise real impacts which will make a noticeable difference to people's lives might start to accrue pretty quickly. The LSE reported that no deal would be three times costlier than Covid and this doesn't sound good for ordinary folk either. www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-54678802
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 25, 2020 10:16:10 GMT
The Reasons I Support Brexit This Brexit thread has been dominated by constant reference to the economic and trade aspects of the UK leaving the EU. Since we have now left, but still have to determine our trading relationship with the EU, this subject continues to dominate the thread and little discussion is given to all the many other reasons for leaving the EU. You could come to think that trade with the EU was the only thing that matters, which I believe is wrong. I have listed below the reasons why I supported our leaving. I have split my comments into three posts. POST A 1. Sovereignty. When the UK joined the European Economic Community (EEC), then referred to as the "common market" it was primarily to join a free trading group of nations. Most of us ignored the warnings about loss of sovereignty or believed that it was acceptable given the economic benefits of membership. During the subsequent decades however there has been a steady erosion of individual countries self-governance by a succession of treaties that have lead to more and more power being centralised in Brussels. The key issue is EU law, formerly known as Community law that is a system of law that penetrates inside the member states and takes precedence over national laws in the domestic courts of the individual countries. This fact might in itself be acceptable but for the fact that the EU law is not made democratically and different countries have differing legal ideologies and concepts of what is fair or justice. Now that the UK is a sovereign nation again our future governments can pass our own laws instead of regulations implementing EU directives. Naturally if we agree treaties with other nations such as trade agreements we should comply with those regulations we have freely entered into. In reality this means that future UK governments can determine UK foreign policy and not be tied to EU foreign policy, establish trade agreements with non EU countries, set immigration laws, decide on what aid the UK regions require, set tax policy, decide on aid to farming, industry, sports, and the arts, etc., set our own competition rules, human rights, environment and food standards, health and safety standards, equality standards, employment law, and those other matters that have been dictated by the EU in the past. Naturally there will be some losses depending on what the final agreed relationships with the EU are, but there are no sensible reasons why the UK could not agree many of the reciprocal rights with the EU which existed when the UK was a full member, such as travel, security, policing, etc. Naturally one would hope that future UK governments authorise at least the same regional aid as has been the case in the past,with control of that finance divested to the regions. Aid for farming can be directed more to where there is greater potential growth like wine production, and to those aspects of farming that have been impaired by environmental regulations such as oil seed rape production, with farmers provided with government funding assistance in crop rotation. metro.co.uk/2019/05/28/british-wine-industry-is-one-of-the-fastest-growing-in-the-world-9700544/www.fwi.co.uk/arable/osr/the-drastic-action-growers-can-take-to-save-oilseed-rape2. Democracy. There is supposed to be ‘double democracy’ in the EU – represented by the European Council and the European Parliament – but the reality is that the EU is run by the unelected bureaucrats of the European Commission who run rings around ministers from national governments as well as EU parliamentarians. In the UK parliament any member can introduce a bill for parliament to pass or reject, and there is, over time, an alternation of political parties in government who can pass laws to improve welfare or improve the economy, depending on its priorities, or change laws introduced by previous governments. The European Commission is the sole EU body that proposes legislation and it is all in one direction, namely ever closer union towards a united states of Europe. Scant regard is given to individual peoples' wishes and indeed this ethos is encouraging separatist movements in a number of member states which could ultimately lead to the demise of the union. The UK government is presently in the hands of Boris Johnson, and the USA is ruled by Donald Trump. Both of them have supporters, but most people can draw comfort from the fact that eventually they will leave power and be replaced with leaders with different views. There is no such opportunity to remove the Eurocrats. www.goodreads.com/quotes/565148-europe-s-nations-should-be-guided-towards-the-superstate-without-theirI am pleased that the UK has left an organisation that actually removed the elected officials of other countries and installed their own Eurocrats. What happened to rule by the people? I wonder what Thomas Paine's reaction would have been? www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2011/11/european-greece-technocratsHow can anyone want to be in such a rotten undemocratic organisation.? No country is sovereign. The more influence you have in the world, the more say you have in the vast numbers of international treaties that all countries sign up to. Brexit means far less global influence for us and so less sovereignty. Democracy - the EU system is much more democratic than our national system. Therefore brexit makes us less democratic. Johnson has a huge majority based on 40% or so of the vote. Most votes are irrelevant in the UK. Plus the majority of law makers here are unelected whereas very few are unelected in the EU.
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Oct 25, 2020 10:21:25 GMT
The Reasons I Support Brexit PART B 3. Legal Ideology The ideology of the EU extends beyond the steady progression towards the end objective of political unity by the stream of new legislation to the purposive nature of EU law, which allows the European Court of Justice to interpret the wording of EU laws in line with the European Commission’s intentions. This is contrary to the UK legal tradition where judges not only make decisions based on acts of parliament but will also consider cases decided by other judges and courts, i.e. precedents. Another issue is the EU legal convention that everything is prohibited unless it is permitted, which requires constant appeals to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to grant permission. This contrasts with the English common law tradition where everything is permitted unless it is prohibited. Unlike the French legal system, the English legal framework is in general terms, based on jurisprudence or case law. The English legal system of common law is the basis of the legal structure of many English speaking countries from England to Australia. The French legal system, however, is based on civil law meaning that it is codified and it originates from Roman law, the Napoleonic Code. The legal system in France can seem foreign to us, whilst the concept that a law that has never been written down is still considered a law can be very confusing to the French. In my opinion, having an excessive amount of law with rules for everything leads to contempt for the law as exemplified by the current morass of rules relating to controlling the pandemic. Is it any wonder that the French workers (lorry drivers, fishermen, yellow coats) have such contempt for law and order? It takes a pretty big issue for the British to take to the streets like the inner city riots in Thatcher's day. From my personal experience of working for a French company and having a French boss in Paris, if he gave me an instruction to do something which I disagreed with, thought was wrong, or would not work/succeed and I refused, he would get hopping mad and lose his temper. But if I said "OK" and went away and did nothing, he was "all right" with that and accepted my explanation later for not doing what he had instructed. It's a cultural difference, I believe, where the British want to get the rules straight and clear and will then abide by them, but some other nations don't bother too much about the letter of the law and adopt what they consider a common sense approach to obeying a rule. I'm not saying one is right and the other wrong, Personally I find the "clip-board" mentality of many British ("job's worth") officials infuriating; what I am saying is nations legal ideology differ. It is inevitable that there could be many occurrences where the decision of the ECJ will not be fair or justice in the eyes of a British citizen. 4. EU Mismanagement. Mismanagement by political leaders is something the British are pretty good at! But at least they are our political leaders and can be removed at an election and replaced. Many Europeans would consider that a weakness in our government system with policies chopping and changing with changes in government parties. Personally I think it is a strength in our democracy and reflects the changing mood and opinion of the citizens. As has already been stated the EU is managed in effect by an unelected bureaucracy that is continuous control. There is the farcical arrangement of the European parliament moving backwards and forwards (pre-pandemic) between Brussels and Strasbourg. Moves to stop this in the past have failed, but this is at least one success of the virus! Take the EU budget: 40% goes to farmers, mostly to the richest farmers with the largest farms. Yet agriculture accounts for only 1% of GDP across the EU. The Common Agricultural Policy encourages overproduction. We used to have wine lakes and butter mountains. Now we have the surplus production being dumped in overseas markets. An example is the dumping of tinned tomatoes in Africa, in particular Ghana, which leads to a significant distortion to the local market and a reduction in the income of Ghanaian tomato farmers. news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/2823015.stmThere have been examples in the past of CAP funding going to the food processing industry, not farmers. 34% of the EU budget goes to regional aid, which is a far more worthy cause. Many countries that have joined the EU need redevelopment, notably Spain, post Franco. But how much of this aid is really to recompense the damage the EU structure does to the very nature of these poorer regions due to the adoption of a common currency and the centralization of commerce in the major economies of Germany, France, and of course till now the UK? Is it healthy for east and south Europeans to have to leave their homelands to find work and despite this suffer high levels of unemployment particularly among young people? Is this the "European Dream"? www.europeanceo.com/finance/southern-europe-continues-to-struggle-in-the-wake-of-the-sovereign-debt-crisis/Probably the largest single mismanagement that the EU is guilty of is the introduction of the Euro. The concept of a a common currency across a group of countries whose economies were so disparate that the operation of a single monetary policy with a single Euro zone interest rate was inevitably going to lead to a pattern of booms and busts in the peripheral states when the interest rate is set to meet the needs of core economies, such as Germany. In addition, the way in which exchange rates were fixed at the start of monetary union resulted in Germany joining at too low an exchange rate, while the peripheral countries joined at too high an exchange rate. This inevitably led to the mainly northern members of the Euro zone, especially Germany, building up large trade surpluses and the southern members, such as Italy and Spain, building up corresponding deficits. This, in turn, has encouraged capital flight from Italy and Spain to Germany by savers fearful of the solvency of their banks. The deficits building up in the Euro zone will implode eventually . In the meantime, the southern member states are stuck in a permanent Japanese-style deflation trap. Many key Euro zone banks are in very serious financial difficulties. All this is the inevitable consequence of an obsession for the move to a single united states of Europe. uk.reuters.com/article/us-banks-m-a-breakingviews/breakingviews-europes-bank-ma-wave-will-sweep-mediterranean-idUKKBN2611QWwww.nytimes.com/2020/04/06/business/european-banks-coronavirus.htmlThe fact that the UK is not in the Euro zone might seem irrelevant, particularly as we have now left the EU, but as the Europhiles keep telling us, the EU is our biggest single trading partner and we are very dependant on it for trade in both directions. When the Euro zone eventually breaks up, or splits as it will inevitably do, it could be damaging to our economy. All the more reason for the UK to spread our dependency on the rest of the world where most of our trade already is. As for EU corruption the problems are serious. I would not be concerned that much, but for the fact that prior to us leaving, a large amount of the financing of this mismanagement is paid for by the British tax payer. While the UK was a member of the EU it paid a total of half a trillion pounds Sterling at today's prices. www.euronews.com/2020/01/27/the-brief-corruption-still-a-major-issue-in-european-unionwww.nytimes.com/2019/11/03/world/europe/eu-farm-subsidy-hungary.htmlwww.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/27/david-cameron-loses-jean-claude-juncker-vote-euWe have our own corrupt politicians in the UK, but they eventually get exposed and some have been sent to gaol. Legal ideology: odd that you say brits prefer clear rules when you correctly point out the fundamental differences between French and British legal systems. The bottom line is, we have a mix of case law and statute. So does the EU. So it works well. Eu mismanagement. We have a far more corrupt and money grabbing for the rich friends of those in power here than in the EU. The tories are the ultimate example of that
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Oct 25, 2020 16:23:31 GMT
If the increasing likelihood of a deal results in an agreement that results in EU fishermen seeing their catches in U.K. waters reduce from 70% to say 40% meaning we can catch around 60% would that mean sovereignty has been achieved or does the U.K. have to catch 100% of fish in our waters?
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Oct 25, 2020 17:17:27 GMT
If the increasing likelihood of a deal results in an agreement that results in EU fishermen seeing their catches in U.K. waters reduce from 70% to say 40% meaning we can catch around 60% would that mean sovereignty has been achieved or does the U.K. have to catch 100% of fish in our waters? Eu fisherman can catch 90 percent and sovereignty is achieved if we tell them they can and we set the quotas each year or so
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Oct 25, 2020 17:44:38 GMT
If the increasing likelihood of a deal results in an agreement that results in EU fishermen seeing their catches in U.K. waters reduce from 70% to say 40% meaning we can catch around 60% would that mean sovereignty has been achieved or does the U.K. have to catch 100% of fish in our waters? Eu fisherman can catch 90 percent and sovereignty is achieved if we tell them they can and we set the quotas each year or so You mean they could catch 20% more than they have been doing and completely destroy our fishing industry providing some bureaucrat in Whitehall says they can? I wonder what Nigel Farage would say about that version of sovereignty?
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Oct 25, 2020 19:06:19 GMT
Eu fisherman can catch 90 percent and sovereignty is achieved if we tell them they can and we set the quotas each year or so You mean they could catch 20% more than they have been doing and completely destroy our fishing industry providing some bureaucrat in Whitehall says they can? I wonder what Nigel Farage would say about that version of sovereignty? The whole point of sovereignty is never the amount but who sets the amount as you well know
|
|
|
Post by nicholasjalcock on Oct 25, 2020 20:03:51 GMT
You mean they could catch 20% more than they have been doing and completely destroy our fishing industry providing some bureaucrat in Whitehall says they can? I wonder what Nigel Farage would say about that version of sovereignty? The whole point of sovereignty is never the amount but who sets the amount as you well know I worked in 3 roles in Whitehall for nearly 2 decades! I know I won’t have a say, you won’t have a say and probably most MPs won’t have a say! It’ll be decided by a few ministers and a few top civil servants? The deal itself will decided this way with Bluffer taking the final decision and The Cabinet rubber stamping it! That’s how the deal will happen and no-one else will get a look in! At least, with Nando’s oven ready chicken if you don’t like it you can send it back to the kitchen?!
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on Oct 26, 2020 8:04:10 GMT
The whole point of sovereignty is never the amount but who sets the amount as you well know I worked in 3 roles in Whitehall for nearly 2 decades! I know I won’t have a say, you won’t have a say and probably most MPs won’t have a say! It’ll be decided by a few ministers and a few top civil servants? The deal itself will decided this way with Bluffer taking the final decision and The Cabinet rubber stamping it! That’s how the deal will happen and no-one else will get a look in! At least, with Nando’s oven ready chicken if you don’t like it you can send it back to the kitchen?! And at the next election we can send the government back to the kitchen
|
|