And therein lies the problem. The sooner a decision is made the better for both parties. In fact, it's damaging ourselves more because what sensible business is going to choose to go to the UK when there is greater instability, weakening economy and the risk of losing access to Europe? One could argue that them pushing it is actually in our better interest.
Brexit thread - what happens next
- Thread starter Gilly
- Start date
- Status
And therein lies the problem. The sooner a decision is made the better for both parties. In fact, it's damaging ourselves more because what sensible business is going to choose to go to the UK when there is greater instability, weakening economy and the risk of losing access to Europe? One could argue that them pushing it is actually in our better interest.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2003
- Posts
- 6,139
- Location
- Birmingham
SNP apparently going to ask the Speaker of the commons today to be declared the official opposition party as Labour can not meet it's Shadow commitments.
Yes, the markets are recovering, pound is still down but creeping back up slowly.
We won't see the true affect of this until we actually leave, then we will know who was right.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 3,827
- Location
- Essex
Blame the EU not us. The EU should've never been more than a super trading block not a political union.
Of course a country was going to get fed up and leave eventually.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,536
It has been proven time and time again the Britain has very little influence in Europe. The fact that Cameron negotiated a new deal that was pretty much the same as the old one is testament to that. So your analogy of us being on the bridge and watching the world go by is exactly right - we sit and watch where the EU leads us with very little ability to change course.
For many leave voters, the migration question was not really the main issue. The issue was the waning influence the UK had in Brussels and the fact that we are are often being overruled because of QMV. Granted, our own politicians and successive governments have been part of this process, but the overall feeling amongst many who chose to leave seems to be that the UK is sinking ever deeper into a situation where we have very little influence and we are easily outvoted by larger member states.
I think the crux of it is that many leave voters would happily stay in the EU but it would need huge reform, something that in 43 years of membership has been agonisingly slow and all the time the UK suffers the negative impacts of a one size fits all approach.
Fundamentally this is why the EU is doomed to fail. All superstates throughout history have done so. It is precisely because of the diversity of ideas, culture, politics and outlook of sovereign states that the EU is on a slippery slope. Making decisions with so many member states and affecting real change and progress is always going to be nigh on impossible to achieve because each country is different and has different needs.
The UK has been overruled on several issues in recent years where European courts have held sway over the UK. To some degree I think there is some security in that for the British people as it hold our government to account to a higher power as it were, but where do you draw the line? We are in a situation where EU decisions for 'the greater good' are not for the good of the UK at all. I think it is all too easy to point the finger and blame the EU for all of our ailments when in fact there are definite benefits, but it is becoming increasingly clear that the EU is desperate for reform which is something it seems to persistently resist. I also note that the mood in the EU is somewhat threatening and I always feel that in a team play situation, if another person chooses to move on then you shake hands and wish them well. Obviously there is a lot more to it when an entire nation chooses to leave but I feel that sentiment should remain. The EU espouses freedom and democracy, yet as the UK chooses to move on I get the distinct sense that if the EU could stop us, it would and I find that a very worrying concept and one which I can see eventually coming to pass with continued membership.
You can espouse all the rhetoric you like about being one nation and loving our neighbours, about being inclusive and having a one world vision but it does not change the fact that a supportive and close relationship relies on balance. When a tipping point is reached where one side is benefitting more than the other, has more control and more power - then the relationship is no longer healthy. Indeed if you look at the way that Junckers is behaving, along with some other heads of state it does seem to be that the UK is the battered wife and the EU is the threatening partner. A poor analogy, I know, but you get the drift. In fact I think, in part, that the threats of the remain campaign and all of the people they drafted in to make the electorate scared of leaving the EU is perhaps why so many people did vote leave. Getting Obama to swan in and make threats was perhaps the last straw for many, but of course that is just speculation on my part.
Overall, the EU's insistence on conformity to a standardised ideal is removing a lot of the variety that it purports to encourage.
Last edited:
notsureifserious.jpg
How are they bossing us around? They are taking a firm and clear position. Be clear that you want to leave, get a proper leadership in place then start negotiations.
Everyone hates uncertainty and right now we are a rudderless nation that's said we will invoke article 50 at a still uncertain point in time, thats on us, not them.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Aug 2010
- Posts
- 3,030
The one thing that I don't understand is how we got through the referendum without any kind of manifesto from the leave campaign?
In the Scottish referendum the white paper had a huge amount of information in it with different potential options etc, fair enough some of the arguments and policies were very hard to achieve, but there was a vision of what the outcome could be with a rough plan in place. So there was at least some basis for reasoned discussion of the issues and potential issues (not on here right enough!)
I don't understand why people think DC should have had a plan, he was leading the remain campaign, his place was to try and ensure a vote for that, surely the side that want change are the ones that detail what the change involves?!
Story after story of how no one had a plan, pre or post vote is quite ridiculous (even more so that they won without actually saying what the outcome would be or how it would be achieved!)
In the Scottish referendum the white paper had a huge amount of information in it with different potential options etc, fair enough some of the arguments and policies were very hard to achieve, but there was a vision of what the outcome could be with a rough plan in place. So there was at least some basis for reasoned discussion of the issues and potential issues (not on here right enough!)
I don't understand why people think DC should have had a plan, he was leading the remain campaign, his place was to try and ensure a vote for that, surely the side that want change are the ones that detail what the change involves?!
Story after story of how no one had a plan, pre or post vote is quite ridiculous (even more so that they won without actually saying what the outcome would be or how it would be achieved!)
I read "losing access to Europe" all over the place, and getting annoyed as ***** from the ignorance of the people.
China, India and US do not have any trade agreements with Europe to "access the single market".
However the significant majority of the imports are from China (with tariffs applied) or the other two, again with tariffs applied. Hell we trade with half African countries importing agricultural products, and the EU has no agreement with any of them.
USA has no trade deals outside NAFTA, and the TTP hasn't been made to law yet for the Pacific deal, while the TTIP might destroy completely the EU and none of the two future candidates for the presidency next year want it. USA hugely trade with the whole world, imposing tariffs.
Commerce has no borders, and free trade with all those strings applied by the EU are not needed. Screw them. They need us more than we need them. Impose tariffs, claim back our seat to WTO we handed over to the EU, and do deals with the whole world.
Thank whom ever, if, exists higher up, that we didn't hand over our UN seat as they demanded last year. (from both UK & France).
China, India and US do not have any trade agreements with Europe to "access the single market".
However the significant majority of the imports are from China (with tariffs applied) or the other two, again with tariffs applied. Hell we trade with half African countries importing agricultural products, and the EU has no agreement with any of them.
USA has no trade deals outside NAFTA, and the TTP hasn't been made to law yet for the Pacific deal, while the TTIP might destroy completely the EU and none of the two future candidates for the presidency next year want it. USA hugely trade with the whole world, imposing tariffs.
Commerce has no borders, and free trade with all those strings applied by the EU are not needed. Screw them. They need us more than we need them. Impose tariffs, claim back our seat to WTO we handed over to the EU, and do deals with the whole world.
Thank whom ever, if, exists higher up, that we didn't hand over our UN seat as they demanded last year. (from both UK & France).
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Apr 2003
- Posts
- 3,360
- Location
- South North West
But is growth via immigration real growth or just the illusion of growth? To me printing flesh is little different to printing money.
That's not to say immigration isn't required to stabilise long term population trends and fuel growth sectors (like working for minimum wage on a farm while bed sharing in an HMO). But uncontrolled immigration leads to all sorts of tensions. It would help if successive governments hadn't allowed raw capitalism to try and solve the housing crisis which saps real GDP while providing the illusion of wealth, but professional politics is all about getting elected, not solving problems.
The best part about the last week, whichever side of the grubby cultural ditch we choose to whinge from, is that wherever I go I hear people talking about politics. All we need now are some politicians worth electing. If anyone sees one, let me know.
It suited the Leave campaign not to have one, because then they could benefit from the contradictory claims of the different threads of the Leave campaign. It's the same way they talked about Norway and Switzerland model while at the same time claiming they'd introduce points-based immigration for EU citizens.
There is no chance the UK is not invoking article 50.
The recovery is down to a weaker pound, a realisation from the markets that the UK will still be in a pretty damn good position outside the EU, and people calming down from the media/remain induced hysteria
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Jun 2012
- Posts
- 5,536
Technically the fact that the leave campaign were not a political party is the key reason there was no maifesto.
Of course it suits their ends not to be held to account for manifesto pledges because they could not possibly make any credible pledges as they had no way of knowing what the outsome of Article 50 would be.
Maybe. Maybe not. We'll find out once Article 50 is invoked.
Interesting to read that Vodafone is thinking about upping and heading to a EU base given the referendum vote. Hadn't realised such a small percentage of their revenue was derived from UK markets.
I think we may see quite a few international firms headquartered in the UK head on over to the Continent in the next year or so. Those with significant non-GBP revenues would be mad not to do so.
I think we may see quite a few international firms headquartered in the UK head on over to the Continent in the next year or so. Those with significant non-GBP revenues would be mad not to do so.
The FTSE 100 might be recovering but the FTSE 250 isn't really and neither is the pound.
Vodafone are performing very weakly in the UK right now, and are about to hit by a 10% revenue fine, have suffered reputational damage due to recent IT failings, and are facing huge pressure to actually pay their taxes.
Brexit might be more of an excuse for them to move rather than a reason.
- Status