Brexit, for once some facts.

[oldgroaner]

From the Express
"
SOFT BREXIT: Immigration stance may be relaxed for the sake of economy, David Davis warns
BREXIT Secretary DAVID Davis has insisted Britain's immigration rules must serve the national economic interest- despite calls for an end to free movement."

Going....going.....gone.
Thus begins the end of many peoples hopes and dreams.
What is left of Brexit now that the voters wanted?
Only one promise kept
The Government has taken back control.

For some strange reason the readers comments are so angry in tone that they make Lord Nigel's outbursts seem like the gentlest of mild reproaches.
This is a scant reward for the worthy Mr Davis, as without his penmanship the bill introducing the call for a referendum would never have reached parliament.
I fear he may have come to rue the day he ever put pen to paper.
"Behold the Monster You've created!" style of thing
I.M.H.O. (naturally)

 

[Zlatan]

Zlantan has asked the question at least twice about the necessity of including freedom of movement as one of the four prerequisites for a free market , and I do not think he has been adequately answered. The discussion loops back to discussing personality disorders rather than staying on track. ( Some of these asides are amusing none the less. )

Yes, there may well be an agenda towards a united states of Europe but the arguement is more simple than that.

To have a free market it must be fair and every participant has to be playing by the same rules. Ideally the same weights and measures will be used,( see previous postings on that ) and the same product standards will be used otherwise fair comparisons cannot be made.

More importantly than the concept of an US of Europe , was the social cohesion principle of the EU , on broadly Christian Democrat lines, and this seeks to bring up the living standards of all EU citizens . The ECJ the various commissions of the EU are all working towards that aim. Almost every country has been brought to book on one or other occasion. Ireland being one of the latest with the Apple Tax schemes.

There is a financial cost associated with social rights. If you have a slave economy you can produce goods and services at a lower cost than economies which value workers. Slaves by definition are not free to travel. If the free market does not penalise those who will by their actions will not play by the same rules as the rest then those countries which act unethically will prosper at the expense of the ethical.

Social services will decline where there is a race to The bottom. There is simply less money around for social needs.

Free people will vote with their feet. It might be advantageous for a local economy to restrict their movement ... Eg flight from the land, but the better solution is to make it more attractive to remain, by increasing productivity and wages.

Well written good explanation.
How does eu address issue of loss of workers from certain areas ?
How does it distribute investment fairly ?
Two issues (IMO) it has failed to even grasp exist or are even related ??

 

[oldtom]

The people of Richmond Park and North Kingston, never noted for their socialist sympathies, have decided that Zak Goldsmith is not the man to represent them in the H of C.

Instead, they have given their support to someone who bears a strange resemblance to Shergar and represents the Liberal Democrat point of view, whatever that may be this week. Of course, historically, these two parties are interchangeable and it is no surprise at all that the constituents of that parish would elect someone just as keen to redistribute wealth from the many to the few as any tory.

Undoubtedly, this by-election result sends a message to tory central office about the current issues facing the government. Sarah Olney, the victorious candidate made her position on 'Brexit' very clear and campaigned largely on that issue while making it known she, like Goldsmith, remains staunchly anti-LHR expansion.

If Mrs May's team decides to re-canvass tory constituencies around the country this week, she may well discover that the national mood in regard to 'Brexit' has changed enormously. She may now recognise that there is a 'get-out-of-jail card' for her by more forcefully articulating the changing opinion amongst the tory faithful around the country, demonstrated very clearly in SW London.



While it is refreshing to see a tory candidate ousted by his constituents, there is a huge downside in as much that we will now be subjected to interview after interview with laughable demo-rat party grandees - already Tim Farron is making himself available to everyone with a camera and a microphone! I expect we shall see Paddy (I was a soldier, don't you know!) Ashdown, Clegg and probably someone from the Orkneys or Shetlands that we've never heard of all queuing up for breakfast TV interviews or appearing with Nick Robinson, Andrew Neil, Peston, Marr or the like.

The Labour party should be making capital out of this divisive 'Brexit' nonsense yet remain strangely quiet. Let's see what develops following this expression of anti-'Brexit' feeling.

Tom

 

[oldgroaner]

Well written good explanation.
How does eu address issue of loss of workers from certain areas ?
How does it distribute investment fairly ?
Two issues (IMO) it has failed to even grasp exist or are even related ??

How are they lost if they move because there was no work? or wages were too low to live on?
Why deny them the right to support their families? in doing so their families will benefit and generate demand, wages will rise and workers return home in due course..
In the Industrial Revolution for a time the countryside was denuded of workers that migrated to the cities.
Wages in the countryside rose, workers returned in sufficient numbers, using better methods and the balance restored itself over time.
Your suggestion merely cements stagnation and poverty in place, and in any case is in the purview of local government not the EU.
Blaming the EU for all mankind's ills may well be UK Government policy, but frankly is nonsense.
I.M.H.O.

 

[oldgroaner]

The people of Richmond Park and North Kingston, never noted for their socialist sympathies, have decided that Zak Goldsmith is not the man to represent them in the H of C.

Instead, they have given their support to someone who bears a strange resemblance to Shergar and represents the Liberal Democrat point of view, whatever that may be this week. Of course, historically, these two parties are interchangeable and it is no surprise at all that the constituents of that parish would elect someone just as keen to redistribute wealth from the many to the few as any tory.

Undoubtedly, this by-election result sends a message to tory central office about the current issues facing the government. Sarah Olney, the victorious candidate made her position on 'Brexit' very clear and campaigned largely on that issue while making it known she, like Goldsmith, remains staunchly anti-LHR expansion.

If Mrs May's team decides to re-canvass tory constituencies around the country this week, she may well discover that the national mood in regard to 'Brexit' has changed enormously. She may now recognise that there is a 'get-out-of-jail card' for her by more forcefully articulating the changing opinion amongst the tory faithful around the country, demonstrated very clearly in SW London.



While it is refreshing to see a tory candidate ousted by his constituents, there is a huge downside in as much that we will now be subjected to interview after interview with laughable demo-rat party grandees - already Tim Farron is making himself available to everyone with a camera and a microphone! I expect we shall see Paddy (I was a soldier, don't you know!) Ashdown, Clegg and probably someone from the Orkneys or Shetlands that we've never heard of all queuing up for breakfast TV interviews or appearing with Nick Robinson, Andrew Neil, Peston or the like.

The Labour party should be making capital out of this divisive 'Brexit' nonsense yet remain strangely quiet. Let's see what develops following this expression of anti-'Brexit' feeling.

Tom

I am waiting, as I'm sure we all are to see whether this small fierce lady (loved that reference to Shergar by the way) will replace the small Scottish woman as the object of tillson's amorous admiration?
She seems to tick all the appropriate boxes...
I.M.H..O naturally , what say tillson old chap?

 

[tillson]

What would we do without you tillson, when all about are losing their heads, etc.
Top man!
Steady as we go, onward and downwards together.
"I see no ships" quite so,
Let there be Brexit!
We are all behind you! (though there are some, dare I say it, not going entirely in the same direction, or even for the same reason, and one, determined to go round in circles .
(No names, no pack drill, but a possible recruit there for the cause, Nudge nudge, wink wink)

I am waiting, as I'm sure we all are to see whether this small fierce lady (loved that reference to Shergar by the way) will replace the small Scottish woman as the object of tillson's amorous admiration?
She seems to tick all the appropriate boxes...
I.M.H..O naturally , what say tillson old chap?

I don't know much about her or what she stands for. She and her team have clearly researched which noises she needs to make in order to get elected, but whether she actually believes in what she says remains to be seen.

It's no surprise that an area which voted by over 70% to remain in the EU have elected someone who says that they are anti BREXIT. I'm sure that had that figure been 70% the other way, she would now be telling people that she will be working hard to deliver the referendum result.

She has played a clever game by aligning herself with Goldsmith's anti airport expansion, thus effectively neutralising that issue and fighting the seat on anti BREXIT in a 70% + pro remain area.

Personally, I don't like the outcome and think that the dumb people of Richmond Park have been lied to and deceived. I sense that their mood has changed and therefore the Lib Dem MP should not be appointed until after a second, third , ........n+1 vote has delivered the outcome that I want.

Take nothing from Richmond Park in terms of BREXIT. It says nothing regarding the mood of the country as a whole.

 

[oldgroaner]

I don't know much about her or what she stands for. She and her team have clearly researched which noises she needs to make in order to get elected, but whether she actually believes in what she says remains to be seen.

It's no surprise that an area which voted by over 70% to remain in the EU have elected someone who says that they are anti BREXIT. I'm sure that had that figure been 70% the other way, she would now be telling people that she will be working hard to deliver the referendum result.

She has played a clever game by aligning herself with Goldsmith's anti airport expansion, thus effectively neutralising that issue and fighting the seat on anti BREXIT in a 70% + pro remain area.

Personally, I don't like the outcome and think that the dumb people of Richmond Park have been lied to and deceived. I sense that their mood has changed and therefore the Lib Dem MP should not be appointed until after a second, third , ........n+1 vote has delivered the outcome that I want.

Take nothing from Richmond Park in terms of BREXIT. It says nothing regarding the mood of the country as a whole.

Great stuff there, especially the new proposed vote till you get the right result idea, but you haven't answered the burning question, or is a case of waiting for her to "Grow on you"?

 

[tillson]

Great stuff there, especially the new proposed vote till you get the right result idea, but you haven't answered the burning question, or is a case of waiting for her to "Grow on you"?

I believe that I have fully answered your question. I know nothing of her or her performance as an MP. We need to wait and see.

 

[oldgroaner]

I believe that I have fully answered your question. I know nothing of her or her performance as an MP. We need to wait and see.

Ha! wait and see therefore if the answer? jolly good!
I was just trying to cheer you up after what Davis has been saying to the press.

 

[tillson]

Ha! wait and see therefore if the answer? jolly good!
I was just trying to cheer you up after what Davis has been saying to the press.

Thank you for your efforts to cheer me up, but it's really not necessary. I posses a naturally cheerful disposition.

 

[Zlatan]

How are they lost if they move because there was no work? or wages were too low to live on?
Why deny them the right to support their families? in doing so their families will benefit and generate demand, wages will rise and workers return home in due course..
In the Industrial Revolution for a time the countryside was denuded of workers that migrated to the cities.
Wages in the countryside rose, workers returned in sufficient numbers, using better methods and the balance restored itself over time.
Your suggestion merely cements stagnation and poverty in place, and in any case is in the purview of local government not the EU.
Blaming the EU for all mankind's ills may well be UK Government policy, but frankly is nonsense.
I.M.H.O.

Because many are heading for a dream that does not exist and if untapped workforce I'd in Eastern Europe why not develop that area with investment..The answer is because its better for wealthy nations to invest in themselves and expect cheap labour to up and move. Its the modern equivalent of slavery. Keeps pay down in area of investment and makes wealthy region more competitive..meanwhile the area supplying labour gets worse and worse.
This process is done on back of social justice but is actually anything but..

 

[anotherkiwi]

Executive summary:
The EU uses its budget to redistribute funds to where they are most needed. Often places left by the wayside by their national governments. And for you that is a bad thing?

If you don't apply for funding you dont get it. And that is somehow the EU's fault according to you?

1. Private companies should invest, not nations that is the liberal ideal you voted for. Funnily enough, companies that make e-bikes have begun to invest in Eastern European countries, Bulgaria for example.

2. My young neighbour is from Moldava and got out and has just gone back on holiday and brought his young wife with him this time as well because "the country is run by the mafia" (his words). Companies don't like investing in countries run by the mafia because even if the wages are low they have to factor in the cost of corruption. Moldava has applied to join the EU btw...

3. Investment helped by EU funds in EU countries is done by both companies (research) and national governments (infrastructure). At one point I had a company at the pointy end of technology and studied the possibility of applying for EU research funds. I would have had to hire a person to do only that and had insufficient capital at the time. If companies and governments in eastern countries have projects that require EU funds they just have to fill in the right forms and apply. You can't throw stones at the EU if they aren't doing that. Apparently the Welsh managed to apply for infrastructure funds with some success before they told the EU to go take a running jump...

 

[oldtom]

This is Sarah Olney, the representative of the policy-free, laughable demo-rat party, who ousted Zak (I'm not as thick as I look) Goldsmith from his parliamentary seat after he relinquished it in protest about something most folks can't even remember.

The pic on the left is the brand-new MP for Richmond Park and that on the right is Shergar, played by an actor......I think I have them the right way round.....not that it will make a great deal of difference to the good folk of SW London!



I may have been a little too kind to Zak in my description as, on reflection, he IS as thick as he looks! Multi-millionaires can do these things and I don't suppose he needed the part-time job in SW1 to make ends meet anyway.

Tom

 

[flecc]

Richmond Park is in no way representative of the mood of the country. There is no comfort to be taken by remainers from this result.

It's true that as a London constituency it's only representative of London, which is a Remain stronghold.

But I think it unwise to think the the government won't be influenced by this result. They had been totally confident that Zac Goldsmith as an independent would win on the airport issue, even to the extent of not putting up an opposing candidate.

This unexpected result will have shaken them, as much as anything for the sheer strength of feeling against Brexit, obviously far greater than they had anticipated. Remember, Richmond is one of the most affected areas from Heathrow approach noise, and it takes a lot for those residents to discount it in favour of expressing their hatred of Brexit.
.

 

[Zlatan]

But Kiwi the eu does not use its budget to redistribute wealth. If I did would Luxembourg be richest nation on planet with Greece amongst poorest ??

 

[anotherkiwi]

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/external/html/budgetataglance/default_en.html#greece

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/external/html/budgetataglance/default_en.html#luxembourg

 

[tillson]

It's true that as a London constituency it's only representative of London, which is a Remain stronghold.

But I think it unwise to think the the government won't be influenced by this result. They had been totally confident that Zac Goldsmith as an independent would win on the airport issue, even to the extent of not putting up an opposing candidate.

This unexpected result will have shaken them, as much as anything for the sheer strength of feeling against Brexit, obviously far greater than they had anticipated. Remember, Richmond is one of the most affected areas from Heathrow approach noise, and it takes a lot for those residents to discount it in favour of expressing their hatred of Brexit.
.

But by voting Lib Dem, they were voting against the airport, and against BREXIT. We know they hate BREXIT because over70% Voted against it in the referendum. Nothing new there.

If they had voted for Goldsmith, they would not have been protesting against BREXIT. That was never going to happen, a protest was always on the cards in such a pro remain area.

The Lib Dem lady will have fed all of this public opinion data into her spread sheet and it will have told her what she needs to be sincerely passionate about. If she purchased the delux version, I think that even provides a suitable life long held ambition.

Definitely a case of, move along, nothing to see here.

 

[oldtom]

In the Industrial Revolution for a time the countryside was denuded of workers that migrated to the cities.
Wages in the countryside rose, workers returned in sufficient numbers, using better methods and the balance restored itself over time.
Your suggestion merely cements stagnation and poverty in place, and in any case is in the purview of local government not the EU.
Blaming the EU for all mankind's ills may well be UK Government policy, but frankly is nonsense.

So much in the discussion in regard to 'Brexit' requires a sense of history to understand fully the ramifications of such a decision. Clearly OG, you have the necessary experience and are sufficiently well-read on history and politics to pontificate with credibility on the daily shifts in media opinion as they grasp at straws to defend their ridiculous editorial standpoint. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for some of the contenders from the 'Brexit' lobby who are akin to the guy who turned up at a gunfight with a knife.

My knowledge of politico-economic and historical matters is reasonably accurate, having realised many years ago that there are two sides to every story, every war and every political argument. Were I still equipped only with the knowledge gained by rote, brainwashed in my school days, I would be like many of the simpletons who believe in the credibility of the Farages of this world and their dangerous policies.

Thankfully, I have risen above believing politicians until I research for myself whatever message they are attempting to put across. Wars, big and small, were not started by soldiers - politicians must shoulder responsibility for probably every war ever waged anywhere and nothing has changed in that regard through the centuries. Sadly, we don't seem to learn from history and as a result, Tony B-liar is still on the wrong side of prison bars.

Incidentally OG, that's a lovely word you conjured up there - 'purview'. I can't recall having heard it before but we live and learn; well, some of us do! I'm a great believer in the lifelong learning ethic and the U3A embodies that beautifully. What a great idea!

Tom

 

[Kudoscycles]

I don't know much about her or what she stands for. She and her team have clearly researched which noises she needs to make in order to get elected, but whether she actually believes in what she says remains to be seen.

It's no surprise that an area which voted by over 70% to remain in the EU have elected someone who says that they are anti BREXIT. I'm sure that had that figure been 70% the other way, she would now be telling people that she will be working hard to deliver the referendum result.

She has played a clever game by aligning herself with Goldsmith's anti airport expansion, thus effectively neutralising that issue and fighting the seat on anti BREXIT in a 70% + pro remain area.

Personally, I don't like the outcome and think that the dumb people of Richmond Park have been lied to and deceived. I sense that their mood has changed and therefore the Lib Dem MP should not be appointed until after a second, third , ........n+1 vote has delivered the outcome that I want.

Take nothing from Richmond Park in terms of BREXIT. It says nothing regarding the mood of the country as a whole.

Tillson...Do you really think the people of Richmond Park are dumb? The area probably has more graduates than anywhere else in the UK.
This was a protest vote against Theresa May and the direction that she is taking Brexit,Davis is already having to soften his stance away from a hard Brexit.
It is ironic that hard Brexit leavers tend to come from poorly educated constituencies. The referendum vote was ,by some voters,a protest vote because they are not being listened to,some of the 52% vote. Richmond Park is the 48% now feeling they have a voice.
Look at the Remain/Leave votes in other constituencies,there are a large number of seats that if the voters voted anti Brexit would go to Liberal. Even my local constituency would for the first time go away from Tory.
Those areas that voted hard Brexit tend to be mainly in Labour seats.
There were some 30% Tory voters in this by-election who admitted that they voted Liberal,I must say that if Theresa May intends to take us out of the Single Market I would also vote Liberal.
Sarah Olney put her head above the parapet and didn't fudge any questions,she said she now has a mandate to vote down Article 50.....most MP's have said that they won't vote against Article 50 but reserved to question the form. I think this by-election will give those MP's the confidence to vote with their heads and also vote against Article 50.
The referendum was only advisory,the split was only 4%,Theresa May must now realise that the 48% are not dead,they will raise their voice at every opportunity,May must be very nervous as to how to proceed on Brexit.
The EU negotiators have noted this result,they must realise that there is still a big anti-Brexit vote in the UK that they can explore in negotiations.
Good result for Remainers,from June 24 I have always taken the view that Brexit won't happen.
KudosDave

 

[flecc]

But by voting Lib Dem, they were voting against the airport, and against BREXIT.

This is not a dumb area, they were well aware that their very real anti-aircraft noise feelings would best expressed by voting for the candidate who stood on that. They weren't fooled by the Lib-Dem candidate's policy addition to exploit that.

You believe as you will, but this result has shaken the government which had been certain Zac would win. They are also aware of the very real national swing away from Brexit following so many betrayals and losses such as:

No £350 million per week for the NHS, instead a demand that the NHS substantially cuts its budget.

The several confirmations that large scale immigration will continue.

The admission that we might yet pay into the EU for access to the market.

The crash in the £ value and the resulting 10% to 20% price rises that are appearing, with strong indications of more to follow.

I could well see the government trying to escape its dilemma with a Brexit so soft that there's no real change, while selling it with propaganda as much harder.

Only the most dedicated Brexiters would be very angry about that, and there's not enough of them to bother anyone.
.