Brexit: Now What? Part II

[Strawberry]

I'm getting one of these as well. But the idea that citizens can pay as individuals to opt in to treaties with other countries, that their government doesn't want the country to enter into, seems very odd indeed. I've literally never thought of that. Any precedents?

Is that what they're suggesting? I thought it was just a case of the individual keeping their right to freedom of movement and right to consular assistance from any EU embassy if they're travelling outside Europe.

 

[Craig B]

Is that what they're suggesting? I thought it was just a case of the individual keeping their right to freedom of movement and right to consular assistance from any EU embassy if they're travelling outside Europe.

But the U.K. Government isn't entering into a state to state arrangement to secure these things for its citizens collectively?

 

[McHrozni]

Does this proposal look as crazy to other readers as it does to me?

It's basically a way of telling the British team that they've screwed up and need to find a way to backpaddle, not a serious proposal as such.

McHrozni

 

[Strawberry]

But the U.K. Government isn't entering into a state to state arrangement to secure these things for its citizens collectively?

No because that would mean signing up to Freedom of Movement, which apparently the Brexiters see as a red line issue.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Pro Brexit Tabloids touting the Jaguar/Landrover announcement that they may, at some time in the future consider building an as yet undecided new factory in the UK as a triumph fof Brexit.
They don't mention that it is subject to J/LR deciding to build an electric vehicle maybe and then only if the Govt pays lots of money.

 

[GnaGnaMan]

Pro Brexit Tabloids touting the Jaguar/Landrover announcement that they may, at some time in the future consider building an as yet undecided new factory in the UK as a triumph fof Brexit.
They don't mention that it is subject to J/LR deciding to build an electric vehicle maybe and then only if the Govt pays lots of money.

I noticed that there was a lot of nonsense in the Brexit press. It's not just tabloids, though, but also the Telegraph. Pro-tip: If you see any news suggesting the german position is changing it almost certainly fake.

ETA:
After Johnson's Prosecco comment I've started to worry this nonsense may be informing the opinions of the british government.

 

[Garrison]

Pro Brexit Tabloids touting the Jaguar/Landrover announcement that they may, at some time in the future consider building an as yet undecided new factory in the UK as a triumph fof Brexit.
They don't mention that it is subject to J/LR deciding to build an electric vehicle maybe and then only if the Govt pays lots of money.

Yeah it was basically if the UK government spends a lot of money upgrading infrastructure in the West Midlands then they might build a new plant there. Frankly sounds more like using Brexit fears to blackmail the government.

No because that would mean signing up to Freedom of Movement, which apparently the Brexiters see as a red line issue.

But don't you remember they promised us during the referendum we could keep the Single Market and get rid of all the immigrants and all those EU officials who keep saying otherwise are just scaremongering, right?

 

[Strawberry]

But don't you remember they promised us during the referendum we could keep the Single Market and get rid of all the immigrants and all those EU officials who keep saying otherwise are just scaremongering, right?

Anybody who bought that was stupid or delusional.

 

[MCel58]

Pro Brexit Tabloids touting the Jaguar/Landrover announcement that they may, at some time in the future consider building an as yet undecided new factory in the UK as a triumph fof Brexit.
They don't mention that it is subject to J/LR deciding to build an electric vehicle maybe and then only if the Govt pays lots of money.

And it's very unlikely that any plant in the future will have 10000 jobs given AI, machine learning, robotics, automation and 3D printing. Even the Nissan deal won't look that good by 2020 given these changes. Add to that the lack of a new job skills plan and the UK is going to look like the worst option for many by then. This is the real problem with Brexit and Trump, at a time of the great industrial change we are being diverted from the new problems the economy faces.

 

[Andy_Ross]

For each job in the factory there are a load of jobs in the associated support industries.
Around Wearside and County Durham there are sub contractors, transport companies, support companies etc.
I used to work for an IT support company. We did support in the Nissan plant, at the factory in Peterlee that made the airbags, a factory in Washington that made the upholstery and one in Chester le Street that made the seatbelt reels and a factory producing turned parts like custom nuts, bolts, fasters etc in South Shields.
That's just the tip if the proverbial iceberg.

 

[Aepervius]

Does this proposal look as crazy to other readers as it does to me?

Pretty crazy and does not solve the free circulation of person problem : non Briton wanting to go into Britain. The problem was never about Briton going to EU alone.

 

[Darat]

Yeah it was basically if the UK government spends a lot of money upgrading infrastructure in the West Midlands then they might build a new plant there. Frankly sounds more like using Brexit fears to blackmail the government.



But don't you remember they promised us during the referendum we could keep the Single Market and get rid of all the immigrants and all those EU officials who keep saying otherwise are just scaremongering, right?

And then retire to Costa Del Sol and receive our pension and free health care!

 

[Garrison]

For each job in the factory there are a load of jobs in the associated support industries.
Around Wearside and County Durham there are sub contractors, transport companies, support companies etc.
I used to work for an IT support company. We did support in the Nissan plant, at the factory in Peterlee that made the airbags, a factory in Washington that made the upholstery and one in Chester le Street that made the seatbelt reels and a factory producing turned parts like custom nuts, bolts, fasters etc in South Shields.
That's just the tip if the proverbial iceberg.

That is doubtless where the 10,000 jobs figure comes from, still little more than a distant maybe dependent on government largesse though.

 

[Garrison]

This article post on the BBC website a few days ago is germane to the argument about what did people vote for when they voted for Brexit:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37989728

 

[MCel58]

Latest news adds more confusion. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38126899

 

[Filippo Lippi]

The Sun are reporting that the PM says her faith will see us through Brexit.

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING CAN GO WRONG NOW!

 

[McHrozni]

Latest news adds more confusion. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38126899

Not really, it's just a formalization of what Brexitards tried to obfuscate: there is no mandate to leave the EEA. The referendum question didn't touch it, the majority of referendum was tiny and the Brexitard campaign advocated EEA membership with no EU membership on occasion.

BBC tries to spin it as a way for UK to gain ground in negotiations, but a British membership in EEA without membership in EU is basically the deal that benefits EU, first and foremost. It also keeps UK from a making a bad situation calamitous, which is also a good thing for it's main trading partners.

McHrozni

 

[ceptimus]

There is a mandate to stop paying into the EU. There is a mandate to stop free movement. Those were two of the main campaign issues.

Providing that EEA membership is free and doesn't come with free movement strings attached then yes, it could be acceptable to remain in the EEA.

 

[McHrozni]

There is a mandate to stop paying into the EU. There is a mandate to stop free movement. Those were two of the main campaign issues.

There would be, if the vote was something like 70-30 in favor of leaving with very high participation. It wasn't even 52-48. It barely gave a mandate to leave the EU and certainly nothing more that might be implied or not, based on circumstances.

Furthermore, there wasn't a mandate to stop paying into the EU, but rather to save money by not paying into the EU. We all know how well that worked out, right?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...brexit-uk-national-debt-a7435201.html#gallery

Compared with figures the OBR released in March, the body now predicts the UK will have to borrow an extra £122 billion over the next five years.

Almost half of that – some £58.7 billion – is directly related to the vote to leave the EU, the forecaster said. Some £16 billion was the cost of lost income due to falling migration.

McHrozni

 

[Darat]

Then there's a mandate to spend £350 million a week on the NHS, on farmer subsidies, on the fishing industry, on education, on the armed services and policing. Also for stopping all immigration and for getting rid of all current immigrants.