If I was the PM, my "opinion" in that matter would be fortified by the best possible research on the motives of the voters on each side in the referendum.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
- Status
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
Narrow horizons, and simple answers - such as grammar schools. May is famously an unpirivleged grammar school girl, having passed the 11+, but was subsequently transferred to a private Catholic school when the grammar went comprehensive. Or so I'm told by my source in the Home Office, where they talk about her all the time apparently.
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
Theresa May is the PM, and her opinion is not worth what yours might be given the same information. That's my opinion anyway. Theresa May is a mug for confirmation bias, but I don't think you are. I'm not saying you're immune, but at least you're aware it exists. I would not say the same of May.
I've certainly never said that, and as far as I know May has never said it either.
I think she was saying exactly that. This from the BBC report.
While she didn't go as far as to say she would ditch single market access in favour of being free to control EU immigration, she certainly appeared to hint at it.
Mrs May said the UK would have control of its borders and the best possible trade deal with the EU. She didn't commit to maintaining "single market access", and she suggested that people who thought the country could keep "bits of EU membership" were missing the point that it "would be leaving".
She stated alsoMrs May said the UK would have control of its borders and the best possible trade deal with the EU. She didn't commit to maintaining "single market access", and she suggested that people who thought the country could keep "bits of EU membership" were missing the point that it "would be leaving".
We will be able to have control of our borders, control of our laws. This is what people were voting for on 23 June.
Last edited:
We're very susceptible to that kind of thing. Indeed, the "harder" the Brexit and the harsher the consequences that the UK population will buckle down and make the best of a bad, bad situation.
IMO it's almost in the government's interest to make sure that Brexit is as damaging as possible
This is getting painfully more likely by the week
Banks will likely start moving operations by Q2 2017. I do wonder how Theresa will explain away that. Plus chances are that the Union Jack will have to be altered to remove the white diagonals and the blue background. It will look similar to the flag of Georgia, and weird for a country that has been intricacy connected to the sea for so long.
McHrozni
Last edited:
What words have you missed out there, and put a - in their place?
We're very susceptible to that kind of thing. Indeed, the "harder" the Brexit and the harsher the consequences that the UK population will buckle down and make the best of a bad, bad situation.
IMO it's almost in the government's interest to make sure that Brexit is as damaging as possible
It has a certain logic behind it. The best way forward for UK is to remain in EU, and all options where it keeps portions of EU (as Theresa put it) will be worse than that. An out-out-out version is the only one that can potentially ever be better.
Yes, it has by far the highest risks of them all. Yes, it will most likely be an abysmal failure. But it is the only option that even has any chance whatsoever of actually improving the fortunes of UK in any run, and this one would be a very long indeed. It's a kamikaze-like action of utter desperation, but it has a minuscule chance of working out in the end, which is not shared with any of the safer options. It's a high-risk low yield gamble, idiotic for the most part, except that it's the only way forward that gets UK out of EU and has any chance whatsoever of ever helping UK in any way.
McHrozni
You're right that an "extreme" approach to Brexit may be the only way for the UK to end up ahead (however unlikely that may be).
What I tried to say is that if Brexit (whatever path is chosen) turns out to be a little bit rubbish with a small dip in GDP, then the British population will whinge and moan and the Conservatives will be out on their ear at the first opportunity.
OTOH if it turns out to be a complete fiasco with the financial services industry leaving en-masse, a collapse in sterling, a double-digit drop in GDP, the service industries taking a real battering, large rises in unemployment and real large scale hardship for large sections of the population then the "Durkirk spirit" will kick in and the British public will uncomplainingly struggle on through and will continue to return the Conservative Party to power until the crisis is over.
Hm, I see.
You guys are weird, I'll tell you that
Upside: a little bit rubbish Brexit with a marginal drop in GDP is the more likely variant of any event, including a hard Brexit. British finances would take a fairly savage beating, but that's a problem for those who don't have the right to vote (yet) to suffocate on.
McHrozni
Last edited:
Once again the markets have reacted to Theresa May's indication that the UK is on track for a "Hard Brexit".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38555673
Unfortunately that's what happens, politicians (understandably) are more interested in playing to the gallery than working to ensure the country's future prosperity. Of course many of those who voted Leave are protected by the pensions "triple lock" - important if inflation starts to rise as predicted - and it's the rest of us who will have to pay the increased taxes and/or pay off the increased borrowing.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38555673
Unfortunately that's what happens, politicians (understandably) are more interested in playing to the gallery than working to ensure the country's future prosperity. Of course many of those who voted Leave are protected by the pensions "triple lock" - important if inflation starts to rise as predicted - and it's the rest of us who will have to pay the increased taxes and/or pay off the increased borrowing.
Hm. I strongly suggest lobbying as many conservative MPs against accepting a hard Brexit as possible. Promises of donations, promises of withdrawing donations, e-mails, letters, what have you. Theresa can perhaps subdue 10 MPs with threats and blackmail of censure and whatnot, but she can't subdue 50 or more. As Russians have found out, fake patriotism makes for a poor lunch.
There is no democratic mandate to leave EEA. There was no debate on the matter, the Parliament hasn't endorsed it (yet). There is time yet to ensure leaving EEA can't happen. If it forces a referendum on membership in EEA it has done a good enough job.
I still hope Theresa is sabotaging Brexit though
It may be a fools' hope, but hey, it's better than no hope at all, and it doesn't do any harm anyway 
McHrozni
Last edited:
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 85,298
I was speaking to someone yesterday about the big Siemens investment in Hull.
They are completely rebuildung one of the docks and building a big factory to build wind turbines for the big North Sea Wind Farms.
He was citing it as evidence that Brexit won't effect investment from and exports to Europe. What he failed to realise is it's entirely for the domestic market, there are no exports involved.
They are completely rebuildung one of the docks and building a big factory to build wind turbines for the big North Sea Wind Farms.
He was citing it as evidence that Brexit won't effect investment from and exports to Europe. What he failed to realise is it's entirely for the domestic market, there are no exports involved.
Archie Gemmill Goal
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2015
- Messages
- 8,324
I can't remember exactly what was planned there. Is it fabrication or just assembly? Presumably a lot of the component parts and raw materials will still be imported so not sure who will pick up the extra costs on that.
The blades are made there, as far as I know. We've just had a 75m blade put on display in Victoria Square:
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/hull...people-think/story-30041730-detail/story.html
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/stun...-by-surprise/story-30038350-detail/story.html
At 75m, I can't see them being used on mainland UK, but they are likely to be used in the offshore projects:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-38160790
I recall Siemens saying that Brexit would impact on the future, saying that Hull would miss out on the "Prize" (presumably more exports than a Brexit UK would bring)
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/how-...after-brexit/story-29455772-detail/story.html
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/hull...people-think/story-30041730-detail/story.html
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/stun...-by-surprise/story-30038350-detail/story.html
At 75m, I can't see them being used on mainland UK, but they are likely to be used in the offshore projects:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-38160790
I recall Siemens saying that Brexit would impact on the future, saying that Hull would miss out on the "Prize" (presumably more exports than a Brexit UK would bring)
http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/how-...after-brexit/story-29455772-detail/story.html
Garrison originally posted: Really? Because according to May and co, and Ceptimus, the British people voted for an end to EU immigration period.
Which was not true, as you know.
They didn't vote for an end to all migration because that was not thereferendum question. They voted for an end to the freedom of movement provided by the EU. That is, they voted for an end to "EU immigration". Period. If the Brexiteers had been able to vote against any immigration, how do you think they would have voted?
Last edited:
Please try to debate more honestly.
One of the many issues in the referendum debates was to take back control over immigration from the EU - and for many of those who voted leave, I'm sure this was the main issue.
But no one - or at least hardly anyone, and certainly not me or Prime Minister May voted for 'an end to EU immigration period.' That would be an absurd thing to wish for and quite impossible to implement.
EU immigration will continue after Brexit, but those wishing to come and work here will need to get some sort of work visa - just the same as if they wished to emigrate to the USA or Australia.
If there is, for example, a shortage of doctors or nurses in the UK, and there are EU citizens who can fill those roles who wish to come to live and work in the UK then I'm sure they will be welcomed in.
On the other hand if some unqualified Romanians wish to come to the UK to steal copper pipes and electrical cable then they'll find it more difficult to come here than they do under the present rules.
Most people would agree that this is a good thing.
One of the many issues in the referendum debates was to take back control over immigration from the EU - and for many of those who voted leave, I'm sure this was the main issue.
But no one - or at least hardly anyone, and certainly not me or Prime Minister May voted for 'an end to EU immigration period.' That would be an absurd thing to wish for and quite impossible to implement.
EU immigration will continue after Brexit, but those wishing to come and work here will need to get some sort of work visa - just the same as if they wished to emigrate to the USA or Australia.
If there is, for example, a shortage of doctors or nurses in the UK, and there are EU citizens who can fill those roles who wish to come to live and work in the UK then I'm sure they will be welcomed in.
On the other hand if some unqualified Romanians wish to come to the UK to steal copper pipes and electrical cable then they'll find it more difficult to come here than they do under the present rules.
Most people would agree that this is a good thing.
- Status