GuestHouse

Another sad result of Brexit.

Europe is going to hell in a hand basket and we still have people like you saying 'another sad result of Brexit'. There are NO sad results of Brexit, it could not come at a better time. The only issue I have is PM May taking her time to action the process. The UK needs to leave today, not in 2017.

Instead of pontificating and putting millions into funds to establish think tanks, the Government needs to start a campaign of education. In particular the animosity towards the Polish needs to be stopped. They are amongst the hardest working most trustworthy immigrants in the UK and they have earned their place with us. There were huge numbers of Polish forces fought with us in WW2. The source of this problem is not Brexit.

The virtues of the Poles is somewhat skewed by the fact that despite their being stalwart allies in a war that few remember and plumbers par excellence, their country is the biggest single EU recipient of repatriated British social benefits. This prevails while it is also the net largest recipient of EU aid versus their paltry contributions to the EU. The UK Government would have to really find out why the latter, much more salient imbalance exists before they can espouse the gallantry or tradesman skills of their forebears as part of some greater educational discourse on who your neighbors really are.

The UK has made a start by exiting the EU. Once that is done and dusted, then the true friends and contributors too the UK will be as welcome as they ever were.

Meanwhile Britain has not exited the EU.

And I strongly suspect the 'educational discourse' going on is can you really replace well educated and hard working Polish workers with 'entitled' British workers?

Farage seemed to think it possible with his suggestion during the Brexit campaign that the UK could, post Brexit, remove laws against discriminating against hiring workers based on their nationality - but of course that poses a question, with the laws of discrimination removed who would the employer really give the job to?

I think we know who would lose out.

Another sad result of Brexit.

Europe is going to hell in a hand basket and we still have people like you saying 'another sad result of Brexit'. There are NO sad results of Brexit, it could not come at a better time. The only issue I have is PM May taking her time to action the process. The UK needs to leave today, not in 2017.

Instead of pontificating and putting millions into funds to establish think tanks, the Government needs to start a campaign of education. In particular the animosity towards the Polish needs to be stopped. They are amongst the hardest working most trustworthy immigrants in the UK and they have earned their place with us. There were huge numbers of Polish forces fought with us in WW2. The source of this problem is not Brexit.

Can we add people from all nations that fought with Britain to defeat the Nazis in WWII?

African's, Arabs and people from the wider middle east, people from the Indian subcontinent (now India and Pakistan), people from Malaya, Burma, Hong Kong, Australia, New Zealand, Canadians and let's not forget volunteers to the British forces from the Republic of Ireland.

"Non-white people being told to leave the country".

This is a hate crime?

Yes it is.

Another racist exposes himself.

You are ill informed, Islam is not a race, but as usually your type label people racist for their disdain of this warped theology, which is nothing more than medieval clerical opinion with its 7th Century barbarism.

'My type', takes note of your comment which states 'Its not just a clash of civilisations, its a a clash of two species that have an entirely different level of mental development'.

The term 'Species' cannot be read as referring to a religion or religious belief, and if there is any doubt on the matter, you close with the claim of these 'Species' 'having an entirely different level of mental development'.

You can argue as you wish, but 'My type' reads the words written by you as almost text book racism.

Your type can label me as a racist for not being willing to tolerate the intolerant and I will wear that badge with pride

'My type' don't have to label you as anything, you need no help at all on the matter, choosing as you do to label other human beings as 'species'.

when were we asked if we wanted a multicultural country.

on a similar note at one time i had served as a regular police officer, and had done a lot of additional traffic patrol courses, i left for family reasons, but was thinking of rejoining after a couple of years, i telephoned one force in a large immigrant area, who were recruiting and was told we would love to have you , but we are only recruiting ethnic minorities.

the minimum height limit was reduced some years ago to enable Indian recruits.

The UK is already a multicultural society, so what you suggest we do about it.

Start ethnic cleansing or accept the reality and deal with it?

UK is a failed multicultural society, in part due to PC positive discrimination like this, but mainly the unwillingness of Muslims to integrate, others no problem

The UK has a booming economy, a rich culture of music, art, literature, theatre, a booming fashion and design industry a fabulous food and restaurant industry, world leading universities and academics... much of these fabulous facets of the UK are a direct result of the UK's multiculturalism which you characterise as 'failed'.

Perhaps you feel your life is not enriched by these things, but that is not a definition of 'multiculturalism failing' though perhaps an indication of failings nearer to home.

Another racist exposes himself.

You are ill informed, Islam is not a race, but as usually your type label people racist for their disdain of this warped theology, which is nothing more than medieval clerical opinion with its 7th Century barbarism.

'My type', takes note of your comment which states 'Its not just a clash of civilisations, its a a clash of two species that have an entirely different level of mental development'.

The term 'Species' cannot be read as referring to a religion or religious belief, and if there is any doubt on the matter, you close with the claim of these 'Species' 'having an entirely different level of mental development'.

You can argue as you wish, but 'My type' reads the words written by you as almost text book racism.

The money wasted on lawyers quote I should perhaps give you more of my thoughts.

The "business people" ( I have no idea who they are ) seem to have committed lot money to this project which they see in their interests, interests which are probably based in the EU where their interests take place, they will as is usually the case there want to lobby their own corner for rules and regs to be more ammicable to their business than to other others, usually smaller competitors, cant blame them from playing by the EU rules, I just dont happen to think that that is the way fair competition should work. They dont want the status quo to change and are wuilling to put the power of thedir money and the law to try and keep it. Lawyers dont come cheap, win or lose, but hey who is paying for it, shareholders most probably. If this case is lost by the complainants then I would see an appeal, which would cost money from the same sources which will go into the lawyers pockets. It will cost the taxpayer as well to defend the case as well, you and me, good job they made a saving from the frozen expat pensions eh?

Some people will just never accept what the result is will they, what makes the world go round along with money.

The right of any individual, or collection of individuals, to challenge the legality of government actions in a court of law has nothing to do with the EU, it is s founding principal of our democracy.

Running our legal system naturally costs money, and yes that comes from the taxes we all pay (including taxes paid by business). To blame business for 'wasting' this money because they make a legal challenge to government action in the light of a non legally binding referendum dismisses the point that the government choose to act when the right to do so under the law is not clear.

Testing government actions are within the law costs money, but what is the alternative, accept all government action regardless of its legality?

Your point about savings on pension increases for expats fails to take note that that 'saving' is actually avoidance of an increasing expenditure on pensions over current obligations within the existing (and long standing) pension regulations.

The legality of which you may recall has been tested in UK and European courts.

Had the decision of the courts come down in favour of pensioners and the government action found to be illegal, I'm sure you and many others would have been pleased with the result and supported challenging the legality of government action.

Thank you for stating the obvious, the only reason these business people are bringing this case to court is because its in their financial interests to do so, they must stand to lose a lot of business from Brexit or they would not be bothering, they of course, will not be bothering about the cost, the company will pay and in our case the tax payer will pay, money that can be found amazingly but not fund to ex pat pensioners of which you are apparently have not yet joined. From your comment about the current frozen pension position you think its very fair to treat people who have paid the same contributions differently, I know what the legal position is and I also know what happened in the ECOJ, that does not make it right. How they ever came to that conclusion is beyond me in the name of fairness, but then when has the EU been fair. No one ever told me or anybody else I know that if they left the UK that there pension would be frozen, they still took the contributions though and never said "dont forget to read the small print" why would anyone?

The next big question for you though is once this has taken its course and we are still on course to leave the EU, what will your point be then? You see I see this as a bit like Maggie Thatcher, people are still carrying the baggage around with them after all these years and I think the same will be true of Brexit, it will for some become a lifetime burden that they just cannot shift, dont let it happen to you.

What are you ranting at me about your pension problems for?

It doesn't matter if I think it fair or not (though I have written to my MP on the matter - I'll let you guess the contentents of my letter).

What is clear is, you never read the small print, you moved to Thailand without first checking the impact on your pension, and of course its all someone else's fault.

This does not surprise me, it mirrors the Brexit campaign - jump first, look where you've jumped later.

Although the EU referendum result is not legally enforceable, Mr McLoughlin said: Im quite clear that the referendum result is binding on Parliament. Technically it isnt, but Im clear that it is binding on Parliament.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-article-50-general-election-eu-referendum-leave-tory-chairman-patrick-mcloughlin-a7153141.html

Confirmation bias?!

Mr McLoughlin is the tory party chairman

And how does that precludes confirmation bias?

So you believe that the German, French, Spanish, Italian, and British people, on the whole, share similar opinions on life in general and on the world outside Europe?

I believe we share a common cultural references and numurous comminalities with respect to how we organise our socities.

Hardly a matter of opinion given rafts of evidence littered across our history, politics, laws, social structures, art, litterature, language ..... &c.,

Although the EU referendum result is not legally enforceable, Mr McLoughlin said: Im quite clear that the referendum result is binding on Parliament. Technically it isnt, but Im clear that it is binding on Parliament.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-article-50-general-election-eu-referendum-leave-tory-chairman-patrick-mcloughlin-a7153141.html

Confirmation bias?!

I doubt they are going to cut NATO's budget as a result of the vote and culturally, Britain has never really been that close to the Continentals. It looks likely we will remain part of the single market at this point in time, so the fallout may be rather less dramatic than many are predicting. At least, going by noises being made by EU officials that is. I think Francois Hollande is the only one being a dick.

"culturally, Britain has never really been that close to the Continentals"

Not sure how true that is ... for starters, we were part of the Roman Empire, so our language shares common-roots with other European ones, also the Angles & Saxons were only a couple of the many waves of immigrants, who have contributed to the blend which is British ?

We all drink coffee more than tea now, we eat croissants & pizza, lasagna & spaghetti, French-bread-sticks with our fromage, the traditional 'Grand Tour' of European-culture is now the shared-objective of millions of British summer-holiday-makers where we meet the Germans & French & Italians & Greeks ?

We drive Renaults & VWs, we learn French (or German or Spanish) in school, we shop at Lidl and Aldi for salami & edam & rye-bread, I think European-culture has been creeping-up on us ! And we've given them a lot of our own culture back, all those school exchange-visits in both directions, the French enjoy 'le week-end' and the Germans laugh at Mr Bean !

And why ever not, we're European as well as British, all purely in my own humble opinion.

I should probably have been clearer in my post - over the last few hundred years, the British and Continental outlook on life has been markedly different. Our shared genes has little to do with the matter - you could apply the same argument to the USA but their culture differs significantly from that of their British and mainland European forefathers.

From personal experience I am of the opinion the similarities between the UK and Europe are as clear as the striking difference between the UK/Europe and the other places I have lived and worked.

End of muslims flooding into Britain and no longer dictated to by EC.

Neither of these will come to an end as a result of Brexit.

The money wasted on lawyers quote I should perhaps give you more of my thoughts.

The "business people" ( I have no idea who they are ) seem to have committed lot money to this project which they see in their interests, interests which are probably based in the EU where their interests take place, they will as is usually the case there want to lobby their own corner for rules and regs to be more ammicable to their business than to other others, usually smaller competitors, cant blame them from playing by the EU rules, I just dont happen to think that that is the way fair competition should work. They dont want the status quo to change and are wuilling to put the power of thedir money and the law to try and keep it. Lawyers dont come cheap, win or lose, but hey who is paying for it, shareholders most probably. If this case is lost by the complainants then I would see an appeal, which would cost money from the same sources which will go into the lawyers pockets. It will cost the taxpayer as well to defend the case as well, you and me, good job they made a saving from the frozen expat pensions eh?

Some people will just never accept what the result is will they, what makes the world go round along with money.

The right of any individual, or collection of individuals, to challenge the legality of government actions in a court of law has nothing to do with the EU, it is s founding principal of our democracy.

Running our legal system naturally costs money, and yes that comes from the taxes we all pay (including taxes paid by business). To blame business for 'wasting' this money because they make a legal challenge to government action in the light of a non legally binding referendum dismisses the point that the government choose to act when the right to do so under the law is not clear.

Testing government actions are within the law costs money, but what is the alternative, accept all government action regardless of its legality?

Your point about savings on pension increases for expats fails to take note that that 'saving' is actually avoidance of an increasing expenditure on pensions over current obligations within the existing (and long standing) pension regulations.

The legality of which you may recall has been tested in UK and European courts.

Had the decision of the courts come down in favour of pensioners and the government action found to be illegal, I'm sure you and many others would have been pleased with the result and supported challenging the legality of government action.

All of the above and still the French hate us .

We have evidence here on TVF of British animosity towards the French, we can hardly trust the same sources for opinions of the French on the British.

I think you need to spend less time worrying about the g/f and more time thinking about the implications for yourself.

It is clear that your stepson has been 'spoiled' by his mother and her family, you now know (or should know) where your life savings are going if you don't act to ensure otherwise.

My advice is not for your son to find another g/f, but you might want to think about what this young man has planned for your own future.

I doubt they are going to cut NATO's budget as a result of the vote and culturally, Britain has never really been that close to the Continentals. It looks likely we will remain part of the single market at this point in time, so the fallout may be rather less dramatic than many are predicting. At least, going by noises being made by EU officials that is. I think Francois Hollande is the only one being a dick.

"culturally, Britain has never really been that close to the Continentals"

Not sure how true that is ... for starters, we were part of the Roman Empire, so our language shares common-roots with other European ones, also the Angles & Saxons were only a couple of the many waves of immigrants, who have contributed to the blend which is British ?

We all drink coffee more than tea now, we eat croissants & pizza, lasagna & spaghetti, French-bread-sticks with our fromage, the traditional 'Grand Tour' of European-culture is now the shared-objective of millions of British summer-holiday-makers where we meet the Germans & French & Italians & Greeks ?

We drive Renaults & VWs, we learn French (or German or Spanish) in school, we shop at Lidl and Aldi for salami & edam & rye-bread, I think European-culture has been creeping-up on us ! And we've given them a lot of our own culture back, all those school exchange-visits in both directions, the French enjoy 'le week-end' and the Germans laugh at Mr Bean !

And why ever not, we're European as well as British, all purely in my own humble opinion.

In addition to which we share judea-christian religious history, very specifically Catholicism and (in Norther Europe) share the history and philosophy arising from the reformation. Across the whole of Europe the renascence re-established and built up philosophical, political, medical and scientific knowledge from ancient Greece and Rome, perhaps most importantly from Lucretius 'De rarum natura' and in no small part from Ancient Greek philosophy, science and medical knowledge pass back to Europe from the Islamic word. All that finished off nicely with the impacts of Bohemianism on modern European society and the shared experience of two world wars. And let's not forget the group that have done so very much to develop the distinct pan-European history, literature, science, music, politics, art, law and indeed financial institutions that oiled the rebirth and growth of Europe, the European Jews.

The only education they will get is from Prophet Mohamed and that is to kill the human next to them. This religion should be banned

The internet is a wonderful invention, you can search information, access ideas from around the world, educate yourself and broaden your world view.

Alternatively you can choose, as you have, to announce your small minded ignorance to the world.

Is that so different from right here in Thailand? Lebanon or Thailand -- (same same)

(Quote)

A report , published on Tuesday by Human Rights Watch, confirms that more than 250,000 Syrian Refugee children in Lebanon between the ages of 15 and 18, do not have access to education. Less than 3% were enrolled in a Lebanese public school in the academic year 2015/16.

Here in Thailand the only difference is that the 15 - 18 year olds have dropped out of school to have babies for the moms or grandmoms to raise while they work in the sex industry that the tourism department so adamently denies exhists..........

While emphasizing --- 'No Sex Please -- we're Thai' When will Thailand educate those 16 year old girls and boys about..........

No Sex Please --- YOU are Thai???????

Well the difference is that before the west decided to intervene Syria had an excellent education system. The more worrying thing is that the majority of Syrian children will now grow up without parents, let alone education.

How would you know what the educational system was and whether it was excellent? You don't, do you? Why not look at the unbiased resources of the UN and accept the fact that primary education was not easy for a large portion of the population, particularly those living in rural areas, and who now support ISIL. Why not comment on the forced streaming of kids into the vocational school system that trains the workers who supported Assad's elitist rule. The poor and the rural dwellers were pushed towards the crap low paying jobs so that Assad and his cronies could maintain a cheap labour force.

I didn't even mention the bogus social and history courses aka propaganda indoctrination forced upon the young.

If you go to the UAE you'll find large numbers of highly educated and very well trained, Syrian doctors/medical professionals, teachers, university lecturers, engineers, architects &c.,

Syrian professionals have for a long time been recognised for their education and skills.

You might argue this is the cream of the crop, but you can't deny Syria must have been doing something right on the education front to produce these people.

when were we asked if we wanted a multicultural country.

on a similar note at one time i had served as a regular police officer, and had done a lot of additional traffic patrol courses, i left for family reasons, but was thinking of rejoining after a couple of years, i telephoned one force in a large immigrant area, who were recruiting and was told we would love to have you , but we are only recruiting ethnic minorities.

the minimum height limit was reduced some years ago to enable Indian recruits.

The UK is already a multicultural society, so what you suggest we do about it.

Start ethnic cleansing or accept the reality and deal with it?

What's NATO got to do with it?

NATO comes into the equation when we step back and view the USA's positioning with respect to funding NATO and providing military security for Europe.

Rather oddly, both sides of the political spectrum in the US are asking why the US tax payer should continue to fund such a large part of the NATO budget when the EU is capable of paying more than it currently does.

Perhaps more of a concern is the question being asked in the US political and military spheres 'Is it acceptable for the US to provide troops to Europe when Europe is capable of proving its own troops'. This latter question arises from US commitments elsewhere in the world, the rise of China and a refocussing of the US to the Asia and the fact that it is simply becoming a harder sell to the US public that US servicemen and women should be required (at least on paper) to serve in a war protecting Europeans - many of whom (and especially Brits) are openly hostile to the US.

It comes under the heading - you can afford to provide your own military security.

The EU response to this has been to examine the possibilities of a European Military Command to replace some, but possibly all, of the support Europe currently receives from the US.

If the UK leaves Europe then this naturally has an impact of the decisions being made with respect to European military security.

It also raises a question, if the US does indeed withdraw or reduce its commitment to NATO, where will the UK find a replacement security partner?

There was clearly not enough space on the referendum ballot paper to fit that consideration in, but be assured these questions will not go away.

Lets just assess where we are right now and where we might be going.

23rd June the UK electorate voted by 52% to 48% to leave the EU, the PM resigns and new administration takes which says they will honour the previous admins to linvoke article 50 and leave the EU, when they decide that the UK is in a position to to start those negotiations, then a group of "business people" engaged a firm of lawyers to look into the legacy of the referendum. The HMG had no plans to bring it to a vote in the commons, it was deemed not to be required, however, the case will be brought to the courts in October, so what is likely to happen then?

Let suppose that the court throws it out, then it could be appealed ( even more money for the lawyers). The October case is likely to go into November, if there is an appeal, when? Article 50 could well have been invoked by then. What would that mean?

Lets now suppose that the "business peoples" lawyers are successful in the case and the court rules that the result has to be debated and voted on in the Commons.

Before the referendum the HMG was for remain and would have had a majority in any vote in the House and it would likely have been voted down, but, things have changed since then, the HMG position is now to take the UK out of the EU so the majority would likely see the HMG win the vote. You can imagine that the SNP would vote against leaving along with the Welsh nationals and some of the NI Mps, remembering that Sein Fein dont tend to turn up, so it throws up some interesting possibilities.

The autumn looks like an interesting time.

While getting the courts to examine the legality of the Governments actions in response to a non legally binding referendum can hardly be described as 'money wasted on lawyers', especially so given the magnitude of the decision being made, and putting aside the PM has said the UK shall not enact Article 50 before 2017, I would agree we can look forward to some interesting developments in the coming months.

It would be interesting to plot Western Expat arrivals (and quiet departures) against the exchange rate between their home currency and the Thai Baht.

I think that union members get to vote too but only after a certain time. The rules may be on the Labour party website.

Hardly a definitive answer... (This sounds rude, I didn't mean it that way.)

As far as I know only one poster has claimed that the unions have a vote on this issue, but we'll find out soon enough I expect.

The union's do have a say in the decision.

This should not be a surprise given that the Labour Party was founded by the unions.

" The new Chancellor of the Exchequer has said he may use the Autumn Statement to "reset" Britain's economic policy.

At the start of a trip to China to strengthen post-Brexit business ties, Philip Hammond said he would review economic data over the coming months."

http://www.bbc.com/news/business-36864099

Although, given that the government has already abandoned any attempt to balance-the-books by 2020, some might say that economic-policy has already just been reset in a major way, oh well at least there won't be any nauseating speeches promising 'fiscal prudence' for a while !

Plus the abandonment of commitments on 'Immigration'

The betrayal of the 'White working class' who voted for Brexit continues apace.

The Brexit campaign used and still clings to the campaign slogan 'Project Fear' and 'Scaremongering' as derogatory terms to characterise the Remain position.

This deserves some examination.

Did the Remain campaign use projections of negative impacts of Brexit and if so what were they, where they 'Scaremongering', can they be described as instilling 'Fear'?

Yes Remain did use a raft of projected negative impacts for Brexit, these were almost entirely economic parameters, but also included loss of access to markets, loss of political influence on the world stage.

The economic projections were, for the most part, rooted in formal/structured economic forecasts which we can argue about the accuracy of and when/if these economic outcomes have/will come to fruition. Some of the worst projected outcomes where not plausible, but were recognised as such by the organisations producing the studies, some of the forecasts have already been demonstrated to be correct - The drop in the value of sterling, decreasing investment confidence, rise in UK profit warnings &c.,

I don't think even the most ardent Brexit supporter will state there are no negative impacts from Brexit (though again, they may argue the depth and time scale of those impacts).

The middle ground (excluding the extremes of both sides of the Referendum debate) will almost certainly agree its too early yet to judge the outcome.

The lack of access to markets, and loss of political weight is yet to play out. But loss of control over European decisions is an absolute outcome of Brexit, and nobody in the Brexit camp has explained how Brexit's core aims shall be achieved in the face of categorical statements from the EU, Germany, France and others that the UK shall not be given tariff free access to EU markets without accepting EU laws, regulations and the free movement of people.

So once again too early to judge on that one (But no clear way forward in sight).

Is the charge of 'Scaremongering' and the use of 'Fear' (Project Fear) justified?

Well it seems that on the extremes of the Remain support it might be, a few people did cling and still do cling to only the worst case scenarios.

But, if we accept its too early to judge the economic outcomes, then we must accept its too early to dismiss the worst projections - So the jury is still out.

'Fear' and 'Scaremongering' was used in the Referendum campaigns and its impact has been measured and can be seen. This however is not the Remain's 'Project Fear' or Remain's 'Scaremongering', but that of the Brexit campaign which shamelessly used 'Fear' and 'Scaremongering' when they integrated racism and xenophobia into the Brexit campaign.

'Fear', 'Scaremongering' is at the core of the xenophobia and racism employed by the Brexit campaign and is still visible amongst Brexit supporters and the comments they make.

The hypocrisy of such xenophobia and racism coming from British migrants to another country is seemingly lost in the eagerness to express the bigotry to which the Brexit campaign has given a voice and which the Brexit campaign has legitimised.

The irony is that Brexit, predicated to such a large extent on 'Fear', 'Scaremongering', xenophobia and racism characterises the Remain campaign as 'Project Fear'.

It would be laughable if it was not so cynical and, as history tells us, dangerous.