Brexit has created chaos in Britain – nobody voted for this

[The Renegade]

4 minutes ago, tebee said:

I believe in the free market and think that should extend to freedom to choose where you live and work. 

Bit of a bizarre statement coming from someone who claims to be in Thailand.

 

Hardly applies to Thailand

[bristolboy]

6 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

Bit of a bizarre statement coming from someone who claims to be in Thailand.

 

Hardly applies to Thailand

So you think if you live in Thailand, it's incumbent upon one  to agree with all the laws that affect oneself? And if not leave? Do you think all the citizens of the UK who live there agree with all the laws that affect them?

[aright]

2 minutes ago, tebee said:

That's not exactly an easy thing to do though is it?

 

Anyway I'm one of those hated "citizens of the world" who believes that concept of nationality and borders are outdated in this day and age. I believe in the free market and think that should extend to freedom to choose where you live and work. 

It's easy to do but not if you want the fall back position of the NHS and benefits.

So with you in charge you would open up our borders so we can extend an invitation to the citizens of the world to come in to live and work should we? Or is it just people like your self should be extended that privilege. 

[The Renegade]

Quote

Asked whether he felt a sense of relief following the UK's decision to leave, after years of Britain restricting attempts to create a closer Europe, Mr Verhofstadt says he sees Brexit as a failure of the EU and bad for Europe.

 

Brexit has, as a result, led to serious discussions about reform of how the European Union works,

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-politics-parliaments-44521613

 

Perhaps you should have thought about that before sending Cameron scurrying back to the UK with a flea in his ear.

[aright]

3 hours ago, dick dasterdly said:

Not at all, not all brits. are nationalistic, but even so, I have no desire to find another nationality;

I half agree with you Dick. I would not regard myself as Nationalistic more a Loyalist. Being loyal to my country gives me licence to praise, denigrate, agree and criticize the nation when I see fit.

I say you are half right because I would prefer Nationalism over perfidiousness which is practiced by some on this forum.

[billd766]

5 hours ago, aright said:

It's easy to do but not if you want the fall back position of the NHS and benefits.

So with you in charge you would open up our borders so we can extend an invitation to the citizens of the world to come in to live and work should we? Or is it just people like your self should be extended that privilege. 

 

I actually agree that we should invite any citizen of the world to come and work in the UK.

 

The caveat to that is that should any employer wish to do so that they must first offer the job to any qualified UK national. Should they not find anyone qualified or interested in the job at the salary and conditions advertised after a period of for example 2 months then open the job to foreign natational who meet the qualifications.

 

There are agencies who specialise in this.

 

Also the company would then be liable for the cost of any work permits etc that will be required and should the foreign applicant be sussessful and wish to bring his family also then it will be at his own expense and any immigration fees etc will be his problem.

 

The applicant will be required to pay UK income tax but would not be entitiled to ANY benefits such as the NHS, child benefit, etc. No tax allowances for housing, food, transport etc will be given. However after a period of time (perhaps 5 years) the applicant would recieve the same benefits as a UK citizen.

 

Should he be on a short, medium or long term contract the cost will be his and his alone.

 

It worked for me when I was contracting in Sri Lanka, also in France, Germany and Thailand.

[Jip99]

I think jobs should go to the best applicant for the job without any positive discrimination in favour of us Brits.

 

If that person is a legal immigrant all is good.

 

 

To take the best of British applicants MAY only serve to dilute the quality of the labour force.

[aright]

49 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

I think jobs should go to the best applicant for the job without any positive discrimination in favour of us Brits.

 

If that person is a legal immigrant all is good.

 

 

To take the best of British applicants MAY only serve to dilute the quality of the labour force.

I agree with you, to the extent that, for certain jobs I would want the best available globally, regardless of nationality.Neurosurgeons, Lecturers on Particle Physics etc. I am however, as Bild proposes, happy to have for  (professional)skilled and semi-skilled jobs UK Nationals asked first. Factory Managers and Aeronautical Engineers, Motor Mechanics and Line Supervisors etc.

The problem I feel is in the area of unskilled jobs. We have 4% unemployed in the UK many of them, able, but long term jobless. Suppose a farmer in Lincolnshire can't get enough labourers to pick cauli and sprouts. We would obviously ask them first and as have been shown they would refuse and his labour would need to be imported from Eastern Europe.. The question is what do we do about the long term jobless who refuse to do these unskilled jobs?

 

 

Edited June 20, 2018 by aright

[Jip99]

1 hour ago, aright said:

I agree with you, to the extent that, for certain jobs I would want the best available globally, regardless of nationality.Neurosurgeons, Lecturers on Particle Physics etc. I am however, as Bild proposes, happy to have for  (professional)skilled and semi-skilled jobs UK Nationals asked first. Factory Managers and Aeronautical Engineers, Motor Mechanics and Line Supervisors etc.

The problem I feel is in the area of unskilled jobs. We have 4% unemployed in the UK many of them, able, but long term jobless. Suppose a farmer in Lincolnshire can't get enough labourers to pick cauli and sprouts. We would obviously ask them first and as have been shown they would refuse and his labour would need to be imported from Eastern Europe.. The question is what do we do about the long term jobless who refuse to do these unskilled jobs?

 

 

 

 

I think employment and unemployment should managed separately.

 

Unemployment should be tackled from the viewpoint of getting them into work - but not shoe-horning them in. There will always be a percentage who don't want to work - and that percentage may be 4% (I think I saw a good few of them in Benidorm last month!). People who show a desire to work, irrespective of age, should be encouraged to do so, with re-training programmes as appropriate.

 

Employment is a different matter and I could not vote for a system that put "British first". To me it sends the totally wrong message and actually sounds racist. I understand the principle of looking after our own, but without the industrious Poles the haulage industry would have had serious problems and, as you said, fruit picking etc too. It also seems that the majority of jobs in catering are taken by East Europeans. Now, that must be for a reason..... maybe they are prepared to work for lower wages... maybe they are just better workers. An employer must have the right to employ the best person for the job irrespective of colour or creed, quota or favour.

 

There are other issues, of course, and I also agree with Billd about deferred access to the NHS and the benefit system.

[aright]

I'm not advocating a "British first policy" but a "British National asked first policy". Obviously if the employer can't find what he wants he has to go further afield. Australia has an immigration policy which requires the employer to prove no Australian exists who can meet his requirements prior to giving him approval to bring someone in from overseas.

I don't think the government should create a jobs environment which is globally open to all and sundry without justification. That's not racism that's pragmatism. I am obviously talking about us being outside the EU. I agree about the industriousness of the Poles in both the haulage and agricultural community but never the less I feel there ingress must be controlled. 

[aright]

European commission guilty of 'negligence' over diesel defeat devices, says draft report

A draft European parliament inquiry into the dieselgate scandal has found the European commission guilty of maladministration for failing to act quickly enough on evidence that defeat devices were being used to game emissions tests.

The commission ignored evidence of emissions test cheating from its own science body, the Joint Research Centre (JRC), partly out of a desire to “avoid placing burdens on industry”, according to the draft report seen by the Guardian.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/20/european-commission-guilty-negligence-diesel-defeat-devices-draft-report-dieselgate

 

European commission warned of car emissions test cheating, five years before VW scandal

The European commission was warned by its own experts that a car maker was suspected of cheating emissions tests five years before the VW emissions scandal.

A documents cache seen by the Guardian show that the commission’s in-house science service told it in 2010 that tests had uncovered what researchers suspected to be a “defeat device” that could cheat emissions tests.

VW has yet to face any legal consequences for its use of defeat devices in Europe, despite ongoing proceedings in the US. In Europe, legal actions are a matter for nation states.

But experts say that the commission had the power and, arguably, a responsibility to alert member states to the defeat devices issue. It could also have informed its legal services department and contacted car manufacturers to ask whether their cars were causing a serious environmental problem that necessitated their recall.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jun/20/european-commission-warned-car-maker-suspected-cheating-five-years-vw-scandal

Are Remainers happy to put their trust in a foreign regime that puts the profits of its car manufacturers before the health, safety and well being of their voters and their families?

 

Edited June 20, 2018 by aright

[tebee]

Another of my occasional questions for the leavers on here.

 

I think very soon international companies are going to start announcing the closure of their British operations   and their relocation to mainland Europe.

 

Will this change the general public's view of Brexit ?

 

How many job losses would it take to change your own view?

 

OK I realize this is in some ways a " when did you stop beating your wife" question, but I'd still like your opinion on what would change if it happens.   

[Jip99]

This part of Project Fear was put to bed shortly after the likes of HSBC rescinded their threats to relocate.

 

 

If a few companies relocated it would have minimal impact and would not scratch the surface of my view on Brexit. Doesn't even register on the scale - if businesses want to invest in the UK, or dis-invest from the UK, that is a commercial decision for them.

 

Next.

 

 

[The Renegade]

13 minutes ago, tebee said:

I think very soon international companies are going to start announcing the closure of their British operations   and their relocation to mainland Europe.

Because you think it - Does not make it true.

 

Sometimes hypotheticals are relevant. This is usually BEFORE an event occurs, not after.

 

The die has been cast and onwards we go. 

 

I will refer you back to the hysterical banking exodus. It did not happen and will not happen. Most banks are opening EU hubs that contain less than 100 staff.

 

March 2018

 

Quote

 A year before Britain is due to leave the European Union, top U.S. investment banks plan to hire far more people in London than anywhere else in Europe, indicating they expect the City will remain their main regional hub, at least in the short term.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/britain-eu-jobs/a-year-to-go-before-brexit-u-s-investment-banks-still-bet-on-london-idUSL8N1QI6G2

 

Careful you do not fall over that large obstacle called pessimism and cause yourself an injury.

 

Footnote:

 

I see the remainer's got handed another defeat yesterday ??

[RuamRudy]

42 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

I see the remainer's got handed another defeat yesterday ??

While the government did win, they had to resort to what could only be described as an affront to democracy in order to secure it, such was their weak and wobbly position.  

[The Renegade]

10 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

While the government did win, they had to resort to what could only be described as an affront to democracy in order to secure it,

So what do you call the '' affront to Democracy '' that has been carried out on a daily, weekly and monthly basis by remainers. That started immediately after the Referendum vote and continues to this day ?

 

Do not try to insult my intelligence by claiming it is to make sure the Government is held to account, it has been nothing more than a concentrated effort to have a '' Democratic decision '' overturned.

[The Renegade]

A good indicator of how desperate the EU are in keeping the UK attached at the hip to the EU.

 

Quote

Brexit could take as long as two decades to get EU approval unless the two sides agree a "precise" blueprint in October, Guy Verhofstadt has said.

 

If there was room for misunderstanding it could take a long time for the EU to ratify it, he warned.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-44546780

 

How about extract your heads and start understanding that that the UK is within its rights to say the UK leaves the EU on 29 March 2019 and WTO rules apply.

 

Nothing for the EU to ratify.

 

I find it rather bizarre that the EU is currently pulling out all the stops, despite opposition from the EU farming community, to sign up to an FTA with Australia, whilst an FTA with the UK is not possible.

 

Why would that be ? The cynic in me says that an FTA would not keep the UK under the thumb of Brussels, the ECJ and £ Billions of the UK's money flowing to Brussels.

Edited June 21, 2018 by The Renegade

[sandyf]

On 6/19/2018 at 11:08 AM, dick dasterdly said:

I don't think it's a case of 'whipping them into submission'.

 

Seems more likely that those MPs in leave constituencies are busy working out how much they can get away with - without losing their seat at the next GE?

Whipped into submission.

 

Rebels did look to have the numbers to defeat the government at the start of the week, but ministers launched an intense whipping exercise to pick some of the rebels off, and to convince pro-Brexit Labour MPs to back the government.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-deal-latest-eu-withdrawal-bill-david-davis-tory-rebels-a8408166.html

[sandyf]

18 hours ago, aright said:

Precisely. However, if you want to make the case that the 3% and/or green passport holders should have equal or more weighting than the 97% I am happy to listen.

Distorted argument. It was TM that said the UK was a union of equals, take it up with her.

[sandyf]

1 hour ago, Jip99 said:

This part of Project Fear was put to bed shortly after the likes of HSBC rescinded their threats to relocate.

 

 

If a few companies relocated it would have minimal impact and would not scratch the surface of my view on Brexit. Doesn't even register on the scale - if businesses want to invest in the UK, or dis-invest from the UK, that is a commercial decision for them.

 

Next.

 

 

There is a tendency to ignore what is happening on the sidelines. If companies must deal with an EU notified body for certification and an EU regulator for GDPR, the incentive to remain in the UK is being eroded.

Relocation is not the only problem, some companies may choose to cease export activity and downsize the business

 

I suspect that there are many companies out there , particularly the smaller ones, that are reluctant to commit to the expense of preparation. They live in the hope that at the 11h hour a knight in shining armour will save them that expense. Should it fail to materialise, chaos will be the order of the day.

[Jip99]

1 minute ago, sandyf said:

 

 

I suspect that there are many companies out there , particularly the smaller ones, that are reluctant to commit to the expense of preparation. They live in the hope that at the 11h hour a knight in shining armour will save them that expense. Should it fail to materialise, chaos will be the order of the day.

 

 

I suspect you are wrong.

 

The chaos you crave will not materialise either.

[The Renegade]

8 minutes ago, sandyf said:

I suspect that there are many companies out there , particularly the smaller ones, that are reluctant to commit to the expense of preparation.

As the co - owner of a small business, let me assure you, that is has cost £1000's upon £1000's over the years to implement EU legislation, and I do no importing or exporting whatsoever.

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, The Renegade said:

So what do you call the '' affront to Democracy '' that has been carried out on a daily, weekly and monthly basis by remainers. That started immediately after the Referendum vote and continues to this day ?

 

Do not try to insult my intelligence by claiming it is to make sure the Government is held to account, it has been nothing more than a concentrated effort to have a '' Democratic decision '' overturned.

You have summed up the entire state of Brexit - the other side cheats/lies/deceives/obfuscates, so our cheating/lying/deceit/obfuscation is justified.

 

[sandyf]

Yesterday in PMQ's there was a heated exchange over the funding of the NHS in a 5 year plan. The PM continually stated there would be funds available from reduced payments to the EU.

The government briefing paper published in March this year indicates that net contributions to the EU from this year through to 2023 will be in the order of 10Bn per year, a good bit above last year at 8.9Bn.

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7886#fullreport

[sandyf]

41 minutes ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

I suspect you are wrong.

 

The chaos you crave will not materialise either.

The writing is on the wall for those that can read.

[The Renegade]

9 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

You have summed up the entire state of Brexit - the other side cheats/lies/deceives/obfuscates, so our cheating/lying/deceit/obfuscation is justified.

 

I never summed up anything. I asked you a question.

 

1 hour ago, The Renegade said:

So what do you call the '' affront to Democracy '' that has been carried out on a daily, weekly and monthly basis by remainers. That started immediately after the Referendum vote and continues to this day ?

cheating/lying/deceit/obfuscation is exactly what you have undertaken in response to a direct question.

[Eloquent pilgrim]

This will go down very well in Brussels; a fine example of the cohesion and harmony that exists between all the member states regarding the policies of this disintegrating Union. Italy, Poland, Austria, Slovakia and the Czech Republic about to follow.

 

This from the Times Online overnight

 

**** Budapest  ………

 

Hungarian MPs have overwhelming passed laws that penalise charities for helping migrants. Anyone convicted of helping a person entering illegally faces a year in jail.

 

The legislation has been called the “Stop Soros” laws after the liberal US billionaire George Soros, who was born in Hungary and whose foundation has donated huge funds to promote human rights in former European communist countries. He is accused by Viktor Orban’s hardline government of orchestrating migration into Europe.

 

MPs also approved a constitutional change to prevent Hungary taking part in any EU refugee resettlement scheme ****

 

Pour another glass J.C.

[RuamRudy]

9 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Yesterday in PMQ's there was a heated exchange over the funding of the NHS in a 5 year plan. The PM continually stated there would be funds available from reduced payments to the EU.

The government briefing paper published in March this year indicates that net contributions to the EU from this year through to 2023 will be in the order of 10Bn per year, a good bit above last year at 8.9Bn.

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7886#fullreport

I think James O'Brien put it very succinctly on Twitter:

 

 

[RuamRudy]

5 minutes ago, The Renegade said:

18 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

You have summed up the entire state of Brexit - the other side cheats/lies/deceives/obfuscates, so our cheating/lying/deceit/obfuscation is justified.

 

I never summed up anything. I asked you a question.

 

1 hour ago, The Renegade said:

So what do you call the '' affront to Democracy '' that has been carried out on a daily, weekly and monthly basis by remainers. That started immediately after the Referendum vote and continues to this day ?

cheating/lying/deceit/obfuscation is exactly what you have undertaken in response to a direct question.

Absolutely perfect - you cannot help yourself, can you? I have now identified a grand total of 2 Brexit dividends - the end of the UK as a political entity, and the regular ability to have a laugh at your waffle.

[Jip99]

14 minutes ago, sandyf said:

The writing is on the wall for those that can read.

 

None so blind as those who will not see ?