Meanwhile for the adults in the room (@Dippenhall, I am just about to start on the book) the short (15 minute) BBC radio progs, Brexit - A guide for the Perplexed, Series 2 are very accessible, and worth a listen. Episode 3, about Euratom, is frankly terrifying.
Who is talking there about euratom thar is very interisting to hear what they say.
I cant remember names, way above my pay grade, (all PhDs I am sure :-)) but iPlayer will have details.
Thanks i know how to find it and know all about it. Just you used the word terrifying. Team fear at its best as usual.
Just looking to be helpful to my new best friend :-)))
It certainly terrified me, because it was new info for me, whereas the previous 2 episodes was about stuff I had more or less - grimly - taken on board. But so long as you can walk down Floyd Road singing " I got my country back" I will try to live with it all. Anything for your happiness, Chippy mate.
Thanks mate, still like you the best.
I can't cope with this, I really can't. I am sure it is some really sophisticated wind up
I am away at the moment (not in EU !) so access to the web is patchy, hence replies are slow.
@Cordoban Addick I don't believe that the current pressure on class sizes/availability of school places is down to underfunding and not the increase in U.K. population.
@randy andy When the Sun cried "stop Brexit" last week it was touted on here as a credible source. It either IS or it ISN'T.
@Leuth Don't give up on the debate. It's the only way we are going to go forward - Brexit or no Brexit.
@ShootersHillGuru Yes I agree that UK needs immigration to fill the skills gaps. I am all in favour of this. I had NHS specialist care recently and the doctors concerned were from India and ROI. Great stuff.
As for infrastructure, we do a census every 10 years to give some indication of the service needs in the future - how can this be valid with an unspecified number of arrivals free to come at any time ?
I was not aware that existing UK legislation could inhibit the free movement of EU citizens to the UK and I am interested to know more.
Well I have posted the video so many times, but maybe instead the complete transcript will help you better, of a politician explaining it on the Marr Show, way back in 2014. A foreign politician. The then Foreign Minister of Poland speaking the Queen's English and in the clearest possible terms .
Read it and weep at the foolishness of the entire Brexit exercise.
@PragueAddick I couldn't find any reference in those 6 pages to limiting the free movement of EU citizens to the UK. Yes there is talk of social benefit variations, but I could not find the specific point about limiting free movement (am trying to view on tiny phone with poor network coverage).
The point was made earlier above that we already have the power to limit migration from the EU and I am interested to find out more about how this can be true.
I am away at the moment (not in EU !) so access to the web is patchy, hence replies are slow.
@Cordoban Addick I don't believe that the current pressure on class sizes/availability of school places is down to underfunding and not the increase in U.K. population.
@randy andy When the Sun cried "stop Brexit" last week it was touted on here as a credible source. It either IS or it ISN'T.
@Leuth Don't give up on the debate. It's the only way we are going to go forward - Brexit or no Brexit.
@ShootersHillGuru Yes I agree that UK needs immigration to fill the skills gaps. I am all in favour of this. I had NHS specialist care recently and the doctors concerned were from India and ROI. Great stuff.
As for infrastructure, we do a census every 10 years to give some indication of the service needs in the future - how can this be valid with an unspecified number of arrivals free to come at any time ?
I was not aware that existing UK legislation could inhibit the free movement of EU citizens to the UK and I am interested to know more.
Well I have posted the video so many times, but maybe instead the complete transcript will help you better, of a politician explaining it on the Marr Show, way back in 2014. A foreign politician. The then Foreign Minister of Poland speaking the Queen's English and in the clearest possible terms .
Read it and weep at the foolishness of the entire Brexit exercise.
@PragueAddick I couldn't find any reference in those 6 pages to limiting the free movement of EU citizens to the UK. Yes there is talk of social benefit variations, but I could not find the specific point about limiting free movement (am trying to view on tiny phone with poor network coverage).
The point was made earlier above that we already have the power to limit migration from the EU and I am interested to find out more about how this can be true.
The argument by anti-immigrant types was that too many come to the U.K. for the benefits and not to work, because in the UK they can claim benefits immediately. That is not the case in other EU countries. Sikorski points out that we could change this on our own. had we done so that would actually have helped reduce the number of non EU immigrants too.
New Statesman - a government of such low repute would be alarming at any time. But Brexit, the greatest challenge any administration has faced since 1945, makes it all the more damaging
The Spectator - there is no point in Britain leaving the EU unless it is done boldly. At present, it looks as if it is being enacted in the spirit of a damage-limitation exercise where we pay large sums in order to retain some of the privileges we had before.
Brexit will damage the U.K. economy. A damage limitation exercise seems eminently sensible.
I’m just glad the rabid Brexit rag The Spectator have even hinted at it.
Damage limitation is pointless.
No rationale to leave if we shadow EU rules from the outside.
We are more than half-way there. Today is the 506th day since the referendum and there are 504 days until the date on which we are due to leave the EU. So it's worth re-capping on what we have achieved, in terms of agreements, already and what we still need to agree. This is not a comprehensive list.
What still needs to be agreed - The status of EU citizens in the UK, UK subjects in the EU, and which courts they have reference to, to ensure their status. - The land border between the UK and Ireland: where it will physically be; how it will be controlled and by whom; what restrictions will be in place for cross-border travel; what controls will be in place to ensure goods are correctly charged for. - The net cost of any settlement between the UK and the EU (ie the "divorce bill"). - Whether the UK will be in the Customs Union - Whether the UK will be in the Single Market - What transitional arrangements will be in place, for whom, for how long, how they will be policed and which courts have jurisdiction. - What will happen to current EU subsidies; for how long will the EU continue to meet subsidy commitments; how will they be met - and by whom - after that time. - How flights into and out of the UK will be allowed to continue if the UK is removed from the European Single Skies Policy; or whether the UK retains membership, for how long and at what cost. - Which geographical areas within the UK will have exemptions from Brexit; and, if not, how those areas' specific social and economic requirements will be met. (Exampe: Scotland). - Which industries in the UK will have exemptions from Brexit; and, if not, how those industries' specific social and economic requirements will be met. (Example: fishing, financial services). - What levels of immigration are appropriate; how they will be policed; how UK citizens will have to prove they have the right to remain in the UK. - How we deal with the UK's exit from Euratom; who owns Euratom's physical infrastructure in the UK; who meets the cost of redundant British staff in Euratom. - Trade agreements between the UK and the EU. - Trade relationships between the UK and every country outside the EU.
(Note, this list isn't as daunting as it might appear. Because we only have to finalise agreement on the first 13 of those 14 items before March 2019. (As well as their associated votes in both Houses of Parliament and taking into account the mood, desire and aspiration of the British public).
What has been agreed - Triggering Article 50. (Although there is still disagreement as to whether it's reversible, what the article contains, whether it can be delayed, whether it can be paused, and whether triggering it was lawful in the first place).
So, we have reached half-time and it seems like we haven't made the best start. Does anyone still think we can achieve agreement on everything that's still outstanding (which is basically, everything) in the second half?
We are more than half-way there. Today is the 506th day since the referendum and there are 504 days until the date on which we are due to leave the EU. So it's worth re-capping on what we have achieved, in terms of agreements, already and what we still need to agree. This is not a comprehensive list.
What still needs to be agreed - The status of EU citizens in the UK, UK subjects in the EU, and which courts they have reference to, to ensure their status. - The land border between the UK and Ireland: where it will physically be; how it will be controlled and by whom; what restrictions will be in place for cross-border travel; what controls will be in place to ensure goods are correctly charged for. - The net cost of any settlement between the UK and the EU (ie the "divorce bill"). - Whether the UK will be in the Customs Union - Whether the UK will be in the Single Market - What transitional arrangements will be in place, for whom, for how long, how they will be policed and which courts have jurisdiction. - What will happen to current EU subsidies; for how long will the EU continue to meet subsidy commitments; how will they be met - and by whom - after that time. - How flights into and out of the UK will be allowed to continue if the UK is removed from the European Single Skies Policy; or whether the UK retains membership, for how long and at what cost. - Which geographical areas within the UK will have exemptions from Brexit; and, if not, how those areas' specific social and economic requirements will be met. (Exampe: Scotland). - Which industries in the UK will have exemptions from Brexit; and, if not, how those industries' specific social and economic requirements will be met. (Example: fishing, financial services). - What levels of immigration are appropriate; how they will be policed; how UK citizens will have to prove they have the right to remain in the UK. - How we deal with the UK's exit from Euratom; who owns Euratom's physical infrastructure in the UK; who meets the cost of redundant British staff in Euratom. - Trade agreements between the UK and the EU. - Trade relationships between the UK and every country outside the EU.
(Note, this list isn't as daunting as it might appear. Because we only have to finalise agreement on the first 13 of those 14 items before March 2019. (As well as their associated votes in both Houses of Parliament and taking into account the mood, desire and aspiration of the British public).
What has been agreed - Triggering Article 50. (Although there is still disagreement as to whether it's reversible, what the article contains, whether it can be delayed, whether it can be paused, and whether triggering it was lawful in the first place).
So, we have reached half-time and it seems like we haven't made the best start. Does anyone still think we can achieve agreement on everything that's still outstanding (which is basically, everything) in the second half?
As they like to say in the EU, nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
You started it last week by asking a ludicrous question about the irish border to my joke response about being on page 2. You may love love the irish.... I have their blood in me and apart from these pages never tell anyone.
I don’t get it.
You are obviously not a stupid man. You are entitled to call yourself doctor. That takes intelligence.
What I don’t understand is why you don’t seem to understand that your overtly and blatant anti Irish posts are insulting to quite a few posters on this forum. You could make an argument in saying your posts are bordering on racism. You don’t have to be talking about people with brown faces for a comment to be racist.
Why would someone go out of their way to insult fellow lifers based on their ethnicity ?
You are obviously totally oblivious to the fact that it’s insulting or you want to insult people.
In the last week i have been called a little englander rascist and now an ignorant brexit twat. Look back over the last few pages and quote me where i have done simular.
Why do people ask me about the border when i hate my irish ancestry. As i said last week, if you don't like the answer, don't ask me the question.
What amazes me is that the remainers here call brexiters disgusting things, yet when a comment is made back, the rat pack don't like it.
Why arnt you asking those on your side why they are doing it. Bit two faced isn't it.
But why insult the Irish ?
Why not... They hate us so cant i hate them... Scots hate us welsh do... But its a crime to reciprocate.... And btw i have every reason to..... Tell me the last time an english fan donned the opposite shirt in a sports match.....
You started it last week by asking a ludicrous question about the irish border to my joke response about being on page 2. You may love love the irish.... I have their blood in me and apart from these pages never tell anyone.
I don’t get it.
You are obviously not a stupid man. You are entitled to call yourself doctor. That takes intelligence.
What I don’t understand is why you don’t seem to understand that your overtly and blatant anti Irish posts are insulting to quite a few posters on this forum. You could make an argument in saying your posts are bordering on racism. You don’t have to be talking about people with brown faces for a comment to be racist.
Why would someone go out of their way to insult fellow lifers based on their ethnicity ?
You are obviously totally oblivious to the fact that it’s insulting or you want to insult people.
In the last week i have been called a little englander rascist and now an ignorant brexit twat. Look back over the last few pages and quote me where i have done simular.
Why do people ask me about the border when i hate my irish ancestry. As i said last week, if you don't like the answer, don't ask me the question.
What amazes me is that the remainers here call brexiters disgusting things, yet when a comment is made back, the rat pack don't like it.
Why arnt you asking those on your side why they are doing it. Bit two faced isn't it.
But why insult the Irish ?
Why not... They hate us so cant i hate them... Scots hate us welsh do... But its a crime to reciprocate.... And btw i have every reason to..... Tell me the last time an english fan donned the opposite shirt in a sports match.....
You really are a bitter and sad individual. You have my sympathy. Seriously. I can’t imagine going through life with such paranoia, bile and hate for everyone.
You started it last week by asking a ludicrous question about the irish border to my joke response about being on page 2. You may love love the irish.... I have their blood in me and apart from these pages never tell anyone.
I don’t get it.
You are obviously not a stupid man. You are entitled to call yourself doctor. That takes intelligence.
What I don’t understand is why you don’t seem to understand that your overtly and blatant anti Irish posts are insulting to quite a few posters on this forum. You could make an argument in saying your posts are bordering on racism. You don’t have to be talking about people with brown faces for a comment to be racist.
Why would someone go out of their way to insult fellow lifers based on their ethnicity ?
You are obviously totally oblivious to the fact that it’s insulting or you want to insult people.
In the last week i have been called a little englander rascist and now an ignorant brexit twat. Look back over the last few pages and quote me where i have done simular.
Why do people ask me about the border when i hate my irish ancestry. As i said last week, if you don't like the answer, don't ask me the question.
What amazes me is that the remainers here call brexiters disgusting things, yet when a comment is made back, the rat pack don't like it.
Why arnt you asking those on your side why they are doing it. Bit two faced isn't it.
But why insult the Irish ?
Why not... They hate us so cant i hate them... Scots hate us welsh do... But its a crime to reciprocate.... And btw i have every reason to..... Tell me the last time an english fan donned the opposite shirt in a sports match.....
A bloke with his Welsh friends in the pub I was in this afternoon had an Australia top on.
Didn't he used to campaign for the UK to join the Eurozone? Everyone's entitled to change their mind of course. Maybe he'll change his mind back again if people stop buying his overpriced vacuums because they can't afford them.
The list that Chizz posts above indicates why many are attracted to a no deal whatsoever outcome. It is because the task is too difficult for the current batch of political morons, and they are getting urged on by many of the Brexit champions out there to do so. No deal is not a negotiating tactic, but it seems an inevitable destination, and it will be 100% down to the UK and the pathetic representatives of the UK. It is also suggested that nothing is settled until everything is settled. Really? Or maybe it is an excuse to cover the absence of progress throughout this process. The sad aspect of this is that the triumphalist braying ignorant brexiters don't seem to realise that real people are being impacted, or if they do they don't care.
Didn't he used to campaign for the UK to join the Eurozone? Everyone's entitled to change their mind of course. Maybe he'll change his mind back again if people stop buying his overpriced vacuums because they can't afford them.
I dont know, I'm just letting anyone who might be interested know that I just see he's on Marr this morning
Didn't he used to campaign for the UK to join the Eurozone? Everyone's entitled to change their mind of course. Maybe he'll change his mind back again if people stop buying his overpriced vacuums because they can't afford them.
I dont know, I'm just letting anyone who might be interested know that I just see he's on Marr this morning
Cheers. Just checked and he did want the UK to join the Euro. In fact he said it was "suicidal" for the UK not to join the Euro.
@i_b_b_o_r_g you didn't mention that Gove is on, I don't blame you, but I thought I would mention it for those who want to keep their breakfast down.
It weren't intentional Seth, I genuinely just thought that people may have been interested in listening to Dyson. I also genuinely wished I never bothered now
James Dyson says the EU are being 'incredibly unreasonable' and 'we' are being reasonable so he wants to walk away. No solution to the Irish border question from him. He is going on about 'moral duties' as well as reasonableness yet his focus is on the financials which of course is what gets him excited. He pontificates about rightness and wrongness yet avoids the moral issues in Brexit. Another self serving brexiters, to top it all he says his new car will be manufactured here or in the far east. Jobs in the UK huh for such a patriot. Moral duties my arse.
James Dyson says the EU are being 'incredibly unreasonable' and 'we' are being reasonable so he wants to walk away. No solution to the Irish border question from him. He is going on about 'moral duties' as well as reasonableness yet his focus is on the financials which of course is what gets him excited. He pontificates about rightness and wrongness yet avoids the moral issues in Brexit. Another self serving brexiters, to top it all he says his new car will be manufactured here or in the far east. Jobs in the UK huh for such a patriot. Moral duties my arse.
Why would you think that a bloke who owns a multinational company, selling his quality, fairly priced products, across the World, including Europe, is "patriotic" in a sense that he shouldn't build a car in the far East?
James Dyson says the EU are being 'incredibly unreasonable' and 'we' are being reasonable so he wants to walk away. No solution to the Irish border question from him. He is going on about 'moral duties' as well as reasonableness yet his focus is on the financials which of course is what gets him excited. He pontificates about rightness and wrongness yet avoids the moral issues in Brexit. Another self serving brexiters, to top it all he says his new car will be manufactured here or in the far east. Jobs in the UK huh for such a patriot. Moral duties my arse.
Why would you think that a bloke who owns a multinational company, selling his quality, fairly priced products, across the World, including Europe, is "patriotic" in a sense that he shouldn't build a car in the far East?
My point is that James Dyson himself brought up the concept of 'moral duty' yet he is at ease about his company exporting jobs to low wage countries rather than in the country that awarded him a knighthood. He could talk about practical expediency and that would be acceptable I suppose, but his faux patriotism is not followed up with actions. He wants to comment on the present UK crisis, to pontificates on behalf of the country that honours him, yet ultimately acting a way that is self serving by contemplating creating jobs elsewhere. If he shut up and got on with it I would find it easier to stomach, but he wants to use his position to make declarations. @E-cafc no he is not a cabinet minister, but if he goes on about reasonableness in negotiations (offering no evidence), and morality, then why not go on about reasonableness and morality regarding the border?
As for self serving. They are everywhere on both sides. The point is that the leavers won. If remainers are self serving it is irrelevant as they lost. It is about all those who voted Brexit, and lead the negotiations to justify themselves, not remainers. The job of remainers is to point out the faults of the leavers not to support the effort because remainers thought it was undesirable from the outset.
As for self serving. They are everywhere on both sides. The point is that the leavers won. If remainers are self serving it is irrelevant as they lost. It is about all those who voted Brexit, and lead the negotiations to justify themselves, not remainers. The job of remainers is to point out the faults of the leavers not to support the effort because remainers thought it was undesirable from the outset.
Many of us pointed out the many pitfalls before the vote. Now that is coming to pass, as you rightly say Seth, over to you Bexiters...
James Dyson is always interesting. I admire the company he has built (although I have no plans to buy one of his products, my 11 year old Miele is just fine). I applaud what I learnt about setting up his onw engineering university. I am less sure about how that came about - the Minister told him to do it, rather than creating policies which encourage more engineers, as Germany does.
I did not know that he had previously been pro-Euro. We can therefore add him to the list of staggering hypocrites (both in public life and on this thread) who urge Brexit on the nation.
As for Gove, words fail me. Not only was his own hypocrisy shown up, (when Marr ran the clip of what he said about Johnson in summer 2016) now that he is cosying up to Johnson again, but he has just put that poor imprisoned woman in Tehran in even more danger. When asked what she was doing in Iran he simply replied "I don't know". Since he is a Minister the Iranians will treat that as confirmation that the government does not confirm that she was on holiday. And why did he do this? All became clear as he set out a defence of Johnson's gaff. It is all the media' fault (especially the medium that found him not good enough as an employee, the BBC), because they don't "focus" on how terrible the Iranians are. He is an utterly repulsive bullying wretch of a man.
Comments
I couldn't find any reference in those 6 pages to limiting the free movement of EU citizens to the UK.
Yes there is talk of social benefit variations, but I could not find the specific point about limiting free
movement (am trying to view on tiny phone with poor network coverage).
The point was made earlier above that we already have the power to limit migration from the EU and I am interested to find out more about how this can be true.
The argument by anti-immigrant types was that too many come to the U.K. for the benefits and not to work, because in the UK they can claim benefits immediately. That is not the case in other EU countries. Sikorski points out that we could change this on our own. had we done so that would actually have helped reduce the number of non EU immigrants too.
No rationale to leave if we shadow EU rules from the outside.
What still needs to be agreed
- The status of EU citizens in the UK, UK subjects in the EU, and which courts they have reference to, to ensure their status.
- The land border between the UK and Ireland: where it will physically be; how it will be controlled and by whom; what restrictions will be in place for cross-border travel; what controls will be in place to ensure goods are correctly charged for.
- The net cost of any settlement between the UK and the EU (ie the "divorce bill").
- Whether the UK will be in the Customs Union
- Whether the UK will be in the Single Market
- What transitional arrangements will be in place, for whom, for how long, how they will be policed and which courts have jurisdiction.
- What will happen to current EU subsidies; for how long will the EU continue to meet subsidy commitments; how will they be met - and by whom - after that time.
- How flights into and out of the UK will be allowed to continue if the UK is removed from the European Single Skies Policy; or whether the UK retains membership, for how long and at what cost.
- Which geographical areas within the UK will have exemptions from Brexit; and, if not, how those areas' specific social and economic requirements will be met. (Exampe: Scotland).
- Which industries in the UK will have exemptions from Brexit; and, if not, how those industries' specific social and economic requirements will be met. (Example: fishing, financial services).
- What levels of immigration are appropriate; how they will be policed; how UK citizens will have to prove they have the right to remain in the UK.
- How we deal with the UK's exit from Euratom; who owns Euratom's physical infrastructure in the UK; who meets the cost of redundant British staff in Euratom.
- Trade agreements between the UK and the EU.
- Trade relationships between the UK and every country outside the EU.
(Note, this list isn't as daunting as it might appear. Because we only have to finalise agreement on the first 13 of those 14 items before March 2019. (As well as their associated votes in both Houses of Parliament and taking into account the mood, desire and aspiration of the British public).
What has been agreed
- Triggering Article 50. (Although there is still disagreement as to whether it's reversible, what the article contains, whether it can be delayed, whether it can be paused, and whether triggering it was lawful in the first place).
So, we have reached half-time and it seems like we haven't made the best start. Does anyone still think we can achieve agreement on everything that's still outstanding (which is basically, everything) in the second half?
Next myth please...
No deal is not a negotiating tactic, but it seems an inevitable destination, and it will be 100% down to the UK and the pathetic representatives of the UK. It is also suggested that nothing is settled until everything is settled. Really? Or maybe it is an excuse to cover the absence of progress throughout this process.
The sad aspect of this is that the triumphalist braying ignorant brexiters don't seem to realise that real people are being impacted, or if they do they don't care.
No solution to the Irish border question from him.
He is going on about 'moral duties' as well as reasonableness yet his focus is on the financials which of course is what gets him excited. He pontificates about rightness and wrongness yet avoids the moral issues in Brexit.
Another self serving brexiters, to top it all he says his new car will be manufactured here or in the far east. Jobs in the UK huh for such a patriot.
Moral duties my arse.
Also, is James Dyson a cabinet minister responsible for solving the UK/ Ireland border issue now?
He wants to comment on the present UK crisis, to pontificates on behalf of the country that honours him, yet ultimately acting a way that is self serving by contemplating creating jobs elsewhere.
If he shut up and got on with it I would find it easier to stomach, but he wants to use his position to make declarations.
@E-cafc no he is not a cabinet minister, but if he goes on about reasonableness in negotiations (offering no evidence), and morality, then why not go on about reasonableness and morality regarding the border?
I did not know that he had previously been pro-Euro. We can therefore add him to the list of staggering hypocrites (both in public life and on this thread) who urge Brexit on the nation.
As for Gove, words fail me. Not only was his own hypocrisy shown up, (when Marr ran the clip of what he said about Johnson in summer 2016) now that he is cosying up to Johnson again, but he has just put that poor imprisoned woman in Tehran in even more danger. When asked what she was doing in Iran he simply replied "I don't know". Since he is a Minister the Iranians will treat that as confirmation that the government does not confirm that she was on holiday. And why did he do this? All became clear as he set out a defence of Johnson's gaff. It is all the media' fault (especially the medium that found him not good enough as an employee, the BBC), because they don't "focus" on how terrible the Iranians are. He is an utterly repulsive bullying wretch of a man.