Brexit discussion thread XIV (Please read OP before posting)

20silkcut

Sam Russell wrote: »

I had forgotten about India.

I think they would accept more Indian immigration because a lot of the Indian people tend to vote Tory anyway. However, other Tory voters might not like it, but who would those voters transfer to - hardly Labour, or Lord Buckethead - but you never know.

Could brexit be more of a symptom of anti Slav sentiment. A very real phenomenon on continental Europe for centuries. Western European’s and Slavs don’t tend to mix well. Britain was obviously exposed to a surge in Eastern European migration post 2004.

Sam Russell

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

That immigration will increase. For example, India has made it very clear that a trade deal will depend on increased access to the UK by Indians. Regarding your question, you would have to ask the anti-immigration Brexiteer voters.

I would but who do I ask?

Not one Brexiteer voter will admit to being anti-immigration from outside the EU because that would be racist, and anyway they all realised that control of such immigration was already within the control of the EU.

Besides they all voted based on the big red bus.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

The realities of increased immigration from India due to trade deals for instance. If UKIP wants to make a come back, they can start right there. It is not possible that increased immigration from outside Europe won't have an impact on Brexit voters' opinion of the Tories - especially those who were told that immigration would be controlled by Brexit and voted Leave for that very reason.

Can you be more specific? I honestly don't know what realities you're referring to.

I've shown more than once over these 14 threads that the places with the least migrants were the ones who voted to leave the EU.

If UKIP makes a comeback, it'll be as nothing. With the migrant Mediterranean crisis, Cameron and the Greek fiscal crisis/crises going on, all they could do was win two by-elections and one seat in 2015.

ancapailldorcha

Sam Russell wrote: »

I would but who do I ask?

Not one Brexiteer voter will admit to being anti-immigration from outside the EU because that would be racist, and anyway they all realised that control of such immigration was already within the control of the EU.

Besides they all voted based on the big red bus.

I've met several. I assure you, based on my experience the bigger problem is enduring the pontificating, smugness, idiocy and arrogance long enough to ask the question.

Sam Russell

20silkcut wrote: »

Could brexit be more of a symptom of anti Slav sentiment. A very real phenomenon on continental Europe for centuries. Western European’s and Slavs don’t tend to mix well. Britain was obviously exposed to a surge in Eastern European migration post 2004.

Poles are not Slavs.

In WW II they quite liked the Poles as they flew Spitfires against the Germans - quite well. They were quite popular - at least those that settled after the war. You could not tell they were polish at all.

It was the Polish plumbers talking Polish and taking the jobs of the unemployed Brits they disliked, and they were better at plumbing and worked harder - that is what they had against them. It was not racist at all.

Professor Moriarty

Sam Russell wrote: »

I would but who do I ask?

Not one Brexiteer voter will admit to being anti-immigration from outside the EU because that would be racist, and anyway they all realised that control of such immigration was already within the control of the EU.

Besides they all voted based on the big red bus.

No they won't admit it. Just to reiterate, while the big stupid red bus was a factor, the biggest reason for voting Leave was immigration. Ramek from Poland has moved out from next door and will be replaced by Ramesh from India. Don't know whether they will think that to be a good or a bad thing.

ancapailldorcha

20silkcut wrote: »

Could brexit be more of a symptom of anti Slav sentiment. A very real phenomenon on continental Europe for centuries. Western European’s and Slavs don’t tend to mix well. Britain was obviously exposed to a surge in Eastern European migration post 2004.

I wouldn't say so. There are various reasons for anti-slav sentiment in central and eastern Europe but through sheer lack of contact if nothing else, I think I can see that the simplest explanation for what we see here in the UK is just good old xenophobia.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Can you be more specific? I honestly don't know what realities you're referring to.

People from Asia moving in down the street. Taking jobs. 'Imposing' their culture on the community.

I've shown more than once over these 14 threads that the places with the least migrants were the ones who voted to leave the EU.

Yet, according to the Economist, in the areas where there was a 200% increase in immigration between 2001-2014, 94% of those areas voted Leave.

If UKIP makes a comeback, it'll be as nothing. With the migrant Mediterranean crisis, Cameron and the Greek fiscal crisis/crises going on, all they could do was win two by-elections and one seat in 2015.

But it's not the seats they take that are the problem, it's the percentage they shave off the Tory vote.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

People from Asia moving in down the street. Taking jobs. 'Imposing' their culture on the community.

This is already the case, no? The UK is a modern, multicultural nation, a fact belied by the fact that the government won an overwhelming mandate from just over 40% of the vote.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Yet, according to the Economist, in the areas where there was a 200% increase in immigration between 2001-2014, 94% of those areas voted Leave.

That's a little bit of a crude metric. If you have 10 Poles in area X and another 10 move in then you've a 100% increase in the number of Poles but the raw number is quite small. Good newspaper headline, not so good for anything else.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

But it's not the seats they take that are the problem, it's the percentage they shave off the Tory vote.

Suits me. The Tories could use the competition and Labour need some form of help.

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

This is already the case, no? The UK is a modern, multicultural nation, a fact belied by the fact that the government won an overwhelming mandate from just over 40% of the vote.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic here!

That's a little bit of a crude metric. If you have 10 Poles in area X and another 10 move in then you've a 100% increase in the number of Poles but the raw number is quite small. Good newspaper headline, not so good for anything else.

TBF, The Economist doesn't go in for headline grabbing. That fact illustrates that where immigration was significant for 14 years to 2014, those places overwhelmingly voted Leave. Another illustration of the reality that immigration was the primary factor for voting leave.

Suits me. The Tories could use the competition and Labour need some form of help.

You and me.

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Not sure if you're being sarcastic here!

Not remotely.

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

TBF, The Economist doesn't go in for headline grabbing. That fact illustrates that where immigration was significant for 14 years to 2014, those places overwhelmingly voted Leave. Another illustration of the reality that immigration was the primary factor for voting leave.

I wouldn't read it if it did. This isn't my point. My point is that places here with more immigrants were more likely to vote remain. Anyone who'd be complaining about too many Indians in the event of increased migration from India was probably already complaining to begin with.

And immigration was top concern for only 33% of the leave vote along with 49% for sovereignty. It's important but not the primary driver.

The problem with actually leaving the EU is now the Tories have to eat everything that comes at them without their continental scapegoat. It's a bit like the BBC except they went too far with the EU.

If, for the sake of argument, between now and 2030 one million Indians come here and there is opprobrium about it, it'll be directed at the government. Control over borders was seized and this is the result. If UKIP does see a resurgence as a result, then what? The UK will fulminate against a deal it negotiated, signed & paraded around as proof of the triumph of global Britain? How is that different from now?

Professor Moriarty

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Not remotely.



I would read it if it did. This isn't my point. My point is that places here with more immigrants were more likely to vote remain. Anyone who'd be complaining about too many Indians in the event of increased migration from India was probably already complaining to begin with.

And immigration was top concern for only 33% of the leave vote along with 49% for sovereignty. It's important but not the primary driver.

The problem with actually leaving the EU is now the Tories have to eat everything that comes at them without their continental scapegoat. It's a bit like the BBC except they went too far with the EU.

If, for the sake of argument, between now and 2030 one million Indians come here and there is opprobrium about it, it'll be directed at the government. Control over borders was seized and this is the result. If UKIP does see a resurgence as a result, then what? The UK will fulminate against a deal it negotiated, signed & paraded around as proof of the triumph of global Britain? How is that different from now?

As you say, it will be directed at the government. And that will have an effect on their support. Increased immigration, plus other negatives from Brexit that will emerge over the years, will damage Tory support. That's the difference, apart from the vaccine bump they got, there is little to be cheerful about now that Brexit is done. Then there is 'frictionless trade' with the EU. And the City of London. Et cetera.

Even in the past few days, Frost pointing to the 12th July as a target date for the EU to back down tells you everything you need to know about how well the fabulous Brexit is going. Immigration is just a significant part of their looming problems. Things will be very different for the Tories in 2030.

Lemming

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

My point is that places here with more immigrants were more likely to vote remain. Anyone who'd be complaining about too many Indians in the event of increased migration from India was probably already complaining to begin with.

To quote a former neighbour of mine that I would occasionally see in the apartment block corridor when I first moved to - and lived in - Rotherham in South Yorkshire; "there's too many immigrants", and then upon my mentioned that I'm an immigrant he gestured by way of a nod of his head in the direction of the apartment in which a young Asian family (I think Indian) had moved into and said "I mean brown people. You're alright" (read "white and speak English").

Rotherham; that sunny cosmopolitan melting pot of international culture ...

fash

Joe_ Public wrote: »

There was talk of a £1bn boost in trade with india recently so that'd be another 0.05% or so if it happens. They seem to be investing quite some energy in that direction anyway, given their apparent reluctance to add india to the travel red list initially. The other side of all this is what kind of add ons come with these deals in terms of immigration opportunities etc.

That was a one off investment (of which there have been many in the past of larger volume, and do you not need to be outside the EU to do) - not an ongoing trade deal.

fash

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Given that this is a Tory Brexit, increased immigration from India might not be the best optics. A third of Brexit voters said that their primary reason for voting Leave was to control immigration.

Yeah but they no longer care because they haven't been told to care by the tabloids

looksee

Edwin Poots has said that the NI protocol needs to be removed https://www.rte.ie/news/ulster/2021/0518/1222327-edwin-poots/ but he isn't being very forthcoming about what the alternative should be.

Incoming DUP leader Edwin Poots has said the Northern Ireland Protocol needs to be removed as it's "hugely damaging to all of the people of Northern Ireland".

He urged the Irish Government to use "common sense" and draw back from the position they have adopted.

Speaking to RTÉ News, Mr Poots said he does not mean there should be flexibilities and mitigations "as flexibilities and mitigations don't cut it".


He said the EU has said it wanted to help Northern Ireland but now that "Northern Ireland has been removed from the union as a result of Brexit", it is not really suitable for the EU "to be harming the people of Northern Ireland who it has sought to help".

Fionn1952

looksee wrote: »

Edwin Poots has said that the NI protocol needs to be removed https://www.rte.ie/news/ulster/2021/0518/1222327-edwin-poots/ but he isn't being very forthcoming about what the alternative should be.

He's perfectly clear! Sunshine, rainbows and trusting the Brits to operate in good faith should be perfectly acceptable assurance for the dastardly EU.

BonnieSituation

looksee wrote: »

Edwin Poots has said that the NI protocol needs to be removed https://www.rte.ie/news/ulster/2021/0518/1222327-edwin-poots/ but he isn't being very forthcoming about what the alternative should be.

He obviously laid out very clearly how it's damaging to ALL of the people of the North?

ancapailldorcha

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

As you say, it will be directed at the government. And that will have an effect on their support. Increased immigration, plus other negatives from Brexit that will emerge over the years, will damage Tory support. That's the difference, apart from the vaccine bump they got, there is little to be cheerful about now that Brexit is done. Then there is 'frictionless trade' with the EU. And the City of London. Et cetera.

Even in the past few days, Frost pointing to the 12th July as a target date for the EU to back down tells you everything you need to know about how well the fabulous Brexit is going. Immigration is just a significant part of their looming problems. Things will be very different for the Tories in 2030.

Increased immigration is basically a given though. We've seen fruit going rotten and various sectors struggling to recruit. The immigration debate was always warped well beyond the point of being fit-for-purpose because EU migrants are net contributors and non-EU migrants are getting in by accruing sufficient points on the immigration system. If immigration was a problem then cutting non-EU migration to zero would have gone a long, long way towards fixing it. Of course, it wasn't the problem because the problem was successive governments denuding the state and then pinning the blame on migrants and the EU.

Lemming wrote: »

To quote a former neighbour of mine that I would occasionally see in the apartment block corridor when I first moved to - and lived in - Rotherham in South Yorkshire; "there's too many immigrants", and then upon my mentioned that I'm an immigrant he gestured by way of a nod of his head in the direction of the apartment in which a young Asian family (I think Indian) had moved into and said "I mean brown people. You're alright" (read "white and speak English").

Rotherham; that sunny cosmopolitan melting pot of international culture ...

I got the "you're the right kind of immigrant" shtick in a medical device firm in Oxfordshire. I'm not denying xenophobia exists but I think that British society is more liberal, dynamic and diverse than the country's warped politics would suggest.

Alun

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I got the "you're the right kind of immigrant" shtick in a medical device firm in Oxfordshire. I'm not denying xenophobia exists but I think that British society is more liberal, dynamic and diverse than the country's warped politics would suggest.

I got exactly the same when I lived in the Netherlands, so unfortunately it's something not unique to the UK.

Joe_ Public

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Increased immigration is basically a given though. We've seen fruit going rotten and various sectors struggling to recruit. The immigration debate was always warped well beyond the point of being fit-for-purpose because EU migrants are net contributors and non-EU migrants are getting in by accruing sufficient points on the immigration system. If immigration was a problem then cutting non-EU migration to zero would have gone a long, long way towards fixing it. Of course, it wasn't the problem because the problem was successive governments denuding the state and then pinning the blame on migrants and the EU.



I got the "you're the right kind of immigrant" shtick in a medical device firm in Oxfordshire. I'm not denying xenophobia exists but I think that British society is more liberal, dynamic and diverse than the country's warped politics would suggest.

Indeed and there are multiple surveys and polls to all but confirm this. There was a you gov poll doing the rounds over past couple of days in which 60% of respondents didnt understand what the term "woke" meant, yet if you were to judge from the msm, you'd swear people across the uk cared about little else right now. There's a very neat and insidious conjuring trick going on where the left/centre left gets mocked for obsessing about issues that, in fact, are being continuously stoked up by the right.

Lemming

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I got the "you're the right kind of immigrant" shtick in a medical device firm in Oxfordshire. I'm not denying xenophobia exists but I think that British society is more liberal, dynamic and diverse than the country's warped politics would suggest.

The point I was making, perhaps not quite so obviously, was that Rotherham is not exactly known to be a hotbed of immigration in general, which fits in with your comments regards areas of immigration being more supportive of it than areas that were not. Rotherham is - or was a few years ago - considered to be part of the geographical triangle (to include Doncaster & Barnsley) that comprised the "last stronghold" of the BNP. At the time I lived there there was a BNP member sitting on Rotherham council too.

I picked up on quite a bit of undertones of racism & xenophobia in and around those parts over the years I lived there; some of it was from people who were just social planks and not exactly self-aware/critical rather than being purposefully malicious. That being said, I also agree that I found Britain to be more liberal & diverse than Ireland (current political Brexit insanity not-withstanding) and I met more people who were friendly and open in Rotherham than I did people who espoused racist commentary. Leeds even more so, and Sheffield sits in between the two.

I've found Yorkshire in general to be quite welcoming by all accounts of English stand-offishness, but the folks around these parts are known for being blunt with a capital B, so when you hear racism it is often aired openly, which I suppose makes it all the more jarring to encounter.

Alun wrote: »

I got exactly the same when I lived in the Netherlands, so unfortunately it's something not unique to the UK.

Sadly not unique at all; plenty to be found in Ireland too. "Ireland for the Irish", spoken by a woman I used to know in response to seeing one of her friends being chatted up by a polish lad in Bruxelles bar in Dublin.

BonnieSituation

Lemming wrote: »

Sadly not unique at all; plenty to be found in Ireland too. "Ireland for the Irish", spoken by a woman I used to know in response to seeing one of her friends being chatted up by a polish lad in Bruxelles bar in Dublin.

There's a lot to unpack in that night out!

I guess it all depends on which room downstairs ye were in. :P

---

That being said, The Bruxelles of Rotherham can accept patrons this weekend, and ours can't. Which is a shame.

Christy42

correct horse battery staple wrote: »

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/17/uk-proposes-phasing-in-irish-sea-border-checks-on-food-brexit

Remember all the Brexiteers who crawled out of woodwork when some Eu beuracrat mentioned article16 and got promptly slapped down.

What they make of Frost wanting to tear up whole agreement and hoping Eu won’t notice

As long as no one in the EU can speak English they are free and clear. This is beyond toddler petulance at this point. They make a deal and then break it 5 seconds later. I am sure in a specific manner obviously.

The Raging Bile Duct

Christy42 wrote: »

As long as no one in the EU can speak English they are free and clear. This is beyond toddler petulance at this point. They make a deal and then break it 5 seconds later. I am sure in a specific manner obviously.

It is way beyond toddler petulance now. They are negotiating with Loyalist paramilitaries and stoking massive divisions in Northern Ireland. Picking the 12th of July as the date for the end of the Protocol is two fingers up to the notion that they care about peace on this island.

pixelburp

The memoirs and tell-alls from the EU side will be fascinating in years to come; it must be such a point of constant and unending frustration that the other side of the table operates with a blatant disregard for adult reality, let alone civility. You'd have to speculate that even trade negotiations with the flakiest, tinpot developing nations haven't been as loopy & idiotic as Brexit: belatedly come to a deal after toddler levels of resistance; declare victory against those pesky Euros; turn around and decide the deal is now terrible and the EU sucks for trying to fool you into implementing it in the first place.

And yet if the EU were to turn around and declare "FFS you morons", translated into diplomatic tongue, it would be the UK that would pivot to the Sealion Defence and act aghast 'dem Brussels types would behave in such aggressive, immature fashion.

Joe_ Public

pixelburp wrote: »

The memoirs and tell-alls from the EU side will be fascinating in years to come; it must be such a point of constant and unending frustration that the other side of the table operates with a blatant disregard for adult reality, let alone civility. You'd have to speculate that even trade negotiations with the flakiest, tinpot developing nations haven't been as loopy & idiotic as Brexit: belatedly come to a deal after toddler levels of resistance; declare victory against those pesky Euros; turn around and decide the deal is now terrible and the EU sucks for trying to fool you into implementing it in the first place.

And yet if the EU were to turn around and declare "FFS you morons", translated into diplomatic tongue, it would be the UK that would pivot to the Sealion Defence and act aghast 'dem Brussels types would behave in such aggressive, immature fashion.

I think some of those on the uk side would be equally fascinating. Olly Robins, for instance, would have a really good perspective on the initial formative stage of the negotiations but I'm not sure of the protocol around former civil servants spilling the beans so may be a while, if ever, before we'd see such a tome.

Sam Russell

London's 'Golden Age' as Europe's financial capital is over, says NatWest chairman

The City of London's "Golden Age" as Europe's financial capital is over following Brexit, but it will remain a major and profitable centre, NatWest chairman Howard Davies said today.

The City has been largely cut off from the EU since Britain's full departure last December, with bankers and City officials not expecting any direct access to the bloc anytime soon.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2021/0518/1222371-natwest-on-city-of-london/

RTE reporting that NAT West chairman says CoL financial is blocked from the EU since Jan and their leadership in Europe is over but they will still be profitable.

I presume that means smaller.

VinLieger

Im seething with anger over this

https://www.thejournal.ie/loyalists-to-westminster-committee-5441327-May2021/

Whatever about the rampant entitled idiocy they all spew from the mouths, like exploring Ireland and the UK being in a seperate customs union, the idea that paramilitary leaders can meet openly with government reps is just disgusting. As someone mentioned in the journal comments imagine if the headline was "Leaders from the IRA, INLA and Continuity IRA are meeting directly with TDs".

schmoo2k

VinLieger wrote: »

Im seething with anger over this

https://www.thejournal.ie/loyalists-to-westminster-committee-5441327-May2021/

Whatever about the rampant entitled idiocy they all spew from the mouths, like exploring Ireland and the UK being in a seperate customs union, the idea that paramilitary leaders can meet openly with government reps is just disgusting. As someone mentioned in the journal comments imagine if the headline was "Leaders from the IRA, INLA and Continuity IRA are meeting directly with TDs".

At least their anger appears to be directed in the correct direction.

I don't mind exploring ROI joining the UK "global" market - could have a simple vote on the entire Island? (I suspect I know how that would go)