nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Brexit discussion thread III

ancapailldorcha

This thread is for discussing the departure of the UK from the EU. I will move some posts over shortly.

New posters, please read the forum charter before posting.

Regards,

The Politics Mods.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ancapailldorcha

According to polling by Global Future, Leave voters reject each scenario modeled by the government as it leaves them worse off than before:

https://twitter.com/IanDunt/status/986631015509749760

If it indeed comes to pass that the UK is poorer after getting an inferior trading agreement with the EU as seems to be the most likely outcome, I can see a lot of anger coming to the fore that would dwarf that seen when 4.4 million people voted for UKIP. I'm not sure how it would manifest itself in a FPTP system though.

Peregrinus

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

House of Lords votes to remain in the Customs Union - largely symbolic, but increases the likelihood of a Commons defeat on same . . .

It's more than symbolic. The EU (Withdrawal) Bill has already been through all stage in the House of Commons (which happened in January). But now, because the Lords have amended the Bill, when it is finished its passage through the Lords it has to go back to the House of Commons for further debate, which wouldn't happen if the Lords passed it without amendment.

So the House of Commons is going to have to reconsider the Bill in the light of developments since January. And these include the Labour Party's conversion to a pro-Customs Union policy, and an increasing awareness in the Tory backbenches of the problems which flow from leaving the Customs Union.

And there may yet be other developments before the Commons comes to consider the Bill again. The Lords aren't finished with it yet; they are scheduled to continue their examination (and possibly make further amendments) between now and mid-May, so it may be June or later before the Commons gets to consider this matter again.

And, of course, the other reason that it's more than symbolic is the huge majority against the government. What this means is that those who are sceptical of the Brexit the government is offering are (a) numerous and (b) active. There are still days more debate to go on in the House of Lords, and more than a hundred amendments have been put down, of which so far only 5 have been voted on. The thumping defeat the government has suffered here suggest that it may also be defeated on many more amendments. And every defeat opens up a fresh area of debate when the Bill goes back to the Commons.

Peregrinus

Anthracite wrote: »

I presume the invisible border IT project they are working on is on-budget and will be delivered within the year?

Yes indeed! It's going to be delivered in a golden carriage drawn by magical unicorns and attended by fairy godmothers.

Peregrinus

Sam Russell wrote: »

Is this in addition to the status that would pertain if the UK stayed in the EU?

Yes. It's additional borrowing that will be required in each of these scenarios, over and above the level of borrowing that would be required if the UK stayed in the EU.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Those are big numbers compared to the net payments to the EU of £10 billion per year.

These figures take account of the saving of the net UK contributions to the EU budget. In other words, under a Norway-style deal, even after whatever savings it makes on its EU budget contribution, the UK will still need to borrow an extra £17 billion, if it is to maintain current levels of expenditure.

Anthracite

The UK Home Office will sign a deal with Accenture to replace its clunky 1990s-era immigration and asylum applications system – having previously written off £347m in its last attempted overhaul.
...
Around 30 of the 85 IT systems currently used at the border will need to be replaced or updated in some way, said the Public Accounts Committee in December.

I presume the invisible border IT project they are working on is on-budget and will be delivered within the year?

ambro25

flutered wrote:

<....> luckily the irish have law and agreements on their side

And we’ve all just seen what happened with that one, with the Windrush lot.

The bit you’re looking for, is the removal of the 1999 (legacy) safeguarding clause relevant to the Windrush generations, amongst the edits to the Immigration Act 2014.

No bang, not even so much as a whimper...and here we are.

So long as the British political apparatus remains as it is, this situation won’t improve. Still less so when Brexit effects begin to bite in anger, because nothing exacerbates xenophobic sentiment like socio-economic hardship.

An Ciarraioch

Also to retain EU-derived workers' rights:

https://mobile.twitter.com/UKHouseofLords/status/986670819320442887

The BBC comments section makes the Daily Mail look tame:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43812360

An Ciarraioch

House of Lords votes to remain in the Customs Union - largely symbolic, but increases the likelihood of a Commons defeat on same:

https://mobile.twitter.com/UKHouseofLords/status/986645506683232256

flutered

Rjd2 wrote: »

That Windrush story is a scandal.
"Come over here and help us and rebuild our country and **** off"

basically, ffs even Nigel Farage thought it was to much.

And earlier we had John Mann read out rape threats of his wife from far left loons.

Where is this new party please?

the new party when and if it launches, will not be allowed to get traction

flutered

ambro25 wrote: »

The Home Office has been sending thousands of identical 'get out' letters to decades-settled EU immigrants since June 2016, just as illegally/"in error".

Though it would have been difficult for the HO to burn EU immigrants' ID cards and passports, like it allegedly did with the Windrush landing cards under May's ministerial stewardship 4 years ago or so.

Any EU and non-EU immigrant still in the UK, who can't see the font size 100, day-glo writing on the wall, urgently needs an eyesight check.

This won't get any better soon (the HO will just turn to the next target of convenience in the name of political expediency) and exiting the ECHR is next for May & Co.

firstly the irish arrived and were discriminated against, then came the blacks who were discriminated against, next on the list were the poles, nowdays its is the romanians, luckily the irish have law and agreements on their side, will the poles and romanians exscape because of the eu having a say after brexit, or will in the event of a hard brexit will they find themselves in the same boat that the blacks are now in

Sam Russell

J Mysterio wrote: »

I'm fairly shocked that they 'decided' to destroy vital documents which are so important to peoples lives, be it 2009 or 2010.

An absolute disgrace. I'm sure there have been deportations already. Institutional discrimination against people who helped to build Britain.

TM was certainly responsible for the 'hostile environment' for immigrants. It was her watch that had the @Go Home' vans going around collecting people for deportation.

She also referred to the Tory party as 'The Nasty Party' at a party conference - never truer words.

LuckyLloyd

J Mysterio wrote: »

I'm fairly shocked that they 'decided' to destroy vital documents which are so important to peoples lives, be it 2009 or 2010.

An absolute disgrace. I'm sure there have been deportations already. Institutional discrimination against people who helped to build Britain.

It's been demonstrated numerous times before that institutional discrimination is very much the British way. You yourself will be very familiar with Hillsborough in that regard.

J Mysterio

I'm fairly shocked that they 'decided' to destroy vital documents which are so important to peoples lives, be it 2009 or 2010.

An absolute disgrace. I'm sure there have been deportations already. Institutional discrimination against people who helped to build Britain.

Capt'n Midnight

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm still thinking about my own future here. I'd ruled a return to Ireland out years ago but it's something I find myself thinking more and more about.

The 2014 immigration act which caused this only had 18 MP's vote against it so anyone expecting Labour to be the heroes here are in for disappointment:

Landing cards are not proof of residency , but they were proof you landed before the deadline.

Theresa May has said the decision to destroy the landing cards of Windrush migrants was taken under Labour.

The prime minister told MPs she was not home secretary when the move was approved, saying it happened in 2009.
...
Labour has disputed her claim, saying the Home Office had said on Tuesday that the decision was taken in 2010 -

57,000 non-nationals arrived before 1971. If they are citizens then their children are too. If not ....

And the paper records are gone.

And future IT systems do not inspire confidence.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/04/12/uk_government_immigration_database/

The UK Home Office will sign a deal with Accenture to replace its clunky 1990s-era immigration and asylum applications system – having previously written off £347m in its last attempted overhaul.
...
Around 30 of the 85 IT systems currently used at the border will need to be replaced or updated in some way, said the Public Accounts Committee in December.

Accenture, Capgemini, Deloitte creating app to register 3m EU nationals living in Brexit Britain

He estimated the cost would be relatively low for a government IT project, at around £10m-£15m. "I guess the complexity will be integrating with other databases," he added.

LOL

Just to put all the above in perspective. Captia got the contract for the Recruitment Partnership Project for the UK Military. It's cost £1.3 Billion and last year 6,060 were recruited.

Zubeneschamali

J Mysterio wrote: »

I don't quite understand i'm afraid...

The report lists the costs in 3 terms: billions extra in borrowing per year, millions per week (£262m £877m £1.25bn £615m), and then the total per year as a percentage of the annual NHS budget.

The reason for putting it in those terms is, I think, for comparison with the side-of-the-bus figure from the referendum campaign.

J Mysterio

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Each figure below represents the percentage of the NHS budget that equates to the cost of Brexit by type

I don't quite understand i'm afraid...

Professor Moriarty

J Mysterio wrote: »

All that money that could be spent on the NHS.

Each figure below represents the percentage of the NHS budget that equates to the cost of Brexit by type:

Norway: 9%
Canada: 31%
WTO: 44%
Bespoke: 22%

J Mysterio

Senior British and EU officials will discuss the UK’s future relationship with the European Union for the first time on Wednesday, in a milestone for the Brexit talks.

More than a year after the government triggered article 50, British and EU negotiators will meet across a table to discuss the UK’s future trade ties.

The talks will be mostly limited to a formal presentation on the negotiating guidelines agreed by EU leaders in March, as well as setting a schedule for future meetings. Nonetheless, it is a significant moment for the UK, 10 months after the Brexit secretary, David Davis, was forced to bow to the EU’s timetable, having previously promised the “row of the summer”.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/apr/18/brexit-first-talks-on-uks-future-relationship-with-eu-begin

J Mysterio

Sam Russell wrote: »

Is this in addition to the status that would pertain if the UK stayed in the EU?

Those are big numbers compared to the net payments to the EU of £10 billion per year.

All that money that could be spent on the NHS.

Rjd2

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Aren't those the exact Labour MPs you are always complaining about being too extreme and left wing to ever be in Goverrnment? Including Jeremy Corbyn that you think is so useless?

You yourself prefer the bit of the Labour Party that voted for this mess.

Not exactly a stellar week for Corbyn and his disciples also. FFS a man read out rape threats his wife received yesterday. Lucinda Berger's speech Yesterday was incredibly bleak.

Zubeneschamali

Sam Russell wrote: »

Those are big numbers compared to the net payments to the EU of £10 billion per year.

Worth every penny for blue passports and wonky fruit and veg.

Sam Russell

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Headline numbers, Additional net borrowing each year by 2033-34

Norway: £17bn
Canada: £57bn
WTO rules: £81bn
May's preferred deal:£40bn

Is this in addition to the status that would pertain if the UK stayed in the EU?

Those are big numbers compared to the net payments to the EU of £10 billion per year.

Zubeneschamali

wes wrote: »

Another report on how every Brexit possibility will leave the UK poorer:

Each Brexit scenario will leave Britain worse off, study finds

Headline numbers, Additional net borrowing each year by 2033-34

Norway: £17bn
Canada: £57bn
WTO rules: £81bn
May's preferred deal:£40bn

Enzokk

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

From here. Here's a list:

Also:

It was a bit of a rhetorical question. I was trying to point out that those that voted against it are being actively plotted against by some in the party. Also, the fact that Jeremy Corbyn went against the whip multiple times is used against him, yet when it is for a vote like this it is glossed over.

ancapailldorcha

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Aren't those the exact Labour MPs you are always complaining about being too extreme and left wing to ever be in Goverrnment? Including Jeremy Corbyn that you think is so useless?

You yourself prefer the bit of the Labour Party that voted for this mess.

Few supporters of any party would support every last letter in their manifesto along with absolutely everything they actually do.

Zubeneschamali

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The 2014 immigration act which caused this only had 18 MP's vote against it so anyone expecting Labour to be the heroes here are in for disappointment:

Aren't those the exact Labour MPs you are always complaining about being too extreme and left wing to ever be in Goverrnment? Including Jeremy Corbyn that you think is so useless?

You yourself prefer the bit of the Labour Party that voted for this mess.

J Mysterio

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm still thinking about my own future here. I'd ruled a return to Ireland out years ago but it's something I find myself thinking more and more about.

The 2014 immigration act which caused this only had 18 MP's vote against it so anyone expecting Labour to be the heroes here are in for disappointment:

https://twitter.com/AllyFogg/status/986528249651126273

A poll released today showed two thirds of those canvassed thought Labour had a problem with 'prejudice'. If Labour has a problem, the conservatives are riddled.

ancapailldorcha

Enzokk wrote: »

But who were those that voted against it? We have an internal Labour fight where lots of people want to get rid of the likes of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell and Dianne Abbott, yet they were the ones to vote against the act. People would rather see those that abstained take control in the Labour party. So is it any wonder Labour under Milliband was so soundly defeated at the polls. They were just Tories light but Milliband doesn't look like Cameron. But it doesn't seem like either Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn will be fit to lead. So what the hell now?

From here. Here's a list:

Abbott, Ms Diane

Edwards, Jonathan

Lazarowicz, Mark

Leech, Mr John

Llwyd, rh Mr Elfyn

Lucas, Caroline

MacNeil, Mr Angus Brendan

Mactaggart, Fiona

McDonnell, John

Robertson, Angus

Skinner, Mr Dennis

Teather, Sarah

Ward, Mr David

Weir, Mr Mike

Whiteford, Dr Eilidh

Wishart, Pete

Also:

Tellers for the Noes:

Jeremy Corbyn

and

Hywel Williams

Leroy42

Wes, I'm not even going to read it, not because I don't care, but because it doesn't matter.

Those in favour of Brexit will either dismiss any report as biased, or state that it fails to take account of the massive opportunities waiting for the UK once it leaves. Possibly both.

They have comforted themselves that any due to Brexit, even if it does happen, will be short lived and easily replaced by trade deals that the UK is working on. The fact that the UK government have been shown to be completely unprepared and unable to handle Brexit doesn't seem to extend to the thinking that maybe they are not best placed to negotiate these amazing deals.

What I do think will happen is that trade deals will be struck, as they will need to look they are winning. The devil, of course, will be in the detail. With, I suspect massive relaxation of regulations, immigration increases from certain countries and other stuff that is actually against what the UK people wanted but will be sold off in order to secure a win

Enzokk

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I'm still thinking about my own future here. I'd ruled a return to Ireland out years ago but it's something I find myself thinking more and more about.

The 2014 immigration act which caused this only had 18 MP's vote against it so anyone expecting Labour to be the heroes here are in for disappointment:

https://twitter.com/AllyFogg/status/986528249651126273

But who were those that voted against it? We have an internal Labour fight where lots of people want to get rid of the likes of Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell and Dianne Abbott, yet they were the ones to vote against the act. People would rather see those that abstained take control in the Labour party. So is it any wonder Labour under Milliband was so soundly defeated at the polls. They were just Tories light but Milliband doesn't look like Cameron. But it doesn't seem like either Theresa May or Jeremy Corbyn will be fit to lead. So what the hell now?