Brexit discussion thread XII (Please read OP before posting)

boring accountant wrote: »

That's a reasonable view. Personally, I don't believe the current problems facing the EU (trade, climate change, populism, technology) will be solved through the current system. The current commission is making some good noises in the right direction, but in order to really deliver the EU needs real leadership. So far the only real leader in the EU is Macron. Germany has a leadership vacuum at the moment. We can't be dependent on internal politics of France and Germany for leadership. I think for consistency of leadership there needs to be real leadership from the Commission itself, and the only way to achieve that is through direct elections.

I don't think the EU is facing a problem when it comes to trade, it is a world powerhouse in that area. Both the US and UK have seen their political systems damage their trade position with Trump needlessly engageing in useless trade wars, and the UK inflicting Brexit upon itself.
What is the advantage of the US/UK system when it comes to climate change? The US does not even recognise it as a problem and has left the Paris Agreement. The UK is not exactly blazing a trail in the area either.

The EU does not depend on strong men to deliver change. It is a politically directed technocracy, its aims and direction are set by the political leadership but where it excells is in the detailed techincal work that political leader dominated systems like the US ignore. Both the US and the UK have failed spectacularly to tackle populism and their political systems have been captured by the populists. Europe faces the same challenge, but so far its way of doing things has proven to be far better adpeted to face up to that challenge. As for technology, I am not sure what you mean. In what way is Europe facing a technology problem?

The European system delvers consistancy, unlike the US where you get massive overnight policy swings from Democrat to Republicen administrations which replace not only the political but also the administrative leadership, or the huge policy swings in the UK from Labour to Conservative government. In the EU, you have consensus based coalition government in which the centre holds sway and extreme changes or policy swings are rare.

In three of the areas you have idenfitied, the European system seems to be doing better than the US/UK system you extoll. The EU works because it is not dominated by devicive politics or the cult of leadership that thinks the man at the top is more important than the culture of the organisation, the systems they oversee or the competance of the people working for them.

CelticRambler wrote: »

That's why I used the term "effective". The number of youngsters in Ireland who start secondary school thinking that they'll quit after the Junior Cert is minimal compared to the UK, where it's perfectly normal not just to plan to leave after doing GCSEs, but to still be citing them as part of your school-leaving qualifications five and ten years later.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2007/oct/03/schools.uk1

People will cite them if it's all they have. However if you leave with just GCSEs you've cut your lifetime earnings by about 50%. I haven't found a similar breakdown for Ireland though. I would be curious too!

As always, normal does not mean it's either good nor beneficial. I'd be trying to understand why people are leaving early and address the underlying problem. They're doing a serious disservice to themselves (broadly speaking)

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

The decay in the bonds holding the union together means that PR is unlikely to save it without further measures, namely significant political reform alongside a very soft Brexit to minimise any economic distress.

PR won't change the nature or system of government. The executive still retains the power, just more likely under a coalition led by Tories or Labour.

PR doesn't address the elephant in the room.. the power of the executive.

Fogmatic wrote: »

In these recent weeks the mainland UK media seems to have gone quiet about Ireland (let alone how the demands of the borders involved will supposedly be reconciled). Is that just because I don't see much of that media, or is the elephant in the room now universal over there?

If the latter, I'm not surprised if most of them don't care about Ireland, as somebody said here. Who has the time (plus the cynicism) to discover current affairs that the popular media may be glossing over?

Before anyone gets hot under the collar, I'm not taking sides here. (Manipulated news does leavers a disservice too!).

There is nothing more to say on the Irish issue, Johnson's withdrawal agreement solves it. When it becomes a concluded International treaty on January 31st, the front stop arrangements will have the force of law and the Irish aspect of Brexit will be concluded.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I love the way when the UK has 1.2% annual growth its strong, when Germany has growth of 1.2% its stagnating and when Ireland has growth rate of 5.6% it can be safely ignored. The one good thing about Brexit is that it allows people to say things like that

We're just back from a week in t'UK, spent Xmas at my mother-in-law near Sheffield.

I can't say I saw much evidence of that percent growth. It might have been the weather (truly dire for the entire week), but the place felt even more of a pit than when we last visited around Easter (there will be a post or two about that in an earlier instance of the Brexit threads). Most roads now worthy of a third world country, and measurably less new cars around on them. More than half of city centres stores boarded up in Worksop, Dinnington, Rotherham. Truly grim.

Whoever still argues that consequences are 'unknown' because "Brexit hasn't happened yet" (ie a prorogation of the Project Fear arguments of old), should have a quiet word with Kent folks who use the M20 on their commute. Must be fun to travel all those miles of motorway coned and cement-barrier'd off for Operation Brock at 40-50 under average speed cams, day after day after day (since Easter at least).

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

In the second link maybe, but in the first, no. But hes also saying thatthe time of nation states is over. Im not sure thats the right message

But it's true. There was a time before nation states. There will be stone after them and after that. Some day in the far future we will leave this planet and by then nation states will be a distant memory. You have to get there somehow and it's going to be through regional superpowers.

Libb1964 wrote: »

I hate to be pedantic but GCSE grades A*to C are the equivalent of Ordinary level in the Leaving.

A-levels are a slightly higher level than Higher level in the Leaving cert.

Grades D-G at GCSE level are the same as the Junior certificate.

The information can be found on the European Commissions website explaining the Qualification Framework which is used by all countries within the EU to understand the different qualifications people have when applying for jobs in other EU countries.
This chart will be of no use to the UK once they leave!!!

I do agree with you that Ireland has an education system that produces a much
better overall standard and is also more inclusive.

There's about as much chance of a GCSE being the same as a leaving cert as a three week old bread not being mouldy. Pedantic or not. There's no proof of this and the educational outcome stands to attest to that .

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Its probably all in London and thats the growth rate for last year. But yeah, the problem we have in Ireland where there is high growth but many people dont feel it is probably worse in the UK

(...)

Keep in mind that the area I was referring to, is one of those electing-a-donkey-with-a-red-rosette-for-generations recently turned blue at the 2019GE.

Topically with the recent aside about education and conparisons, my kid took the opportunity of visiting her old secondary school in Retford (North Notts), on their last day before the Xmas break.

Now for background, she entered the Luxembourgish educational system mid-year last year (March '18), in a brand new international (state) school with multingual streams, dispensing the Luxembourgish curriculum towards the European Baccalaureate. That means 4 languages (3 official Lux: Lux, German, French; plus English) at once, with a 5th starting next year (choice of approx.17, including mainstays like Mandarin, Japanese, Soanish, Portuguese etc.).

The curriculum is geared so that kids in the English stream get taught maths, history, etc. in English, and all the foreign languages in the actual language. Starting the 2nd year, they then get taught maths, history, etc. in their 'first' foreign language (French, for my kid). No more teaching in English (besides English language classes). The year after, in the 'second' foreign language (German, for my kid).

Her Brit (ex-) teachers couldn't believe it. Nor how far ahead she's got, academically, relative to her mock GCSE sitting (ex-) classmates. But I can tell you it's been quite the slog for her (and I mean in terms of homework and regular weekly exams, rather than adaptation/levelling up to her new schooling environment), relative to the Brit learning pace.

CelticRambler wrote: »

I wouldn't be too sure that the "Irish" special relationship with the US will stand up to the challenge posed by a Brexiting Britain, for the simple reason that many of those self-identifying Irish are of Scottish Presbyterian decent (like Trump). The Irish Catholics in the US are very vocal and make a name for themselves, but the Scottish Presbyterians are the ones who repeatedly get into power and pull the political levers. Much will depend on what the native Scots decide to do in the next half-decade, particularly if they engineer a conflict with England/Westminster over the right to hold a second referendum. We might well see a Stateside proxy war flare up, as the Presbyterians pushing US negotiators to maintain UK unity face off against Irish Republicans and Scottish Independentists.

That is something I did not anticipate. I have often wondered what the US would do when they are weighing irish, scottish and english nationalisms. I suspect the special relationship with England would win out, but it is just an assumption