Brexit is off ?

fatcat posted:

Eloise posted:

My understanding is that the Electoral Commission* have investigated both sides but found only the Leave side have used "undue influence" as while the Remain campaign made some dubious claims (a loss of £4,000 per family and the "threat" of a post referendum emergency budget would be required being the main two), those were considered to be matter of opinion (which are permitted). On the other hand Leave made factually incorrect statements (the £350million sent to the EU and claims of Turkey being about to join the EU) and continued to use them even after being informed they were factually incorrect.

I can't believe that is true. The leaflet that the Electoral Commission sent to every household in the country contained the information Turkey where about to join the EU and we give £350 million a week to the EU.

Take a look at page 5 of the link below. Bizarrely, the heading on the page is “the truth”

http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/_...and-and-Scotland.pdf

I believe the Electoral Commission where in part to blame for the quit vote prevailing. What where they thinking, why give either side the opportunity to misinform the voters in an official government document.

That booklet is a set of campaign information from the recognised leading campaign groups.  The electoral commission themselves have no say at that point over the information enclosed. That page you referenced was the responsibility of "Vote Leave". It wasn't up to the electoral commission to fact check what was published there.

PS. And yes Dan... it was a typo (should have said "now up to the CPS". 

Thank you dayjay.....music fans together !

Eloise posted:

fatcat posted:

Eloise posted:

My understanding is that the Electoral Commission* have investigated both sides but found only the Leave side have used "undue influence" as while the Remain campaign made some dubious claims (a loss of £4,000 per family and the "threat" of a post referendum emergency budget would be required being the main two), those were considered to be matter of opinion (which are permitted). On the other hand Leave made factually incorrect statements (the £350million sent to the EU and claims of Turkey being about to join the EU) and continued to use them even after being informed they were factually incorrect.

I can't believe that is true. The leaflet that the Electoral Commission sent to every household in the country contained the information Turkey where about to join the EU and we give £350 million a week to the EU.

Take a look at page 5 of the link below. Bizarrely, the heading on the page is “the truth”

http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/_...and-and-Scotland.pdf

I believe the Electoral Commission where in part to blame for the quit vote prevailing. What where they thinking, why give either side the opportunity to misinform the voters in an official government document.

That booklet is a set of campaign information from the recognised leading campaign groups.  The electoral commission themselves have no say at that point over the information enclosed. That page you referenced was the responsibility of "Vote Leave". It wasn't up to the electoral commission to fact check what was published there.

PS. And yes Dan... it was a typo (should have said "now up to the CPS". 

andarkian posted:

To paraphrase The Beatles -  You are a Loser! Your numbers mean nothing, just as Project Fear meant nothing to the sentient voter. We need not one more immigrant to this country and we need no more platitudes from people such as yourself. Bring 'em in  and we need more schools, hospitals, houses and especially welfare to cope with the influx. We simply cannot afford them.

You took us into this mess and am just as sure your only capability is to take us deeper into the mire. I talked of a tabula rasa earlier and no one needs your projections on the clean slate. Your numbers are fictitious and the only reality anyone should look at is the reality of the destruction being perpetrated by the EU throughout the European continent by elitists whose only cause they would fight would be their own entitlement to their next Michelin meal.

Just let me make it clear, we also need not one more Indian, Pakistani or any other so called favoured nation whose own countries are miserable wrecks. In fact I am wholeheartedly in favour of allowing one native of any of these mentioned into the UK for one from the UK who decides to emigrate there. After all, we are stealing their corn seed to 'enrich' our own country, though I cannot see how we cannot possibly teach a curry chef and you all know that is allegedly one of the the shortages that we have.

As a country we did okay and advanced ourselves quite remarkably until the liberal elite decided to 'reeducate' us by giving us massive guilt trips about the success we created. 

In my view, this post verges on racism, or at least intolerance.

And whilst I would not presume to know how many curry chefs are needed to supply British demand for curry, the statement personifies the rejection of any benefit brought to Britich society by immigrants.

At the risk of sounding didactic, let's not forget that this is a nation of immigants, just the length of stay ivaries: Celts, Anglos, Saxons, Romans, Normans, Jews, Italians, Poles, West Indians,, Pakistanis, Indians, Bangladeshis, Nepalese, Chinese...  Britain would be nothing if it weren't for the wealth the mixed gene-pool and skill-pool has brought over the centuries and millennia, so whatever anyone's personal ancestry may be, knocking immigration is an 'own goal'. 

As I see it the only issues regarding immigrants are whethe they are here to contribute or sponge off the state, the degree of their integration, whether they seek to undermine the society they have joined, and possibly the rate of entry if that exceeds the absorption ability. As for the likes of berry pickers mentioned in a previous post with the comment that we dont need any more, try telling that to,the businesses struggling to find such manual labour, which  is an example of a need the indiginous population seem unwilling to fill, (though that whether reasonable depends on whether they pay a reasonable wage for the job, which is a matter of which I know nothing).

That's true, I'm British: 1/4 Norwegian and of a Norman family!

Looking after our populations and being able to house, protect, educate, provide healthcare, provide resources (water, sewage treatment, electricity etc), provide employment, infrastructure, facilitate a quality of life, cohesion and cultural support and integration is equally important. Simply opening the doors like a tap as a source of convienient or cheap labour whilst ignoring the requirements of your population is irresponsible and is tantamount to exploitation and dare I say verging on racism itself. Bloodlines, DNA makeup, colour of skin, son/daughter of immigrant families .. Yada yada yada is irrelevant, fascile  and quite honestly like a smoke screen obviscates the real issues and concerns.

Many people of this country  as I am sure as in many other countries are abosuletly sick to the back teeth of being labelled racist, bigots or whatever by those that are completely sociologically irresponsible and inept when ever they wish to raise these concerns... and then we wonder why we have been getting some of the electoral results we have been getting.

Phew that feels better.. I'll get off my soapbox now

I fully agree re 'opening doors like a tap' but at the same time it is wrong to suggest that all immigration is wrong and should be stopped - it is a matter of determining a policy that allows  whatever may be a healthy level of immigration, of people beneficial to the country, apparently (though I don't pretend to be an expert on either demographics or economics) needed at least in part because of an ageing population and a need for more workers to generate money to help meet the inevitable health and other support demands. Of course other options could be to ban contraception and abortion or introduce compulsory euthanasia, unless the flu pandemic that was actively feared a few years ago materialises. (Obviously these are not serious suggestions!)

Indeed, migration, both ingressing and egressing is a normal healthy part of life, and societies and people's benefit from it immensely and have done for centuries. My point is when it's unmanaged or disproportionate and the consequences aren't managed and planed for on the residing populations it effects can be very damaging. We are talking people here, not containers on a ship... people are not commodities (despite what Trump has said). 

Incidentally, the U.K. Has a higher birth rate that many European countries, so its population is becoming more balanced as the baby boomers age.. I think other European countries with very much smaller birth rates have far greater challenges..the answer can't be to always attract people's from other nations to prop up your own.. to me that is exploitative and says there is something systemically wrong... if you think about it it perpetuates the issue, unless you insist immigrant people can only reside in a country whilst they work and then they and their families have to leave (like some countries do). To me that is not a human or respectful way to deal with people... I am back to we  are not commodities 

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Indeed, migration, both ingressing and egressing is a normal healthy part of life, and societies and people's benefit from it immensely and have done for centuries. My point is when it's unmanaged or disproportionate and the consequences aren't managed and planed for on the residing populations it effects can be very damaging. We are talking people here, not containers on a ship... people are not commodities (despite what Trump has said). 

 

Couldn't agree more

The movement of people at the moment is anything but normal though.  There are probably more people displaced in the world today than at any point since the Second World War.  In addition to those poor souls who have had to flee their homelands to avoid war, persecution and terrorism there are also huge numbers of economic migrants looking for a better life.

 This country has welcomed refugees from wars and persecution many times in the past but I suspect that it is both the potential scale and the addition of many economic migrants that has lead to a backlash in certain sections this time around.  Of course the way that the press have published all of this, and video and pictures of young healthy men queuing to illegally board vehicles in France etc, hasn't helped in the slightest.  Taking in those in desperate need can only be part of a balanced response; we have to fix the route cause and stem the flow of people away from their own countries by helping to deal with the problems that exist there too.  In addition we also have to integrate people better into society when they move to European countries and help them to feel part of society, and indeed expect them to do so as a condition of them entering in the first place,  or we will continue to see disenfranchised young people being brainwashed by evil men to commit attrocities in the countries that have taken them in.  Along with a disconnect between those at the top of society and everyone else, it is the great problem of our times and one our children will still be dealing with when we have gone

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Looking after our populations and being able to house, protect, educate, provide healthcare, provide resources (water, sewage treatment, electricity etc), provide employment, infrastructure, facilitate a quality of life, cohesion and cultural support and integration is equally important. Simply opening the doors like a tap as a source of convienient or cheap labour whilst ignoring the requirements of your population is irresponsible and is tantamount to exploitation and dare I say verging on racism itself. Bloodlines, DNA makeup, colour of skin, son/daughter of immigrant families .. Yada yada yada is irrelevant, fascile  and quite honestly like a smoke screen obviscates the real issues and concerns.

Many people of this country  as I am sure as in many other countries are abosuletly sick to the back teeth of being labelled racist, bigots or whatever by those that are completely sociologically irresponsible and inept when ever they wish to raise these concerns... and then we wonder why we have been getting some of the electoral results we have been getting.

Phew that feels better.. I'll get off my soapbox now

Absolutely. Thank you Simon for bringing some sanity to this subject. Oh, and I'm a racist bigot...... 

I think links are allowed in the padded cell but please delete it not.  Lots of expletives but an interesting take on why Trump won and Brexit happened. Worth a discussion perhaps.

https://www.facebook.com/Jonat...os/1044777035645189/

Dayjay - said in a puerile manner - but seems to resonate in part with some of the messages here and on another thread and elsewhere in the media

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Looking after our populations and being able to house, protect, educate, provide healthcare, provide resources (water, sewage treatment, electricity etc), provide employment, infrastructure, facilitate a quality of life, cohesion and cultural support and integration is equally important. Simply opening the doors like a tap as a source of convienient or cheap labour whilst ignoring the requirements of your population is irresponsible and is tantamount to exploitation and dare I say verging on racism itself. Bloodlines, DNA makeup, colour of skin, son/daughter of immigrant families .. Yada yada yada is irrelevant, fascile  and quite honestly like a smoke screen obviscates the real issues and concerns.

Many people of this country  as I am sure as in many other countries are abosuletly sick to the back teeth of being labelled racist, bigots or whatever by those that are completely sociologically irresponsible and inept when ever they wish to raise these concerns... and then we wonder why we have been getting some of the electoral results we have been getting.

Phew that feels better.. I'll get off my soapbox now

Spot on Simon, this is clearly the point. Our politicians just don't get the impact immigration has on the people at the bottom of the 'food chain'. Classic example is Gordon Brown during the 2010 election with his rant about the lady who had the audacity to ask him what he was going to do about all the immigrants pouring into the country and taking the jobs that British people could and should be doing. His accidentally caught on audio rant vilified the poor woman for daring to ask the question. They do not see or understand the impact it has on people as it does not directly affect them or theirs. This is one of the reasons the leave vote won because those in power refuse to listen to or accept the concerns of ordinary working people.

Remember also 'British jobs for British workers' to quote the hypocrite Brown!!

Dayjay, I've just watched the clip you posted, and, as Simon has commented, the message is delivered in a fairly direct manner, allowing little room for manoeuvre.

Nevertheless, there's a fair measure of truth in what is being said, insofar as it addresses both the total lack of empathy with the opinions of the "man in the street", on the part of our career politicians, and the outrage when results don't go their way, on the part of the so called "Generation Snowflake".

"Worth a discussion perhaps?".............certainly.

dave marshall posted:

Dayjay, I've just watched the clip you posted, and, as Simon has commented, the message is delivered in a fairly direct manner, allowing little room for manoeuvre.

Nevertheless, there's a fair measure of truth in what is being said, insofar as it addresses both the total lack of empathy with the opinions of the "man in the street", on the part of our career politicians, and the outrage when results don't go their way, on the part of the so called "Generation Snowflake".

"Worth a discussion perhaps?".............certainly.

 

I've seen that video and it is spot on, Trump won because the masses have no faith in the main stream politicians anymore after 20+ years of B S and spin. As said in a previous post the disaffected masses are becoming too large to be ignored anymore. Elections coming in Europe next year. I wonder if Merkel et. al. are taking note.

I am probably directing the following thoughts to andarkian, dayjay, Simon, SWS and Wugged Woy.

Immigration is a significant issue and many of the Leave voters consider that leaving the EU will give the UK control over its borders and hence the quality and level of immigration.

Recent immigration has been a 50/50 mix (approximately) of EU migrants and non-EU migrants.

Our UK politicians could have controlled the non-EU immigrant portion but didn't.

Our "benefits" schemes, which were amongst the most generous within the EU, had to be offered on an equal basis to EU immigrants thus making the UK an attractive place for many EU citizens to migrate to. The limited change negotiated by Cameron wasn't a sufficent deterent.

The UK economy and the ££ was strong and these factors attracted EU citizens to the UK and its higher wages.

There has been little or no mention of the numbers of UK citizens who emigrated to EU countries and who might/might-not have balanced the EU immigrants to the UK. Neither is it clear what will hapen to these UK and EU transfers post Brexit. Net migration is a bit of an unkown quantity and quality, but there was more immigration than emigration.

The UK Gov and the EU failed to provide increased health, schooling, infrastructure to match the net rate of immigration to the UK. This lack of investment has reduced service levels to breaking point. Either existing immigrants have to go home or the UK (post Brexit) has to invest in these activities (from within its own GDP) if these immigrants are allowed to stay.

All our immigration problems and consequences therefrom, will be elimiated post Brexit, simply by preventing immigration and the Gov has a mandate and the will to do this.

I appreciate there is more to immigration/emigration that this and even more to Brexit, but I felt a need to try to get a clear start somewhere.

Southweststokie posted:

dave marshall posted:

Dayjay, I've just watched the clip you posted, and, as Simon has commented, the message is delivered in a fairly direct manner, allowing little room for manoeuvre.

Nevertheless, there's a fair measure of truth in what is being said, insofar as it addresses both the total lack of empathy with the opinions of the "man in the street", on the part of our career politicians, and the outrage when results don't go their way, on the part of the so called "Generation Snowflake".

"Worth a discussion perhaps?".............certainly.

 

I've seen that video and it is spot on, Trump won because the masses have no faith in the main stream politicians anymore after 20+ years of B S and spin. As said in a previous post the disaffected masses are becoming too large to be ignored anymore. Elections coming in Europe next year. I wonder if Merkel et. al. are taking note.

So, 20 years of BS and spin have been displaced by outright lies, racism (in the case of Trump's early campaign speeches and rhetoric), misogyny and general nastiness.

yes, this is the way to go to improve the lot of we ordinary people. I think not.

Be careful what you wish for. Who would you like to see making inroads into our European neighbours, Marie Le Pen in France? Norbert Hofer in Austria? the DPP in Denmark?  and Frauke Petry n Germany? What a fantastic place Europe would be if this Group of fine 'populist' leaders were to gain power or influence!

I hope that anyone reading the above sentence can't help but notice my sarcasm.

I am assuming that you too would not want the above people and their parties to increase their respective influences. On the other hand, I really am beginning to wonder.

Hmack posted:

Southweststokie posted:

dave marshall posted:

Dayjay, I've just watched the clip you posted, and, as Simon has commented, the message is delivered in a fairly direct manner, allowing little room for manoeuvre.

Nevertheless, there's a fair measure of truth in what is being said, insofar as it addresses both the total lack of empathy with the opinions of the "man in the street", on the part of our career politicians, and the outrage when results don't go their way, on the part of the so called "Generation Snowflake".

"Worth a discussion perhaps?".............certainly.

 

I've seen that video and it is spot on, Trump won because the masses have no faith in the main stream politicians anymore after 20+ years of B S and spin. As said in a previous post the disaffected masses are becoming too large to be ignored anymore. Elections coming in Europe next year. I wonder if Merkel et. al. are taking note.

So, 20 years of BS and spin have been displaced by outright lies, racism (in the case of Trump's early campaign speeches and rhetoric), misogyny and general nastiness.

yes, this is the way to go to improve the lot of we ordinary people. I think not.

Be careful what you wish for. Who would you like to see making inroads into our European neighbours, Marie Le Pen in France? Norbert Hofer in Austria? the DPP in Denmark?  and Frauke Petry n Germany? What a fantastic place Europe would be if this Group of fine 'populist' leaders were to gain power or influence!

I hope that anyone reading the above sentence can't help but notice my sarcasm.

I am assuming that you too would not want the above people and their parties to increase their respective influences. On the other hand, I really am beginning to wonder.

 

"I am assuming that you too would not want the above people and their parties to increase their respective influences. On the other hand, I really am beginning to wonder".

Wonder no more, and please refrain from trying to second guess my opinions.

The point being made was quite simply that if the political elite continue to ignore the views if the "people", then it simply opens the door to the scenario where these idiots do, indeed, take over the asylum.

Pre referendum, the tone adopted by both sides was condescending in the extreme, and in the aftermath has risen to new levels of name calling e.g the "great unwashed" were not to be trusted with such an important decision.

I would suggest that insulting sections of the electorate is hardly liable to persuade them to vote in your favour.

The second point touched upon was the sense of real outrage on the part of the Snowflake Generation, whose reaction to a result with which they disagree is entirely predictable.

These are the same folks who will avoid any debate on any given subject about which they have strong views, preferring to "shut down" their opponents, e.g. speakers with controversial viewpoints banned from university campuses, and in these days of widespread use of social media, people are often reluctant to air their views, for fear of ostracism; the list goes on.

The point I'm trying to make is that without open debate, the loonies have free rein, and the current trend of labelling those who don't agree with one's point of view, as facist or racist, in an attempt to end the discussion, is indeed an unhealthy state of affairs.

Don Atkinson posted:

The UK Gov and the EU failed to provide increased health, schooling, infrastructure to match the net rate of immigration to the UK. This lack of investment has reduced service levels to breaking point. Either existing immigrants have to go home or the UK (post Brexit) has to invest in these activities (from within its own GDP) if these immigrants are allowed to stay.

 

indeed - and if the true cost of supporting people who enter and join our country is properly assessed across a wider truer sociological basis rather than simply looking at tax receipts and social security costs and relying on largely sweating our existing assets and infrastructure, I wonder if the same appetite would be so strong for throwing open the doors to relatively  large numbers of low and middle waged individuals.. We need to drive up productivity and wealth generated per person in our country to support the standard of living and social security we have got used to, not drive average wealth generated per person down... i know its complicated and there are no simple answers, but one thing i think most people would agree is that  migration of people in and out of countries, where there are obligations in those countries  to support and nurture its people of all colours and creeds,  needs to be managed and controlled. Relatively large uncontrollable migration of populations can be  irresponsible and lead so often to tragic consequences and  encourages the darker and more divisive side of human nature.

Hmack posted:

 

Be careful what you wish for. Who would you like to see making inroads into our European neighbours, Marie Le Pen in France? Norbert Hofer in Austria? the DPP in Denmark?  and Frauke Petry n Germany? What a fantastic place Europe would be if this Group of fine 'populist' leaders were to gain power or influence!

I hope that anyone reading the above sentence can't help but notice my sarcasm.

I am assuming that you too would not want the above people and their parties to increase their respective influences. On the other hand, I really am beginning to wonder.

 

NO I WOULD NOT, but as already said if present governments don't start to address the issues that concern the disaffected then 'watch this space' as they say. Also Don Atkinson is right we could control some of the immigration problems under present legislation but again successive governments have elected to almost turn a blind eye to it until Farage started to 'rattle their cages' and refused to let go of the issue. Had governments made a determined effort to bring immigration under control and limit it as other European countries did when Poland, etc joined the EU we might not be in in this Brexit mess now. But B Liar elected to opened the flood gates allowing thousand of low paid workers into the country effectively undermining the job security of the lower paid members of society who were already on a sticky wicket as it was. Their plight was just made even worse by the political party who was supposed to be looking out for them. No wonder UKIP had a surge in popularity, the underdogs had no one left to turn to as the political elite were / are not interested in their concerns, real or imaginary.

As Simon from Suffolk said, I am not against immigration but not at the expense of the welfare of our own people. Myself personally it doesn't really affect me but I fear for the future of my daughters and grand daughter.

Well it appears we are not alone amongst the chattering classes 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/37949669

Simon-in-Suffolk posted:

Well it appears we are not alone amongst the chattering classes 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/37949669

 

Sums the situation up. You cannot solve the worlds problems and world hunger at the expense of your own people and then expect them to vote for you.

Ref the post re populist leaders.  The real danger here is that mainstream politicians continue to ignore the public's need for change, both in direction and in the way that they are governed, and either ignore it, or even worse, treat it with contempt and resort to insults, because if sensible, well thought out, genuine change is not on offer from those mainstream politicians then we have already seen that the people will go to those who offer change that is anything but sensible and well thought out.  This isn't just a recent thing seen in brexit and in America, I would suggest that the changes we saw in the Arab Spring a few years ago, plus the rise of ISIS abroad and at home, are also signs of populations deciding that they have had enough of the status quo.  I wonder if, in years to come, people will look back at these times as a turning point in society following the stability of the Second World War 

Dayjay - like turkeys not voting for Christmas - I am sure mainstream politicians will pick up on the mood and adapt - after all they are politicians and that is what they do.. Its those who are not elected we need to be wary of