[Politics] Brexit

[ManOfSussex]

I've now heard the fifth different statement on freedom of movement in 4 days. The government doesn't know it's arse from its elbow. Will they be allowed to limp on and drag the nation down with it?

It's summed up rather well here - http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/201...ent-on-free-movement-completely-without-meani

So in summary: Today's announcement means either that free movement will end, or that it won't end, or that it might end after a while, or that it won't end after a while, or that if it does end the system which replaces it might be completely different or that it might be identical.

The hardest thing about our new political culture is working out when they're being cynically ambiguous and when they're just being stupid.

 

[nicko31]

It's summed up rather well here - http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/201...ent-on-free-movement-completely-without-meani

Just saw Jeremy Hunt on Channel 4, said there was unity in the cabinet. Then went on to contradict himself during the interview with Jon Snow that followed. May has lost control, but the question is who is there as a replacement?

 

[melias shoes]

I've now heard the fifth different statement on freedom of movement in 4 days. The government doesn't know it's arse from its elbow. Will they be allowed to limp on and drag the nation down with it?

Or we could have Corbyns clowns did drag us even further down. Just in case you wanted to read it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40774251

 

[portslade seagull]

The doomsayers are out in force tonight, squeezing out every bit of supposed bad news. So many on this site and so few of it.

 

[5ways]

Confidence in the City is high as job volumes rise by nearly a fifth after June's General Election

http://www.cityam.com/268762/confidence-city-high-job-volumes-rise-nearly-fifth-after

It looks like London continues to attract tech experts despite Brexit looming, new figures suggest, with the number rising since the vote to leave Europe.

The capital remains home to more tech developers than any other city outside the US, new data from Stack Overflow shows, with worker numbers up 11 per cent year-on-year in the 12 months to June.

This rate of growth was on par with Tokyo, Moscow and Singapore and slightly ahead of France, one of European cities emerging as a contender to London's status as a leading tech hub, with 418,000 developers working in the capital. That was behind only Silicon Valley and New York.

http://www.cityam.com/266746/tech-developer-numbers-rise-london-despite-brexit-but-tech

so WHY bugger this all up by ending free movement!

 

[portslade seagull]

so WHY bugger this all up by ending free movement!

I would think some compromise will be worked out long before the out date.

 

[5ways]

I would think some compromise will be worked out long before the out date.

Govt says it will end

 

[portslade seagull]

Govt says it will end

Some of them do some of them don't, TBH who knows, my bet is some compromise

 

[melias shoes]

The doomsayers are out in force tonight, squeezing out every bit of supposed bad news. So many on this site and so few of it.

It is bad news for them. They thought the tide had turned then along comes a bloody great wave down on them.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

Why not post the full articles?

I don't want to overload the more pessimistic members of this thread with too much positive news at any one time. (yes I really am that considerate)

Also, copy pasting entire articles isn't encouraged on NSC (rightly so). Showing the main point of an article with the link is more sensible. Mind you as a one off special treat (especially for those remainers who value Dan Hannan's opinion ...when it suits) I'll gve you this ..

The Good News on Brexit They’re Not Telling You

LONDON — On July 24, trade talks began between Britain and America. All right, they weren’t formally called trade talks: As long as Britain is still in the European Union, it is supposed to contract out all its commercial decisions to Brussels. Officially, the United States trade representative, Robert Lighthizer, and the British trade secretary, Liam Fox, met for broad discussions about what might happen when Brexit takes effect in 2019.

Still, both sides can see the prize. For decades, there have been fitful negotiations between Washington and Brussels on trade liberalization, but they have always run up against the protectionism of France and some southern European states.

Between Britain and America, there are few such problems. Each country is the other’s biggest investor: About a million Americans work for British-owned companies, and a similar number of Britons work for American-owned companies. A liberal trade deal, based on mutual recognition of standards and qualifications, will bolster both economies.

Prime Minister Theresa May keeps saying she wants Britain to be a “global leader in free trade.” In parallel to the talks with Washington, Britain is starting discussions with China, Japan, India, Australia and others. Global trade deals should supplement rather than replace Britain’s economic relationship with the remaining 27 European Union states. The nonmember Switzerland, for example, exports nearly five times as much per head as Britain does, mostly to the European Union, while simultaneously having bilateral trade deals around the world.

The idea of a more global Britain emerging from the European Union may strike you as jarring. Much of the commentary over the past year, at least outside Britain, has portrayed Brexit as a nativist and protectionist phenomenon. I keep reading — often in the pages of this newspaper — that the vote was overwhelmingly about immigration.

I’ve learned in politics that almost no one listens to the other side. Rather than going to the source, people read allies’ reports of what the other side is supposed to have said. If a British person tells you that the vote was “all about immigration,” I can almost guarantee that you are talking to a Remainer. Those among my friends who voted to stay in the European Union didn’t weigh and then dismiss the economic and democratic cases against membership; they never heard them.

The same confirmation bias can be seen in their determination to find bad economic news. Here is a selection of British reports from the past two weeks: Unemployment fell again, as every month since the vote, to 1.49 million (from 1.67 million in June of last year); manufacturing orders are at their highest level since August 1988; retail sales, official figures show, are up 2.9 percent on this time last year.

Exports were up 10 percent year-on-year in May, helped by the long-overdue correction of the exchange rate. Remainers like to point to the fall in sterling, but rarely mention that, before the vote, the International Monetary Fund and the Bank of England agreed that Britain’s currency, seen as a haven from the travails of the euro, was artificially expensive.

Continental Europeans evidently still regard the British economy as attractive; more of them are working in Britain than ever before. As for the supposed decline of London, a number of European banks, including Deutsche Bank and ING, have grown their operations here since the referendum. Last year, Wells Fargo spent £300 million (about $392 million) on its new European headquarters — in London. The latest survey from the Robert Walters City Jobs Index, for July, reported that hiring in financial services was up 13 percent year-on-year.

You may think I’m prone to a confirmation bias of my own. But it’s only fair to contrast what has happened since the Brexit vote with what was predicted during the campaign. Remain campaigners told us to expect a recession in 2016; in fact, Britain grew faster in the six months after the referendum than in the six months before. They told us that the FTSE 100 index of leading companies’ share prices would collapse; in fact, British stocks performed strongly after the Brexit vote. They told us that Scotland would leave Britain; in fact, support for separatism has collapsed, and the Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has shelved her planned independence referendum.

Most people, whichever way they voted, are celebrating the good news. But a few Euro-fanatics, disproportionately prominent on the BBC and at The Financial Times*, are acting like doomsday cultists, constantly postponing the date of their promised apocalypse. First, a Leave vote was supposed to wreck the economy. Then, it became “wait until we begin the disengagement.” Now it’s “wait until you see what a bad deal we get from the European Union.”

It’s odd. The people who are the most pro-union are generally the most convinced that the union will act in a self-harming way out of spite. I have a higher opinion of our European allies. But even if I didn’t, I’d still expect a deal. Adam Smith observed that “it is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.” It is not from the benevolence of the European Union that we expect a free-trade agreement: Exchange makes everyone richer.

If you want a picture of Britain’s future relationship with the European Union, think of Canada’s with the United States. Canadians have a type of federation on their doorstep that they decline to join, but with which they enjoy the closest possible diplomatic, military and economic ties. Two years from now, in a similar vein, the European Union will have lost a bad tenant and gained a good neighbour.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/opinion/brexit-european-union-good-news.html


*And on this thread

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Govt says it will end

leave is leave ,pull up the draw bridge and take control ,say good bye to sauntering into this country on a coach from Poland

regards
DR

 

[BigGully]

It's summed up rather well here - http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/201...ent-on-free-movement-completely-without-meani

Why oh why do you drag out another absolute no mark, surely even if you agree with this twerps views wouldn't you at least understand that it adds nothing of any substance to your position other than with the other resident Moonies on here, jog on mate.

 

[JC Footy Genius]

so WHY bugger this all up by ending free movement!

Ending free movement doesn't mean ending immigration.. especially the higher skilled professions as you know.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Some of them do some of them don't, TBH who knows, my bet is some compromise

There's various things we can do now on FOM which we don't because of Home Office shortcomings - 3 month removals as is done in Belgium and Germany and registration after 3 months as is done in Austria to name but two, the latter of which appears to be what 'Settled Status' is, but that system wont be up and running for years, so it's rather pointless saying it will end in 2019, when it might not as it could be part of a transitional deal arrangement, not least because the new 'Settled Status' system wont be in place, so we'd need to allow more time for any new immigration system.

My view is it's going to be a bit like watching Sky News at 2am and then again at 3am - exactly the same but called something different and hope Nigel Farage doesn't notice.

 

[ManOfSussex]

Why oh why do you drag out another absolute no mark, surely even if you agree with this twerps views wouldn't you at least understand that it adds nothing of any substance to your position other than with the other resident Moonies on here, jog on mate.

I know - he's just a no mark because his view is different to yours.

 

[studio150]

I don't want to overload the more pessimistic members of this thread with too much positive news at any one time. (yes I really am that considerate)

Also, copy pasting entire articles isn't encouraged on NSC (rightly so). Showing the main point of an article with the link is more sensible. Mind you as a one off special treat (especially for those remainers who value Dan Hannan's opinion ...when it suits) I'll gve you this ..

The Good News on Brexit They’re Not Telling You

LONDON — On July 24, trade talks began between Britain and America. All right, they weren’t formally called trade talks: As long as Britain is still in the European Union, it is supposed to contract out all its commercial decisions to Brussels. Officially, the United States trade representative, Robert Lighthizer, and the British trade secretary, Liam Fox, met for broad discussions about what might happen when Brexit takes effect in 2019.

Still, both sides can see the prize. For decades, there have been fitful negotiations between Washington and Brussels on trade liberalization, but they have always run up against the protectionism of France and some southern European states.

Between Britain and America, there are few such problems. Each country is the other’s biggest investor: About a million Americans work for British-owned companies, and a similar number of Britons work for American-owned companies. A liberal trade deal, based on mutual recognition of standards and qualifications, will bolster both economies.

Prime Minister Theresa May keeps saying she wants Britain to be a “global leader in free trade.” In parallel to the talks with Washington, Britain is starting discussions with China, Japan, India, Australia and others. Global trade deals should supplement rather than replace Britain’s economic relationship with the remaining 27 European Union states. The nonmember Switzerland, for example, exports nearly five times as much per head as Britain does, mostly to the European Union, while simultaneously having bilateral trade deals around the world.

The idea of a more global Britain emerging from the European Union may strike you as jarring. Much of the commentary over the past year, at least outside Britain, has portrayed Brexit as a nativist and protectionist phenomenon. I keep reading — often in the pages of this newspaper — that the vote was overwhelmingly about immigration.

I’ve learned in politics that almost no one listens to the other side. Rather than going to the source, people read allies’ reports of what the other side is supposed to have said. If a British person tells you that the vote was “all about immigration,” I can almost guarantee that you are talking to a Remainer. Those among my friends who voted to stay in the European Union didn’t weigh and then dismiss the economic and democratic cases against membership; they never heard them.

The same confirmation bias can be seen in their determination to find bad economic news. Here is a selection of British reports from the past two weeks: Unemployment fell again, as every month since the vote, to 1.49 million (from 1.67 million in June of last year); manufacturing orders are at their highest level since August 1988; retail sales, official figures show, are up 2.9 percent on this time last year.

Exports were up 10 percent year-on-year in May, helped by the long-overdue correction of the exchange rate. Remainers like to point to the fall in sterling, but rarely mention that, before the vote, the International Monetary Fund and the Bank of England agreed that Britain’s currency, seen as a haven from the travails of the euro, was artificially expensive.

Continental Europeans evidently still regard the British economy as attractive; more of them are working in Britain than ever before. As for the supposed decline of London, a number of European banks, including Deutsche Bank and ING, have grown their operations here since the referendum. Last year, Wells Fargo spent £300 million (about $392 million) on its new European headquarters — in London. The latest survey from the Robert Walters City Jobs Index, for July, reported that hiring in financial services was up 13 percent year-on-year.

You may think I’m prone to a confirmation bias of my own. But it’s only fair to contrast what has happened since the Brexit vote with what was predicted during the campaign. Remain campaigners told us to expect a recession in 2016; in fact, Britain grew faster in the six months after the referendum than in the six months before. They told us that the FTSE 100 index of leading companies’ share prices would collapse; in fact, British stocks performed strongly after the Brexit vote. They told us that Scotland would leave Britain; in fact, support for separatism has collapsed, and the Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has shelved her planned independence referendum.

Most people, whichever way they voted, are celebrating the good news. But a few Euro-fanatics, disproportionately prominent on the BBC and at The Financial Times*, are acting like doomsday cultists, constantly postponing the date of their promised apocalypse. First, a Leave vote was supposed to wreck the economy. Then, it became “wait until we begin the disengagement.” Now it’s “wait until you see what a bad deal we get from the European Union.”

It’s odd. The people who are the most pro-union are generally the most convinced that the union will act in a self-harming way out of spite. I have a higher opinion of our European allies. But even if I didn’t, I’d still expect a deal. Adam Smith observed that “it is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.” It is not from the benevolence of the European Union that we expect a free-trade agreement: Exchange makes everyone richer.

If you want a picture of Britain’s future relationship with the European Union, think of Canada’s with the United States. Canadians have a type of federation on their doorstep that they decline to join, but with which they enjoy the closest possible diplomatic, military and economic ties. Two years from now, in a similar vein, the European Union will have lost a bad tenant and gained a good neighbour.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/opinion/brexit-european-union-good-news.html


*And on this thread

And when Trump says its going to be a good deal, good for jobs, what do you think he means.

It won't be good for America and Britain, it will only be good for America and will be totally one sided, but the UK will be desperate just to say they have a deal they will take anything.

Also the standing of the UK post Brexit on the International stage will be totally diminished, to a level that the likes of Mexico, enjoy. While we will maintain our position on the UN security council, we will be outside of other major international talks. America will no longer seek the UKs advice on what the EU is thinking, as we are outside of the EU, so they will go straight to Germany or whoever. We will be the ones walking up and down the corridors while the main talks are on going, and then just getting to hear what has been agreed when the press conference starts.

And the other good news from today, courtesy of the Times, car servicing to increase by £70 post Brexit.

Time to get the flags out and have a street party.

At least we can still enjoy the Proms, particularly the closing remarks and music from the first proms that have been occurred. Respect to the musicians and conductors.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

There's various things we can do now on FOM which we don't because of Home Office shortcomings - 3 month removals as is done in Belgium and Germany and registration after 3 months as is done in Austria to name but two, the latter of which appears to be what 'Settled Status' is, but that system wont be up and running for years, so it's rather pointless saying it will end in 2019, when it might not as it could be part of a transitional deal arrangement, not least because the new 'Settled Status' system wont be in place, so we'd need to allow more time for any new immigration system.

My view is it's going to be a bit like watching Sky News at 2am and then again at 3am - exactly the same but called something different and hope Nigel Farage doesn't notice.

Why are you so adamant you want more people coming into this country ,what benefit do you get out of it
regards
DR

 

[ManOfSussex]

I don't want to overload the more pessimistic members of this thread with too much positive news at any one time. (yes I really am that considerate)

Also, copy pasting entire articles isn't encouraged on NSC (rightly so). Showing the main point of an article with the link is more sensible. Mind you as a one off special treat (especially for those remainers who value Dan Hannan's opinion ...when it suits) I'll gve you this ..

The Good News on Brexit They’re Not Telling You

LONDON — On July 24, trade talks began between Britain and America. All right, they weren’t formally called trade talks: As long as Britain is still in the European Union, it is supposed to contract out all its commercial decisions to Brussels. Officially, the United States trade representative, Robert Lighthizer, and the British trade secretary, Liam Fox, met for broad discussions about what might happen when Brexit takes effect in 2019.

Still, both sides can see the prize. For decades, there have been fitful negotiations between Washington and Brussels on trade liberalization, but they have always run up against the protectionism of France and some southern European states.

Between Britain and America, there are few such problems. Each country is the other’s biggest investor: About a million Americans work for British-owned companies, and a similar number of Britons work for American-owned companies. A liberal trade deal, based on mutual recognition of standards and qualifications, will bolster both economies.

Prime Minister Theresa May keeps saying she wants Britain to be a “global leader in free trade.” In parallel to the talks with Washington, Britain is starting discussions with China, Japan, India, Australia and others. Global trade deals should supplement rather than replace Britain’s economic relationship with the remaining 27 European Union states. The nonmember Switzerland, for example, exports nearly five times as much per head as Britain does, mostly to the European Union, while simultaneously having bilateral trade deals around the world.

The idea of a more global Britain emerging from the European Union may strike you as jarring. Much of the commentary over the past year, at least outside Britain, has portrayed Brexit as a nativist and protectionist phenomenon. I keep reading — often in the pages of this newspaper — that the vote was overwhelmingly about immigration.

I’ve learned in politics that almost no one listens to the other side. Rather than going to the source, people read allies’ reports of what the other side is supposed to have said. If a British person tells you that the vote was “all about immigration,” I can almost guarantee that you are talking to a Remainer. Those among my friends who voted to stay in the European Union didn’t weigh and then dismiss the economic and democratic cases against membership; they never heard them.

The same confirmation bias can be seen in their determination to find bad economic news. Here is a selection of British reports from the past two weeks: Unemployment fell again, as every month since the vote, to 1.49 million (from 1.67 million in June of last year); manufacturing orders are at their highest level since August 1988; retail sales, official figures show, are up 2.9 percent on this time last year.

Exports were up 10 percent year-on-year in May, helped by the long-overdue correction of the exchange rate. Remainers like to point to the fall in sterling, but rarely mention that, before the vote, the International Monetary Fund and the Bank of England agreed that Britain’s currency, seen as a haven from the travails of the euro, was artificially expensive.

Continental Europeans evidently still regard the British economy as attractive; more of them are working in Britain than ever before. As for the supposed decline of London, a number of European banks, including Deutsche Bank and ING, have grown their operations here since the referendum. Last year, Wells Fargo spent £300 million (about $392 million) on its new European headquarters — in London. The latest survey from the Robert Walters City Jobs Index, for July, reported that hiring in financial services was up 13 percent year-on-year.

You may think I’m prone to a confirmation bias of my own. But it’s only fair to contrast what has happened since the Brexit vote with what was predicted during the campaign. Remain campaigners told us to expect a recession in 2016; in fact, Britain grew faster in the six months after the referendum than in the six months before. They told us that the FTSE 100 index of leading companies’ share prices would collapse; in fact, British stocks performed strongly after the Brexit vote. They told us that Scotland would leave Britain; in fact, support for separatism has collapsed, and the Scottish first minister, Nicola Sturgeon, has shelved her planned independence referendum.

Most people, whichever way they voted, are celebrating the good news. But a few Euro-fanatics, disproportionately prominent on the BBC and at The Financial Times*, are acting like doomsday cultists, constantly postponing the date of their promised apocalypse. First, a Leave vote was supposed to wreck the economy. Then, it became “wait until we begin the disengagement.” Now it’s “wait until you see what a bad deal we get from the European Union.”

It’s odd. The people who are the most pro-union are generally the most convinced that the union will act in a self-harming way out of spite. I have a higher opinion of our European allies. But even if I didn’t, I’d still expect a deal. Adam Smith observed that “it is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest.” It is not from the benevolence of the European Union that we expect a free-trade agreement: Exchange makes everyone richer.

If you want a picture of Britain’s future relationship with the European Union, think of Canada’s with the United States. Canadians have a type of federation on their doorstep that they decline to join, but with which they enjoy the closest possible diplomatic, military and economic ties. Two years from now, in a similar vein, the European Union will have lost a bad tenant and gained a good neighbour.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/opinion/brexit-european-union-good-news.html


*And on this thread

Interesting article elsewhere in The NY Times today, as bit of balance from Daniel Hannan's rose tinted view on the future - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/31/...o-spot-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

 

[studio150]

Ending free movement doesn't mean ending immigration.. especially the higher skilled professions as you know.

or the lower skilled, just don't take a European holiday around 1 April 2019 it will be chaos on visas, duty free, long queues and meltdown

 

[BigGully]

I know - he's just a no mark because his view is different to yours.

No .....he is an absolute no mark no matter what his view might be, at what point did you think I know 'Ian Dunt' he has some credibility lets quote his blog that'll show them rascal Leave Neanderthals, you will get a pat on the back from Nicko and HT, they'll be a disciple before bedtime ....................