Racist 'incident' I think. Most of these 'incidents' (before and after Brexit) seem to feature abuse of kids, women and elderly people, which is hardly surprising given that they are perpetrated by cowards. EU position seems pretty clear now, no easy access to the Single Market without freedom of movement. I think our leaders, whoever they are, need to understand that keeping the rest of the EU together is now the priority of EU leaders. Sure our trade is important to them, but not as important as the trade within the rest of the EU. In the unlikely circumstances that Germany loses free trade with 65 million people it still may be willing to risk that to keep trade with 500 million free. Stephen Crabb first to declare for Tory leadership. A flag for the future I would imagine rather than a serious hope of winning. May ahead in the betting from Johnson, but who would rely on the bookies now? Would be interesting if a proper, hard core Brexiter stood as well. I think Thursday is the deadline to declare. Why then it takes until 2 September for 150,000 party members to choose our Prime Minister is still a mystery to me. Small businesswoman on the radio couldn't give a single example of EU regulation that she is looking forward to losing. Only concern was her ability to recruit staff from South Africa. Hopefully not very representative. Nigel Farage and his wife will have drawn over £4.5m from EU coffers in salary and benefits if he continues as an MEP until the next elections in 2019, probably when British MEPs will be kicked out. Then he gets a payment of £175,000 to help him over the shock of unemployment, and a pension of at least £71,000 a year. Good to know that someone has benefitted from our membership. Does any one think his habit of abusing fellow MEPs has had any impact on the development of the EU over the past 17 years, or that his presence in Brussels contributed in any way to the Brexit vote?
We're still going through the "angry, disappointed and hurt" stage in the EU leadership. At some stage though, pragmatism will kick in. Merkel has an election in Germany next year, and if she acts to lose one of German industry's biggest customers, she's going to have to explain that to her domestic market. The EU is showing itself to be the inflexible, one-size-fits-all organisation we all knew it was. It says it won't bend. But if there is a rising of exiters from other countries in Europe, the Junckers will be forced to think again, and loosen rules to accomodate everyone. Don't bet against this happening.
If they don't which would you discard - keep the single market and accept free movement, or forego the single market but keep immigration controls, Goldie?
I have been watching a lot of the business channels as its the same crap on Sky and BBC and 2 things that i have heard from them. 1. many of the financial people saying EU is like a dictatorship and we are better off out. 2. Reason markets are stabilizing now is because many feel we won't trigger article 50. and there is a 50% chance we won't leave. This differs from what Merkel said today. Someone along the line is going to get stitched up so hold onto your hats.
For me, control over the amount of immigration is a red line, Tooting. It's what underpinned the Brexit vote. Net immigration must be brought below 100,000 pa which was the Tory promise and helped get them elected. When the fifth biggest economy in the world, and the second biggest net financial contributor to the EU votes to leave because of the inflexibility of club rules, and the degree of cynicism of citizens of other member states is rising exponentially, then only a dying dinosaur would fail to change track. Juncker should be kicked out and a far sighted moderniser brought in imo
The rules may be loosened for members Goldie. But we won't be a member. Financial people resist any kind of regulation of their activity. And we all know where poorly regulated financiers take us. I keep an eye on the markets, but I wouldn't read any conscious thought behind market movements. They bet that we would stay in, they bet that 8% of Americans sold sub prime mortgages would not default. The potential consequences of their idiot guessing are of course horrible, but too soon to say in terms of Brexit. As a remainer accepting the reality of the situation I would make a clean break as soon as possible, assume control over immigration (which I doubt will be effective control, but I really believe the majority of Leave voters had this as top priority) and trade under WTO rules. The fall in the £ has already exceeded the average tariff level, so exports should not be damaged too much. Imports will be much more expensive because of currency + tariffs, but there has to be a sting somewhere. Then we can negotiate a brand new deal with the EU from a clean slate position if we want. And by then we may have an idea of what restricted immigration really means for our economy. The worst thing will be to be locked into long negotiations over terms of exit with the EU which may end up nowhere. Even worse than that from a selfish perspective is a disintegration of the EU as then we have to reach deals with 27 seperate countries plus the 53 countries the EU has deals with, plus any new ones we want.
You may be right, Stan, but I don't think the ramifications of Brexit are played out yet over The Channel. I may be wrong but I feel there will be a groundswell of support and sympathy for the British vote, not among the EU elite but by ordinary European citizens. EU leaders are trying to hold it together at present, which is why we're being treated like the pariah, but may be the ground will be taken from under them over the next couple of years...we'll see
I think the only assumption I would make is that they (European citizens) will operate on the same basis as UK citizens - perceived self interest. I doubt the UK will stay top of their minds for long. I'm not sure what that means in practice. What do you think re Tooting's question?
Sb agree with your comments that we need to Brexit now because the longer we are left in limbo the worse off we will be. I also agree with your points re Juncker. He has proved that the EU is not democratic and has many flaws. TBH if they had understood our concerns and acted on them we would still be in Europe today. For people like me a better deal would have made me vote 'remain', However saying all that i am actually excited about the prospect of moving forward. Whatever happens, free market and free movement will be the main stumbling block.. I also hope that both NI and Scotland stay part of the union and together we all go forward. Nichola Sturgeon actions are not helping us, in fact she knows her actions are hurting us and markets. She like Cameron is playing a dangerous game with Scotland.
In Europe, there is a groundswell of resentment in EU bureaucracy and undemocratic rule making. The UK is not alone. The question is, in the 2 years plus it will take to extricate the UK from the EU, will other countries look for their own referendums? My bet is that they will, and that will change the complexion of the UK/ EU talks. I answered Tooting's question at #2678.
I think it was Goldies comments re Juncker, but I would certainly agree that he is part of the problem and the whole EU would be better off without him. Missed that, sorry.
sturgeon is out in Brussels trying to make friends and stir up more trouble however Cameron has basically said that they discussed Scotland last night and quickly moved on as if they are not important to the big picture. Even yesterday one of the blokes at the EU said Scotland is not their priority. We give Scotland £8.6b every year and as i said in my earlier post that Sturgeon is playing a dangerous game with Scotland. Firstly there are no guarantees that the EU will let Scotland in. Secondly, Spain is a problem and will veto. Lastly, once the EU lose us do they need another country to bail out each year without our money? If Scotland does break up the union and leave us they may regret it later as what happens if the EU breaks up in 5 years? As i said she is playing a dangerous game.
I assume that the main terms of exit will be agreed quite early into the two years so can't imagine there'll be much room for manoeuvre late on. Also, I'd suspect we'd need to show real prospects of recovering our economic strength to influence anyone that an exit or referendum is any good (the only other way would be if we've lit the fuse for extreme right wing groups across Europe).
I'm not sure the main terms will be that easy to arrive at. Obviously, there's an impasse at present on freedom of movement and single market. It's simple to say, ok, that's the agreement, neither of them apply to the UK and therefore World Trade Rules and tariffs. But I can't see Merkel agreeing to that, if it damages German industry, particularly motor cars. Anything agreed tentatively, has to be agreed with all member states presumably. It's going to be lengthy. And I don't necessarily think anti-EU parties in Europe will hold back from pressing for their own referendem on the grounds they want to see if the UK sinks or swims
