[Closed] EU Referendum - are you in or out?

And the locals start harrassing them to leave.....

Indeed. I can easily imagine a scenario which is going to result in a mass movement of hundreds of thousands or even upwards of a million people in the years post-brexit. Given the demographics of the British expats and the fact they are mostly property owners, where EU migrants here are younger and mostly not property owners, this will result in a net influx of (mostly retired) people to the UK. If people think the NHS and social care system is stretched now, they may be in for a bit of a shock.

94.4% of our mutton & lamb exports were to the EU. Over seven times more than we imported from the EU. If we start paying that 40% tariff or sheep trade will undoubtedly suffer. Or are you are predicting the pound will fall so far against the Euro that we can charge 40% more and remain competitive?

No, we can buy our lamb cheap from New Zealand without a punishing an unnecessary import tariff, and rewild our own hillsides to reduce flooding and enhance wildlife, just like George Monbiot says we should.

OK good you want to decimate the UK lamb industry while shipping food from nz? Genius

Excellent - a return to our green and pleasant land?
Will our 10,000 sheep farmers be employed as gardeners?

It's OK graham the increased suicide rate will help the NHS. Anyway it won't really matter because with some of these amazing ideas most people won't be able to afford to eat.

most people won't be able to afford to eat.

Nah, they can live wild in our newly repopulated forests.

rewild our own hillsides to reduce flooding and enhance wildlife, just like George Monbiot says we should.

That's about the most sensible thing I've seen you say on here. People should just eat less lamb though to be honest instead of transporting it across the globe.

Will our 10,000 sheep farmers be employed as gardeners?

They could retrain as foresters and wildlife managers. Far better than doing what they do now which amounts to laying waste to the countryside by preventing anything other than grass from growing.

Well you and other Brexiteers are still repeating that £350 figure on this thread - so clearly you think it had a great deal of influence.

Not me, I use £10bn pa or £190m per week. Also the contribution changes based on many factors including relative performance of UK economy and estimates of black market. Its been going up steadily for years.

Churchill would be horrified to see that we want to opt out of the ECHR that he had drawn up after the horrors of world war 2

Or is it OK for British soldier to torture chubby hotel clerks to death for fun
[img] [/img]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Baha_Mousa

Or drown children at gunpoint

[img] [/img]
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/ahmed-jabbar-kareem-ali-four-british-soldiers-forced-iraqi-teenager-into-river-where-he-drowned-a7310641.html

Not me,

Apart from when I googled your username and 1st hit got you saying 350m/week and cut and paste it, page 252 of this thread I think, in sure many other times if I could be arsed to trawl through this black hole of the soul that this thread has become

You can do something about it you know

http://www.compulsivelyingdisorder.com/how-to-stop-habitual-lying/

Or is it OK for British soldier to torture chubby hotel clerks to death for fun

that's still going to be covered under the Geneva convention, so what's your problem ?

Several other European countries have already taken the same steps to protect their armed forces. We are far from the first.

They could retrain as foresters and wildlife managers. Far better than doing what they do now which amounts to laying waste to the countryside by preventing anything other than grass from growing.

Eh? foresters and wildlife managers? More subsidy junkies? I thought we wanted to rewild it? Not very wild if it needs all that intervention is it?

are you coming up with all these ideas on your own or do you have help ninfan? Not see Sepp Blatter in ages

Here we go:

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/eu-referendum-are-you-in-or-out/page/252#post-7814505

[quote=jambalaya ]As for the £350m p/week we'll have to wait till we are out before we are able to decide how we'll spend that. Most of that benefit will be decided by our government in 2020

Let me look into these lamb and mutton figures. We won't see a decimation in the industry, imo far from it. Exiting the EU will be a great boost for our farming and domestic food industries. It's one of the reasons I am in favour of WTO tariffs, we can pay 10%-20% more for new European cars (or shock horror jist keep them 10 years like I do or do a deal with Japan and buy tariff free hybrids from them) and the boost for domestic farming and fisheries would be worth every penny in extra car taxes.

It's OK graham the increased suicide rate will help the NHS. Anyway it won't really matter because with some of these amazing ideas most people won't be able to afford to eat.

Mike we won't have to worry about suicides as the death toll from WW3 take care of that. Even Remain stopped short of national starvation.

are you coming up with all these ideas on your own or do you have help ninfan?

No, I got them off Mark Avery, Chris Packham and George Monbiot. Their ideas are usually pretty popular with the left wing intelligentsia around here when it comes to bashing the rich Tory landowners, so it seems like the perfect answer to the Brexit sheepfarming conundrum.

Here we go:

Yup the Government will decide. Most of that they have already said they will continue with (farming, edication grants etc) so the only varience up for discussion is the £10bn leftover (or 8.5 if we want to keep Mike happy)

@kimbers that case could have been brought to the ICJ or under Geneva Convenstion. Ambulance chasing lawyers with a political agenda have been abusing legal aid system and the ECHR to actively solicit cases against British Troops. There where 1500 cases and now there are just 250 after the one firm was caught encouraging Iraqi's to make false claims. All those cases where fropped as there is no evidence.

Mike we won't have to worry about suicides as the death toll from WW3 take care of that. Even Remain stopped short of national starvation.

, we can pay 10%-20% more for new European cars (or shock horror just keep them 10 years like I do

As said the UK is a net exporter of Lamb so that is a killer for the UK farming industry not a bonus
The UK produces a lot of good food, exports what we can during surplus and import when out of season.
Still no sign of job creation

[quote=jambalaya ]Here we go:
Yup the Government will decide. Most of that they have already said they will continue with (farming, edication grants etc) so the only varience up for discussion is the £10bn leftover (or 8.5 if we want to keep Mike happy)

Gross contribution after rebate was ~£12.9bn last year, UK CAP ~£4bn. I'm fairly sure Mike's figures don't include all grants to UK on that basis...

BTW supposedly our net contribution is actually ~£3.5bn

The serious legal challenges are going to delay the whole process and create more incertainty for business.

Will our 10,000 sheep farmers be employed as gardeners?
They could retrain as foresters and wildlife managers. Far better than doing what they do now which amounts to laying waste to the countryside by preventing anything other than grass from growing.

Or, to put it another way - they are using a resource for protein production that can't be used for much else in terms of food. Saves us having to import lentils from around the world; intensively farmed beef or stealing quinoa from South American poor people.

I thought we wanted to rewild it? Not very wild if it needs all that intervention is it?

On the contrary, sustainable forestry is one of the integral parts of re-wilding. The wildlife management is purely a sop to the farming brigade who think wild animals are a threat to their livelihoods.

Re: ECHR and troops, and 'ambulance chasing lawyers' and all that's been said above about the government protecting the armed forces from legal action.

Remember that a so-far unmentioned corollary of removing the protections of the ECHR from our armed forces is:

Troops (actually, usually their survivors) will no longer be able to bring action against a government who fails to supply them with the necessary safety equipment.

Google Susan Smith, Philip Hewlett, Snatch Landrovers.

There are currently other cases in progress that Article 2 of the ECHR has made possible after our judiciary denied the families justice.

So much for protecting troops- this will remove real scrutiny from politicians and their cack-handed procurement failures.

I think the Brexiters are in a George Bush / Tony Blair situation.

They had a plan to win the war (and you can make your own mind up on whether if that referendum campaign was a military campaign they'd be done for war crimes), but they totally fail to have a plan to win the peace.

An interesting vacuum into which some creative thinking might actually salvage this mess - but it ain't going to come from the wreckers of the leave side.

BTW supposedly our net contribution is actually ~£3.5bn

source?
let me guess a guy in the pub told you...

[img] [/img]

igm - Member
I think the Brexiters are in a George Bush / Tony Blair situation.

thats quite an interesting analogy

do you think that in few years time, when the economy is flushed down the loo

there will be a hutton style inquiry?

Let me look into these lamb and mutton figures. We won't see a decimation in the industry, imo far from it. Exiting the EU will be a great boost for our farming and domestic food industries.

Yes please do look into those figures.

You claim that the 40% tariff protects EU sheep farming and I agree it does.
So given that 94.4% of our sheep meat exports are to the EU, how does removing the protection of that 40% tariff boost sheep farming??

All those cases where fropped as there is no evidence.

As happens with most of the [i]"X terrorist/pedo/murderer/dj is appealing to the European Court of Human Rights"[/i] shock headlines. It's just the tabloids conveniently neglect to mention that part.

Roughly half of all applications to the ECHR from the UK are rejected as inadmissible before they get to court.

Only 1 in every 200 cases heard by the court originates from the UK.

Sources:
http://rightsinfo.org/0-4-european-court-cases-uk-heres-matters/

[quote=kimbers ]BTW supposedly our net contribution is actually ~£3.5bn
source?
let me guess a guy in the pub told you...

There are currently other cases in progress that Article 2 of the ECHR has made possible after our judiciary denied the families justice.

Not to worry - once we have the "British Bill Of Rights" anyone failed by the British judiciary like that will be able to take their case straight to the British judiciary.

As that is apparently fairer than having an independent hearing by an international court that specialises in human rights cases.

It'd be funny if it wasn't so scary.

And no more foreign doctors and nurses in 10 years.

I have to admit that in 20 years in the UK I have rarely came across direct racist attitudes, but Brexit is certainly changing it.
All May is talking about is immigration and control.

And no more foreign doctors and nurses in 10 years.

Not to worry, that nice Mr Hunt has a plan for that: 25% new junior doctor places to fill the shortfall and fines for junior doctors who move abroad.

See http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/doctors-on-strike/page/50#post-7999447

Not entirely sure what he plans to do about nurses and the other medical staff from the EU though.

As that is apparently fairer than having an independent hearing by an international court that specialises in human rights cases.

First, the judiciary is independent from government in the UK, there is no significant benefit to going to Europe. Second, the UK is the most international and sophisicated market for legal services in the World. You will find at least as well qualified people in this country, indeed if you talk to lawyers, they will say the UK judges that end up in the European Court are those that struggle to make the grade here.

I have to admit that in 20 years in the UK I have rarely came across direct racist attitudes, but Brexit is certainly changing it.
All May is talking about is immigration and control.

looking at the statements being made at the Tory conference, its like they've all heaved a massive collective sigh of relief and said

"Hurrah! We don't have to pretend we're not racist any more!!!'

.....and now they can set about getting rid of all the darkies. And if the economy collapses in the process? Well... it'll be worth it as long as we're rid of those frightful Johnny Foreigner types

I despair of the direction of travel of British Politics. Its hate-filled, petty, small-minded and really, really nasty

All the more reason to get behind the alternative candidates IMO.

Not necessarily Corbyn either. I think Farron's a good bloke too.

cchris2lou - Member

And no more foreign doctors and nurses in 10 years.

I don't think Hunt's said "no foreign doctors and nurses", it's "let's end reliance". TBH, not being reliant on importing medical staff is a good idea, and it's pretty low that as one of the richest countries in the world we brain-drain from elsewhere (and yet the government complains bitterly when UK doctors emigrate). Hey, it's almost like it's his job to adequately staff the NHS and he's admitting that he doesn't, eh.

But the figures seem to be complete howling mad bullshit. Hunt says there'll be 1500 extra places per year and that's going to close the gap by 2025. There are apparently 30000 EU doctors alone in the UK. So, no, not even close. (I've seen 70000 for "doctors from the rest of the world" but I'm not clear if that includes the 30000 EU or not. It doesn't matter really, it's still several times more than this would produce even if a doctor took a week to train.

But that's not even the bottom of it. We already face massive shortfalls- over 8000 gps in England aloneand rising fast because of the aging GP population. So what he's announced as "ending reliance" in fact isn't even enough to reverse the current understaffing trend, which until recently he claimed didn't exist. That's without the "7 day NHS"

In short- it's Hunt telling transparent and ridiculous lies, because if he told the truth for 2 minutes he'd probably end up dangling from a lamppost.

And no more foreign doctors and nurses in 10 years.

I'll bet as much as you want that in 10 years there will be at least 1 foreign Doctor or Nurses. The NHS has Indian, Australian and NZ Doctors and Phillipino nurses. A good friend and ex-nurse works in HR for NHS

Graham the govt has made it clear all EU citizens here legally will be allowed to stay assuming EU says the same. If the EU does not we will not be ejecting European Doctros and Nurses who want to stay. If they don't want to stay we'll replace from the long queue of people from elsewhere in the world who want to come here and who will happily apply and pay for a 3yr visa

Mike's net £8.5bn figure comes from fullfact.org (who Stoner, I and many others funded for their EU fact check effort)

Mike it makes sense you apply for an Ozzie passport given your negativity on the UK's prospects. We need optimists and go getters who see opportunity. There is a very very long queue from all around the world to come here. No one has a problem with one in, one out.

If these policies were Labour they'd be howling 'how are you going to pay for this?' and 'this is la-la economics' and so on.

[b]mefty - Member [/b]

First, the judiciary is independent from government in the UK, there is no significant benefit to going to Europe

Yes there is. Re my example above: the Court of Appeal had already rejected an argument put on behalf of Mrs Smith and family that they had a claim under Article 2 of the ECHR. Thats the point- our judiciary, guided by the MoD, had already denied justice to these families, and these changes will remove this access.

indeed if you talk to lawyers, they will say the UK judges that end up in the European Court are those that struggle to make the grade here.

And? Thats a fairly pathetic ad-hom if you don't mind me saying.

those that struggle to make the grade here.

The rest of the world must be looking at this country with the same look of disbelief as we are staring slack-jawed across the Atlantic, at the possibility of a Trump presidency.

The brexiteers are all banging on about how countries will be queuing up to do trade deals with us. In reality, due mainly to the Return of Grand Brittania bollocks they're spouting, we look like the looney on the bus. The one everyone pointedly avoids.

They're utterly ****ing delusional to the point where they're totally blind to the enormous didconnect between theiir cloud-cuckooland Wishlist, and the reality of how we appear to the rest of the world.

At present, we're about as appealing as a nation as a great big steaming turd on a pristine white carpet

Binners, each day I take a look at the BBC with the front page reviews. When the mail, express, tele, sun and times and having a massive circle here you know it's bad. At the moment the Donald is a preoccupation for the world. The at will have run its course well before anything actually happens with brexit.
It's only if you look inwards that you see the way the UK is busy flinging insults and shit at the people they need to negotiate with.

First, the judiciary is independent from government in the UK, there is no significant benefit to going to Europe.

Righto, so if the UK courts decide something is not a breach of human rights we should just accept that?

So if for example our courts say that beating a child with a cane is a-okay with them then we accept it?
http://rightsinfo.org/stories/beating-children-is-never-right/

Or if our judiciary are unable to act on a case of someone trafficked into domestic slavery because "there was no offence in English criminal law which applied to the facts of her case" then we just accept it?
https://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/11/28/uk-not-doing-enough-to-combat-human-trafficking-and-domestic-slavery/

Or if our Court of Appeal and the House of Lords decide that it is just fine for the police to indefinitely retain DNA samples from innocent people.
http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2008/1581.html
(a case incidentally that led to the [url= https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Freedoms_Act_2012 ]Protection of Freedoms Act 2012[/url] introduced by one Theresa May)

Which policies Molgrips ? The cap on Doctors training places at Uni should have been raised years ago.

Also you forget the £10bn pa we have to play with and the much improved medium and long term economic prospects outside the EU. Much rather spend the £10bn domestically on projects which enhance the UK than bolster ex communist countries of Eastern Europe or wannabe EU members as part of the EU superstate political project.

In other news Italian papers have been "complaining" that UK is claiming its share of the 42,000 bottles of vintage wines in the Brussels cellars and its share of the artwork at the Union. Note this is part of the argument around €6bn of pension liabilites for UK EU staff.

Those of us brought up in the 80s (or before), will have a fairly sanguine view on the effectiveness of a UK based (establishment is the phrase that keeps coming up...) judicial process...

Shall we have a game of "dubious process / miscarriage of justice" bingo - where to start???