Forum menu
cancelling applications etc. Sounds like stropping off to me
Oh gosh
You really do need things explaining simply
Applying for EU funding is now a closed door to UK researchers because out of the EU we aren't eligible to get what previously was 20% of our revenue. Not to mention the damage to collaborative networks and institute like the European Bioinformatics Institute, based at the Sanger Centre.
The government has only pledged to fund existing grants that still run after A50.
Science funding is planned 3,5,10 years ahead,
The only 'stropping off' has been done by the UK with our ridiculous vote to diminish our place in Europe and the world
Your (EU and remainder) time is over. This is the beginning of the end. You need to come up with something new coz yours are no longer seen realistic but a pain in the backside.
We'll just go back to the old ways killing each other, Russia will start by annexing a few baltic states claiming that they need to secure access to Kaliningrad. It will escalate as it always does.
As for the UK, our position on the security council will be challenged and having no real armed forces anymore we don't really have much right to the place.
Spain and Portugal once had empires and now? Britain will join the list of former countries that have fallen on hard times. The world has changed.
kimbers - Member
Applying for EU funding is now a closed door to UK researchers because out of the EU we aren't eligible to what previously was 20% of our revenue.
The government has only pledged to fund existing grants that still run after A50.
Science funding is planned 3,5,10 years ahead,The only 'stropping off' has been done by the UK with our ridiculous vote to diminish our place in Europe and the world
I am sure there will be no shortage of funding if you have credible research.
Allegedly, could, may ... just put that in front of anything you like really.
there is almost certainty that Boris will not be in that job come the time we can do a deal. Trump will (if he makes it be coming to the end of his presidency, the Conservatives could not even be in power.
Forgive me Mike but you couldn't have been more wrong on Trump. My predictions
2019 April Brexit done
2019 Dec US/UK trade deal agreed in principal probably including Canada .. amongst others inc Australia likewise
2002 May May relected with massive Tory majority, Boris still Foreign Secretary
2020 Nov Trump Relected
Of course any funding promises could just be a "mistake".
I very much doubt there will be any money left except for lawyers .
mrmo - Member
We'll just go back to the old ways killing each other, Russia will start by annexing a few baltic states claiming that they need to secure access to Kaliningrad. It will escalate as it always does.
This argument has been playing on and on for a while now ... who are Russia annexing exactly? Ukraine? Let them fight because they have been fighting with each for so long it is no longer the business of the outside world.
You want to save a few millions by sacrificing few billions with a nuclear war? Way to go I totally support that.
Russia is Not a threat. Those inept politicians from within are.
My predictions:
2019 Hoverboards for everyone
2022 Second coming of the black baby Jesus
2024 Kate Beckinsale moves in with me
2044 Elvis found on the moon
2019 April Brexit talks fall apart, hard brexit sees flight of capital and manufacturing
2019 Dec Trump impeached for conflict of intrest/nepotism/incest ?
2020 Jan May replaced in brutal Tory backstabbing by Raab, Boris gets his own chat show
2020 May David Milliband PM
ftfy
😛
2019 April Brexit done
2019 Dec US/UK trade deal agreed in principal probably including Canada .. amongst others inc Australia likewise
Seriously, is that the deal where we give them everything in exchange for proving we can get a deal?
Australia will not negotiate until A50 is fully completed. We are due for another election before then too.
Also please take a read of the point of view of somebody who actually knows what he is talking about
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jan/08/trade-negotiator-shocked-at-brexiters-ignorance
So Jamba and Chewy: You seriously believe a Conservative government would invest money in UK science, will subsidise the countries hard hit industries and will help the ordinary punter out with the likely 20% tariffs on the food that we eat???? 😯
You've not really being paying attention for the last 40 years have you?
and in all seriousness this detailed text book seems to explain both what is happening in Downing Street and in the extreme Brexit camp
[img] 
[/img]
My predictions:
2019 - The beginning of the end of EU.
2019 - Some countries see sense so follow suit to leave EU.
2002 - EU militia starts a war with the Greek people.
2020 - EU is defined as countries with less than 9 million population.
Science. Yes absolutely.
Subsidising industries ? Matching EU grants, investing in skills, encouraging global exporters yes
20% tariffs on foods, hardly. EU will be bending over backwards to allow tariff free trade on food to the UK
20% tariffs on foods, hardly. EU will be bending over backwards to allow tariff free trade on food to the UK
Not just the EU, those countries that have deals with the EU too. Why would somebody be bending over backwards when the UK has very little choice?
chickenman - Member
So Jamba and Chewy: You seriously believe a Conservative government would invest money in UK science, will subsidise the countries hard hit industries and will help the ordinary punter out with the likely 20% tariffs on the food that we eat????
Yes. You seen the opposition parties? How much worst can you get? One glace you know they are all clowns.
How worst can the future be by comparison to the last 43 years. People have had enough of the last 43 years.You've not really being paying attention for the last 40 years have you?
2019 April chewkw is revealed to be a chatbot created by a teenage boy
2019 Dec something jamba claims to be a fact is actually true
2020 May ninfan is elected PM as the Green party sweeps to power
2020 Nov Trump reelected as the Democrat Party's candidate, as he's got bored with being a Republican
aracer - Member
2019 April chewkw is revealed to be a chatbot created by a teenage boy
2019 Dec something jamba claims to be a fact is actually true
2020 May ninfan is elected PM as the Green party sweeps to power
2020 Nov Trump reelected as the Democrat Party's candidate, as he's got bored with being a Republican
Those are good predictions. You are goooood. 
Kimbers the UK is already one of the best places in the world for Science and Education. Just look at the global University rankings. Why not make it better ? If all the EU academics strop off I predict there will be a very long queue from the rest of the world keen to take their place.
The UK is one of the best places to do scientific research precisely because of the global influx of academics, primarily from the EU. Most of my European colleagues are pan-european in outlook and don't subscribe to the rather parochial and closed "nation state" mentality being espoused at the moment (not just in the UK). To them Britain is saying "we don't want you any more", and Britain is now no more part of their European society than China or the US. The problem if they "strop off" is that, much like our deal with the EU, our present deal couldn't get much sweeter. We are (were) choc-a-bloc full of top flight academics from the UK and EU. We pretty much had all of the top researchers in the whole of the EU wanting to work here. Saying we can recruit from elsewhere in the world is somewhat naive. The source of research group leaders is largely EU, with some US/Canada followed a long way behind by China, India, ****stan and South America. The situation for PhD and PostDocs is almost the exact opposite. And why? Because B[s]R[/s]ICS nations and their scientists want to be trained up and then go home to establish their research groups, largely as a result of wanting to go back home to families, etc. and from national pride. There is little desire to stay on even though many of them are eligible for fellowships or tenure-track positions and would have no problem securing a visa. EU researchers felt at home already in pre-23/6 Britain, generally integrated better with the research environment and were largely more talented and creative research scientists. There may be many reasons behind this but at the end of the day saying that EU scientists can be replaced wholesale with no impact on the quality of UK science just shows a staggering lack of understanding of how the whole process works.
EDIT: too much if the higher education argument from Remainers is based on the EU funding, which is just our own money back less a 60% haircut. Whilst I appreciate people don't trust our Governments (inc Labour ?) to keep funding research using that as a reason to vote IN is very strange
The problem is that scientists in particular (rightly as you point out) don't trust the UK government to fund discovery science, free from artifical targets, goals or constraints. Much government funding requires alignment to strategic priorities, etc. and is designed to capitalise on existing discoveries with as much governmental oversight and researcher accountability as possible. This means that the direction of science is pre-determined whereas pretty much all of the major breakthroughs in science have originated from curiosity driven research. The EU funded much more of this kind of research, which still fuels the economy and provides the platform for future development, but without the heavy handed approach of central government. With EU funding now going where is this academic freedom to make the initial discoveries going to come from? Are we going to rely on others to kick start our research that will have been reduced to R&D for industy? I find it hard to believe that the current Tory or Labour front benches value intellectual advancement very much given what they say and do so yes, I am genuinely worried about what will happen to UK science once the creative V8 engine is reduced to a 2-stroke. The same arguments apply to EU funding of deprived area, etc.
The bottom line on this is that the EU does what needs to be done in this case, the UK govt does what it needs to do to get reelected. The H2020 framework doesn't have any of that political crap attached.
I can't even be bothered to correct your phallacious comments about getting our own money back when even the most optimistic post-Brexit predictions say we'll have less of it anyway. If post-Brexit we have the same levels of funding for curiosity driven research in the UK I will humbly apologise to you. If we don't I expect you to return the courtesy. Given that the UK govt hasn't said anything about EU levels of funding with application deadlines post 2019, and the hardly secret knowlege that funding applications take 2 or more years to develop to the point of submission, I'm feeling pretty certain what the outcome will be and which way the apology will be going.
Science. Yes absolutely.
Subsidising industries ? Matching EU grants, investing in skills, encouraging global exporters yes
But the 'cambridge study' you kept quoting
promised a 2% loss to GDP and then only if we managed a trade deal
but now you say we will have more money ?
[img] 
[/img]
Shackleton - Member
The UK is one of the best places to do scientific research precisely because of the global influx of academics, primarily from the EU.
Is that a one way traffic? i.e. only EU researcher come to UK but not the other way around. Are you saying British scientists are incapable of competing in research? If British scientists are incapable then you have not managed to cultivate home grown scientists for a very long time. Your soul searching start here ...
If your research is valuable there will be funding. If you cannot convince others of your "discovery science" you have no research regardless of how good it looks for you. As for major breakthrough is there a hurry because that sounds like being directed?The problem is that scientists in particular (rightly as you point out) don't trust the UK government to fund discovery science, free from artifical targets, goals or constraints.
2002 May May relected with massive Tory majority
Probably 2020. And yes, there will be a huge Tory majority at next GE. You'd be crazy to bet against it.
Is that a one way traffic?
Of course not, but that is the point. Don't stop people moving, it limits what is possible. It limits mankind's development.
Big projects happen across countries, not within a single one. Think bigger, please.
kelvin - Member
Of course not, but that is the point. Don't stop people moving, it limits what is possible. It limits mankind's development.
Question you need to ask yourself is if you are a world class highly qualified scientist that is in high demand globally, do you think you have problems moving? Your contribution to science in other countries that benefit mankind is that not the same?
Big projects happen across countries, not within a single one. Think bigger, please.
Absolutely non-issue if it benefits countries participating in big projects and I am sure the govts will come to some sort of agreement.
Probably 2020. And yes, there will be a huge Tory majority at next GE. You'd be crazy to bet against it.
Lets see what issue could the Tories manage to completely rip themselves apart over......
BoJo/May/Davies/Fox will be the focus for Brexit regardless of other politicians being for or against. If in 2019 the deal the UK offered is bad and the prospects for the man in the street look bad then expect a different result. Perhaps even the Labour/Momentum lot will manage to see the JC is in no way a politcal leader and call back Milliband, maybe Clegg will fancy another go.
Jez 2.0 is finally getting "on message", now I am worried 8)
Jeremy Corbyn will claim on Tuesday that [b]“Britain can be better off after Brexit”[/b], in his first major intervention of the year which will include a toughening of his line on immigration.
Link etc in the Jezza thread
May only has to deliver on putting measures in place to reduce immigration (she doesn't even have to bring numbers down, just "take back control") and the Tory win is guaranteed at the next election. That is her only real plan, and, for her party, it is a good one. Devastating for the country though, in my opinion.
Corbyn has never been pro EU, so I fully expected him to get behind Brexit over the next two years, as he drifts towards the lowest share of the vote for his party in my lifetime at the next GE (he'll still have loads of seats though, FPTP and all that, keeping Labour on a front bench).
mikewsmith - Member
Perhaps even the Labour/Momentum lot will manage to see the JC is in no way a politcal leader and call back Milliband, maybe Clegg will fancy another go.
Crikey, if you are so desperate at being in EU at least make an effort to find credible candidates to support your arguments.
Those so called "leaders" you have suggested are such a poor choice even pigs (animal) will volunteer to enter slaughter house.
Look at Milliband, look at Clegg ... look at their faces ... do you think they are credible? Even themselves consider themselves not qualified to be politicians with meaning.
Look at Milliband, look at Clegg ... look at their faces ... do you think they are credible? Even themselves consider themselves not qualified to be politicians with meaning.
and yet you support the orange babboon in the US and by the sounds of it Vald the bear impailer. By Milliband I obviously meant David though just in case there was any confusion.
and just in case remember this is our current Foreign Secratary
[img]
[/img]
Wiff Waff baby
chewkw - Member
Shackleton - Member
The UK is one of the best places to do scientific research precisely because of the global influx of academics, primarily from the EU.Is that a one way traffic? i.e. only EU researcher come to UK but not the other way around. Are you saying British scientists are incapable of competing in research? If British scientists are incapable then you have not managed to cultivate home grown scientists for a very long time. Your soul searching starts here ...
It isn't a case of Brits can't compete. The top Brits can compete [u]and[/u] we attract the top researchers from other countries. We have enough British researchers to fill UK universities who are good, but we currently have the pick of the best from across Europe rather than just the UK. Many "good" UK researchers lead research groups overseas precisely because they couldn't compete in the UK. Remember that the number of research group leaders across the UK is measured in the low 1000's, so there aren't huge numbers of jobs, but the impact they have on research is orders of magnitude greater in terms of knock on effects on the economy, etc. So in my view it is worth having the best you can get rather than Brits only.
The problem is that scientists in particular (rightly as you point out) don't trust the UK government to fund discovery science, free from artificial targets, goals or constraints.If your research is valuable there will be funding. If you cannot convince others of your "discovery science" you have no research regardless of how good it looks for you.
How do you know research is valuable before you do it? That is the main problem with UK funding at the moment - you can get funded to expand upon XYZ but it is nigh on impossible to get funding to test an idea. Basically the first step of discovery isn't funded very well by UK govt. It is very easy to convince other scientists of the value of discovery science because they know what it [u]can[/u] bring, it is hard to get money because you can't guarantee what it [u]will[/u] bring.
As for major breakthrough is there a hurry because that sounds like being directed?
I don't understand.....but I meant funding is currently directed largely by government policy rather than having the freedom to follow scientific results wherever they lead to.
For examples of curiosity driven research where the initial discovery would almost certainly never have been funded under current UK scientific policy or was found by accident see the laser, CD/DVD, velcro, superglue, graphene, CRISPR-Cas9, TALEN editing, viagra, saccharin, the microwave oven, bakelite, vulkanised rubber, Teflon, Mauve dye, glue on post-it notes. All from the top of my head so there maybe some duff ones in there (but no more than a Jamby post 😉 )
Question you need to ask yourself is if you are a world class highly qualified scientist that is in high demand globally, do you think you have problems moving? Your contribution to science in other countries that benefit mankind is that not the same?
It isn't that there would be a problem, it is why on earth would they want to move? They would go where the research funding and ability to do good science was. Like the UK at the moment. You can be the best scientist in the world but unless you are in an environment capable of providing the funds, collaborations and infrastructure to support you and easy access to the best people to come and work for you then you aren't going to succeed.
mikewsmith - Member
and yet you support the orange babboon in the US and by the sounds of it Vald the bear impailer.
Yes, I support him so long as he supports PM May. He might look out of place but he definitely speaks his mind.
By Milliband I obviously meant David though just in case there was any confusion.
They had their moments and they are completely out of their political depth now. Everything has changed.
He is Not the British PM but Foreign Secretary so being who he is.and just in case remember this is our current Foreign Secratary
Teflon, Velcro and Post-It Notes were all commercial discoveries - not academic ones.
Theresa will delay the Brexit process just enough to win the 2020 GE she has no other objective. She has demonstrated a complete inability to cope and its obvious to the other EU leaders.
No serious poltical competition will be available in opposition for many years so there is little reason for Mrs May to actually deliver anything and simply borrow money to prop the s**t house up.
No pont arguing over investment/research/banking/manufacturing etc it will gradually erode and the govt will borrow money to prop farmers and bribe overseas mnufacturing to stay in the UK - the welfare cost will explode as the younger tax paying demographic falls due to lack of young immigrants. None of the above is an opinion by the way its just what happens when confidence is removed and restrictions (immigration and investment) arrive.
Teflon, Velcro and Post-It Notes were all commercial discoveries - not academic ones
And? I'm talking about how they are discovered not where. They are examples of things that probably wouldn't have been funded at discovery stage by UK Govt (or industry). Their value was only recognized after the fact.
oldmanmtb - you should get to bed earlier, might be less grumpy.
But that is a pretty rubbish argument, if you are worried about lack replacement of existing funding you need to point to things that funding created, not any old discoveries that happened by chance, we all know things happen by chance the important thing is whether and how they are developed. There is a huge amount of blue sky research in the commercial sector.
Shackleton - Member
It isn't a case of Brits can't compete. ...
Okay I see your logic but that strategy does not guarantee "discovery". Besides, I am sure scientists will be able to justify the reasons for employing other world class scientists or to entice them to come over if the govt see values in them.
You cannot expect funding to be a form of gambling. You simply cannot throw funding money into the pit in the hope something will be discovered because the pit will never be filled, ever. I think science needs to rethink ways of testing ideas.How do you know research is valuable before you do it? That is the main problem with UK funding at the moment - you can get funded to expand upon XYZ but it is nigh on impossible to get funding to test an idea.
Follow your funds. Be flexible but forget about insisting on where the results come from. (obviously all ethics considered)It isn't that there would be a problem, it is why on earth would they want to move?
Mefty that was my positive take on it! Might do a grumpy response now.
Glad to see your expertise in Research Funding chewkw, where did you gain your experience. When people at the front line and involved in this as their occupation are telling you something perhaps you should listen to them, you might actually learn something. Like the points raised by the Canadian Trade Negotiator - you know somebody who knows better than you and Jamby how these things actually work.
As one of my first bosses advised me as a younger man, you have 2 ears and one mouth - try and use in those proportions.
Mefty and chewkw - you are confusing chance with following results and testable ideas.
Science funding shouldn't be gambling but it should provide the freedom to investigate ideas broadly free from top down restraint (within ethical and moral reason).
I'll see if I can dig up some papers tomorrow that put it better than my sleep deprived brain can.
I think science needs to rethink ways of testing ideas
There is really only one correct way. What science really needs to do is educate people as to what that means and what it requires.
mikewsmith - MemberGlad to see your expertise in Research Funding chewkw, where did you gain your experience. When people at the front line and involved in this as their occupation are telling you something perhaps you should listen to them, you might actually learn something. Like the points raised by the Canadian Trade Negotiator - you know somebody who knows better than you and Jamby how these things actually work.
Some of me mates are so boring they keep bombarding me with their works about funding this and that in the far east so I get to know what they say. Yes, some also work for British institution in research ...
Shackleton - Member
Science funding shouldn't be gambling but it should provide the freedom to investigate ideas broadly free from top down restraint (within ethical and moral reason).
Yes, but how many research have you seen not currently part of other research or continuation from other research?
If the research is a "hot topic" then surely you know the value in them hence worth "investing" or funding.
You sound like saying you have suddenly come up with some new ideas that have not been done before so you should have the freedom to investigate.
Surely if this is the case the reason might simply be that your idea is not so hot or dated, therefore there is no value in funding them unless you have superb justification to turn things around.
Can somebody explain to me how we will get all of our Brexit money back when we will now need to set up a bigger civil service to do all those things that we currently do collectively with the EU, pay for our liabilities from being a member and possibly pay to access the EU markets?
In regards to my last point about rights of residency it is usually that once rights are given they cannot be removed and the mess is to do with the U.K. having such a laissez-faire attitude to immigration and where people live. And since it is the UK governments choice to allow people here without registration then they cannot blame the immigrants. People have been legally residing in the U.K. and I can see another court case coming.
It is really easy to see when I arrived in Sweden as I had to register with the council to state that I live here and get a national id code. From reading the page about residency rights in the EU the only criteria is that one has been living there legally so I assume the working stuff is more to do with proof than a qualification?
But then again it seems to be a none issue where the U.K. government is having an argument with its self much like the rest of Brexit when seen from the distance of living in another country. Very sad in all meanings of the word.
The whole Brexit/nation state thing is harking back to the good old days and quietly forgets that even if we were outside the EU we would and will still be subject to laws and rules outside our control and decided collectively. A case in point would be Hinkley Point where even though we may have wanted to scrap the whole thing as too expensive we could not as we needed to have the Chinese and other parties onside to further our other goals. The same may happen to when we negotiate trade deals. We may want to protect our farmers but sacrifice them in order to get better access for our financial services as they make us way more money and we are good at them
Dissection of a [s]good[/s] successful campaign…
A hell of a lot of good stuff in there, so I apologise for cherry picking a few choice bits…
If about 600,000 people – just over 1% of registered voters – had decided differently, IN would have won.
The office could only do so much. If Boris, Gove, and Gisela had not supported us and picked up the baseball bat marked ‘[b]Turkey/NHS/£350 million[/b]’ with five weeks to go, then 650,000 votes might have been lost.
2. ‘The official bill of EU membership is £350 million per week – let’s spend our money on our priorities like the NHS instead.’ (Sometimes we said ‘we send the EU £350m’ to provoke people into argument. This worked much better than I thought it would. There is no single definitive figure because there are different sets of official figures but the Treasury gross figure is slightly more than £350m of which we get back roughly half, though some of this is spent in absurd ways like subsidies for very rich landowners to do stupid things.)
Pundits and MPs kept saying ‘why isn’t Leave arguing about the economy and living standards’. They did not realise that for millions of people, £350m/NHS was about the economy and living standards – that’s why it was so effective. It was clearly the most effective argument not only with the crucial swing fifth but with almost every demographic. Even with UKIP voters it was level-pegging with immigration. Would we have won without immigration? No. [b]Would we have won without £350m/NHS? All our research and the close result strongly suggests No. [/b]Would we have won by spending our time talking about trade and the Single Market? No way…
…sorry for taking out of context… the whole piece is worth reading, but not really aimed at skimmers.
Would we have won without immigration? No. Would we have won without £350m/NHS? All our research and the close result strongly suggests No. Would we have won by spending our time talking about trade and the Single Market? No way…
Which really sums it up as a pure ideological campaign where the cornerstones of the reasons to leave were so greatly exaggerated to a point where they accept had they told the truth people would not have voted for them. Then have the balls to suggest the other side was using project fear...
Yes, they had the balls (and the brains)…
Mandelson regarded this as ‘sheer nerve, sheer chutzpah’. It was obvious. The hard thing was sticking to it despite the sensibilities of many of our own supporters.
…perhaps those running the IN campaign did not…
I suspect that in general big mistakes cause defeat much more often than excellent moves cause victory
…article is very forthright. All a good read.
How worst can the future be by comparison to the last 43 years. People have had enough of the last 43 years.
Which people? How much of the last 43 years have you observed in the UK? 43 years just happens to coincide almost exactly with the period I've been in employment and it's actually been pretty good.
@kelvin mefty posted that already. It's a long but excellent piece. I posted a few paragragphs I found interesting
who would have thought that leave would have read and absorbed Mein Kampf so well
All this was inspired by the principle - which is quite true in itself - that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes. From time immemorial, however, the Jews have known better than any others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited. Is not their very existence founded on one great lie, namely, that they are a religious community, where as in reality they are a race? And what a race! One of the greatest thinkers that mankind has produced has branded the Jews for all time with a statement which is profoundly and exactly true. Schopenhauer called the Jew "The Great Master of Lies". Those who do not realize the truth of that statement, or do not wish to believe it, will never be able to lend a hand in helping Truth to prevail.
It's a long but excellent piece. I posted a few paragragphs I found interesting
and what it's really letting people know is that the streets are not paved with gold, there will not be £350 million heading to the NHS and all the other promises well they were more like inspirational quotes.
Sorry Jamba, missed that.
mrmo & mikewsmith hence why I said the campaign was "successful" not "good".
I'm sure the Leave campaign bods would say something like "our misdirection spoke to a greater truth".
It marks a low in the politics of our lifetime hence the moniker = post truth politics
and what it's really letting people know is that the streets are not paved with gold, there will not be £350 million heading to the NHS and all the other promises well they were more like inspirational quotes.
What like "arbeit macht frei?"
As always follow the money and you will find why. Obviously the large majority of brexiters won't admit that they have been played for fools as that would be to admit that they are idiots.
Politicians need to be personally held account for their actions. If a surgeon screws up they can go to jail, it a politician lies they get to go on the after dinner circuit.
Obviously the large majority of brexiters won't admit that they have been played for fools as that would be to admit that they are idiots.
I'm afraid that is probably bullshit. The "large majority of brexiters" voted out at any cost, and were not persuaded by the campaign, they had already made up their minds. However, the vote could not have been won without the misdirection aimed at those who were undecided which way to vote, or even whether to vote. I have spoken to people who voted Leave to "do right by the NHS' etc, but they were not the majority, just the necessary minority of voters that had to be swayed for the Leave vote to win. Most Leave voters were not fooled, but the vote could not be won without fooling enough people to vote Leave.
Most Leave voters were not fooled,
Time will tell...
my mum voted out because of 'the money sent to brussles', that couldve been spent on the NHS she'd worked for for 30 years
she was definitely fooled
Edukator
[i]I think you need to revise your choice of history books, br, and perhaps spend a little time working and living in Germany. [/I]
I both lived in Germany and worked there (over a +10 year period).
I'm afraid that is probably bullshit. The "large majority of brexiters" voted out at any cost, and were not persuaded by the campaign
Not so sure, take 40 years of blaming the EU to sort the base out, then a few more months on top.
Fair comment.
The campaign had been running for years. The official campaign was just tidying up around the edges and topped off by the political face of fun Boris and animated spitting image doll Gove.
I doubt many leave voters were fooled by the official campaign but had been swayed many years previously by the (IMO) insidious drip drip campaign of fear and half truths (Farage, Dacre/Mail, Murdoch/Sun, Desmond/Express, etc.).
It is a bit like religion. It becomes unquestionable and when one is inside it you cannot see that it is illogical and built on sand. It is very hard for the brain to remove illogical ideas as they are connected to loads of other beliefs and concepts.
This will be a big problem for the UK when it comes to negotiate with the EU. Both parties are on different planets. When the EU elections where on here in Sweden there was lots of coverage how important it was for things like environmental and labour legislation while in the UK the major campaign messages were about how terrible the EU was. Both the same event but totally different perspectives and very it is hard to come out of those perspectives.
As this thread has proved arguing either way does not change peoples minds it tends just to entrench ideas.
The whole Brexit anti EU thing fits well into the British mentality of a plucky, long suffering, complaining underdog bumberling through to victory like Dad's Army.
Anyone got an ft sub?
High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our T&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights.
https://www.ft.com/content/0f276426-d67b-11e6-944b-e7eb37a6aa8eOld schemes counted in post-Brexit vote inward investment tally
Trade department study of ‘£16bn’ projects coming to UK shows deals unveiled years agoInvestments announced by Liam Fox's department include: £650m in a renewable energy plant in Teesside, the regeneration of the Ferrybridge Power Station and £60m for a recycling and energy plant in Northwich © FT Montage
I both lived in Germany and worked there (over a +10 year period).
And yet you still attribute peace in Europe to the total destruction of the German state, br. Were you BFG or working with Germans?
Anyhow, you linked a book with glaring errors in the abstract, [url= http://www.historyandpolicy.org/policy-papers/papers/germany-1945-1949-a-case-study-in-post-conflict-reconstruction ]here's the first Google result.[/url]
It was similar in France, all the pre-war political groups resurfaced and quickly filled the vacuum left by Vichy. Initially it was resistance members who came to the fore, so the far left, but very quickly the political landscape was very similar to pre-war. I proof read Madame's doctorate on the subject BTW.
And yet you still attribute peace in Europe to the total destruction of the German state
I'm no expert on what other people mean but it seems fairly clear to me he was referring to the "destruction" of the 3rd Reich.
With no mention of Nazis or 3rd Reich it was far from clear.
The state is far more than the political leaders. It's the civil servants who go on doing their jobs whoever is in power, it's the institutions, the legal system, the health system, the people who look after infrastructure and services. Whilst diminished all of those remaind intact and ready to serve the new leaders - the armies of occupation initially but within a couple of years their new elected German leaders.
Still waiting for even a HINT of a plan for Northern Ireland…
I think science needs to rethink ways of testing ideas.
Sorry, I missed this hilarity from chewkw earlier 😆 😆 😆
Does anyone else read his posts with a Russian accent?
Kelvin NI is a non issue. There is already a UK / Ireland group working on it and the EU said it was fully supportive. There will be no hard border between the two. Ireland is struggling with strong € but they can manage that, maybe they will stop telling the EU they don't need the €13bn Apple are supoosed to pay in back taxes,
Read Cummings piece, the EU budget contribution was a key message, even Remain kept bringing the conversation back to it by arguing about the figure 8)
[i]There will be no hard border between the two.[/I]
Convinced enough to bet your own money?
IMO It'll have to be the same border approach as between Poland and the Ukraine, otherwise there's a soft way in to the UK and you Brexiters wouldn't like that. Or will the hard border be in our mainland ports?
Said it before the poor huddled masses that voted for Brexit are well and truly f*d the far right shite got them to vote brexit and that is the end of their usefullness to the right wing. Now their traditonal supporters (the middle ground) as many of us are due to the fact many of us come from this group have now gone * you - add in automation and deregulation of employment not to mention welfare cuts their ass is grass. We are going to have a much more isolated working/benefits class with continually reducing quality of life and they have no political representation
Kelvin NI is a non issue.
Well, the NI Executive has fallen already.
There will be no hard border between the two.
Which two? Eire&NI? NI&rUk? Eire&rUK? Eire&rEU?
It is also unclear what impact leaving the EU’s customs union would have on the UK’s land border with the Republic of Ireland. This issue is addressed more fully in our report on the implications of Brexit for UK-Irish relations.
The government would beg to differ - on both sides
The implications of the 23 June referendum result for UK-Irish relations are often overlooked, at least on this side of the Irish Sea. Yet the consequences of Brexit are highly significant, not only for the Republic of Ireland, Northern Ireland and North-South relations between the two,1 but for the totality of relationships across these islands. Indeed, Taoiseach Enda Kenny has described the UK’s vote to withdraw from the EU as “arguably the greatest economic and social challenge for this island in fifty years.”
Stable door. Horse. Bolted. Germany reacts to repeated terrorist attacks and substantial asylum seeker benefit frauds.
Effective border controls and an EU asylum policy which member states respected would have rendered this irrelevant.
Extensive pre deportation detention and electronic tagging. Tougher residency proof requirements for those found guilty of benefit / multiple identity fraud. Plus trying to deal with countries who won't take their own citizens back.
http://www.dw.com/en/germany-sets-out-tougher-post-attack-security-measures/a-37078879
The non-issues identified by the Gov to date:
The economic implications for the Republic of Ireland, which it will face even though it had no say in the UK’s decision to leave the EU.
The economic implications for Northern Ireland, particularly given the extent of cross-border trade and the agri-food sector’s reliance on EU funding.
The consequences for the soft Irish land border of potential restrictions to the free movement of goods and people.
The implications for the Common Travel Area and for the special status of UK and Irish citizens in each other’s countries, including the right of the people of Northern Ireland to Irish (and therefore EU)
citizenship.
The potential impact on political stability in Northern Ireland, and in particular on the confidence of both communities that their interests and aspirations are being respected.
The challenge to the North-South and East-West institutional structure established under the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement.
Re Germany: There is still more that can be done INSIDE THE EU on these matters, by nation states, if they choose to.
Effective border controls and an EU asylum policy which member states respected would have rendered this irrelevant.
I doubt it
Q: Reason for travel?
A: To explode a bomb in a crowded shopping centre
Q: How long do you intend to stay?
A: 48 hours
Q: Have a nice trip....next
Jambalaya, how did the UK government stop the IRA bombings on the mainland with explosives shipped from Libya?
How do you stop someone stealing a truck and driving it through a crowd? Do you intend to deport all second and third generation immigrants?
Seem like others have been making plans for Nigel, his anti-EU group in European parliament is going to lose the Italian contingent, which puts it perilously close to losing its status as a parliamentary group with a large loss of funding and access places on committees, speaking slots etc.
He's gone from "ambassador to the US" to part time DJ.
Also noticed that Marine Le pen is in a spot of bother over Russian funding, and has done a complete u-turn on leaving the EU/dropping the Euro after opinion polls suggested the majority wanted to stay in the EU.
It really does look like your wet dream of the break up of the EU isn't going to happen Jumbleliar, quite the opposite is happening...after seeing the Shambles that will await anyone else wanting to leave.
fourbanger - Member
I think science needs to rethink ways of testing ideas.
Sorry, I missed this hilarity from chewkw earlier
Bloody hell someone got that ... It was meant to poke fun at testing ideas as science being science they forget how to make experiment cheaper ... you clever person you got that.
You are Not meant to get that. 😆
Research, product testing or prototyping regardless what they are can be very expensive but the problem is that we keep adding complication to those areas. If you can make an "accurate" simulation or prediction of the outcome. i.e. cheaper to test. Jackpot.
Does anyone else read his posts with a Russian accent?
Russian speaking English is not so bad, try Japanese. 😛 Terri-bu-ru! 😀
[quote=teamhurtmore ]including the right of the people of Northern Ireland to Irish (and therefore EU) citizenship.
I'm not sure that one really is an issue. Plenty of UK nationals (myself included) who are entitled to Irish passports irrespective of the status of NI (my entitlement arises from before partition!) The EU also appeared kind of keen on the proposal for stateless EU citizenship post Brexit.
It did occur to me that given my UK passport has just run out it might be easier not to bother renewing it and just get an Irish one instead.