Brexit benefits – lets start a list

At the risk of being shouted at, i’m going to try + be impartial.

Some cheap EU labour was undermining UK salaries from the late 1990’s. However, we were left with a huge labour shortage that wasn’t being filled by African/Asian workers, domestic workers or new technology. So lots of retail/hospitality/factories/farms closed. A wasted opportunity.

It’s difficult to assess the costs/benefits, though, as you have to compare the current position of the UK to an imaginary scenario where we are still in the EU, 4 years later. Would we still have high inflation, for example? Probably, yes.

For me, it’s the lack of planning and consideration given to our long-term prospects which is the most frustrating. There was far too much emphasis on ‘Getting Brext done’ instead of ‘Making Britain better’!

The private sector will always act in it’s own interests. A classic example is the Freeport at Redcar – this will be a gold standard in corruption and misappropriation.

Leaving the EU allows the UK to restructure its railways, but that would require a competent government that actually wanted to achieve something rather than just put out press releases.

You can argue about the pros and cons of leaving, but you can’t really argue against giving people the power to make the decision. We need a lot more of it IMO.

Surely it’s a warning of what will happen if you give people the power to make a decision, when they aren’t provided with the information needed to make that decision, and aren’t blessed with the skills to analyse that information even if they had it?

there’s a reason we’ve never been offered a referendum on bringing back capital punishment.

Capital punishment is a fringe issue. You wouldn’t ask the population to vote on something that trivial. You might however get the population to vote on taxation levels, budgets, NHS, schools reform and other big stuff that directly affects them. Yes the brexit vote was poorly organised and a terribly implemented example of a referendum, which is why we need to do more of them to get them right. The tories won an election on the promise of a referendum on EU membership, then won another because the results of it weren’t being implemented or could even be overturned. That shows they have a place in our legislative system, and an improvement on our corrupt and venal system of representative democracy.

Surely it’s a warning of what will happen if you give people the power to make a decision

If you want a functioning democracy you need to trust the people to make decisions. If you want good decisions you need to maximise opportunities for involving voters in them. You can’t have it both ways. Either we believe in democracy or we don’t, and with patronising comments such as this the remain/rejoin lobby sounds more and more anti-democratic. That’s one of the (main) reasons people voted out, because of a perceived political establishment which wields power without accountability.

You might however get the population to vote on taxation levels, budgets, NHS, schools reform and other big stuff that directly affects them.

Then you’d have an absolute tyranny of the majority. How do you think, say, cyclists would fare if relevant issues were decided by a majority?

Sorry Dazh, I don’t think you’ve made the case.  I’m going to disagree.

My life has changed and I’m a dual national. CRC closed my account which dated to back to when they first launched the site, it’s easier to buy stuff from China than the UK and the border is an absolute random shit show pain in the butt. It’s absolutely pointless booking any transport on the other side because you have no idea how long it’s going to take to get through customs. The customs people seem to make life especially difficult for dual nationals and airport staff randomly refuse access to flights people have every right to be on (that’s no longer a problem, I’ve given up flying). My last effort to leave the UK, we did catch the boat but I did begin to wonder:

“Do you have any proof you are British?” my national insurance number is ……… check. “A British passport?” I’m travelling on my French passport because it’s a good idea to enter and leave a country on the same passport, besides my British one is out of date. “Driving license” – French. “Adresse?” – French, the one on this ID card is correct as is all the other information including place of birth, Birmingham, same as on my passport. “Wait there”

On junior’s last trip he arrived over an hour early in St Pancras for Eurostar as advised and missed it. On the way in they wanted proof of where he was going to stay, since when did a Brit need proof of where he is going to spend the night in Britain?

I’ve dusted off my birth certificate, the English one before I was born again French, maybe that will help.

Rant to be continued…. 😉

So a personal benefit is that it’s really made me appreciate how easy it is to get around Shengen.

The customs people seem to make life especially difficult for dual nationals and airport staff randomly refuse access to flights people have every right to be on

MrsJ is one of them dirty forriners like the majority decided we don’t want. Last time around she was asked to show her UK residence card. Her what ????????

If you want a functioning democracy you need to trust the people to make decisions. If you want good decisions you need to maximise opportunities for involving voters in them. You can’t have it both ways.

A functioning democracy needs people to indicate preferences, not make decisions (that’s what governments are for – if the population makes the decision you just need a civil service not a government)

And the preferences should be preferred outcomes, not preferred mechanisms.

PS – I think you might find (with your time machine I’ve supplied) Brexit was more of a fringe issue than capital punishment in 2010ish.

Then you’d have an absolute tyranny of the majority. How do you think, say, cyclists would fare if relevant issues were decided by a majority?

You’d have checks and controls to prevent a tyranny of the majority situation. And do you really think we’d have referenda on cycling/roads policy?? Seriously that’s clutching at straws and doesn’t help your argument. Look, if you don’t want more democracy then fine, but don’t dress it up by pretending fringe issues would result in some sort of tyrannical mob rule. The flip side is also true though, don’t then complain when corrupt representatives like tory MPs make stupid policy which harms you.

You’d have checks and controls to prevent a tyranny of the majority situation.

Like the checks and controls that were abscent from the brexit referendum?

http://www.voteleavetakecontrol.org/why_vote_leave.html

Wait a few years when even more people aren’t benefiting from capitalism, because they’ve no capital – and this “socialism”, that’s the very thing YOU benefited from with your free-at-point-of-use healthcare, education, law & order etc etc.

Except this isn’t what this thread is about – is it? Spare your lectures on the benefits of socialism and start a new thread on the subject.

You’d have checks and controls to prevent a tyranny of the majority situation.

So it wouldn’t actually be the people’s choice, then, it would be modified by some non-democratic actors.

And do you really think we’d have referenda on cycling/roads policy?? Seriously that’s clutching at straws and doesn’t help your argument.

Err, no but I thought STW readers would be sensitive to the impact of what a majority believe, and that it would be a clear example around a shared concern.

Look, if you don’t want more democracy then fine, but don’t dress it up by pretending fringe issues would result in some sort of tyrannical mob rule.

And yet they have. That’s exactly what this thread is about. A small problem of the Tories and UKIP has led to an ignorant majority messing everyone’s life up.

And do you really think we’d have referenda on cycling/roads policy??

If you gave any group of folks the chance to dictate the local transport issues, I would happily wager your money it would not be safe and separated cycling infra, and that’s precisely the sort of local and popular “more democracy” you’re advocating.

Capital punishment is a fringe issue.

A decade ago so was leaving the EU. No one but no  one saw it as the issue that should be a national referendum.

A functioning democracy needs people to indicate preferences, not make decisions (that’s what governments are for – if the population makes the decision you just need a civil service not a government)

Semantics. Expressing a preference is making a decision. The govt decides which outcomes are presented to the people on a particular issue, then enable a debate and a referendum to make the decision. I really don’t see what’s so controversial about that.

And the preferences should be preferred outcomes

Like being in the EU or out of it? If you’re arguing that referenda should have simple to understand outcomes, the EU referendum was a good example.

And do you really think we’d have referenda on cycling/roads policy??

Are you paying attention to Rishi “culture warrior” Sunak and sundry other muppets in parliament? Of course we would and Sir Starmer would not be any better at not pandering to the nutters. (See panic about ULEZ for an example of flip-flop policy making).

some non-democratic actors

They’re not undemocratic, the idea of a referendum is to get an idea of the majority view without oppressing the minority. Without losers consent the process is undemocratic no matter what the majority require and the danger is that revolution and heads on stakes becomes more likely.

Expressing a preference is making a decision

What? No it’s not!

The only potential “advantage” maybe that Scottish people who see how badly the divorce from the EU has gone may reconsider how they vote in terms of independence.

Possibly, but not the direction I suspect you mean.

A decade ago so was leaving the EU. No one but no one saw it as the issue that should be a national referendum.

Don’t be daft. EU membership was an issue which directly affected everyone in the country. Capital punishment affects a tiny few people who commit or are victims of murder. Clearly you wouldn’t have a referendum on an issue that only impacts a negligible percentage of the population.

the EU referendum was a good example.

But it wasn’t though was it. The Good Friday agreement was posted through the letterbox of every address on the Island pointing out what it meant, what it didn’t mean, what structures would be in place and when that would happen. No one could’ve honestly said that they didn’t know what it was they were voting for in 1998. The Brexit vote was the complete opposite of that process. If you’re going to advocate for more democracy at least have a sensible idea of what that looks like, and if you think it was the EU vote in 2016, then I’m going to ignore you because you’re not being serious.

The fact that politicians gave the people a choice on an issue as big as this goes against the popular view that politicians do what the hell they like and don’t listen to the voters.

Politicians (Tory politicians) gave the people the opportunity to vote on this as a means of getting shut of Farage and his ilk. I don’t think for one moment it panned out exactly as they imagined it would.

Politicians (Tory politicians) gave the people the opportunity to vote on this as a means of getting shut of Farage and his ilk. I don’t think for one moment it panned out exactly as they imagined it would.

Worse. It didn’t pan out as expected, but instead of trying to mitigate the effects on the innocent victims (the population) they swiftly re-oriented themselves and pursued whatever course they thought would benefit their personal interests.

Don’t be daft. EU membership was an issue which directly affected everyone in the country.

Please do find the 2013 articles for us all to read pointing out the affect leaving the EU would have and the importance of voting in a national  referenda.

You know full well that it was called to try to finally resolve an internal Tory party conflict, to try to pretend otherwise makes you look unserious.

I believe that it’s a fairly established fact in political science that more democracy does not mean better democracy.

Hence you get the situation where MPs are held hostage by their local (often swivel eyed crazy) associations rather than representing their constituents.

The UK population both Tory and Labour had become used to the idea of referendums in the context of decisons on Europe, they’d already had one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_United_Kingdom_European_Communities_membership_referendum

In 2004 Blair yielded to pressure for a referendum on the European constitution  (which I interpreted as Britain not being prepared to sign as I reckoned “no” would win and got on with protecting my interests). As it was referendums in France and the Netherlands scuppered the idea which was watered down to the Lisbon treaty and the promise of a referendum got forgotten.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/apr/20/eu.politics6

But the idea of a referendum on Europe persisted – the foreign press barons dictating British public opinion and government policy weren’t going to let it drop with both sides of the house having yielded to their pressure before.

The press barons knew they could win and Boris was their man.

You’d have checks and controls to prevent a tyranny of the majority situation

Such obstructions would be voted out

Capital punishment is a fringe issue

Ask the right questions and itd have majority support.

Bit  late in the day but https://fullfact.org/health/coronavirus-vaccine-brexit/

This is not correct. Under European law, the UK was permitted to act independently to approve the vaccine in an emergency.

The tax on Tampax was reduced from 5% to 0%, (whether it’s been passed on thou may be a story for another day).

The imperial thing is also another thing you could do without leaving the E.U., as long as you had the metric on the packaging I dont think it ws illegal to have this.

Don’t be daft. EU membership was an issue which directly affected everyone in the country. Capital punishment affects a tiny few people who commit or are victims of murder. Clearly you wouldn’t have a referendum on an issue that only impacts a negligible percentage of the population.

what like ECHR membership?

youre arguing against yourself here Daz, EU membership barely registered on voters concerns, until it became a scapegoat for the governments own failures

brexit has shown us that anything can be weaponised in a culture war

brexit has also helped normalise the far right policies of this government, rwanda deportation scheme, prison hulks for immigrants …. these are policies we long thought we’d consigned to history

Capital punishment affects a tiny few people who commit or are victims of murder.

Or folk who didn’t commit whatever offences were deemed to be capital (we could all have a referendum on those too) but get hung anyway. The justice system is not in fallible after all.

Dazh, I know you mean well and all, but your arguments don’t hang together.
Leaving the the EU was a mechanism not an outcome. It sought to achieve something (admittedly different groups were sold it as a mechanism to achieve mutually exclusive outcomes) – it wasn’t an outcome in itself.
The outcomes associated might have been better jobs, fewer foreigners, higher environmental standards, faster deportation of disreputable types, more international trade, onshoring of manufacturing and so on and so forth. Ask people’s preferences on those by all means, but don’t use a referendum to ask them how to do it.

I think whatever replaces the CAP will be better.

Says the Brexiteer. Any idea what will replace the CAP, ctk. Be nice if you could explain how it will be better rather than just think it.

Monbiot CAP

to try to pretend otherwise makes you look unserious.

Of course it was to fix an internal Tory problem. I’ve never claimed otherwise. That doesn’t mean the people voting in it didn’t take it seriously. The fact that the turnout was higher than any general election and the amount of campaigning was off the chart that shows the voters were wholly supportive of their opportunity to make a decision on something irregardless of why it happened.

Fan of the CAP edukator?

I’m looking at it from an EU point of view, Brucewee. Freedom of movement was at the heart of negotiations:

https://www.thelocal.fr/20211208/blame-uk-for-end-to-onward-freedom-of-movement-barnier-tells-brits-in-france

Yep,people who already lived outside of the U.K. were biggly shafted by the U.K. as this removed their rights to free movement which I think should have been protected.

Anyway I’m still unable to leave Spain,without voiding my residency application, haven’t seen family for 2+ years, my driving licence will not be recognised in the middle of the next month. I’m also not the only person to be in this position.

Without Brexit I wouldn’t be a legal, illegal alien 🙁

Wales proposals

Seems good to me- an emphasis on the environment and sustainable farming.

CAP was/is a disgrace.

it wasn’t an outcome in itself.

Nonsense. The question on the ballot was do you want the UK to leave the EU or remain? A simple binary choice with a definite outcome. Everyone understood what this question means.

I agree with the objectives of the CAP which you’ll find by googling just that and the good health of European agriculture demostrates its success.

Sure there are abuses and some failings as with any system, but on the whole I think European farming has benefitted from the CAP and the population is well fed at affordable prices as a result.

Fan of the CAP edukator?

Probably goes without saying seeing as he lives in France.