Brexit matters

AlterEgo

Veteran Member
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
15,845
Location
No longer here
The same people who won't be able to afford the food because the prices increase by (say) 20%.

Sure, nobody's wages should go up - least of all the most vulnerable and lowest paid - just in case it makes prices rise. Wage rises and better, safer working conditions are harmful to the poor - got it.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
25,711
Location
UK
Maybe just tell them they should have worked harder in life.

In the US, the Republicans are doing a grand job shaming the less fortunate. I am sure the Tories could learn a thing or two.

Let's blame inflation on pay rises! Inflation that even happened before the pay rises!
 

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
2,807
Location
Churn (closed)
Not at all. My argument is that Brexit substantially improved things as far as the vaccine roll-out is concerned because, without Brexit, we would've followed the EU programme, and thereby ended up with a much later vaccine rollout resulting in many more people in the UK dieing, and lockdowns having to be continued for longer than they actually were.
Any EU country had the option to opt out but few have the skill set to do so. The UK does plus Germany and Denmark chose to after a while.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
27,119
Location
Scotland
Sure, nobody's wages should go up - least of all the most vulnerable and lowest paid - just in case it makes prices rise. Wage rises and better, safer working conditions are harmful to the poor - got it.
I never said that wages don't need to increase, but increasing wages too high too fast leads to stagflation. What do you expect will happen when farmers - who are already operating on paper-thin margins - find their labour costs go up by 25%?
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
25,711
Location
UK
I never said that wages don't need to increase, but increasing wages too high too fast leads to stagflation. What do you expect will happen when farmers - who are already operating on paper-thin margins - find their labour costs go up by 25%?

They arrive in the real world? Perhaps they need a more effective union that can push back against the supermarkets that forced them to provide food so cheap in order to put their products on the shelves.
 

Cdd89

Member
Joined
8 Jan 2017
Messages
1,173
I think you need to have very rose tinted glasses to see these as Brexit gains
I thought it was a very fair list.

I voted remain and continue to believe that overall the harms of Brexit have exceeded the gains (so to the extent that there even are sides any more, I'm on yours).

However the keenness of insisting that no consequence of Brexit has been beneficial - with excuses given why every benefit is not really a benefit - is bordering on obsession in my opinion.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
27,119
Location
Scotland
They arrive in the real world? Perhaps they need a more effective union that can push back against the supermarkets that forced them to provide food so cheap in order to put their products on the shelves.
Well, taking beef and lamb farmers as an example, they're up against (so far) Australian and New Zealand producers (thanks to our post-Brexit trade deals) who have considerably lower production costs. So more realistically, they will go out of business.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
25,711
Location
UK
Well, taking beef and lamb farmers as an example, they're up against (so far) Australian and New Zealand producers (thanks to our post-Brexit trade deals) who have considerably lower production costs. So more realistically, they will go out of business.
This Government sold out the farming and fishing industries in a heartbeat, but everyone knew what they were voting for..
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
22,628
Location
Nottingham
Sure, you're correct. One person's higher wages, in the absence of corresponding productivity improvements, will always be someone else's higher prices.
And productivity has taken a hit because the uncertainty after 2016 has deterred investment in the UK.
We've discussed this before, and needless to say, I disagree. Brexit wasn't just a legal thing - it was also a cultural shift that changed the normal way we expect to do things. Even if it was theoretically possible that we could have done our own vaccine roll-out as EU members, the point is we (almost certainly) wouldn't have done: Pre-Brexit, the normal expectation was that we'd go along with whatever the EU decided (as did every EU member when it came to the vaccine roll-out). Brexit changed the expectations, with the result that the normal thing to do was now for us to go it alone - and as we saw, in this case, that had spectacularly good results.
If this is true then it's indicative of the attitude of successive British governments to see the EU as a convenient scapegoat for problems mostly of its own making. A larger and much more serious example of the mindset that said we could only have blue passports if we left the EU, when we could have had them any time and at least one EU member kept their previous colour.
 

nw1

Established Member
Joined
9 Aug 2013
Messages
3,198
And productivity has taken a hit because the uncertainty after 2016 has deterred investment in the UK.

If this is true then it's indicative of the attitude of successive British governments to see the EU as a convenient scapegoat for problems mostly of its own making. A larger and much more serious example of the mindset that said we could only have blue passports if we left the EU, when we could have had them any time and at least one EU member kept their previous colour.

Besides whether the purple was mandatory or not, if anyone thinks that "blue passports" are a benefit of leaving the EU, they need their head examining. Who really cares about the colour of a passport? Far more important than the colour of a particular passport is the rights that it gives, and the blue passport gives very little indeed in the way of rights compared to an EU passport.

I've never had a blue passport anyway, and I'm not especially young anymore.
 
Last edited:

AM9

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2014
Messages
11,797
Location
St Albans
Besides whether the purple was mandatory or not, if anyone thinks that "blue passports" are a benefit of leaving the EU, they need their head examining. Who really cares about the colour of a passport? Far more important than the colour of a particular passport is the rights that it gives, and the blue passport gives very little indeed in the way of rights compared to an EU passport.

I've never had a blue passport anyway, and I'm not especially young anymore.
But at least the new Blue British passports are made in France. :lol:
 

tomuk

Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
820
Far more important than the colour of a particular passport is the rights that it gives, and the blue passport gives very little indeed in the way of rights compared to an EU passport.
Apart from freedom of movement in the EU a British passport is a highly rated passport for access it provides around the world, it is ranked top five or six above strangely some EU passports.
 

317 forever

Established Member
Joined
21 Aug 2010
Messages
1,922
Location
North West
I suspect I understand it. It's a very, very simple message to take into a FPTP election which is winner-take-all, and it effectively turns the election into 59 mini-referenda. With Labour and the Liberal Democrats having to fight the Tories in Scotland for the simple fact that the Tory government will be on its knees by then, it should give the SNP victory in most seats yet again.

The other thing is that by making it a vote on independence, the SNP will have a very strong hand as kingmakers post-election. Let's say that a Lab-Lib coalition is still short of the seats needed for a majority. The SNP can offer confidence and supply, as long as a second referendum is held in Autumn 2025. Do they accept or refuse? The SNP will have fought explicitly on the topic of independence, so if Lab-Lib need Scottish votes, they'll need to meet the SNP's manifesto promise.

It could backfire if the three Unionist parties form an electoral pact, but that could also be electoral suicide for Labour and the Lib Dems in Scotland with a Holyrood election looming and the SNP being able to very easily portray them as Tories in disguise. And of course, if the SNP win the most seats regardless, then they could punish a Lab-Lib minority government repeatedly.
Where the SNP need to be careful is here. Labour governments tend to be more in tune with Scottish needs and wishes than Conservative governments. So if the SNP overplay the demand of a referendum to the point of bringing down a Labour-led government, we could all get a Conservative-led sooner than otherwise. Echos of 1979 again. So their best bet if disappointed at the lack on an independence referendum is to generally abstain at Westminster votes.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
22,628
Location
Nottingham
Where the SNP need to be careful is here. Labour governments tend to be more in tune with Scottish needs and wishes than Conservative governments. So if the SNP overplay the demand of a referendum to the point of bringing down a Labour-led government, we could all get a Conservative-led sooner than otherwise. Echos of 1979 again. So their best bet if disappointed at the lack on an independence referendum is to generally abstain at Westminster votes.
On the other hand a Conservative government, especially one of with the extreme behaviours of Johnson and likely successor, is the best recruiting sergeant the SNP can wish for. So they are likely to do what they can behind the scenes to make this happen, as long as they don't end up being seen to be responsible. I suspect this was one factor in play in late 2019.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
22,628
Location
Nottingham
Can you explain what these extreme behaviours are? Doesn't appear to be any different to 2018 around here.
The way the Johnson government has ignored all the norms, like trying to prorogue Parliament, Partygate, wanting to break inernational law to change the NI Protocol they themselves signed up to, and the lack of personal morality shown most notably by Partygate. Mostly to secure a Brexit Scotland never wanted and surrender the EU membership which was one of the main reasons for a vote against independence.
 

tomuk

Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
820
The way the Johnson government has ignored all the norms, like trying to prorogue Parliament,
Parliament by that stage was in a complete mess, the supreme court did rule that the prorogation was unlawful but the government then prorogued and later dissolved parliament for the election anyway.
Partygate, wanting to break inernational law to change the NI Protocol they themselves signed up to, and the lack of personal morality shown most notably by Partygate.
Yes it was sad to see the lack of morality of many senior civil servants. Were they not still partying when the PM was in hospital or at Chequers? Why did Dom or the Permanent Secretary stop them?
Mostly to secure a Brexit Scotland never wanted and surrender the EU membership which was one of the main reasons for a vote against independence.
Oh I see its Brexit again, you don't like Brexit so the government that implements what people voted for is extreme. Cue the ad Hominem attacks, arguments about the validity of the referendum, the right wing media interference blah, blah blah.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
27,119
Location
Scotland
Yes it was sad to see the lack of morality of many senior civil servants. Were they not still partying when the PM was in hospital or at Chequers? Why did Dom or the Permanent Secretary stop them?
As they say, the fish rots from the head.

And as is usually the case - it's not the crime, it's the cover-up. Had Boris simply come to parliament and said "I messed up" then the whole thing would have been nothing more than a blip.
 

tomuk

Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
820
Had Boris simply come to parliament and said "I messed up" then the whole thing would have been nothing more than a blip.
That's the most hilarious thing I've read. Of course everyone would have just forgotten all about it. Just next days fish and chip papers.

It is odd that no one batted an eyelid when the 'birthday party' he and dishy Rishi were eventually fined for was reported in the Times and elsewhere back in June 2020. Or indeed the very similar PR visit at a school where he was presented with a cake earlier that day.
 

Gloster

Established Member
Joined
4 Sep 2020
Messages
4,416
Location
Up the creek
It is odd that no one batted an eyelid when the 'birthday party' he and dishy Rishi were eventually fined for was reported in the Times and elsewhere back in June 2020. Or indeed the very similar PR visit at a school where he was presented with a cake earlier that day.

I was in a home at the time, so had little knowledge of what was going on in the world, but would have thought that people were rather more concerned with their own situation. (Am I going to die? Will the economy tank and will I lose my job? What is going to happen?) Once the worst was over people had a better idea of their situation and, possibly, felt that their sacrifices were worth it. And then they find that Johnson...
 

tomuk

Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
820
And then they find that Johnson...
Did what? Stood there while the staff gave him a birthday cake. Sat in the garden of his flat and had bottle of wine and some cheese? Meanwhile millions of people were visiting supermarkets everyday.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
27,119
Location
Scotland
That's the most hilarious thing I've read. Of course everyone would have just forgotten all about it. Just next days fish and chip papers.
It would have been a blip - in the same way that the wallpaper was a blip - it would've been in the headlines for a week or two and then we would have moved on to his next scandal. The thing that kept it in the headlines was the drip, drip, drip followed by denial after denial: "There were no parties".... "I've been assured there were no parties"... "I wasn't aware that there were any parties"... "I've been assured that all relevant guidance was followed at the parties, but I wasn't there"... "Okay, there's a picture of me at the party, but I thought it was a work event"... "It was a party, and I was there, but we need to wait for the Sue Grey report".
Did what? Stood there while the staff gave him a birthday cake.
Please don't insult our intelligence by rolling out that pathetic excuse.

I would expect a six-year old to come up with a better line than that.
Sat in the garden of his flat and had bottle of wine and some cheese?
Sat in the garden of his next-door neighbour.
 

tomuk

Member
Joined
15 May 2010
Messages
820
It would have been a blip - in the same way that the wallpaper was a blip - it would've been in the headlines for a week or two and then we would have moved on to his next scandal. The thing that kept it in the headlines was the drip, drip, drip followed by denial after denial: "There were no parties".... "I've been assured there were no parties"... "I wasn't aware that there were any parties"... "I've been assured that all relevant guidance was followed at the parties, but I wasn't there"... "Okay, there's a picture of me at the party, but I thought it was a work event"... "It was a party, and I was there, but we need to wait for the Sue Grey report".
The SPADs and Civil servants were having parties when he wasn't there. He asked the Permanent secretary if one of the events was ok and he was assured it was. Even if he was completely innocent, his commentary would change as he learnt of the full details of the events.
Please don't insult our intelligence by rolling out that pathetic excuse.

I would expect a six-year old to come up with a better line than that.
Sue Gray report:

The Prime Minister was not aware of this event in advance and it did not form part
of his official diary for the day. He returned from an external visit to No 10 Downing
Street at approximately 14.20 and was taken into the Cabinet Room which had
been set up with sandwiches, snacks, soft drinks and cans of beer. Those attending
included No 10 officials and Mrs. Johnson. The Permanent Secretary for Covid and
Pandemic Response, Simon Case, attended for a short period having arrived early
for a meeting which was due to take place in the Cabinet room. The Chancellor
was also there briefly having also arrived early for the same meeting. He had no
advance knowledge about what had been planned.
The event lasted between 14.25 and 14.45, throughout which the Prime Minister
was present. Those attending consumed food and drink, and some drank alcohol.
There are photographs of the event.
Sat in the garden of his next-door neighbour.
Its all one garden.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
22,628
Location
Nottingham
Parliament by that stage was in a complete mess, the supreme court did rule that the prorogation was unlawful but the government then prorogued and later dissolved parliament for the election anyway.
The government prorogued first, including lying to the Queen about the reason, and was forced to reinstated it by the verdict of the court.
Yes it was sad to see the lack of morality of many senior civil servants. Were they not still partying when the PM was in hospital or at Chequers? Why did Dom or the Permanent Secretary stop them?
That's the sort of deflection and whataboutery that would be typical of Johnson. If the person at the top had said it would have to stop, then the ones lower down would have fallen into line.
Oh I see its Brexit again, you don't like Brexit so the government that implements what people voted for is extreme. Cue the ad Hominem attacks, arguments about the validity of the referendum, the right wing media interference blah, blah blah.
It doesn't matter what I think, the point is about what the Scots think.
 

najaB

Veteran Member
Joined
28 Aug 2011
Messages
27,119
Location
Scotland
Sue Gray report
Which deliberately pulled its punches.

And, again, it's not about the effin' cake! It's about the culture in his administration where people thought that was perfectly fine to have a birthday party - while people weren't able to be with loved ones as they died.
 

alex397

Established Member
Joined
6 Oct 2017
Messages
1,272
Location
UK
To me, it is unforgivable that people were not allowed to visit dying relatives in hospital (amongst other things), yet the people in charge of the country were having parties. I still can’t understand why anyone can defend them, or think it was an overreaction to be offended by it.
 

Top