Brexit matters

[nlogax]

(I do think however @ainsworth74 is also correct to the extent that the Leave Campaign didn't really adequately point that out).

Adequately? It completely by-passed them, pretending everything was going to be roses and unicorn farts. This whole 'we knew what we were getting' thing is an absolute farce.

 

[dosxuk]

I think some people are using Brexit as a convenient excuse for everything that goes wrong, just like they are doing with COVID.

Airport delays have been happening all over the world as the industry recovers from COVID, and the delays at some EU airports such as Amsterdam and Dublin have been as bad if not worse than at Heathrow and Gatwick.

If Brexit was the main factor behind airport delays, you wouldn't see any disruption outside the UK, and yet this is patently not the case.

Surely you'd expect similar delays across the EU where they have gone from waving through UK passports to having to inspect them? It's not just at the UK end where the amount of work has significantly increased.

 

[AlterEgo]

Surely you'd expect similar delays across the EU where they have gone from waving through UK passports to having to inspect them? It's not just at the UK end where the amount of work has significantly increased.

UK passports are a small percentage of most European airports' workload.

The squeezes are around ground handling staff and some airlines are having crewing problem too, not border control. Schiphol in Amsterdam has been the worst hit this summer.

 

[dosxuk]

UK passports are a small percentage of most European airports' workload.

The squeezes are around ground handling staff and some airlines are having crewing problem too, not border control. Schiphol in Amsterdam has been the worst hit this summer.

The handling staff and crewing issues are being seen globally, and are nothing to do with Brexit.

The large queues at immigration are partly to do with Brexit. These issues can be seen across the UK and the EU. I suspect that a significant proportion of Greek island immigration is done on UK passports - up until now a couple of desks and a nod and a wave was all that was needed, now it's a whole lot more involved and the staff and space simply doesn't exist.

Blaming everything on Brexit is just as disingenuous as blaming nothing on it because similar issues can be seen elsewhere.

 

[najaB]

The squeezes are around ground handling staff and some airlines are having crewing problem too, not border control. Schiphol in Amsterdam has been the worst hit this summer.

The main issues have been baggage handling/ground staff, true. But there have been long queues of inbound British passport holders at immigration control as well.

 

[duncanp]

UK passports are a small percentage of most European airports' workload.

The squeezes are around ground handling staff and some airlines are having crewing problem too, not border control. Schiphol in Amsterdam has been the worst hit this summer.

And Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam is, er, in the EU, as is Dublin Airport, where delays have been just as bad.

So Brexit is not the main reason for airport delays, whatever some people might like to think.

 

[najaB]

And Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam is, er, in the EU, as is Dublin Airport, where delays have been just as bad.

So Brexit is not the main reason for airport delays, whatever some people might like to think.

That depends on which delays you're referring to. Where there are queues of UK and other third-country passport holders at the passport desks while EU/EEA nationals walk straight through are, undeniably, a result of Brexit.

 

[AlterEgo]

The main issues have been baggage handling/ground staff, true. But there have been long queues of inbound British passport holders at immigration control as well.

Undoubtedly. But that isn't resulting in flight cancellations, severe delays and lost productivity. That's just people queueing to get into a country.

 

[RT4038]

Could we please stop retrofitting these false narratives to the situation? Thanks.

No false narratives - didn't you realise this? Bit like in the past all those colonies voting for independence and then not finding it not quite so good and easy.....

I don't recall it being sold that way though...

If you buy a hedge cutter it is sold on the basis of the nice clean cut hedge shown on the box. No mention in the sales pitch of the weight of the tool, what this will do to your wrists, shoulders and muscles until you get used to it, the dangers and how long it will take to get the skill for the perfect hedge. They wouldn't sell many by accentuating the negatives and drawbacks. Buyer beware and all that. However, with a bit of thought before making the decision, these will be pretty obvious. Same would go for a Brexit vote.

 

[najaB]

No false narratives - didn't you realise this? Bit like in the past all those colonies voting for independence and then not finding it not quite so good and easy.....

As someone from one of those colonies I can't help but notice more than a hint of British exceptionalism in that post.

 

[RT4038]

As someone from one of those colonies I can't help but notice more than a hint of British exceptionalism in that post.

Not confined to British colonies I am sure. Nor necessarily every ex-colony - some will have done very nicely thank you, but not necessarily immediately.

 

[Doppelganger]

Not confined to British colonies I am sure. Nor necessarily every ex-colony - some will have done very nicely thank you, but not necessarily immediately.

I think it's fair to say that almost everywhere the Brits were, they left a mess behind, sort from white settler colonies, South Africa definitely being the exception there.

 

[RT4038]

I think it's fair to say that almost everywhere the Brits were, they left a mess behind, sort from white settler colonies, South Africa definitely being the exception there.

I don't think the colonies (of whichever country) were being run/ invested in with the ultimate intention of leaving, and there was no real incentive to sort out any mess that might occur afterward. They were certainly left in a different condition to when they were started, but that is a little inevitable. Whether this was positive or negative will depend on your point of view.

 

[Doppelganger]

I don't think the colonies (of whichever country) were being run/ invested in with the ultimate intention of leaving, and there was no real incentive to sort out any mess that might occur afterward. They were certainly left in a different condition to when they were started, but that is a little inevitable. Whether this was positive or negative will depend on your point of view.

And now the Brits look to do trade deals with former colonies who were pretty much abandoned.

For context the whole of Africa has a GDP less than France. How is this new British renaissance going to happen?

 

[Flying Snail]

I don't think the colonies (of whichever country) were being run/ invested in with the ultimate intention of leaving, and there was no real incentive to sort out any mess that might occur afterward. They were certainly left in a different condition to when they were started, but that is a little inevitable. Whether this was positive or negative will depend on your point of view.

Absolutely despicable ignorance of the realities of British colonialism there. Go educate yourself on the utter destruction Britain and other colonisers rained down on the people and societies they "civilised".

 

[duncanp]

I don't think the colonies (of whichever country) were being run/ invested in with the ultimate intention of leaving, and there was no real incentive to sort out any mess that might occur afterward. They were certainly left in a different condition to when they were started, but that is a little inevitable. Whether this was positive or negative will depend on your point of view.

I also think it is a bit rich of people like Tom Daley to blame Britain for attitudes to homosexuality in many Commonwealth Countries.

Most of them have been independent for more than 50 years, so attitudes in society now are solely the responsiblity of the people of that country, and nothing to do with a colonial power that left in the 1960s.

 

[RT4038]

Absolutely despicable ignorance of the realities of British colonialism there. Go educate yourself on the utter destruction Britain and other colonisers rained down on the people and societies they "civilised".

What a strange comment. Please re-read what I wrote in post # 4813 in reply to that of @Doppelganger post #4812 . I am very well aware of the effects of colonialism, and I am well aware of the differing views of it - yours is one of them.

And now the Brits look to do trade deals with former colonies who were pretty much abandoned.

Abandoned? Most were only too pleased to see the back of the colonial power, at the time. The relationship is different now with sixty years or so under the belt.

 

[DC1989]

Of course many things are now blames on Brexit but the onus is on the people that sold brexit to deliver

You can't say that energy prices will be cheaper, food prices will be cheaper, there will be less immigration, there will be no NI border and then the exact opposite of those things happen and not expect to be called out on it.

 

[AlterEgo]

What a strange comment. Please re-read what I wrote in post # 4813 in reply to that of @Doppelganger post #4812 . I am very well aware of the effects of colonialism, and I am well aware of the differing views of it - yours is one of them.

Colonialism was, overall, very bad with far more negative outcomes than positive.

"They were certainly left in a different condition to when they were started, but that is a little inevitable. Whether this was positive or negative will depend on your point of view" is like saying you drove my car and used all the petrol and crashed it into a lamppost and returning it and saying "well I accept it's different to how I found it!".

Abandoned? Most were only too pleased to see the back of the colonial power

Quite.

 

[Doppelganger]

Abandoned? Most were only too pleased to see the back of the colonial power, at the time. The relationship is different now with sixty years or so under the belt.

Decolonisation happened at far too fast a pace. The Brits pulled out at lightening speed and left massive holes in governance.

Look at the partition of India, the failed African states, the mess that is Cyprus.

The list goes on...

 

[VauxhallandI]

There will be those who voted for Brexit and knew full well that there will be pain for a period, but felt it worth going through in order to free the UK to go its own way. No gain without pain.

Said no-one ever

 

[najaB]

Not confined to British colonies I am sure. Nor necessarily every ex-colony - some will have done very nicely thank you, but not necessarily immediately.

Again, the attitude of "Everything was fine when we were running things..."

 

[Gloster]

My opinion of British colonisation is that we occupied countries
that weren’t threatening us, stole their resources, enslaved their peoples and then boggered off when things got bad. Yes, I will accept that they wanted us to go, but we could have done a lot more to produce stable successors, rather than ones who would, we hoped, continue to flog us their resources at preferential rates. Anything positive that we left behind was more by chance than anything else.

And fifty years is nothing when you are dealing with entrenched beliefs and prejudices. Particularly when religion is in the mix.

This is some way from Brexit.

 

[najaB]

This is some way from Brexit.

Yet many of the same attitudes inform both Empire and Brexit.

 

[Mikw]

And Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam is, er, in the EU, as is Dublin Airport, where delays have been just as bad.

So Brexit is not the main reason for airport delays, whatever some people might like to think.

It's certainly one of the reasons.

If you have to manually check every passport - and that takes a certain amount of time for each one - then it's going to a while to inspect even a 737/A320 full of British passengers. Especially if a few come in at once.

 

[RT4038]

Decolonisation happened at far too fast a pace. The Brits pulled out at lightening speed and left massive holes in governance.

Look at the partition of India, the failed African states, the mess that is Cyprus.

The list goes on...

But Decolonisation happened because (a) the inhabitants wanted the Colonial power out, and trying to stay by force would cost too much money and lost colonial lives, and (b) the most powerful country at the time (USA) only fought in the war in Europe on this condition [altruistically because there was a paradox in fighting Nazi colonisation in Europe and European colonisation elsewhere, but really because they wanted to extend their own influence and power, with mixed results].

As I pointed out earlier - colonies were not run with the ultimate intention of leaving. When resistance to the colonial power got too great, then the colonisers departed - what incentive was there at that point in prolonging the process when clearly they were not wanted? Quite understandably, no independence movement (and they were hardly united) was fighting on the ticket of 'please leave in 20 years after you've sorted out X,Y & Z' .

Write whatever list you want, but what other option was there?

Again, the attitude of "Everything was fine when we were running things..."

Well it was, wasn't it? (from the colonizers point of view). However, I do understand how (at worst)civil war and/or economic ruin (or lesser results) 'and freedom, can be preferable to being colonised, provided one survives, but this is the ultimate in long termism. Zimbabwe being a work in progress?

Yet many of the same attitudes inform both Empire and Brexit.

You are possibly right - the boot on the other foot perhaps - independence from Imperial Europe?

 

[najaB]

You are possibly right - the boot on the other foot perhaps - independence from Imperial Europe?

No. The attitude that we are better than everyone else because, well, we're British!

 

[Doppelganger]

As I pointed out earlier - colonies were not run with the ultimate intention of leaving. When resistance to the colonial power got too great, then the colonisers departed - what incentive was there at that point in prolonging the process when clearly they were not wanted? Quite understandably, no independence movement (and they were hardly united) was fighting on the ticket of 'please leave in 20 years after you've sorted out X,Y & Z' .

Exactly, they were run with the sole purpose of making the colonisers richer. They stole and raped the countries that they occupied.

The Caribbean colonies looked to join Canada at one point, Britain didn't give a flying fig about it and by the time any serious consideration was given it was too late and independence was the only option left.

The leave in 20 years malarkey is just whataboutary, the fact is Britain couldn't decolonise fast enough and they left power vacuums all across the world. Look at the shining example that Israel is now, an ongoing conflict as the British couldn't be bothered to try and make things right before they pulled out.

And the nonsense about Imperial Europe, the UK chose to join and then chose to leave, so I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

You sound like an apologist for imperialism and the only country actively doing that in Europe currently is Russia.

 

[najaB]

Well it was, wasn't it? (from the colonizers point of view).

Well yes. Everything was fine for the (for many years) literal slave owners. And even post-Emancipation, everything was fine for the 2% of the population who happened to be white and British.

 

[RT4038]

No. The attitude that we are better than everyone else because, well, we're British!

Oh well, that's a given. Part of the culture.

Exactly, they were run with the sole purpose of making the colonisers richer. They stole and raped the countries that they occupied.

Yes. No point in having an Empire, colonising countries, if it is going to make the colonisers poorer! Don't suppose the Romans did it for altruistic purposes?

The leave in 20 years malarkey is just whataboutary, the fact is Britain couldn't decolonise fast enough and they left power vacuums all across the world. Look at the shining example that Israel is now, an ongoing conflict as the British couldn't be bothered to try and make things right before they pulled out.

No it is not. Can you give an example of an independence movement in a country which fought on a ticket of 'Independence later after you have sorted out X, Y & Z' ? No. It was not a case of couldn't be bothered - it was just not a viable option. Obviously power vacuums were going to be created - the colonisers had all the power to themselves, and suddenly they were gone. When they left, bound to be trouble!

I have explained my view why Britain (and other European countries) decolonised when they did and the speed at which they did. Which country is the leading supporter of Israel? Which country demanded European countries divest themselves of their colonies as a condition of support in WW2 European theatre? That is not to say that mistakes (particularly with the benefit of hindsight) were not made, but what country hasn't done that? The Caribbean as part of Canada? Not sure the country in between would have been enamoured with that?

And the nonsense about Imperial Europe, the UK chose to join and then chose to leave, so I have no idea what point you are trying to make.

In the context of @najaB post # 4324. A little in jest of course. The UK chose to leave the EU - this did not happen because the EU was loved, was it? It was basically because of dislike of some EU rules and policies being applied here, not unlike (but not the same as) a Colonial country applying their laws in the colonies. It is not exactly the same I know, the EU was joined voluntarily and there was some input into the rules and polices, but the effect was a similar unhappiness amongst a proportion of the population.

You sound like an apologist for imperialism and the only country actively doing that in Europe currently is Russia.

If you don't like the viewpoint attack the person expressing it...... Shock. Our Imperial history is in the past. The points are raised to explain/discuss why things happened as they did. We are where we are - the rights and wrongs are complicated and have to be judged by the circumstances, standards and mores of their time.

Well yes. Everything was fine for the (for many years) literal slave owners. And even post-Emancipation, everything was fine for the 2% of the population who happened to be white and British.

Yes, but even amongst the British, this was a pretty niche position to be in.