Brexit UK vote to leave Europe in historic referendum

[DaveO]

You seem to imply that the rules are based on the size, industry or population of the country, when in fact they are not.

No I am not. I am saying that different countries require (or want) different things from the EU when it comes free trade.

In this campaign we have had Canada held up as an example of the EU negotiating a free trade deal with a single country. Well apart from the fact it is on the rocks over visa access, it excludes services which is one of our most important sectors.

Greenland was another example. This time of a country exiting the EU and prospering when their only export of note is fish.

Now we have Liechtenstein. A tiny country that is basically a tax haven.

Yet these are held up as examples of why we will get all we want and all you have is speculation we will get that. Ridiculous.

Why if Liechtenstein can get away with it can't Norway which has one of the biggest migrant influxes in the EEA yet isn't in the EU?

These countries are like not like us either in the current states of their economies or what access they need to the single market.

We on the other hand want all the access we already have. So in order to get it we are in my view going to have to accept the four underlying principles of it, including free movement of labour.

It is not just an economic exercise either. Ireland is shit scared of what a hard border means between north and south, Spain is after Gibraltar and Scotland wants to leave the UK again.

This shit storm has been stirred up for what?

As to TTIP being killed off by Trump or Clinton that doesn't excuse Leave from using it as a stick to beat the EU with. You were told it was going nowhere and that is what happened.

Now out of the EU you have no idea if we will not end up with a shit deal like Canada has with the US with NAFTA. In the EU we would not.

It may come as a surprise to you as a Europhile, but there was no real economic certainty in remaining either. The only certainty was the inevitable pull towards closer and closer union, and the erosion of a democratically elected national government, in deference to a panel of non elected bureaucrats.

There you go again. There was no certainty of closer and closer union for the UK anymore than we were going to get £350m chucked at the NHS if we left.

In any event, we haven't had much of a say in the rules whilst we have been in the EU. Almost every time we challenged the rules, we lost.

That is at best disingenuous. We voted "for" the rules 95% of the time. Abstained 3% and against 2%. That was 2475 times in favour, 57 against.

What we vote against with a Tory govt in charge is also not always in our best interests anyway, such as country by country tax reporting, import of genetically modified food imports.

Project fear is still in full swing with the remain side I see.

Project distort the facts from Leave is still in full flow from you.

You will see my predictions come true steadily over the next two years. You watch.

[i'm spartacus]

You seem to imply that the rules are based on the size, industry or population of the country, when in fact they are not.

No I am not. I am saying that different countries require (or want) different things from the EU when it comes free trade.

In this campaign we have had Canada held up as an example of the EU negotiating a free trade deal with a single country. Well apart from the fact it is on the rocks over visa access, it excludes services which is one of our most important sectors.

Greenland was another example. This time of a country exiting the EU and prospering when their only export of note is fish.

Now we have Liechtenstein. A tiny country that is basically a tax haven.

Yet these are held up as examples of why we will get all we want and all you have is speculation we will get that. Ridiculous.

Why if Liechtenstein can get away with it can't Norway which has one of the biggest migrant influxes in the EEA yet isn't in the EU?

It isn't a case of 'getting away with it'. This assumes that placing restrictions on free movement is something Norway wants, when as far as I am aware, this is not the case.

These countries are like not like us either in the current states of their economies or what access they need to the single market.

We on the other hand want all the access we already have. So in order to get it we are in my view going to have to accept the four underlying principles of it, including free movement of labour.

What they want, or what the state of their economies is has nothing to do with it. The rules exist within the ambit of the EEA agreement. It isn't one rule for one, and another for somebody else. If the government choose to pursue this option you are suggesting that we have to accept all the EU rules for being in the EEA. That is absolutely incorrect, only the EEA rules apply to EEA countries

Ireland is shit scared of what a hard border means between north and south

Ireland - member of the EU with a seat at the table and a say in the rules. By your logic they have influence on what happens from the EU side. In any event, it is outside of the competence of the EU to dictate whether Ireland erects a border into the UK. The UK and Ireland are part of the common travel area, and the EU have no intention of putting up a border. Sinn Fein have grabbed an opportunistic shot at punting for unification, which is their primary aim in any event

Spain is after Gibraltar

Yes - since 1704

Scotland wants to leave the UK again.

Sturgeon and the SNP want another shot at independence because it is their stated aim. That doesn't mean that Scotland wants, or would vote to leave.

This shit storm has been stirred up for what?

Because the majority of people in the UK want to leave. Swearing is part of your stock in trade it seems. You really should try growing up

Now out of the EU you have no idea if we will not end up with a shit deal like Canada has with the US with NAFTA. In the EU we would not.

the converse point being that if we don't know, as you say, we could end up with a good deal. Everything we produce is of course already EU compliant.

It may come as a surprise to you as a Europhile, but there was no real economic certainty in remaining either. The only certainty was the inevitable pull towards closer and closer union, and the erosion of a democratically elected national government, in deference to a panel of non elected bureaucrats.

There you go again. There was no certainty of closer and closer union for the UK anymore than we were going to get £350m chucked at the NHS if we left.

There was certainty of closer and closer union. Cameron's deal was unenforceable under EU law. Agreement over lunch amounts to nothing.

Nobody on the leave side ever promised £350m to the NHS

Michael Gove published on the 20th May 2016

When pressed, Gove refused to give a figure for the promised injection. "We spend or we give the EU £350m a week [gross]. Some of that money we will continue to devote to supporting farmers, some of it to structural funds, some of it to science and then there will be hundreds of millions of pounds that we can spend additionally on the NHS
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... remains-eu

But still the bus rolled on and in public view with

We send to the EU 350 Million a week
Lets fund the NHS
That for rather dumb people will mean one thing.

In any event, we haven't had much of a say in the rules whilst we have been in the EU. Almost every time we challenged the rules, we lost.

That is at best disingenuous. We voted "for" the rules 95% of the time. Abstained 3% and against 2%. That was 2475 times in favour, 57 against.

Who cares about the rules we wanted?

The original point stands, almost every time we challenged the rules, we lost.

Project distort the facts from Leave is still in full flow from you.

No distortion from me. Only a total and complete lack of understanding sprinkled with profanity from you.

[Owd Codger]

You seem to imply that the rules are based on the size, industry or population of the country, when in fact they are not.

No I am not. I am saying that different countries require (or want) different things from the EU when it comes free trade.

In this campaign we have had Canada held up as an example of the EU negotiating a free trade deal with a single country. Well apart from the fact it is on the rocks over visa access, it excludes services which is one of our most important sectors.

Greenland was another example. This time of a country exiting the EU and prospering when their only export of note is fish.

Now we have Liechtenstein. A tiny country that is basically a tax haven.

Yet these are held up as examples of why we will get all we want and all you have is speculation we will get that. Ridiculous.

Why if Liechtenstein can get away with it can't Norway which has one of the biggest migrant influxes in the EEA yet isn't in the EU?

These countries are like not like us either in the current states of their economies or what access they need to the single market.

We on the other hand want all the access we already have. So in order to get it we are in my view going to have to accept the four underlying principles of it, including free movement of labour.

It is not just an economic exercise either. Ireland is shit scared of what a hard border means between north and south, Spain is after Gibraltar and Scotland wants to leave the UK again.

This shit storm has been stirred up for what?

As to TTIP being killed off by Trump or Clinton that doesn't excuse Leave from using it as a stick to beat the EU with. You were told it was going nowhere and that is what happened.

Now out of the EU you have no idea if we will not end up with a shit deal like Canada has with the US with NAFTA. In the EU we would not.

It may come as a surprise to you as a Europhile, but there was no real economic certainty in remaining either. The only certainty was the inevitable pull towards closer and closer union, and the erosion of a democratically elected national government, in deference to a panel of non elected bureaucrats.

There you go again. There was no certainty of closer and closer union for the UK anymore than we were going to get £350m chucked at the NHS if we left.

In any event, we haven't had much of a say in the rules whilst we have been in the EU. Almost every time we challenged the rules, we lost.

That is at best disingenuous. We voted "for" the rules 95% of the time. Abstained 3% and against 2%. That was 2475 times in favour, 57 against.

What we vote against with a Tory govt in charge is also not always in our best interests anyway, such as country by country tax reporting, import of genetically modified food imports.

Project fear is still in full swing with the remain side I see.

Project distort the facts from Leave is still in full flow from you.

You will see my predictions come true steadily over the next two years. You watch.

No doubt during that two years will be spent brooding over the result and not accepting that the people took the opportunity to tell the establishment that they had had enough of seeing our great country going downhill as a result of more and more people flooding into the country to enjoy the benefits and free NHS and in most cases, no intention of working for a living.

You need to get around the country more and then you will see why the majority voted to leave the EU.

[Caboosegg]

No doubt during that two years will be spent brooding over the result and not accepting that the people took the opportunity to tell the establishment that they had had enough of seeing our great country going downhill as a result of more and more people flooding into the country to enjoy the benefits and free NHS and in most cases, no intention of working for a living.

You need to get around the country more and then you will see why the majority voted to leave the EU.

i think multiple people have mentioned this already in thread and you seem to miss the point,

Leaving the EU will not have the effect on immigration you think it will, Most Immigrants come to the country pay tax, improve our country and do the jobs that you wouldnt.

Illegal immigration and refugees are the side your on about and Both the Brexit Campaign and Conserv Gov admitted lower the numbers is unobtainable.

[Wintergreen]

Although I have no particular love for the EU I voted Remain on the basis that on balance it was the best outcome for the UK.

I suspect that many people voting leave did not do this, and furthermore I suspect many voted leave to reflect their dissatisfaction with other issues, from Cameron to their "lot" in life.

This is where referendums fall down. The baby gets ejected with the bathwater.

Having digested the facts, my biggest concern is the City of London. This is the economic engine of the UK. As long as this can be protected then we have a chance. Scupper this (and I am nervous that it might happen) then the unemployed people who voted leave will be joined by hundreds of thousands of others, and all of them will receive less money for their troubles.

[DaveO]

No doubt during that two years will be spent brooding over the result and not accepting that the people took the opportunity to tell the establishment that they had had enough of seeing our great country going downhill as a result of more and more people flooding into the country to enjoy the benefits and free NHS and in most cases, no intention of working for a living.

As ever you assert our country is going downhill because if immigration. You are wrong. You say people are "flooding into the country to enjoy the benefits and free NHS and in most cases, no intention of working for a living." You are wrong (its just the opposite) and in both cases there is plenty of evidence to the contrary but you clearly don't want to see it.

You want to blame immigration for everything going wrong as you see it. It should be obvious to anyone that despite a deliberate exaggeration of the issue by Leave (which you fell for) that if we have problems in the UK the 65m non-immigrants are going to be far more responsible, not a small proportion of immigrants. That is just common sense.

One group of people who are causing problems are those who think they are owed a living, which isn't immigrants. It will be these self same entitled people who are going to be very disappointed when immigration continues and a plum job doesn't just land in their laps.

I have no doubt that some people voted Leave in protest at the establishment but any that voted to leave for the reasons you state above are either as misinformed as you are, they just don't like foreigners or are basically racist or all three!

You need to get around the country more and then you will see why the majority voted to leave the EU.

Oh like you have you mean? When did you embark on your grand fact finding tour?

FYI my wife's family is from Barnsley one of the top Brexit areas, though one of her three sisters is in Scotland, we have a large part of my family in Bournemouth, my son (as I once was) was at Uni in Wales, I live 250 yards from Wales myself. Due to living in London for years I have many friends down there and go down often.

I have seen first hand some of the racism this divisive campaign has led to and some of the things one of my nephews shouts out at Barnsley Football ought to see him arrested to be honest. I reckon I have a far better idea of what people think in various parts of the country than you do and no doubt many of them voted Leave for the same stupid reasons you did and worse.

I wouldn't be surprised if you have never left Wigan!

I can argue the toss with Sparticus about the other issues such as sovereignty and the EHCR but with you, your "It's the immigrants fault" is ridiculous, though I have no doubt others share your misguided views, particularly in areas like Barnsley.

[DaveO]

Leaving the EU will not have the effect on immigration you think it will, Most Immigrants come to the country pay tax, improve our country and do the jobs that you wouldnt.

All sides on the Tory leadership contest and Labour are also saying free movement of Labour will end on Brexit.

WW may think this means an end to immigration when in fact the politicians are all also saying we will introduce a points system for EU migrants. (We already have one for non-EU migrants but still let in 188K last year....).

So it's obvious immigration will continue given the vast majority of EU migrants come for a job (so will get the points), not as WW mistakenly thinks to swan about idle in A&E!

The price for the introduction of this points system will potentially be exclusion from the single market. Costing jobs and reducing our economy so there is less money for the NHS etc, not more.

If by some miracle we do get to introduce a points system AND retain access to the single market we won't have any say in the rules of it but will still have to comply.

So what will have been achieved? Well from WW's point of view, absolutely nothing. He is going to see very little difference in immigration.

[Caboosegg]

I wouldn't be surprised if you have never left Wigan!

whats wrong with that DaveO..... you wouldnt be making assumptions on people disposition based on their location would you (jk)

[nellywelly]

You seem to imply that the rules are based on the size, industry or population of the country, when in fact they are not.

No I am not. I am saying that different countries require (or want) different things from the EU when it comes free trade.

In this campaign we have had Canada held up as an example of the EU negotiating a free trade deal with a single country. Well apart from the fact it is on the rocks over visa access, it excludes services which is one of our most important sectors.

Greenland was another example. This time of a country exiting the EU and prospering when their only export of note is fish.

Now we have Liechtenstein. A tiny country that is basically a tax haven.

Yet these are held up as examples of why we will get all we want and all you have is speculation we will get that. Ridiculous.

Why if Liechtenstein can get away with it can't Norway which has one of the biggest migrant influxes in the EEA yet isn't in the EU?

It isn't a case of 'getting away with it'. This assumes that placing restrictions on free movement is something Norway wants, when as far as I am aware, this is not the case.

These countries are like not like us either in the current states of their economies or what access they need to the single market.

We on the other hand want all the access we already have. So in order to get it we are in my view going to have to accept the four underlying principles of it, including free movement of labour.

What they want, or what the state of their economies is has nothing to do with it. The rules exist within the ambit of the EEA agreement. It isn't one rule for one, and another for somebody else. If the government choose to pursue this option you are suggesting that we have to accept all the EU rules for being in the EEA. That is absolutely incorrect, only the EEA rules apply to EEA countries

Ireland is shit scared of what a hard border means between north and south

Ireland - member of the EU with a seat at the table and a say in the rules. By your logic they have influence on what happens from the EU side. In any event, it is outside of the competence of the EU to dictate whether Ireland erects a border into the UK. The UK and Ireland are part of the common travel area, and the EU have no intention of putting up a border. Sinn Fein have grabbed an opportunistic shot at punting for unification, which is their primary aim in any event

Spain is after Gibraltar

Yes - since 1704

Scotland wants to leave the UK again.

Sturgeon and the SNP want another shot at independence because it is their stated aim. That doesn't mean that Scotland wants, or would vote to leave.

This shit storm has been stirred up for what?

Because the majority of people in the UK want to leave. Swearing is part of your stock in trade it seems. You really should try growing up

Now out of the EU you have no idea if we will not end up with a shit deal like Canada has with the US with NAFTA. In the EU we would not.

the converse point being that if we don't know, as you say, we could end up with a good deal. Everything we produce is of course already EU compliant.

It may come as a surprise to you as a Europhile, but there was no real economic certainty in remaining either. The only certainty was the inevitable pull towards closer and closer union, and the erosion of a democratically elected national government, in deference to a panel of non elected bureaucrats.

There you go again. There was no certainty of closer and closer union for the UK anymore than we were going to get £350m chucked at the NHS if we left.

There was certainty of closer and closer union. Cameron's deal was unenforceable under EU law. Agreement over lunch amounts to nothing.

Nobody on the leave side ever promised £350m to the NHS

Michael Gove published on the 20th May 2016

When pressed, Gove refused to give a figure for the promised injection. "We spend or we give the EU £350m a week [gross]. Some of that money we will continue to devote to supporting farmers, some of it to structural funds, some of it to science and then there will be hundreds of millions of pounds that we can spend additionally on the NHS
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/u ... remains-eu

But still the bus rolled on and in public view with

We send to the EU 350 Million a week
Lets fund the NHS
That for rather dumb people will mean one thing.

In any event, we haven't had much of a say in the rules whilst we have been in the EU. Almost every time we challenged the rules, we lost.

That is at best disingenuous. We voted "for" the rules 95% of the time. Abstained 3% and against 2%. That was 2475 times in favour, 57 against.

Who cares about the rules we wanted?

The original point stands, almost every time we challenged the rules, we lost.

Project distort the facts from Leave is still in full flow from you.

No distortion from me. Only a total and complete lack of understanding sprinkled with profanity from you.


What you all have forgotten is it is not in the interest of the EU to give us a good deal,because it will encourage other country's to leave.So we will have to pay 3% to 5% on everything we export to the EU, we of course will charge them on our imports this will mean prices going up. Also US and JAPAN cars will be more expensive if produced in the UK, what do you think they will do, THEY WILL MOVE PRODUCTION TO THE EU it is obvious to me any way. The loss of jobs will slowly escalate and guess what once jobs get harder to find the people from EU will stop comming here so you will get your way but at a great loss to the country's prosperity

[medlocke]

DaveO tells lies don't listen to him http://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/6 ... ter-Brexit