Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To ask for tangible benefits of Brexit?

459 replies

RiskIt4Biscuit · 10/11/2017 21:01

Some politicians are saying that we're all brexiteers now.

But I can't actually think of any tangible benefits of Brexit, and I think as a brexiteer, I should be able to list at least 3.

So how is Brexit going to make our lives better?

OP posts:
DesignedForLife · 13/11/2017 21:12

We don't see Farage on TV every day. That's about it.

Humpsfor20yards · 13/11/2017 21:18

The east Europeans are super wily.
They come over here, they don't register with council, doctors, anyone, but even so, since they've gone, everyone's got their kids in their first choice school.
It's awesome!

Julie8008 · 13/11/2017 21:23

Not really a surprise but Parliament will have to vote on a Brexit deal
The leavers on my local rag are imploding

Why? I dont have a problem with parliament having a vote. If they like the deal fine, if they dont and we leave onto a WTO deal, then fine as well. Whats the issue?

KatharinaRosalie · 13/11/2017 21:30

How can they be simultaneous job-stealers AND benefit scroungers AND uncounted under the radar?

The famous Schrödinger's immigrant, lazying around on benefits while stealing your job

TheABC · 13/11/2017 22:04

The only direct benefit of Brexit to date has been watching the Tory party implode. I have no idea who will replace them - hopefully we will get a cross party alliance in the meantime to stop the shambles from getting any worse. It's now about damage limitation.

JacquesHammer · 13/11/2017 22:05

Why

From the poorly spelled and inane ramblings, usually in block capitals there's a lot of "out means out".

It's funny as hell watching them all argue over it

RiskIt4Biscuit · 13/11/2017 22:35

Are you really a Brexiteer, OP?

I am not a Brexiteer, far from it. I am an EU-national based in the UK, feeling very uncertain of my future here because I don't know if I will be able to stay here. I was not allowed to vote, but that does not make me feel less devastated about what is happening in my country. My passport is not British, but I have chosen to live here, work here, to integrate here and the UK is my country.
It is heartbreaking to get comments from people telling me to go back to my country asap, or asking me why on earth I am in the UK. It is heartbreaking to have someone say these things to my face - and many people are getting far worse comments than I.
But it hurts just as much to hear these things on TV and radio, and I am not the only EU-national who feels sad to hear these things - many of my fellow EU-nationals are leaving the country that they had made their home.

On a less selfish, and far more important note, I think it's incredibly sad that we are leaving the EU.
The EU have given us a lot of rights and security (workers' rights, consumer rights, product safety).
Selling products in the EU has become easier because there is only one standard across the 28 member states, rather than 28 standards to adhere to. That means a company only has to produce one product, rather than make 28 different versions of the products to sell to all member states. It also means that we as consumers know the shampoo, lipstick and toothpaste we buy when in Spain or Italy are as safe at the products we buy here in the UK.
Now we're looking at getting rid of the red tape - which is exactly these rules and regulations which were put in place to protect us as employees and consumers.

I personally have enjoyed freedom of movement of people, and so has my British partner. We have lived and worked in different EU countries. In the UK, we have benefited greatly from FoM because we have had people coming from abroad to work in the hospitals, schools and doing a lot of the jobs that aren't very popular.

I completely understand why some people feel that immigration levels have been too high, but I think that leaving the EU is the wrong way to deal with it. The government have had options to deal with immigration levels while in the EU and they have not. They could use the rules and regulations for EU-nationals with regards to access to benefits and so on, just like many of the other EU member states have done.

2. We will have more control over our laws, especially the opportunity to work outside EU human rights laws which were contentious. This is debatable, though, because the EU are very wedded to the idea that the UK should continue to be answerable to the EU Court of Human Rights - it's a huge bargaining chip. That also works both ways. It would take away the opportunity for UK citizens subject to human rights violations to have a higher level of recourse than the UK courts. Let's hope none of us never need that. And it won't make sense, given our close trading relationship with the EU, to have our trading laws very divergent. So we'll probably end up adopting a lot of them anyway.

The only issue with this is that the European Court of Human Rights is not an EU institution. The European Court of Human Rights is a body of the Council of Europe, which has 47 members, including the UK. The Council of Europe was founded in 1949 and the European Court of Human Rights was established in 1959.

All in all, I simply cannot think of one single tangible benefit of Brexit, and unfortunately I don't feel any closer to having a list of benefits of Brexit after reading this thread.
We are not getting wealthier by leaving the EU - the £350m/week to the NHS was a lie, the pound has dropped, inflation is up, products are getting more expensive.
We are likely to get rid of the red tape, which means lowering standards and getting rid of some of the protections we have had as workers/employees, and that surely is not a benefit to us.

OP posts:
LaurieMarlow · 14/11/2017 10:24

My biggest concern is what happens with the NI border. If the UK is intent on coming out of the single market, that causes one hell of a problem to figure out how the border is managed. Our brexiteers appear to have given precisely zero thought to how this should be managed. That's in violation of the Good Friday Agreement.

Having said that, I'm pleased to see the ROI government standing firm on this. Brexit is a fucking awful can of worms to unleash upon them, huge financial implications, real danger of a return to violence and what's in it for them? Precisely nothing. So they're in no humour at all to help the UK on this one. And the EU have their back in a big way.

wasonthelist · 14/11/2017 10:36

The government have had options to deal with immigration levels while in the EU and they have not. They could use the rules and regulations for EU-nationals with regards to access to benefits and so on, just like many of the other EU member states have done.

I think the issues here lie in the fact that most other EU nations (possibly all) have a greater reliance on contributions for benefits, thus entitlements depend on contributions and are not directly discriminatory against non nationals even though they are in practice.

Not sure what the government could have done to stem the influx of EU migrants within freedom of movement/free trade? We weren’t in Schengen but we were obliged to take pretty much any EU citizen.

AgnesSkinner · 14/11/2017 11:09

The EU allows conditions to be set on freedom of movement of workers - the UK chose not to enforce them, e.g.:

Three months to find a job - after that, anyone not employed or self-employed has to demonstrate they are not a burden on the state;

Right to remain for six months after job has ended provided they have a realistic chance of finding work.

www.europarl.europa.eu/atyourservice/en/displayFtu.html?ftuId=FTU_3.1.3.html

Ta1kinPeece · 14/11/2017 12:21

We weren’t in Schengen but we were obliged to take pretty much any EU citizen.
But we are not obliged to let them stay and claim benefits
or stay and be exploited by gangmasters
but UK employment rules are the loosest in the EU so lots of EU folks are working as "self employed" subbies and gig workers.
Clamp down on the bosses and that would sort itself
but the bosses are Tories ....

wasonthelist · 14/11/2017 15:06

I am not a Tory supporter or in favour of exploitation - but the costs of finding and detaining overstayers must be massive. My experience of France suggests it is straightforward racism that means they don’t have this issue, although it is true their enforcement efforts are probably superior to our non existent ones.

The rules are written to suit the majority of EU countries so whilst it is fair to blame our government, it’s far from a simple issue.

habenero20 · 14/11/2017 15:20

But we are not obliged to let them stay and claim benefits

we are absolutely obliged to do that, especially with in work benefits.

My biggest concern is what happens with the NI border. If the UK is intent on coming out of the single market, that causes one hell of a problem to figure out how the border is managed.

europe is insisting that if the UK comes out of the customs union that a hard border must be in place. it's not the UK that wants that.

wasonthelist · 14/11/2017 15:34

europe is insisting that if the UK comes out of the customs union that a hard border must be in place. it's not the UK that wants that.

Indeed - we have a form of schengen with Ireland that pre-dates the EU.

LaurieMarlow · 14/11/2017 15:56

europe is insisting that if the UK comes out of the customs union that a hard border must be in place. it's not the UK that wants that.

Well of course the UK would prefer to have their cake and eat their cake. That's been the whole deluded leaver position.

It's entirely fair enough that the EU isn't going to give them all the benefits of being in the single market and but at the same time let them opt out of EU freedom of movement. Why on earth would they do that?

And this causes huge problems for the Northern Irish border, which is the UK's responsibility to solve.

habenero20 · 14/11/2017 16:11

It's entirely fair enough that the EU isn't going to give them all the benefits of being in the single market and but at the same time let them opt out of EU freedom of movement. Why on earth would they do that?

the UK may well want to have its cake and eat it too, but the NI issue is not about that. It's a logistical and historical issue. For logistical reasons, the EU wants a border there, like it wants between France and the UK. This is entirely understandable from the EU's point of view (it doesn't want a borderless Ireland to be a backdoor for British products). But historically, for reasons we all know, these are two countries that do not want a hard border between them.

That being the case, it's clear on WHO is insisting on the border. it's not the UK. The UK absolutely does not want a border there.

Roark · 14/11/2017 16:12
  1. send the buggers back

  2. compulsory tea and scones on the croquet lawn each morning

  3. dame vera on the wireless every evening

  4. send the buggers back

  5. tea dances and a brass band at the social club on a Friday, after our fish and chip supper

  6. send the buggers back

wasonthelist · 14/11/2017 16:22

Roark nice bigotry

LaurieMarlow · 14/11/2017 16:25

That being the case, it's clear on WHO is insisting on the border. it's not the UK. The UK absolutely does not want a border there.

No. The EU wants the UK to stay in the single market and the customs union. Therefore, the EU does not want a border between NI and ROI. Why on earth would it?

Make no mistake, the UK started this shit. They knew, because there are clear precedents (Norway/Switzerland) that no-one would agree to them having the privileged position of being in the single market, but opting out of freedom of movement. So by making immigration a
part of the leave campaign, they knew the impact this would have on Northern Ireland.

Actions have consequences. This was easily foreseen. Leavers didn't give a shit.

To try to shift the blame is spectacularly low.

habenero20 · 14/11/2017 16:35

No. The EU wants the UK to stay in the single market and the customs union. Therefore, the EU does not want a border between NI and ROI. Why on earth would it?

It is entirely in the EU's power not to have a border there. There is no treaty that the UK would sign where the UK would insist on a border there. None. It's the EU insisting there be a border there. Not Australia, not Canada, not the UK. It's one group, and that's the EU.

Make no mistake, the UK started this shit. They knew, because there are clear precedents (Norway/Switzerland) that no-one would agree to them having the privileged position of being in the single market, but opting out of freedom of movement. So by making immigration a
part of the leave campaign, they knew the impact this would have on Northern Ireland.

The UK did not "start this". We had a referendum, and referenda tend not to be good with unknown nuances like what a foreign entity will say about borders. And, unlike in europe, it appears that our government is taking the outcome of the referendum seriously. You are correct that that the EU has made it clear that they will not accept infringements on free movement.

However, that doesn't change the fact on who is insisting on the border. Whatever deal happens, the UK would always want a borderless Ireland. It's the EU that has its conditions.

AgnesSkinner · 14/11/2017 16:37

But, but, but ... pre-Referendum Gavin Robinson of the pro-Leave DUP said concerns about the NI border was all EU scaremongering? Was he telling porkies?

LaurieMarlow · 14/11/2017 16:43

UK would always want a borderless Ireland. It's the EU that has its conditions.

The EU's position (on the single market and customs union) has always been clear And it can't have one rule for one nation and one for another. It doesn't work like that.

The UK, in that case, want two mutually exclusive things. So you can't blithely say they want a borderless Ireland. They don't. They want to control immigration more than they want a borderless Ireland. They can't have both and they knew that. Their priorities are super clear.

It is entirely in the EU's power not to have a border there.

Only by breaking all the rules that the EU has been built on. To do so would undermine the whole project. The arrogance of the UK is really breathtaking. Why on earth would the EU contemplate that?

AgnesSkinner · 14/11/2017 16:45

And both the EU and Ireland are trying to avoid a hard border - but it requires at least NI staying in the single market and customs union:

www.rte.ie/news/2017/1109/918860-northern-irish-border-after-brexit/

habenero20 · 14/11/2017 16:52

The UK, in that case, want two mutually exclusive things. So you can't blithely say they want a borderless Ireland. They don't. They want to control immigration more than they want a borderless Ireland.

UK's position: Whatever deal we have, we want a borderless Ireland.

EU's position: A borderless Ireland only if...

Is this predictable? Probably. But it isn't the UK that wants a border there. As I said earlier, the EU's position is entirely understandable. But they alone are the ones insisting on the border.

They can't have both and they knew that. Their priorities are super clear.

I have no idea who "they" is. The government? The leave campaign? Who is they? Our government is stuck now, dealing with an uncompromising EU, and a population totally polarized.

Swipe left for the next trending thread