To think Brexit has robbed us of so much?

[elzober]

A friend of mine from America recently obtained citizenship of an EU country due to family links. She's now ready to look for a job and open to anything as she doesn't have a degree but worked in the family agricultural business back home. She's fluent in English.

A few years ago I would have been able to invite her to stay with me here in the UK, help her get established and set her up to apply for one of the many jobs over here. But now I can't do any of that.

The ridiculous part is I know local businesses that are really struggling to recruit, can't find people locally and have struggled with the lack of EU workers since Brexit. Particularly in hospitality, agriculture and travel.

Why did we close the door to people who filled these vacancies and contributed to society and paid taxes?

She would have been a decent tax payer, nice member of the community but she's not allowed in.

She's probably going to Ireland now as apparently there's lots more opportunities there since we became an isolated island.

I will never forgive the Conservatives for this shambles. Don't get me started on the fact that a British passport is now worthless and we've lost our right to live in 27 countries. Madness.

are locally called middle class.

And, to clarify because it seems to need saying, are, in local terms, very well off. I knew no one else like me at Uni.

@notimagain

Remind us what Nigel Farage did for a living for a few years?...

He was a Commodities Trader before he was an MEP

I don't recall him being a bureaucrat and he was certainly elected to a parliament.

Agreed

However, the EU parliament is not democratic. To call it a 'parliament' is an oxymoron. The main assertion of democratic illegitimacy focuses on the European Parliament lacking the power to determine the direction of EU Law, with the European Commission being the only institution empowered to initiate legislation and having a near monopoly on legislative initiative.

The European Commission is a non-elected institution. It's members take an oath to put the interests of the EU before those of the Member States

MEPs do not have the ability to create legislation only to vote; yes/no/abstain.

Hard-core socialists like Skinner and Corbyn did not support the concept of the EU on the grounds of non-democracy. Socialism itself is democratic, seen as the highest democratic form by its proponents and at one point being one and the same with democracy.
Therefore I can't for the life of me understand why any socialist would not support Brexit.

That's interesting, however I'll be honest and say the picture you paint doesn't quite square with what I heard when of members of my former professional body lobbied "the EU" over a series of legislative issues that would effect us as a workforce. Those that were at the coal face of negotiations talked at length to MEPs, not commissioners, and ultimately it was the MEPs, not commission members, who had the final say by way of a vote over whether such legislation should enacted EU wide or not.

Ultimately it didn't do us much good because the industry bosses did a better job of lobbying the MEPs than our lot did..but ultimately in that instance it was the MEPs who voted to change the rules, after a lobbying process, it was not a change done on the hoof by unelected bureaucrats.

Just to really boil it down, I feel like it’s a simple as the company you keep.

Best Remain people: ordinary people pissed off with the elites
Best Leave people: also ordinary people pissed off with the elites

Worst Remain people: some bankers, some tories, some international figures and institutions you don’t personally like
Worst Leave people: Britain First, the EDL, the BNP, the DUP, UKIP, the Traditional Britain Group (who supported apartheid, lest we forget), the nutter wing of the tories (including the ERG), the nutter wing of Labour, other bankers (who seem to have bet against the pound for their own gain…), every anti-women’s rights activist group, and so on and so on

If you have come to the same conclusion as the latter, then you need to accept you’re on the side of the bad guys, even if you personally don’t feel like you’re a bad person. ‘Leave’ is the one position that seems to have paleoconservatives, neofascists, asset stripping bankers, and Marxists on the same side. Whatever you may think, they most definitely don’t give a shit about you, and Brexit was never about helping out ordinary people.
🤷

There was nowhere in Europe where British people could go and do that.

Wages don't necessarily need to be higher to have a better quality of life though - especially of the COL is lower and the weather is better.

@ParsleySageRosemary As someone who lived in a midlands mining town till I was 30, got divorced and moved 'down south' a lot of this is true, however these poor grotty areas do exist all over , Bristol is full of them as is Southampton, Swindon, Reading etc. on a recent holiday in Majorca it was an eye opener listening to many 'working class families' conversations and were clearly on their 3rd or 4th holiday abroad that year and many were from the north west and midlands. Working class as Brits tend to define it covers a wide range of assets and income levels and is not a geographical thing. We used to live below an elderly but very posh lady who clearly had very little money - poverty isn't just a preserve of big northern council estates. I'm not a Tory at all but there does seem to be an attitude that poverty only exists in sink hole areas- it's not true, it's more complicated than that.

Nevertheless being poor in the south east or in London itself is to have many more opportunities open to you than somewhere in the north that most southerners wouldn’t be able to locate on a map. In terms of funding, the diversity of people and languages, and in terms of ease of transport. It is a very different proposition to transport oneself to Europe from the valleys of Wales, the ends of Cornwall or the north than it is from the south east.

The same people against Brexit would have been against the end of apartheid in South Africa,

As someone whose mother was arrested in an anti apartheid demonstration, how fucking dare you. Just how fucking dare you.

Agreed OP. I’m a duel National, as our my kids through me and I’m glad they still have the option to be Europeans as well as British.
PS if the friend has an Irish passport they can still live/work etc in the U.K.

‘The same people against Brexit would have been against the end of apartheid in South Africa,’

yup. Lots of similarities…

@Alexandra2001 @Rosewaterblossom

Just to clarify there was never any requirement under the RLMT that it be advertised throughout the entire EU. Advertising requirements were as follows.

"In order to satisfy the RLMT, employers must advertise the position for a minimum period of 28 days. The advertisement must have full details on the position, including the job title, the job description, an indication of salary, skills and qualifications required, location(s) of employment, and closing date for applications.

The role must also be advertised in at least two places as listed in the Sponsor Guidance issued by UK Visas and Immigration. These include, but are not limited to, national newspapers, the internet, and recruitment agencies."

Basically the employer needs to show they made a good effort to recruit someone who doesn't need to be sponsored and hasn't created an impossible job description and advertised it for a day in order to hire a specific person.

However, keep in mind that people don't usually discuss their immigration status. You may very well work with people from lots of different countries but it doesn't mean they are here on a work visa. Their visa could be dependent on their marriage, family, or ancestry. They could be on the Youth Mobility scheme, a student visa, or an entrepreneurial visa. They may also have Indefinite Leave to Remain or dual citizenship. None of these people will have restrictions on what jobs they can take. Only someone whose status in the UK is tied to their employment will need a job to sponsor them and thus would have been subjected to the RLMT under the old rules.

It's also helpful to keep this in mind when the government talks about visa numbers, as it will include all these categories, not just people coming to work. You even need a visa if you come over to work in a creative field or as a professional sportsperson! A lot of these visa holders will be spouses or family members of British Citizens. And quite often one immigrant will have applied for multiple visas over their time in the UK so every new visa issued does not mean someone new has entered the country (I personally have had 5 if you count my student visa from 12 years ago).

@Bubblebubblebah A "large employer" is one that has an annual turnover of over £10.2m. A £1400 fee every four years is pretty negligible. As is paying an extra £1000 on top of each employee's salary. I suspect most employer's probably price this in and offer a slightly lower salary. As I said, the majority of the cost is paid by the employee. That's like saying wages shouldn't ever go up because prices might get higher.

Companies are not forced to become sponsors. They have to decide there is a business need and choose to apply. It's a pretty drawn out process so if a company decides to go through it they clearly think the small cost is worth it to access a wider pool of talent.

Many posters have come on to counter argue these posts, Alexandra was one example who ignored someone's post giving them facts to counter what they were saying and instead chose to try and patronise me like in a playground.

My job involves training hundreds of people in various settings and sizes. I have patience in abundance and tend to get the best from people. I find it staggering that grown adults cannot have a debate without resorting to silly insults, put downs and downright rudeness. From my experience if you want people to listen to, and take in what you say, then don't put them down and/or insult them! People only shut off otherwise.

I'll clarify, not literally the same people, but the modern day equivalent in Britain absolutely are the equivalent of the pro-Apartheid people in SA and the well-to-do in antibellum Southern US. Going on about the economy being based upon cheap labour/servitude/slavery and how the country won't be able to cope without it. There were plenty of people going on about how people who voted the wrong way "not being intelligent enough to understand what they were voting for" and how only certain people should be entitled to vote.

Thank you and very informative. One query, my ex had a small business and didn't advertise in two places, it was usually just the local paper.

Er I’ll think you’ll find that the public voted for it in a democratic vote. But don’t let that get in the way of bashing a party who were voted in also democratically

’Er I’ll think you’ll find that the public voted for it in a democratic vote.’

They chose to have the referendum. There wouldn’t have been a referendum without the Conservatives.

Er I’ll think you’ll find that the public voted for it in a democratic vote.

It can't really be considered the result of a democratic vote when the subject of the vote is a lie.

Given the way Brexit was promoted and sold to the public It's barely any different to holding a referendum on "Everyone in the UK should get a 50% pay rise", the majority voting "yes" and then finding out that in fact it's a 25% pay cut they're getting.

"Well, it was a democratic vote. Just accept it."

This is like pulling teeth :(

Just to clarify there was never any requirement under the RLMT that it be advertised throughout the entire EU. Advertising requirements were as follows
"In order to satisfy the RLMT, employers must advertise the position for a minimum period of 28 days. The advertisement must have full details on the position, including the job title, the job description, an indication of salary, skills and qualifications required, location(s) of employment, and closing date for applications
The role must also be advertised in at least two places as listed in the Sponsor Guidance issued by UK Visas and Immigration. These include, but are not limited to, national newspapers, the internet, and recruitment agencies"

Yes in the UK..... not across the EU - which i note isn't mentioned in your copy n paste.

Er I’ll think you’ll find that the public voted for it in a democratic vote

A democratic vote that broke the rules.

It was in effect a binding vote, but they had to dress it up as advisory so that funding rules could be got around, so that Leave could effectively cheat. If it had been declared as the binding vote that it undoubtedly was, it would have been disqualified and voided.

It was also swimming in dirty Russian money and manipulation, troll factories targeting social media with disinformation as has been clearly uncovered. Also heavily influenced by foreign owned press in this country with their own agenda.

And also the fact that most other countries would have sought some kind of super-majority for such a major decision, as a knife edge win for either side has the potential to split a country in two, causing major division, which is sadly what we have now. That was ignored by Cameron the fool who, let’s face it, was only interested in cementing power for himself- that’s why he called the vote in the first place, to see off ukip.

I think it’s actually the perfect example of how to manipulate democracy- certainly not some shining example.

@notimagain that's interesting.

Without knowing what the industry was I can't really say anything more.

I understand that MEPs can table 'amendments', however, when you get hundreds of amendments added, then you end up with a totally unworkable piece of legislation such as the Hunting Bill (UK Parliament) and the spirit of the original Bill lost.

‘you'd rather have some unelected bureaucrats in Brussels telling us what to do?’

Do you recall voting for Lord David Frost, Lord Goldsmith, Lord Andrew Lloyd Webber, The Queen? I don’t recall any of these people being elected. Liz Truss will be foisted on the rest of us by about 100k people also. Doesn’t sound like much of a mandate to me.

On the other hand the ‘unelected bureaucrats in Brussels’ were actually all elected. The U.K. elected multiple MEPs. If you were over 18 you could have possibly chosen people other than lazy jokes such as Farage and Ann Widdecombe to ‘represent’ us. Farage never turned up to one debate or vote to represent U.K. fishing in the European Parliament but was apparently the fisherman’s champion by the time June 2016 and the tv cameras came around.

The U.K. had a massive and perhaps over represented voice in Brussels. Many of the laws e.g financial services regulations were written by the U.K and supported by elected MEPs. MEPs also voted in rules to clean up coastlines.

Meanwhile unelected Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber flew into the U.K. for one day specially to vote for cutting benefits to the vulnerable and the majority of the Tory party waited until a scandal to quietly approve water companies dumping sewage on to U.K. coastlines which is probably one of the reasons why Polio’s back.

Out of the EU and the Tory party plus their unelected Lords, I’d trust the EU MEPs to protect us.

‘I'll clarify, not literally the same people, but the modern day equivalent in Britain absolutely are the equivalent of the pro-Apartheid people in SA and the well-to-do in antibellum Southern US. Going on about the economy being based upon cheap labour/servitude/slavery and how the country won't be able to cope without it.’

I must say you are an absolute disgrace to compare Remain voters to apartheid supporters and American white supremacists. A complete fucking disgrace when the only violent racist act was committed by a Brexit supporter against Jo Cox.

The question of the ballot paper was fairly clear. "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?".

As far as it being advisory, the leaflets provided by the government prior to the vote, clearly stated "This is your decision, the government will implement what you decide". I do not recall anyone saying anything about it being an "advisory" vote until it was clear remain had lost.

I do not recall anyone saying anything about it being an "advisory" vote until it was clear remain had lost

You recalling it is neither here nor there. I do. It was a binding vote as the result was enacted as if it was binding, yet it used the rules for an advisory vote to, basically cheat. Different rules for different types of referendum. Google “was the Brexit vote advisory” and see what comes up.