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

Brexit

March? What march?

751 replies

Thefuturecouldbebright · 02/07/2016 14:04

Can anyone else find much news coverage of this 'democratic march against democracy'? Twitter is full of info, but tune into the news channels and you would be forgiven for thinking it wasnt happening. Kind of has the ring of 'nobody cares' really doesnt it?

A number of marchers posting on twitter seem to think they are geographically being removed from Europe, although I guess you could forgive them given the odd name given to the march itself 'March for europe'

Why is it not 'March for E.U'? Isnt that what they are really there for? Anyone else as confused as I am?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
12
smallfox1980 · 05/07/2016 11:41

Yes, that's true, but the person in power who called the referendum, did so because the Tory party was losing the vote to UKIP.

The Labour vote going that way is mainly in areas in the North East, and again, its immigration based!

prettybird · 05/07/2016 12:05

Smallfox1980 - re the postwar push for "collective good" and subsequent move away from it: I agree with you with the exception of Scotland - which may also explain why Scotland voted the way we do.

I remember way back in 1991, Robert Maxwell of Kings Fund (I remember the date because it was the day that the "other" Robert Maxwell disappeared off his boat Wink) gave a talk to a group of us who were part of a pilot scheme, the "Executive Development Programme" (hosted by Yorkshire and Trent Regional Health Authorities) to bring high level experience of the private sector to the NHS and expose us to the "best" thinking before taking on Director and Chief Exec roles.

He was talking to us about the reasons behind the setting up of the NHS and how WW2 in particular had contributed to a sense of community and collective responsibility. He then described how in the decades that followed we'd been moving back towards individualism with the exception of Scotland.

I remember looking around the table (there were about 15-20 of us) and noticing that every single one of us (ie people who'd been successful in the private sector but who'd made a choice to give senior management in the NHS a go) was either Scottish or Scottish University educated.

25 years later, I think that that divergence has continued Sad

The Pilot scheme itself didn't work out the way it was intended as the "Purchaser/Provider split meant that career paths were difficult to plan but that's a whole other story Wink

tiggytape · 05/07/2016 12:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

JudyCoolibar · 05/07/2016 12:24

It's very clear that the main motivation for voting Leave for a very substantial number of people was concern about immigration. There were a number of surveys that demonstrated that, and post-referendum surveys have showed the same. In the months coming up to the referendum, any random sampling of comments on articles in the Mail and Sun showed a very persistent dragging of immigrants into virtually anything they weren't happy about: problems with the NHS - it's because it's overrun with immigrants! Failing schools? They're overrun with immigrants! Someone commits murder? If he'd been an immigrant we'd be giving him a luxury cell with a massive TV and offering a mansion to his family! Dying refugees? It's because we let in too many immigrants! Traffic delays? The roads are full of immigrants! And on and on and on. And virtually all those comments contained the words "Vote leave".

Sure, a number of those would have voted Leave anyway even if they were totally happy about immigration. However, if that convenient scapegoat hadn't been available, it's very likely that a significant portion would have realised that the source of their dissatisfaction was in fact the UK government and had little to do with the EU, and the results would have been very different

tiggytape · 05/07/2016 12:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

StrictlyMumDancing · 05/07/2016 12:57

I think the problem with the immigration discussion, and this goes beyond the last few general elections, is what immigrants are being blamed for. Lack of schools/housing/nhs/etc. Those problems have been going on for longer than the big increases in immigration. They come here and sit on benefits is a big fallacy, it's not often reported we have the right with EU law to send them home after a period but we are soft. That's why it's the hot potato no one wants to touch. Largely it's a media problem I think.

I do think most people acknowledge that there is a problem with the numbers of immigration we are seeing now. That it isn't sustainable. But we need immigration and not just for skilled work. Without it, then the country is going to need to start enforcing people movement within the country to fulfill jobs. And that's not going to go down well.

And the levels we are seeing now may be the peak. The 330k figure was 2014. Projections for 2015 based on 3/4 are showing a similar figure but an increase in outside Eu migration and drop in Eu migration. We could limit the non eu right now. We don't.

Figmentofmyimagination · 05/07/2016 13:47

I think inward migration will inevitably fall as living standards fall and we cease to be an attractive destination, relative to our European neighbours - as long as our EU neighbours move quickly to freeze us out and prevent further break up. It's a case of careful what you wish for.

Outward migration may start to look more attractive - but will no longer be an option, sadly.

What an almighty cock up.

JudyCoolibar · 05/07/2016 13:54

The issue of our lack of trade negotiators seems to be another massive cock-up. According to the Financial Times:

*Sir Simon Fraser, former permanent secretary at the Foreign Office, said last month that Britain had 20 “active hands-on” trade negotiators, and would be up against 600 experienced trade specialists in Brussels.

Britain is turning to the private sector to prepare for Brexit, seeking to second consultants to boost a civil service with almost no experience of complex trade negotiations.

Sir Jeremy Heywood, the country’s top civil servant, has held talks with companies including accountants EY and KPMG, and the consultants McKinsey, as he prepares for a negotiation with Brussels described by outgoing prime minister David Cameron as “the most important task the British civil service has undertaken in decades”.

“We want the brightest and the best working on these complex negotiations,” said a government spokesperson. “It is right to draw on people with the necessary skills and expertise from within the civil service but also to look outside too.”

The senior partner of a leading London-based law firm said: “We’ve got super-smart people who understand the regulatory framework who will be intensely valuable.”

The companies told Sir Jeremy that their staff were already stretched helping clients deal with the fallout of Brexit and that while they want to help, it will come at a substantial price to the taxpayer.

The government is believed to have estimated that it needs between 700 and 750 extra staff to negotiate not just with the EU but with the other countries with which the bloc has trade deals.

“The government is going to struggle to gear up to have the bandwidth to properly negotiate the detailed cross-EU and wider bilateral trade deals across the globe,” said Iain Anderson, executive chairman of communications company Cicero.

One leading lawyer said staff were not willing to be seconded to government for the task and that the government’s hopes of recruiting enough people from the private sector for the task ahead was “dreaming”.

“The Cabinet Office needs to come down to reality,” this person said. “They will be confronted with people from the EU who live and breathe its rules. They should focus on getting people back from Brussels.”

To compound matters, some civil servants who have devoted their careers to developing Britain’s relations with the EU say they do not have the stomach to spend the next few years unravelling what they have built.

“Of course part of me thinks I have a duty to the country because I understand this stuff,” said one senior official. “But I could always go and make some money in the City instead.”"

rosierrosierrosier · 05/07/2016 14:05

Ha, I wonder if they would employ EU citizens living in the UK for those negotiating roles, seeing that there are many highly skilled international business people in London. The international company I worked for before dc had some incredibly c;ever (analytical as well emotional intelligence), they included Italian, German, Dutch. I suspect the government would not touch these negotiators with a barge pole would they as they may not be seen as patriotic enough to fight for a deal?

UnderTheGreenwoodTree · 05/07/2016 14:05

God. It's going to be like watching a slow-mo train crash, and being unable to do anything about it.

To compound matters, some civil servants who have devoted their careers to developing Britain’s relations with the EU say they do not have the stomach to spend the next few years unravelling what they have built.

This is particularly galling. Sad

BreakingDad77 · 05/07/2016 15:51

So with the private sector is going to be used a lot in the negotiations how are we going to ensure they are 'neutral'

Figmentofmyimagination · 05/07/2016 17:13

"So with the private sector is going to be used a lot in the negotiations how are we going to ensure they are 'neutral'".

Well duh - like this is even going to be an issue? - where have you been for the last six years?

TheElementsSong · 05/07/2016 17:16

So with the private sector is going to be used a lot in the negotiations

And we're going to pay a pretty penny for it from the Magic Money Tree £350 million.

So to summarise the story so far (corrections and additions welcome):
-Unknown amount wiped off value of economy.
-International reputation is in ruins.
-Likely settlement is Norway-style model, meaning we pay but receive no rebate or grant funding.
-To achieve this and other trade agreements we'll have to pay the private sector.
-Therefore we're poorer, and will be paying more money for a worse position than before June 23?
-But we're free and sovereign.

MangoMoon · 05/07/2016 17:23

We'll be free & sovereign, and also not wasting untold amounts of money on the EU project.

It's not just about the amount we officially 'pay in', or what we get back from that in rebates & funding - it's all the other hidden, incidental costs.

Accommodation, travel, subsistence, expenses, wages etc etc.

Literally millions being spent on schlepping backwards & forwards to something that we don't need.

TheElementsSong · 05/07/2016 17:26

wasting untold amounts of money on the EU project.

I'm jolly pleased about that. The money that's been lost from the economy these past 10-ish days - how does that compare with the wastage on the EU?

MangoMoon · 05/07/2016 17:27

-Unknown amount wiped off value of economy.
Unknown being the key word here.
Wiped off, or added on (long term) = Unknown.

-International reputation is in ruins.
Is it?
In ruins?
Why? Because we enacted democracy?
We've proved that democracy works - perhaps even inspired downtrodden citizens in other countries to pursue democracy?

-Likely settlement is Norway-style model, meaning we pay but receive no rebate or grant funding.
Likely being the key word here.
Unknown as yet.

-To achieve this and other trade agreements we'll have to pay the private sector.
Yes.

-Therefore we're poorer, and will be paying more money for a worse position than before June 23?
Maybe poorer short term during Brexit, but what of mid or long term?
Unknown.

-But we're free and sovereign.
Yes, thankfully.

TheElementsSong · 05/07/2016 17:32

Well you know I'm one of those negative thinking doom-mongers Talking Britain Down Grin. You honestly think the world is watching in awe at our giant headless chicken impression? Are you impressed with it?

JudyCoolibar · 05/07/2016 17:35

The money that's been lost from the economy these past 10-ish days - how does that compare with the wastage on the EU?

It leaves us heavily in the red. Starting with the millions that had to be pumped in to stop the pound falling any further.

StrictlyMumDancing · 05/07/2016 17:36

We are free and sovereign
Unless we go down the Norway route. In which case we are a tiny bit more free and sovereign and still have to pay the money without the rebate and have to accept all the other incidental costs and free movement etc etc. Oh and higher taxes - an opinion universally given by Norway's experts on either side of the argument.

JudyCoolibar · 05/07/2016 17:37

Mango, what your post indicates very clearly is that the best that the Leave camp can say about the economic future is "Unknown". It's not exactly reassuring.

InShockReally · 05/07/2016 17:37

We've proved that democracy works - perhaps even inspired downtrodden citizens in other countries to pursue democracy?

Oh indeed Grin

March? What march?
StrictlyMumDancing · 05/07/2016 17:39

Though it's also pretty well accepted that there's a good chance it will all be ok without the Norway model as long as we dive headfirst into the sea of neo liberalism. Bye bye nhs and education then.

MangoMoon · 05/07/2016 17:43

InShockReally, am unsure if your point?

We had a referendum, the people of our country spoke & were heard via marks on a bit of paper.

How different from the bloody civil wars and uprisings in countries with no democracy.

What does that have to do with Team America swooping in and taking out The Terrorist in random countries?

TheElementsSong · 05/07/2016 17:45

perhaps even inspired downtrodden citizens in other countries to pursue democracy?

You mean like this Grin?
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-07-04/eu-support-surges-in-denmark-as-brexit-scare-spreads-in-nordics

MangoMoon · 05/07/2016 17:47

We are free and sovereign
Unless we go down the Norway route.

Had this been decided?
I must have missed that.

In which case we are a tiny bit more free and sovereign
A lot more.

and still have to pay the money without the rebate
All the money? Same amount as now?

and have to accept all the other incidental costs
How? Why?

and free movement etc etc.
Must have missed this final decision too.

Oh and higher taxes - an opinion universally given by Norway's experts on either side of the argument.
Again, must have missed the 'Norway' decision.

Swipe left for the next trending thread