Is there really a majority for ending freedom of movement?

[Figmentofmyimagination]

To me, the worst thing about Brexit is the removal of freedom of movement rights from UK workers, especially young workers. We've introduced the highest university fees in the western world, made housing inaccessible to anyone without access to the bank of mum and dad and now we are removing free movement rights.

What is driving this desire to limit the life chances of young people?

Exactly LeClerc. I haven't undermined any of my points, and furthermore I am offering reasons other than it only being racist to vote Leave.

You may well think our maintaining our security through deterrence is "stupid"; I do not.

On HS2 I think the naysayers are on much stronger ground. Personally, if we need it, and I think we do, it makes far more sense to me to start at the Manchester/Leeds/Birmingham end of things rather than build more to help London, but that is a London centric government for you.

I can (regrettably) cite zero evidence that a Labour government would follow this course of action, more likely they would cancel the whole thing, which is the only outcome that is worse than 'starting at the wrong end' IMO.

I agree that there is money available for all sorts of things and governments make choices. Austerity was unfortunately necessary IMO.

For me, I think as a society we need to have very serious conversations about what we expect the NHS to do for us, and how it will be sustainably resourced in the long run. Unfortunately, governments mostly care about getting themselves re-elected so such long term thinking is akin to political suicide.

I think loss of FOM is one of the worst things about leaving the EU and it is why I would accept a Norway deal however stupid it really is.
But I want FOM for myself and my dc, I think many people who voted leave only saw it terms of what others could take from their country not what they could take from other countries.

plaidlife Because as we’ve seen by the low percentage of U.K. citizens that take advantage of FOM ( 1%) mostly retirees in Southern Europe, it effects more the people that don’t wish to use it, that’s part of living in a democracy

plaidlife Norway includes FOM, so I think that’s out, ( for now)

I think it's very questionable whether Trident is 'defence', especially since it's so dependent on the Americans. This is still shades of Empire and us not wanting to "go naked into the conference chamber" IMO.

As for the NHS - one area where I happen to agree with you. We desperately need a debate about what sort of Health and Social care we need and are prepared to pay for, but this debate isn't happening. I think significant numbers of people would pay more for a good NHS.

I don't think Austerity was necessary; it was a political choice.

Why bring the Labour party into it? Austerity wasn't their policy but they weren't elected in 2010.

I wonder when I read about how diverse a country we are. I never grew up in a diverse country and neither my parents but all of a sudden I'm supposed to be OK with it?

The true impact of FoM is far wider than a supposed 1% and it is only the fact that the UK government haven't bothered implementing any of the available 'rules' is why it has failed. I don't normally use public transport because when I am going somewhere I need to carry far too many tools with me to be practical. Should I object to paying for bus and train infrastructure?
Practically all citizens in the UK are 'immigrants' from one era or another. My family surname has roots back to France a few hundred years back although used in parts of 'central' England.
Trident as a deterrent is all well and good, but how does anyone know if they would actually 'work'. If it came to using one, it would be 'game over' anyway for the UK as most of it would be uninhabitable.

@Hesta54
Because as we’ve seen by the low percentage of U.K. citizens that take advantage of FOM ( 1%) mostly retirees in Southern Europe,

Something like 1.5 million UK citizens are registered as living permanently in the rest of the EU - about 2.5% of the approx. 60m British citizens.

'Retirees in Southern Europe' is a lazy stereotype. There are fewer than 400,000 UK retirees living permanently in the EU. The other one million UK citizens are living normal lives doing normal jobs.

As I wrote earlier, there are approx. another 1 million British workers who rely on FoM in order to do their jobs - pilots, engineers, consultants, reps, drivers etc. Add to this the British students studying in the EU on Erasmus and other schemes, and then add in the British citizens who flip and flop between the UK and Spain and something like 2.5 million British citizens (4% of the population) take advantage of FoM at any given time.

This is just a snapshot of the number in the EU at any given time. Over the last 40 years, millions of UK citizens have used their FoM rights in order to live, study and work in the EU at some point in their careers. Builders and bricklayers in the 1980s, project engineers working for Airbus, BMW and other European companies, 200,000 UK students have studied in the EU under Erasmus, 50,000 holiday reps every year and so on.

And for balance, 3.5 million EU citizens in the UK represents less than 1% of the EU population - Britons are more likely to move to the EU than EU citizens are to move to the UK.

Trident is a waste of money because we will never ever use it independent of other Western nuclear states, is Russian/China/NK going to attack just the UK ?

HS2 gives us trains that are faster than France's TGV why does a country a 1/3rd of the size need that?

We need capacity not vanity projects.

{ I never grew up in a diverse country and neither my parents but all of a sudden I'm supposed to be OK with it?}
Why not?
Most people around the world hanker after a 'pleasant' life with family and friends around them and some have aspirations of going out to make new friends and different experiences.
As a Brit and having traveled pretty extensively over 40 odd years the only people who have wished me harm are 'fellow' Brits.

Far more benefit would be gained by upgrading the transpennine rail links.

Havanananana As a balance, 3.5 million have come to a population of 66 million compared to 1.1 million adding to a population of over 500 million, seems a bit heavy in one direction, that is probably why England is the 2nd highest densely populate in the E.U.

I think we are getting side tracked a bit but

On Trident, it has been "used" round the clock 24/7/365 every day since 1993. It has done its job perfectly and continues to do it.

On HS2 - we do need capacity, agree totally. Any capacity we now build to travel a significant distance by rail is going to be high speed rail.

On FOM, clearly the EU are of the view it is essential to them to keep it. Not sure where the stats come from to back up the "Britons are more likely to move to the EU than EU citizens are to come to the UK" point?

Havanananana Or to put it another way, EU citizens have increased our population by approximately 4.5% we have increased Europe’s by approximately 0.22%,

@Hesta54
It was you who introduced percentages into the discussion, stating (incorrectly) the low percentage of U.K. citizens that take advantage of FOM ( 1%)

As I suggest, something like 4% of British citizens either live in the EU or rely on FoM for their jobs and many more have at some point lived and worked in the EU. A far higher percentage than the percentage of EU citizens who come to the UK to work.

Havanananana Turning stats to make your point,

@LouiseCollins28 what has Trident got to do with being in the EU? Remain voter who supports keeping Trident here. Stop wasting your energy assuming all Remain voters are leftists just because some of them are.

It's highly debatable whether something we haven't used has done it's job or not, but as you say, not really relevant to the debate.

As for railways - yes they do need more capacity in certain places, but there would be alternatives. I used to be a fan of HS trains until I began to look into it properly, and now I see it as a vanity project.

A handful of 'Trident' armaments have been tested and worked.
The hardware that is present could just as well be cardboard boxes painted grey with 'bomb' written on them, as long as you don't tell anyone.

Trains need to be clean, comfortable, travel to the timetable and a decent price.
Being 'fast' might be nice, but is nowhere near the most important aspects.
Having 'high speed' trains to make regular commuting from Manchester to London (say) is deliberately disadvantaging Manchester, simply making it a dormitory for the cess pool that is London.

Havanananana Turning stats to make your point,

lol! Pot/kettle much?

@hesta54 I know Norway includes FOM but it is a form of leaving the EU that might be able to get a majority in parliament so I don't think it is out.
If May's deal gets voted down and Grieve 3 means that a no deal will be blocked by parliament we are left with 1. Revoking article 50 and not leaving 2. Having a PV with much clearer questions this time round or 3. Parliament voting for a type of Brexit that would have a cross party majority (ie. Norway)
The only option which actually follows the ref vote is Norway. There was nothing about FOM on the ballot.

I have not assumed remain voters are leftists, and would not do this.

I think we started down this road because somebody posted about cancelling trident as a solution to find the money to sort the problems that caused the Brexit vote. For my money, that argument is nonsense

Sorry for the thread drift.

Hesta Louise neither of you have acknowledged the benefits FOM has given UK industry, Pharma and Science or how we will replace that.

Non EU migration is double that of EU migration and set to rise dramatically over the next few years, you ve achieved nothing at all.

If Brits are too narrow minded to take adv of FOM, whose fault is that?