Can someone give me one benefit of Brexit.

[Tulipsroses]

It's going to be 4 years since we withdrew our membership in European Union. Apart from the passport colour (some people might prefer) can anyone name one positive change which happened since then.

I don't recall anyone labelling moving from Hampshire to London as migrating, rather a lot of people do it every day, I think it is more normally called commuting.

There was a poster who seemed to think that since Rishi Sunak was born in Southampton he couldn't be a migrant, which is rather odd, but there we go.

Migrants do not live in the country in which they were born.
Rishi Sunak was born in England.
He is not a migrant.
Boris Johnson was born in New York.
He is a migrant.

So if Rishi Sunak had spent time living in another country he would at that point be a migrant?

I suspect it won't be long before he is a migrant again.

Did he give up his green card in the end, or is he still a permanent resident of the USA as he was when he was Chancellor?

Green Card is right to work, not residence.

It was withdrawn by the US when he became Chancellor as being elected elsewhere is a breach of the terms.

Almost 1,000 posts. I wonder what the question will be on the next Brexit thread?

I am glad you are agreeing that he has been a migrant, an economic one at that.

He held onto his green card for a significant period of time as Chancellor, demonstrating his attention to detail and love of the rule of law.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61044847

Oddly the BBC think it means he was allowed permanent residence in the US, strange they should get something so simple wrong (or perhaps they haven't).

It also requires adherence to US law.

Call me a fuddy duddy, but I'm not keen on UK elected officials having any obligations to foreign powers. And that's before you consider Diddy Dave Cameron is quite happily organising a war with zero democratic legitimacy.

Cunt.

Oddly the BBC think it means he was allowed permanent residence in the US,

Prince, once famously said "If I want sax, I call Candy".

In the same vein, if I want facts, I don't call the BBC. It's not their forte.

I imagine the search for a single Brexit benefit will continue, and we will all continue to immensely appreciate your help in the matter.

Four eyes being better than two and all that ...

Indeed working together constructively is always the best.

I imagine the search for a single Brexit benefit will continue

Posters have given what they consider to be benefits. Mine were;

As per the ONS:

Unemployment in the UK has reduced.

NHS has received more funding. The ONS figures for 2019 to 2023 excluded COVID measures to prevent distortion as detailed in the narrative of the ONS reports if posters take the time to read them carefully.

If there is another thread on Brexit benefits, maybe the OP should amend the wording of the question to:

Can someone provide Brexit benefits that everyone else will agree with?

Why would leaving the EU effect how much was spent on the NHS?

@jgw1 Why would leaving the EU effect how much was spent on the NHS

Once the UK had left the EU it would no longer be liable to pay the EU membership costs. So, money previously paid to the EU could be used to provide additional funds for the NHS.

There was red bus which went around the UK which advertised this option. It became controversial as the statement that UK sends £350 million per week to the EU did not reflect the rebates negotiated by Mrs Thatcher in 1985 which

Paying more on visas for non EU staff ?

EU staff cost nothing, non EU cost several thousand a year
times thousands ?

Just a guess

Reduced the amount paid to the EU by Approx. 35%. So, net contribution was about £225 million.

You seem to be rather missing the point.

Why couldn't the UK government have spent more on the NHS when the UK was a member of the EU?

Was there a rule against it?

@jgw1 You seem to be rather missing the point. Why couldn't the UK government have spent more on the NHS when the UK was a member of the EU? Was there a rule against it?

To spend more on the NHS, or anything else, the government has to find the funds. This can come from the following sources:

Borrow more and pass on the cost to future generations.

Increase taxes. Risky as voters tend not to like tax increases. Some suggest that high earners should pay more, but 1% of the population already pays Approx 30% of all taxes collected. Increase it too much and they will leave the UK as they can afford to move.

Reallocate from existing expenditure. So, to spend more on NHS, cuts to other public services would have to be cut. Leaving the EU avoids that action as money that was previously sent to the EU can be used elsewhere without making cuts.

But it didn't
did it

You can't relocate expenditure of the pot is smaller, which is what has happened.

You think all the things the UK benefitted from as a result of being in the EU were somehow cheaper for the UK after it left the EU, and so a saving was made?

Seems somewhat implausible.

The government have increased both taxes and borrowing since we left the EU.
Could that be where the money for the NHS has come from?

@Talkinpeace

EU passport holders can be present in the UK for 180 days per financial year without a Visa. Days are calculated based on the number of midnights passed between entry and departure.

So, if a French citizen arrives in the UK Monday morning and leaves Thursday evening, they will have been in the UK for 3 days. 3 days in every 7 day period plus public and annual holidays means they will never exceed the maximum of 180 days per year in the UK.

For those that wish to stay longer they will need a Visa. A 12 month work visa can be had for less than £1,000. So, UK would have to employ Approx. 250,000 EU passport holder every week (12 million per year) to match the amount previously paid to the EU.