Brexit mega thread part 15a - looking forwards

[Talkinpeace]

Just rebooting the most recent thread

At the moment the UKs issues are rather over shadowed by events elsewhere
but maybe that is a good thing.

The German election on Sunday is worth watching
Right wing European politicians pulling out of CPAC speeches because they realise its not a good look
Farage floundering to stay relevant

and the possibility of the return of free movement for our kids if not us

Relations between mainland Europe and the UK remain a worthy topic for discussion

You should work on your reading comprehension

@MaybeNotBob

The only qualifications needed to vote in the UK are:

to be 18

to make the effort to vote

Five of those are EU countries, and your lot threw away the right to move there easily.

The Farage garage is up for sale

https://www.ft.com/content/66763def-d141-465d-ba96-31399071bf3b

And more Brexit money waste

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/may/21/brexit-food-control-post-at-portsmouth-may-have-to-be-demolished-says-port-director

I refer you to the reply just above yours...

@pointythings

Five of those are EU countries, and your lot threw away the right to move there easily

Same question as I presented to Toffee;

Can you provide evidence that the majority of the UK want or need to move to any of those five countries?

For information;

Spain has 262,000 UK citizens (0.4%) of UK population). This is the highest figure in the EU. A third of which are over 65.

Approx. 1.2 million (1.7% of UK population) UK citizens live in the EU

Spain is campaigning for the 90/180 rule to be scrapped. France campaigned too, but their courts overruled.

So, the notion that the majority of the UK want to move to the EU is incorrect.

@DuncinToffee

25 million is what the UK spends every three days on hotel for immigrants.

@MaybeNotBob

Still waiting for you to quote the law that says people must pass an exam before they are allowed to vote.

Another Brexit benefit...

It doesn't have to be a majority wanting to live and work in other countries. That's your cheap strawman. The fact is that just for the Erasmus scheme, uptake has halved post Brexit. Doesn't mean the others didn't want to go; if you make something harder, fewer people will do it. Taking away opportunity from young people is not a good thing.

Still waiting for your English comprehension lessons to have any effect...

The only qualifications needed to vote in the UK are:
to be 18
to make the effort to vote

And now, to provide valid I or be turned away. Despite the fact that therewas virtually no voter fraud in this country.

@pointythings

The fact is that just for the Erasmus scheme, uptake has halved post Brexit.

Correct. From 36,000 to 18,000 thereabouts I remember.

However, if you are presenting the argument that a vote cast by 17.4 million should have been ignored to suit 18,000 people it won’t get you far.

Also, UK decided to leave the Erasmus+ exchange scheme due to poor foreign language skills of the UK. Lower take up by UK students would have resulted in the UK paying approximately €300 million more per year than it would have got back.

Source www.politico.eu dated 3 April 2024

if you make something harder, fewer people will do it.

That’s called laziness. Things that are easy to achieve are often not worth a lot

Taking away opportunity from young people is not a good thing.

There are approximately 1.9 million UK citizens attending University. So, even if the there had been no reduction, it’s still less than 2% of people who were interested.

I bet you enjoyed taking away opportunies from other people when you voted leave

@DuncinToffee

There will never be an outcome of a vote that pleases everyone. Difference of opinions is what brought about voting.

If you didn’t get what you voted for, try harder the next time.

Just £350 million entrance fee.

No Brexiteer actually got what they voted for!

However, if you are presenting the argument that a vote cast by 17.4 million should have been ignored to suit 18,000 people it won’t get you far.

The vote wasn't ignored; you have got your Brexit. It was however undefined. I recollect Daniel Hannan talking after the vote that 'no one was talking about leaving the Single Market' and yet apparently that had been mandated by the Leave vote.

It was all "Take back Control" and "We spend £350 million a week on the EU, let's spend it on the NHS. I don't see any mention of Erasmus in either of those slogans.

The vote wasn't ignored; you have got your Brexit

Brexit is done and dusted. delivered. Signed sealed and delivered.

All else is now working in a post-Brexit world.

Or are we gearing up for a campaign to leave the EU ?

@MaybeNotBob

No Brexiteer actually got what they voted for!

So, you know each and every one of the 17.4 million who voted leave in 2016? Must have an excellent memory

@Peregrina

We spend £350 million a week on the EU, let's spend it on the NHS.

That’s not what was said. The wording on the red bus was:

We send the EU £350 million a week. Let’s fund our NHS instead.

Nowhere was it specified that all funds sent to the EU would all be diverted to the NHS. Boris Johnson was taken to court, but the courts dismissed the case.

Funding for the NHS has increased from 151 billion in 2016 to 188 billion in 2024.

Regards control, all parties acknowledge that has not been achieved. Not likely to be achieved in my view based on the following logic:

Immigration (cheap labour) = more profits for the elites.

^We send the EU £350 million a week. Let’s fund our NHS instead.^

This is not the gotcha that you think Globetrotter.

As soon as the Leave result was announced, one Leaver immediately said, 'We could spend it on the NHS; we didn't say we would.'

At least one person interviewed by the BBC on the day the result was announced said that she would be angry if the money wasn't spent on the NHS. I would love the BBC to go back and find her and ask her how she feels now.

At least one person interviewed by the BBC on the day the result was announced said that she would be angry if the money wasn't spent on the NHS. I would love the BBC to go back and find her and ask her how she feels now.

Statistically, dead ?

The £350m figure - debunked by the UK Statistics Authority in any case - was HIGHLY suggestive that the money would be spent in its entirety on the NHS.

@hoopyvest

The figure of £350 million was definitely incorrect as it omitted the rebate which gave a net payment of about £250 million. However, the increase of £37 billion from 2016 to 2024 is an increase of over £700 million per week, but funded by other sources.

The amount spent on COVID and subsidies for energy has swallowed the £250 million per week for the next half century at least.

@Peregrina

I remember it was Julia Hartley-Brewer that said on Question Time savings could be spent on the NHS.

Heartless Brewer was obviously not the only person saying that, as you well know. The entire campaign implied it. They only admitted it was false after the referendum, nice people that they are.

The £350 million figure was misleading for many reasons, not just the fact that the headline figure was wrong.

It was mostly because there were no savings at all, partly because of the massive increase in costs of replicating all the EU institutions we so wisely withdrew from.

But hey, blue passports eh?