Is Britain about to leave the EU?

[Arakhor]

Football Manager does Brexit!

 

[really]

Was just speaking to someone who is on an advisory committee to the department for exiting the EU.

They are hoping that a hard Brexit doesn't happen but their priority if it does is to keep the free movement of workers. The UK workforce just isn't big enough or skilled enough to sustain the tech sector.

 

[FriendlyFire]

It seems that you have created another set of different problems
The tarrifs are imposed by the EU along with subsidies are designed to protect EU argiculture (For food security reasons orginally)
I guess removing tarrifts, would open the heavily subsidies and protected Argiculture to globel market, and if not handled carefully is going to hurt UK Argiculture.

Higher food prices are a fact of life in the UK now that the over valuation of the pound is ending after the loss of the misplaced over confidence.
The vote to Leave may be the immediate tripwire trigger, but it is the UK's current account trade deficit that is the underlying cause.

Secondly to the best of my knowledge there is nothing in WTO rules that obliges the UK to apply such tariffs at all to its imports.
My understanding is that the UK would merely not be entitled to impose higher tariffs than the rates specified in those schedules.

It seems tarffits might be the least of the Leavers problem though. UK will need to quickly sign FTA and treaties else its going to find itself in serious trade barriers
If the UK is unable to export to the EU due to a hard Brexit the trade barrier is going to be a disaster and as the smaller trading partner guess who is going to be hurt more ?

For animal products exported to the EU, the situation is even worse — if that is possible. Products from third countries (which is now the UK) are permitted entry only through designated border inspection posts (BIPs). Only at these can they be inspected and, if necessary, detained for testing. For animal products exported to the EU, the situation is even worse — if that is possible. Products from third countries (which is now the UK) are permitted entry only through designated border inspection posts (BIPs). Only at these can they be inspected and, if necessary, detained for testing. Your container inspection is typically about £700 and detention costs about £80 a day for the ten days or so it will take to get your results back. Add the testing fee and you’re paying an extra £2,000 to deliver a container into the EU.

One can say, unequivocally, that the UK could not survive as a trading nation by relying on the WTO Option. It would be an unmitigated disaster, and no responsible government would allow it.

http://leavehq.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=128

 

[Lillefix]

Was just speaking to someone who is on an advisory committee to the department for exiting the EU.

They are hoping that a hard Brexit doesn't happen but their priority if it does is to keep the free movement of workers. The UK workforce just isn't big enough or skilled enough to sustain the tech sector.

Britain. What have you done to yourself? What was the point?

 

[aelf]

Was just speaking to someone who is on an advisory committee to the department for exiting the EU.

They are hoping that a hard Brexit doesn't happen but their priority if it does is to keep the free movement of workers. The UK workforce just isn't big enough or skilled enough to sustain the tech sector.

But do the Brexiters care? Heck, the Tories are now considering reducing the number of foreign students (and not just from the EU). Seeing that foreign students are a vital source of income for UK universities, I'm not sure how they expect UK higher education to retain its position. And it will certainly exacerbate any skills shortage.

It might also force tuition fees for UK students to rise (in a hilarious irony much like how the cheaper pound makes British real estate more attractive to foreign investors, who might now drive prices up and make the working class' lives even more miserable). But to Brexiters it's all fine as long as them foreigners are stopped.

Bigotry never got anyone anywhere, whether they have other legitimate grievances or not.

 

[HAND]

Well, it's still possible Brexit might not happen:

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...-very-likely-to-be-asked-to-agree-brexit-deal

 

[Arakhor]

That's not quite the same thing. The government still insists that the Royal Prerogative will cover Article 50, so this "very likely" deal will merely cover our post-Brexit relationship with the EU. Even if MPs rejected the deal for whatever reason, we'd still leave the EU without recourse to Parliament two years after Article 50 was triggered.

 

[Manfred Belheim]

Bigotry never got anyone anywhere, whether they have other legitimate grievances or not.

That's a hell of a statement to make. I'm sure it must have got lots of people lots of benefits throughout history.

 

[Traitorfish]

However most English do not see why we should continue to surrender our sovereignty to a federal Europe
merely because the Scots or Northern Irish or Gibraltians seem content to go along with that drift.

And the Scots do not see why we should continue to surrender our sovereignty to a not-even-federal Union merely because the English say so. If Scotland is possessed of some degree of sovereignty, and in both the imagination of Scots and the current constitutional settlement, that seems to be the case, it is not clear that English votes can compel it to make this sort of dramatic constitutional change without at least some sort of consultation, for which no provision has been made. You see the problem?

You can't appeal to "sovereignty" and then refuse out of hand to acknowledge competing arguments for where that sovereignty might lie.

 

[EnglishEdward]

And the Scots do not see why we should continue to surrender our sovereignty to a not-even-federal Union merely because the English say so.

The Scots chose that, in their independence referendum, to stay in the UK, not the English.

Nobody gave me a vote as to whether England should remain in union with Scotland, not that I am bothered.

And as to the argument that Nicola Sturgeon puts forward that the facts have changed.

Fine. UK agrees exit date and agreement with EU. I am very content for Scottish adults (whether in Scotland or elsewhere),
who would then know what it is that they would be voting for or against, to vote again on the English&Welsh/Scottish union.

The Scots had their consultation, they have voted twice, us English only voted once.

Theresa May is quite happy to consult with Scotland, the problem is that the SNP is not interested in genuine consultation;
it is simply using that as a pretence to try to veto Brexit and break the union without risking the outcome of a
further independence vote, and there is no reason why Theresa May should put herself out to support that line.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Was just speaking to someone who is on an advisory committee to the department for exiting the EU.

They are hoping that a hard Brexit doesn't happen but their priority if it does is to keep the free movement of workers. The UK workforce just isn't big enough or skilled enough to sustain the tech sector.

Leaving the EU does not prevent the UK from admitting skilled workers if and where and when, there are shortages of such skilled workers in the UK.

I am cynical enough to wonder if that peculiar prioritisation merely reflects the advisory committee's day jobs and, "follow the money", their source of income.

 

[EnglishEdward]

But do the Brexiters care? Heck, the Tories are now considering reducing the number of foreign students (and not just from the EU). Seeing that foreign students are a vital source of income for UK universities, I'm not sure how they expect UK higher education to retain its position. And it will certainly exacerbate any skills shortage.

It might also force tuition fees for UK students to rise (in a hilarious irony much like how the cheaper pound makes British real estate more attractive to foreign investors, who might now drive prices up and make the working class' lives even more miserable). But to Brexiters it's all fine as long as them foreigners are stopped.

Bigotry never got anyone anywhere, whether they have other legitimate grievances or not.

I am not sure I understand your logic. I have not seen any hard evidence of claims made elsewhere that tuition fees for UK students studying in the UK are currently lower because of
cross subsidisation by foreign students. I would therefore have thought that more students drives up that price as the universities do not have to compete on the price of tuition fees.

 

[Takhisis]

In referring to cities and islands, I am also thinking of Gibraltar and London so I do not agree that I am being disingenuous.

But the City of London is not a sovereign entity. It is a weird legal jumble of stuff in which Parliament generally doesn't meddle, but that's another kettle of fish.

However most English do not see why we should continue to surrender our sovereignty to a federal Europe
merely because the Scots or Northern Irish or Gibraltians seem content to go along with that drift.

I have no objection to the Scottish people having another vote on independence. As for the Northern Islands, all I can say is that splitting up Ireland
did not work so well, and I would not want to split up Scotland. By the way I see the existing Crown dependencies as liabilities as much as assets.
I.e. they should either elect and send MPs etc to Westminster and share the laws of England and Wales OR try to make their own way in the world.

So, Man, Jersey, Guernsey, etc.… all are also to go away or become regular boroughs of the UK then?

Leaving the EU does not prevent the UK from admitting skilled workers if and where and when, there are shortages of such skilled workers in the UK.

I am cynical enough to wonder if that peculiar prioritisation merely reflects the advisory committee's day jobs and, "follow the money", their source of income.

Their source of income is a state job and as such they have more in common with the government officials who appoint them than anything or anyone else.

 

[Lillefix]

Leaving the EU does not prevent the UK from admitting skilled workers if and where and when, there are shortages of such skilled workers in the UK.

"Skilled workers" aren't like those people in Calais. They won't be lining up, waiting eagerly to be admitted. If people don't feel welcome fewer people will come.

 

[EnglishEdward]

But the City of London is not a sovereign entity. It is a weird legal jumble of stuff in which Parliament generally doesn't meddle, but that's another kettle of fish.

Exactly, and which is why its claim to stay in the EU has no historical significance.
Quite a different matter from Scotland that was an independent nation up to 1603.

So, Man, Jersey, Guernsey, etc.… all are also to go away or become regular boroughs of the UK then?

If Scotland and Northern Ireland go their own way, I see no good reason why
England and Wales should carry the burden of such tax avoiders and/or evaders.

Their source of income is a state job and as such they have more in common with the government officials who appoint them than anything or anyone else.

That may well be true, but it is not clear to me from Really's post.

In my experience advisory committees are often made up of volunteers
from business who merely promote their own business's interests.

 

[EnglishEdward]

"Skilled workers" aren't like those people in Calais. They won't be lining up, waiting eagerly to be admitted. If people don't feel welcome fewer people will come.

I agree, particularly if they have been enjoying watching the conservative party conference on the telly,
but Leavers are not synonymous with Tories, and so the UK leaving the EU has nothing to do with that.

 

[really]

Leaving the EU does not prevent the UK from admitting skilled workers if and where and when, there are shortages of such skilled workers in the UK.
I am cynical enough to wonder if that peculiar prioritisation merely reflects the advisory committee's day jobs and, "follow the money", their source of income.

Their source of income is a state job and as such they have more in common with the government officials who appoint them than anything or anyone else.

Edward is correct they aren't public employees but a collection of employers that are now focused on Brexit.

"Skilled workers" aren't like those people in Calais. They won't be lining up, waiting eagerly to be admitted. If people don't feel welcome fewer people will come.

Correct - my employer is already worried that potential employees are being put off. They aren't as welcome. They don't know what their status will be after Brexit. They don't fancy having to apply for a visa to work. The pounds they would be earning will be worth less in their home currencies. The little luxuries they like from home and trips home will be more expensive.

Less people will be hired. Less taxes will be collected. Less money will be spent. It is entirely negative.

 

[Arakhor]

Theresa May is quite happy to consult with Scotland, the problem is that the SNP is not interested in genuine consultation; it is simply using that as a pretence to try to veto Brexit and break the union without risking the outcome of a further independence vote, and there is no reason why Theresa May should put herself out to support that line.

Whilst that's entirely probable (and unfortunate), when the SNP are the Scots administration, you can't refuse to deal with them, simply because you don't like what they have in mind. That would be undemocratic, to say the least.

 

[Takhisis]

Exactly, and which is why its claim to stay in the EU has no historical significance.
Quite a different matter from Scotland that was an independent nation up to 1603.

*1707 .

If Scotland and Northern Ireland go their own way, I see no good reason why
England and Wales should carry the burden of such tax avoiders and/or evaders.

Gibraltar is an artificial construct and a Malvifalkland-like clusterphuck. It's basically a relic from the time when the UK needed bases everywhere to rule the British Empire (same reason why Cyprus, Cape Town, etc. were targetted at the time). Good riddance to the place. The rest… they actually serve a function. By acting as financial havens, they help the UK's money-markets and have been one of the fundamental factors behind the pound sterling being such an overpriced currency for so long.

That may well be true, but it is not clear to me from Really's post.

In my experience advisory committees are often made up of volunteers
from business who merely promote their own business's interests.

really's clarified by now. Yes, it's the typical chamber of commerce in disguise group then, business as usual. With the former Mayor of the City as the head honcho in foreign affairs.

 

[aelf]

I am not sure I understand your logic. I have not seen any hard evidence of claims made elsewhere that tuition fees for UK students studying in the UK are currently lower because of
cross subsidisation by foreign students. I would therefore have thought that more students drives up that price as the universities do not have to compete on the price of tuition fees.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/educatio...h-lower-grades-jump-the-university-queue.html

Universities were accused of profiteering by rejecting tens of thousands of British teenagers, currently sitting A-levels, so they can fill places with more profitable foreign students.

Universities say that even the new £9,000-a-year tuition fees for British and European Union students do not cover their costs, and they need to turn to foreigners who are charged 50 per cent more.

...

Richard Cairns, the headmaster at Brighton College, said: “Universities are increasingly searching for, and needing, overseas fees. It’s something we have noticed. It’s tougher for British students to get into top universities than overseas students… There is a higher offer rate to overseas students.”

...

Professor Alan Smithers, director of the Centre for Education and Employment Research at Buckingham University, said that “money is the main factor” in universities recruiting foreign students.

“The reason universities are recruiting more foreign students, is at its heart, about fees. Universities are business, they have to secure their future, they look at their income streams.

Are universities and experts lying about the need for supplementing their income with foreign student fees? If they lose this stream of income, where are they going to get their funding? The Tory government?

Unsurprisingly, you're living under the Brexit rock. This isn't news, but since you left higher education like 40 years ago, you probably have no idea. The hallmark of the Brexit voter is pretending to know more than they do.