The now-enacted will of (some of) the people

[Awol]

Always make me laugh when people talk about EU money. It's not EU money, it's money from the UK Treasury that's been passed on to projects in the UK via Brussels - who take a considerable cut for themselves. 

Until it starts raising direct taxes the EU doesn't have its own money, what it spends comes from the nation states - of which the UK is one of the few net contributors. 

Maybe the Welsh aren't quite the poor, duped and ignorant plebs some would like to believe. Perhaps they are actually more astute than those people patronising them.

[Enda]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

Always make me laugh when people talk about EU money. It's not EU money, it's money from the UK Treasury that's been passed on to projects in the UK via Brussels - who take a considerable cut for themselves. 

Until it starts raising direct taxes the EU doesn't have its own money, what it spends comes from the nation states - of which the UK is one of the few net contributors. 

Maybe the Welsh aren't quite the poor, duped and ignorant plebs some would like to believe. Perhaps they are actually more astute than those people patronising them.

Most of Wales is officially considered under-developed under the EU's regional policy, and is thus a net recipient of transfers. And as the UK gets a rebate in terms of its contributions, and much more of the UK than Ireland (we have no officially under-developed regions) is classed as under-developed, Wales gets more (per capita) from Ireland than from the UK. So calling it "EU money" is more accurate than "UK Treasury" money.

So perhaps they're more astute than they're given credit for, or perhaps they were duped that they'd keep "their money" and have it pumped into the NHS. Hard to say.

Anyway, here's a great piece by Kevin O'Rourke on the implications for the Border. Shows some of the difficulties of keeping peace up there with a hard border.

The UK House of Lords on Brexit and Ireland

This very welcome report by the UK House of Lords is available here, and it is good to see an official British document recognising that “Ireland now faces challenges that are not of its own making” — we might perhaps put things less politely on this side of the Irish Sea. Well done to all concerned.

I do have a couple of nitpicks.

1. Beware of Britons suggesting bilateral negotiations. The report suggests that the UK and Ireland should negotiate bilaterally on UK-Irish issues. The problem is that UK strategy more generally appears to have been to try to open up divisions between member states by starting bilateral conversations with individual countries. The EU 27 have been very consistent in emphasising that we will be negotiating as a bloc, which is the only sensible way to proceed. In my view Ireland shouldn’t facilitate this long-standing British aim: not only do we share a common interest in getting the best possible deal for the EU27, and in preserving the cohesion of the EU; but as part of the EU 27, we will be in a stronger negotiating position vis à vis the UK than if we were to negotiate on our own. Ireland is already one of Michel Barnier’s top negotiating priorities, suggesting that our diplomats are succeeding in getting our message across to the rest of the EU. They should keep up the good work.
2. Besides: how could Ireland and the UK agree on arrangements concerning the Border before we know what the eventual nature of the UK’s relationship with the EU will be?
3. I am genuinely baffled by the following recommendation in the report:

   In the event that the UK leaves the customs union, a customs and trade arrangement between the two countries, subject to the agreement of the EU institutions and Member States.

   What does this mean? Ireland can’t be part of a customs union with both the EU and the UK, unless the UK chooses to stay in the EU customs union.  A bilateral trade deal between Ireland and the UK, not involving the rest of the EU, is impossible, both legally and as a practical matter, and it’s very important that everyone in Ireland understand this. If what is meant is that Northern Ireland should remain within the EU customs union (and, preferably, the Single Market also), then that is another matter — this would require customs controls between the two islands, but that would be far preferable from our point of view than customs controls along the Border. But I am not sure that that is what is meant, and so some clarification on this would be helpful.

But well done to the House of Lords for raising these issues, and for appearing to take them seriously, which is more than can be said for the vast majority of the British political establishment.

[Chindie]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

Always make me laugh when people talk about EU money. It's not EU money, it's money from the UK Treasury that's been passed on to projects in the UK via Brussels - who take a considerable cut for themselves. 

Until it starts raising direct taxes the EU doesn't have its own money, what it spends comes from the nation states - of which the UK is one of the few net contributors. 

Maybe the Welsh aren't quite the poor, duped and ignorant plebs some would like to believe. Perhaps they are actually more astute than those people patronising them.

Was the British government queuing up to spend that money on the Welsh? I don't think they were. Or will be in future.

Whether that money was originally pounds or euros when the Welsh get it, they're given it to improve their region. You'll forgive me for not believing Westminster would have spent, or will, that cash in a similar way.

[blandy]

2 hours ago, StefanAVFC said:

Voting against their best interests for these non-economic reasons

Arguable at best. While it's true that the EU grants going into Wales are net positive and that it's likely that the UK Gov't will not replace them with equivalent funding, that's not the same as an economic argument overall.

Most of the UK can look at London and see loads of money getting spent, per head on all kinds of stuff, from garden bridges, cross-rail lines, parliament repairs, the Queens house and all the rest of it, and they can look at their own roads, trains, infrastructure, schools, hospitals etc. and see the crumbling and decrepit. They can basically say "we're getting the rough end of the economic stick here, and despite a bit of EU money spent on this bit of road or this seafront, we're still being rodgered compared to London" They might feel that they are not being treated economically fairly, and so vote for different to now. It's not just a sum about EU grants.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

Maybe the Welsh aren't quite the poor, duped and ignorant plebs some would like to believe. Perhaps they are actually more astute than those people patronising them

I'm sure they are similar to the English or Scottish etc. population in terms of "ignorance" and whatever. Most of the UK population is not even now, well informed about the complex issues of leaving the EU, the single market, the various treaties, WTO stuff, laws and all the rest of it. Even the people like us in here who try to follow it are mostly in the dark about most of it.

It's not patronising, or an insult to the Welsh or anyone else to say they are ignorant of much of the detail. They/we are. People on both sides were making decisions based largely on ignorance and a scant acquaintance with the truth - in great part because both campaigns lied their arses off.

[chrisp65]

33 minutes ago, blandy said:

Arguable at best. While it's true that the EU grants going into Wales are net positive and that it's likely that the UK Gov't will not replace them with equivalent funding, that's not the same as an economic argument overall.

Most of the UK can look at London and see loads of money getting spent, per head on all kinds of stuff, from garden bridges, cross-rail lines, parliament repairs, the Queens house and all the rest of it, and they can look at their own roads, trains, infrastructure, schools, hospitals etc. and see the crumbling and decrepit. They can basically say "we're getting the rough end of the economic stick here, and despite a bit of EU money spent on this bit of road or this seafront, we're still being rodgered compared to London" They might feel that they are not being treated economically fairly, and so vote for different to now. It's not just a sum about EU grants.

For London, read Cardiff and London.

----

Blaenau Gwent is poor. Compared with the national average, they have lower than average education, less people have degrees, less people in full time work, poorer prospects, poorer health, lower car ownership, lower house ownership. Approximately 98.1% identify as white welsh / british. You get the picture. They've received their EU 'grants' for artwork in the Library Wifi Hub. They voted leave. Rhondda, poor, leave. Merthyr, poor, leave....

The Vale of Glamorgan, Monmouth and Cardiff are relatively well off. In the 2011 census 58% in Cardiff self identified as Welsh or Welsh / British. Cardiff is mixed. There are jobs here. The house prices are higher. The office I work in has male, female, white, black, asian, The last three staff we recruited were Portugese, Bulgarian and Spanish. We've even got a lesbian. We're so cool.

These areas voted remain.

The unhealthy, permanent sick leave areas were told an additional £350 million per week was to be spent on the NHS.

The Secretary of State for Wales stated on local TV numerous times over numerous weeks that Wales would not miss out financially, that the money they were getting from europe for art projects and cycle paths to nowhere, would still be spent, but on what the people need and want.

But there are as may individual reasons and prejudices to vote leave or remain here, as anywhere else.

I'd count myself as spectacularly intelligent, yet I couldn't work out which side was least poor in their 'facts' before the referendum. I was interested in politics, followed local politicians of all stripes on social media and even went to a handful of talks and meetings. I couldn't get comparable measurable quantifiable and proveable 'facts' from either side.

So you can stick the fact checking argument.

I voted remain, with little conviction. 

 

[darrenm]

I don't know of any lies the remain campaign said. Can anyone show me any?

[chrisp65]

14 minutes ago, darrenm said:

I don't know of any lies the remain campaign said. Can anyone show me any?

Lies or very very wrong predictions?

Quote

Leaving the European Union would tip the UK into a year-long recession, with up to 820,000 jobs lost within two years, Chancellor George Osborne says.

Publishing Treasury analysis, he said a Leave vote would cause an "immediate and profound" economic shock, with growth between 3% and 6% lower.

BBC

Now, apparently we won't have absolute tested figures on growth for 2016 until 2018. But I'd be quite surprised if we've currently got a negative 3% to 6% recession.

[Awol]

16 minutes ago, darrenm said:

I don't know of any lies the remain campaign said. Can anyone show me any?

Everyone in the country will be £4,324 worse off by the year 2036 - because of the economic uncertainty..

Emergency budget

Tax hikes

Spending cuts

War in Europe

The end of Western political civilisation (to be fair that was D Tusk).

The Remain campaign was the b'stard child of Nightmare on Elm St and Jackanory.

...and yes the Leave campaign spouted a lot of parp too, but towards the end Cameron's doom mongering was so outrageous it was actually funny.

[Chindie]

The Remain campaign was quite happy to paint the absolute worst case scenario, but I don't think it out and out lied like Leave did. And proudly too. They won awards for their lies (I'm not kidding).

In fairness to the Remain campaign, the figures I've seen recently for work are sobering for the next few years. We're in somewhat of a phoney war at the moment, the markets jumpy at anything whilst nothing actually happens. Things will start to solidify one we actually see what deal we'll get. A truly 'hard' Brexit is going to unpleasant, but whatever we get, unless this whole shebang is to get a Norway deal (snigger), it's going to hurt once it hits.

Edited December 12, 2016 by Chindie

[snowychap]

24 minutes ago, Awol said:

War in Europe

The end of Western political civilisation

I'd certainly reserve judgement on those two for a decade or more.

[mjmooney]

8 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I'd certainly reserve judgement on those two for a decade or more.

TBF, after a decade it'd be pretty hard to put it down as caused by Brexit. 

[Awol]

39 minutes ago, snowychap said:

I'd certainly reserve judgement on those two for a decade or more.

Ahhh, but you're not allowed to wait for a decade! I want your answer now - or tomorrow at the latest..

[snowychap]

2 minutes ago, Awol said:

Ahhh, but you're not allowed to wait for a decade! I want your answer now - or tomorrow at the latest..

I think that rather misses the point.

[peterms]

I've just had a very annoying experience with a restaurant.

I phoned to book a table, and they wanted to know what day and time, and for how many people.  Naturally I wouldn't tell them, for fear of undermining my negotiating strategy.  They flat out refused to accept the booking.  Bastards.

[brommy]

4 hours ago, peterms said:

I've just had a very annoying experience with a restaurant.

I phoned to book a table, and they wanted to know what day and time, and for how many people.  Naturally I wouldn't tell them, for fear of undermining my negotiating strategy.  They flat out refused to accept the booking.  Bastards.

When you know the restaurant isn't that busy and is no longer as good as previously thought, an approximation should suffice. You shouldn't be expected to state an exact time you'll be eating each course and what each course will be, especially as the restaurant has refused to let you know what is on the menu - since hearing you would like to look at other restaurants. It's time for you to enjoy adding other restaurants to your gastronomic experience. 

[Davkaus]

Were the restaurant at least willing to stop anyone foreign looking from entering?

[brommy]

54 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

Were the restaurant at least willing to stop anyone foreign looking from entering?

I believe the booking was for a group that was already inclusive of non-whites, so I hope not!

[PieFacE]

16 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

Lies or very very wrong predictions?

BBC

Now, apparently we won't have absolute tested figures on growth for 2016 until 2018. But I'd be quite surprised if we've currently got a negative 3% to 6% recession.

We haven't left yet...

[chrisp65]

13 minutes ago, PieFacE said:

We haven't left yet...

Quote

he said a Leave vote would cause an "immediate and profound"

...he said a leave VOTE would lead to immediate and profound consequences, recession, mass unemployment etc..

people VOTED leave, it didn't happen