Current Politics in the United Kingdom

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by ********

I mean, this is clearly bollocks, isn't it?

Innovation has been a constant in Britain since the industrial revolution, so when you say it is clearly bollocks, it is in fact bollocks to deny that Britain is an innovative country. May I remind you Moko that Britain invented the electric motor, television, the telephone, stereophonic sound systems, the search engine (Alan Turing). The microchip was created by Americans who stole the credit, but the concept was promoted first by a British electrical engineer, who couldn't get funding. That has often been the story - we have the people, we have the knowledge, but we can't get past pure research and early design into development and production. But to argue that we are unable to create new products misses the point; we have the ability to do it, but we lack the organisation; the systems are not in place.

Membership of the EU is not a positive for that problem. It is we ourselves who must deal with it; others cannot solve it for us. Taking control over our own country will be a positive in that we will also assume responsibility, with no else to blame. It is for us to work towards a better future, one in which Britain is a sovereign country deciding for itself what is right for its own people.

Cassius - Men at some time are masters of their fates;
The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings.
~ Julius Caesar Act One, Scene Two.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by ********

So have you got anything from the last 60 years?

I'll give you a free one - microcomputers. We were doing quite well in the early 80s, but then failed to compete once the US and Japan got involved. It did give us ARM, which is now Japanese.

And now we are cutting ourselves off from Europe, ensuring that there will be even less funding because why throw money at a place where you can't get the international talent a visa and where the supply lines are clogged up by customs checks?

Such negativity and unwillingness to rise to a challenge is truly admirable.

When we are genuinely in charge of our own immigration policy we will also be responsible for successful implementation. There is no reason why suitably skilled and qualified people would not come here unless we ourselves fail to introduce a sensible immigration structure.

BTW I am not at all opposed to international cooperation or even globalisation as such. I myself would advocate collaboration on development and implementation of projects, not merely a free trade arrangement. It is not necessary to concede our national sovereignty in order to achieve international cooperation with friendly nations and traditional partners, such as the United States; in fact, it would be a lot easier to work in cooperation with world countries when we are not answerable to the EU while so doing.

As for our supply lines being clogged up by customs checks, that is as the event will prove or not prove. The EU may well decide to impose a hard Brexit of its own by erecting non-tariff barriers to trade. But if they do, what is the argument supporting being in a Union with such hostile nations? Why would we consider them to be friends of ours?

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by ********

So have you got anything from the last 60 years?

Wendigo has already mentioned the synthetic material Graphene. Britain is also at the cutting edge for designing improved prosthetic limbs and joints for amputees. Trevor Bayliss developed the clockwork wind-up radio, a very simple and valuable concept particularly in underdeveloped countries. James Dyson developed a bagless vacuum cleaner which is now a fairly standard concept. The touchpad on your laptop is a British innovation.

[Wendigo]

Originally Posted by ********

Yeah, and look at who has all the patents. Korea, China, Japan, US.

We invented it and then didn't bother to invest enough in it. There was even a story on Newsnight about how we squandered our chance.

You obviously cannot differentiate between innovation and investment, Graphene was isolated in the UK, you can read about the patents issue here
https://umi3.com/wp-content/uploads/...enting-CR3.pdf

and about UK Government investing in graphene here
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/0...ust_too_early/

The brain power will always be there but as I said previously we need to invest in innovation, we need to value scientists more and "here today gone tomorrow overpaid footballers" a lot less.

It's a challenge but I think Britain can rise to it.

[G-Type]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

...
...
The EU may well decide to impose a hard Brexit of its own by erecting non-tariff barriers to trade. But if they do, what is the argument supporting being in a Union with such hostile nations? Why would we consider them to be friends of ours?

I am highly sensitive now on this particular statement, Mate

Do you consider all 27 nations as being hostile (in the true sense of the meaning) once the EU adapts to your wish for a hard Brexit?

It is exactly that thin line which highly disturbs me. It would exactly be the same if we 27 nations within the EU labelled and tagged the UK as our hostile enemy because you voted for a separation from our community.

Not with me, not with me!

I think that there is no need for hostility or de-friending sentiments. Perhaps you got more of so-called hostile people within your own country (judging by some very recent posts) as from abroad.

Honestly, I am done with this thread.
.

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by G-Type

I am highly sensitive now on this particular statement, Mate

Do you consider all 27 nations as being hostile (in the true sense of the meaning) once the EU adapts to your wish for a hard Brexit?

It is exactly that thin line which highly disturbs me. It would exactly be the same if we 27 nations within the EU labelled and tagged the UK as our hostile enemy because you voted for a separation from our community.

Not with me, not with me!

I think that there is no need for hostility or de-friending sentiments. Perhaps you got more of so-called hostile people within your own country (judging by some very recent posts) as from abroad.

Honestly, I am done with this thread.
.

The question is going to be about how we interact as neighbours into the future. The answer will depend on what is or isn't agreed. We are being offered a hypothetical future in which Britain is subjected to bureaucratic obstacles to her export trade and I propose that this may be a hostile act if it is not warranted by necessity. Where rules and regulations are self-evidently justified and needed this is not a cause for complaint, but if it should happen [as has not happened yet] that Britain is subjected to unreasonable constraints on her trade, it is fair comment for us to interpret that as hostile.

I think it is a duty on all of us to prioritise the preservation of good relations. This duty is a difficult one when we are also negotiating a future relationship on trade where all parties must defend their own best interests and cannot be weak. All I say is that we have been subjected to a lot of pressure on various fronts; although I am pretty unhappy with the British government's failure to form a valid negotiating position, I think it would be helpful if the EU side makes clear that it is not going to cut our throats. When we keep hearing about how we are going to be so disadvantaged for presuming to resume self-government, it does look hostile. We are told that we will be shut out of security cooperation for being an ex-member - not really friendly, that one. We are being told that we will have to eat crow, join the Euro, accept ever-closer union etc. etc if we were to change our minds and ask to rescind the process. Again, not exactly full of warmth and affection. No negotiations on trade at all unless we agree to an open border with Ireland - I am not very impressed by that. Article 24 of the EU negotiating guidance states:

After the United Kingdom leaves the Union, no agreement between the EU and the United Kingdom may apply to the territory of Gibraltar without the agreement between the Kingdom of Spain and the United Kingdom.

This is (if I am being honest) very offensive.

So we will all need to retain our sang froid and turn the other cheek to some extent in order to get this done.

[palo5]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

We are told that we will be shut out of security cooperation for being an ex-member - not really friendly, that one

Actually, you've already been told you'll get a security deal. It's just that your access won't be as comprehensive as it was before. Which is 100% understandable and correct, imho, because EU data-handling laws won't apply for you, and you won't be answerable to EU courts. There's also the fact that UK has already been caught unlawfully passing EU data to the Americans, and that was while you were a member, which doesn't inspire confidence. In a sense, you lose your security clearance when you leave the EU, if that makes it clearer

About your other concerns, if you were treated worse than any other third country, then you could call it "hostile". But I see no reason that should happen, and you may get a deal that gives you better. I hope so. That's why you're negotiating, right?

Only thing to remember is that the EU is law-based, and doesn't do "fudge" or "cakeism". But where Ireland is concerned it is different, because there is no other way to square the circle. Concessions from the EU to keep GFA alive are essential, and you have an offer

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by ********

LOL you fell for that one!

Currently more than half of immigration is from outside the EU, and we have full control over that. We also have more control than we exercise over immigration from inside the EU, e.g. the ability to deport people who fail to find a job.

So why wait until after Brexit to fix the immigration system? We could have done it years ago!

The reality is that the government won't fix it because it would break the economy. Companies and the NHS already can't get enough skilled workers. So on the one hand they have real economic needs, and on the other they have screaming xenophobes demanding an unrealistic "tens of thousands" goal.

They they realize they have been fucked over on immigration post-Brexit they are going to be very upset, but that will be only one of many things about it to anger them.

I dont see it as a game of traps. Rather more than 45% percent of immgration presently comes from the EU and is unregulated under free movement of labour. We certainly need to forbid that and impose common sense controls. The rest is under regulation now and should always be under review - but I am not opposed to immigration per se, nor am I opposed to immigration from the EU countries per se.

As for government immigration policy being in favour of undermining the UK labour market and keeping wages low, that will be more controllable when the UK government can no longer pretend its hands are tied by EU membership rules. They do that a lot and on all sorts of topics, even the colour of the passport was held out to be an EU requirement until we found out that the UK government merely opted for the cheap default colour. Taking back control also means the UK voters knowing that the buck stops with Westminster.

[judy84]

Originally Posted by ********

LOL you fell for that one!

Currently more than half of immigration is from outside the EU, and we have full control over that. We also have more control than we exercise over immigration from inside the EU, e.g. the ability to deport people who fail to find a job.

So why wait until after Brexit to fix the immigration system? We could have done it years ago!

The UK cannot deport people who fail to find a job if they are still seeking employment.


And an EU citizen who can support themselves without calling on the welfare system can also stay, eg beggars.


http://www.itv.com/news/update/2016-...in-six-months/
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/60...n-Union-judges

[judy84]

[QUOTE=********;4495499]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

unregulated under free movement of labour./QUOTE]

Originally Posted by judy84
The UK cannot deport people who fail to find a job if they are still seeking employment.


No, that is absolutely untrue. You are completely wrong.

In fact, scoundrel hit upon the reason why: it's freedom of movement of labour. If you don't find a job within a few months you can be told to leave, and other countries do enforce that rule. Many countries had transition rules when countries like Poland joined, to prevent a sudden inflex like the UK had.

One of the reasons why we don't enforce it is that we don't have the infrastructure to track people coming and going very well. It won't magically appear after Brexit either, especially as all available resources are directed to customs and unemployment benefits.

I have provided references to back up what I say, can you do the same please?


Here are a couple more:



https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/...ruled-unlawful


The Uk also had restriction of entry also. In Britain, prospective employers had to apply for work permits and Bulgarians and Romanians migrants for an "accession worker card". Low-skilled workers were restricted to existing quota schemes in the agricultural and food processing sectors.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25565302


I don't know where you are getting your information from?