Brexit watch

Daphnedill
You and I know that within every society there are thinkers and doers, artists and educators, some within our societies would never be able to rise to the challenge of getting themselves better educated and showing their grit in the international workplace through no fault if their own.
Do we ignore these people create an Indian like caste system because we cannot return to a manufacturing society because we have priced ourselves out of the market?
I agree that we cannot salvage the majority of outsourced manufacturing exactly because of this reason, however, is it right that these people either cannot get any of the few remaining manufacturing, warehousing or other jobs because they are undercut on wages or do we expect them to live in relative poverty because to work they must accept below poverty level wages?

Daphnedill
Aren't Wales and Conwall part of UK?

Joelsnan, what's that got to do with the EU?
It's Tory party policy which has created this class of low earners, particularly under 25 year old low wage or no wage earners. Not the EU.
There are 4 million living in poverty, either relative or real.
It's nothing to do with migration, either EU or international. Fullfact says that there is no relationship between low wages and immigration.
All Cameron could do at PMQs was argue about which type of poverty he was talking about when asked by Corbyn. Whichever definition you use, it's a lot of people living in poverty because of this government's policies.

@Joelsnan

Yes, last time I looked a map.

Cornwall and Wales receive huge amounts from the EU - far more than they pay. In fact, many parts of the UK outside London and parts of the South East receive at least as much FROM the EU as they pay in. EU funding is far more redistributive than any spending from Westminster. They've shot themselves in the foot if they think the government will replace the funding they've been receiving. EU funding is far more redistributive than any spending from Westminster.

@dj

I watched him squirming about poverty too.

Relative poverty actually goes down when the country gets poorer, so it's quite horrifying that it's shot up at a time when Osborne claims that the country is getting richer. This is absolutely nothing to do with the EU.

@Joelsnan

I spent 30 years teaching languages to a range of pupils in comprehensive schools. What I do know is that I used to encourage all my pupils to see opportunities beyon their own environment. Quite a number of my former pupils - from builders, engineers, salespeople to CEOs - must have listened to something of what I said, because they went abroad to find work.

I also know that there were many pupils, usually egged on by their parents, who were entirely negative and had no intention of mixing with 'bloody foreigners' (and that's mild compared with some of the stuff they came out with). They thought they'd be able to follow their parents and grandparents into work and I'm afraid I don't have much sympathy with them.

Daphnedill
Yes, good on those students who grasped the value of education, however, was the remaining % wholly composed of negative racist offspring of similar parents? I think not, I think the majority of less able students either had specific learning difficulties or were from hardworking conscientious families whose given hand was to be a doer, the hairdressers, shop assistants, garage mechanics, the warehouse packers etc.

Durhamjen What it has got to do with the EU is that rather than encouraging the workers of the poorer Eastern European countries to fight for fair wages for fair work as our forefathers who formed into unions did for our benefit, we are attracting them to UK, there is nothing intrinsically wrong with this movement other than it failing to raise wages and standards of living within their own countries (except for expat remittances) and it depresses salaries in their history countries, so for the workers who cannot migrate it is a lose lose situation.

Should read 'host' not history.

Daphnedill,

According to the EU Commission.the UK 'quietly' paid the whole bill.Osbourne paid half and the commission agreed to wait for the other half until after the last general election,but refused to reduce it.
I do know why we were served with it, which is why it is so disgraceful,and why it was challenged.

Durhamjen,
You are very confrontational to suppose that 52% of voters were swayed by the UKIP poster.
Like me and yourself,the majority would have known how they were going to vote as soon as the referendum was offered.Many others would have done so prior to the poster appearing ,particularly as it appeared towards the end of canvassing.
I suspect both sides had a majority of voters who made a very considered decision,plus their share of those who decided at the last minute,or for obscure reasons.
I spoke with quite a few people who reluctantly voted to stay in.

Confrontational is a strange word to use. I said appeared to support, not were swayed by.
Can you prove they did not support it?
Many people did not know how they were going to vote as soon as the referendum was offered. The numbers who did not know were changing all the way along, depending on which debate they saw.

I know a lot who voted to stay in and were not voting that way reluctantly. They were voting with pride in the fact that they saw the EU as a positive force for good.

Most of the people I know that voted to stay in (which includes all of my family) voted that way with a passion. It's a pity that remaining in wasn't something that those who supported it could make sound glamorous and adventurous.

Granny2026, if the people you know voted in reluctantly , why did they vote in?

I voted to remain in and certainly not reluctantly

Interesting developments reported by Financial Times today. The lawyers at www.mishcon.com. Brexit faces legal challenge to ensure parliamentary involvement in article 50 process.

www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog?p=13983

There's a chart on here which shows what is happening to existing government projects since brexit.

Oh dear! and

Yes, I've just been sent that, Actoniann.

www.mishcon.com/news/firm_news/article_50_process_on_brexit_faces_legal_challenge_to_ensure_parliamentary_involvement_07_2016

This is a link to the actual article, for those who do not want to look at the full website.

This is what jackofkent thinks about it.

jackofkent.com/2016/07/the-mishcon-de-reya-legal-challenge-on-article-50-some-thoughts/

@ Anniebach

I know people who were happy to vote IN,and people who were happy to vote OUT.However,some are not happy in the EU but were worried to vote out.

They are self employed or involved in higher education,with work dependent on their EU links.

jackofkent.com/2016/07/parliament-article-50-and-the-leave-paradox/ More food for thought

If an Act of Parliament is required, I wonder how many MPs will be brave enough to vote for it in Parliament, given that their constituents probably voted Out.

Could be that some at least of their constituents would be glad for them to vote whichever way means we remain if they have changed their minds on how they voted since they realised what it really means !

I would like to speak up for one of my dearest friends, who voted to leave. She doesn't have the opportunity to speak up because she's not a member of any forums. She is a totally commited Christian, not only in word but deed. She is educated and doesn't have a rascist bone in her body. This is evident by the amount of Nigerians she has for dinner every Sunday.
She is fortunate to own property where most of the rent goes to support several orphanages around the world. She is trying to support 2 families that are involved with drink and drugs etc etc.

Lovely,but your point is....?