Unintended consequences of brexit

Many recent surveys have shown that the 48% of 2016 are now the majority. Most British people now want to Remain in the EU.

If these angry leavers are so keen on democracy, why do they oppose a peoples vote on "the deal"?

They voted for a pig in a poke. No-one had any idea of the implications of brexit. When the deal has been set out, even some of the ardent levers may find it quite unacceptable. Let's not jump off that cliff.

How come when Allygran writes a long and tedious piece on how the referendum was won by a tiny majority, ignoring the glaring flaws in the campaign, its called a "good post", yet when someone points out that this was based on lies, fear mongering by racists etc, we are told to stop moaning and get over it. The government's fear of the hard line Brexiteers had led to this current mess where no-one has a clue what will happen, the cabinet are in disagreement, not to mention both Houses of Parliament. The government should realise, that they are working for the 48% as well. The GE was held to support strong and stable government, it was a mistake on May's part, and it has proved to be neither strong nor stable. What is the Brexiteers answer to the recruitment crisis in the NHS, where British trained medics are leaving and we are unable to recruit from elsewhere because of the hostile environment?

This winter, for the first time in five years, Joan Pons Laplana, an NHS project manager and transformation nurse from Norfolk, “went back to working the front line” because his hospital “had no nurses”. As was the case in many other NHS hospitals nationwide, wards were closed, non-urgent appointments and operations cancelled, and their resources focused on A&E.

“We managed to put a plaster to stop the crisis, but now we need to catch up with the patients and operations and everything,” he says. “And that's like a catch-22.” NHS England recommends a working capacity of around 85 per cent in hospitals to absorb the winter’s patients rise, but Pons Laplana’s hospital is “constantly” working at 90 per cent, he says. “It’s a high stress environment, constantly low on resources and doctors. And now we don't have enough staff.” He sighs: “It’s getting more and more difficult to deliver safe care. At the moment, we’re playing Russian roulette.”

Originally from Barcelona, Pons Laplana has lived and worked in the UK for 17 years. He is one of around 62,000 EU citizens who currently work for the National Health Service, according to House of Commons statistics. Amid the winter crisis and severe financial pressure, the NHS’s next big problem is already unfolding: the prospect of Brexit is driving European NHS workers away. Within England’s NHS services, EU nationals make up almost 10 per cent of doctors, more than 7 per cent of nurses and 5 per cent of scientific, therapeutic and technical staff. Almost 10,000 EU workers had already left the NHS when NHS Digital released its 2017 data last autumn.

“If none of the EU citizens were [in my hospital], I can say without any exaggeration: you could absolutely close tomorrow”, Dr Peter Bauer, 47, a consultant anaesthetist in a Brighton hospital who has worked in the NHS since 1999, tells the New Statesman. In his hospital, he says, the proportion of EU staff is “phenomenal”: “Well over 50 per cent of senior staff is European, it’s about three quarters of the people. It would be disaster.” Mary, a 37-year-old British nurse from London, says her clinic, which employs many Europeans, is struggling to find a cover for her colleague on maternity leave: “Recruitment has fallen massively since Brexit.” With the British government still unclear on citizens’ rights, it is unlikely to stop there.

The ability of competent, skilled European staff to move seamlessly to the UK from the continent, thanks to the EU's freedom of movement, has been “a boom for the NHS”, Bauer says. Recruiting elsewhere (something the NHS has already started doing) will bring additional costs, visa requirements and various other complications that freedom of movement was designed to avoid. “You need these people! If you can't recruit Europeans, you then have to go out of the EU, and it's much more costly and difficult. It's a house of cards, and we're getting closer and closer to the point where it's all going to collapse.”

www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2018/02/they-are-leaving-alarming-rate-european-nhs-workers-winter-crisis-austerity

Of course these EU citizens, many of whom had worked in the NHS for ten, twenty years or more, paying taxes to the UK government, were not allowed to vote in the EU referendum. - Utterly shameful and irresponsible!

Good post Allygran
Corbyn bas done his best lately to fudge Labour’s stance on just about anything to with Brexit, even though he personally has been decrying the EU for years.

With regard to Brexit, two things happened, as we all know: a referendum advising Government of the popular support by majority for a course of action in this case leave the EU. Followed later by a general election. These two actions together had the result of giving Parliament a popularist clear mandate for delivering brexit.

Conservatives, Labour, and UKIP stood for election on a promise to respect the Brexit referendum result. The majority of MP.s were elected or re-elected on a brexit and some on a hard brexit party platform.

All MP's voted in at the General Election ran on their party manifestos. The people who voted Conservative, Labour and UKIP candidates in, did so on a deliver Brexit mandates, as promised in their party's manifestos.

With a total joint share of the vote for parties who stood for election at the general election being 85% for the three party's who promised in their manifestos to respect the brexit referendum majority vote, ( Acknowledgment: Annette Bongardt and Francisco Torres Senior visiting Fellows in the Europea Political Economy at LSE European Institute), the expectation should be that the Parliamentary system should vote through the Brexit Bill as it is commonly known by that sort of majority.

The Conservatives stood on a 'better no deal than a bad deal" - hard brexit and increased their share of the vote by 5.5%. whilst not increasing the number of Conservative MP's the increase in the share of the vote showed they had won the popular vote on the hard Brexit stance.

It's important to note that Labour, having stood at the General Election on a "respect the Brexit majority vote", after the GE the party changed their stance. A deception of a majority of Labour voters on a grand scale. It might be that this U turn will affect the Parliamentary vote on the Brexit Bill. This could have long term negative repercussions on a Corbyn led Labour Party at the next GE.

Our Parliamentary democracy depends on the integity of the political party's standing by the mandates on which they stood for election.

Parliament through the MP's elected on a respect brexit mandate have a duty to represent the views of the people who voted for them based on their mandate.

I trust in our democratic system and have confidence that the majority and populist voters of both the referendum and the GE will find their trust in the advisory and democratic system of the UK has not been misplaced.

The words referendum and plebiscite refer to electoral institutions in which the mass of the population votes on an issue.
However, they have very different political connotations. Plebiscite is a negative term referring to an unfair and unfree vote in an undemocratic political system.
ukandeu.ac.uk/referendum-or-plebiscite-whats-the-difference/

A referendum is only advisory and that is how it legally was passed by Parliament. Anything else would have needed many rules to make it binding - such as at least 75% electoral turnout and at least a 60/40% split in the vote - some countries have a bigger split needed. None of these things happened - Cameron with his schoolboy antics got the country into this mess.
The U.K. is not a democracy run by plebiscite - it is a Parliamentary democracy and the MPs have a duty to do what they see as the best course for the country - not for their political affiliations and mates or on the result of an iffy referendum.

But it wasn't a democratic vote it was a referendum.

Leaving the EU, once put to the people in a democratic vote the result being democratic is sacrosanct. The alternative is anarchy. Once one democratic vote is overturned and the majority ignored then democracy is dead.

John F Kennedy said,
"The problems of the world cannot possibly be solved by skeptics or cynics whose horizons are limited by obvious realities. We need men and women who can dream of things that never were." - John F. Kennedy (1917 - 1963), 35th President of the United States

It was absurd to hold a referendum on EU membership, which is an extremely complex matter. It was wickedly irresponsible to fail to prevent a narrow marginal vote being regarded as sacrosanct.

H L Mencken wrote that “For every complex problem there is a solution which is clear, simple, and WRONG.” These solutions typically complicate existing problems while creating new ones. Never was that so true as it of brexit - the clear, simple and WRONG answer to an exceedingly complex question. .

I’m speaking out because the cabinet is in disarray, the government has not got a clue on what the deal will be , Theresa May has sad there will be “ alignments “ with the EU but we don’t know what they are, and neither does she. She has split the cabinet to discuss two possibilities, neither of which would be approved by the EU. She hasn’t sacked Boris Johnson, despite him calling her idea “crazy”, as she scared of the repercussions. Talk about “strong and stable”.

Mostlyharmless This is a poem I read as a teenager, it is very moving. So pleased you found it and reminded me of it, I will re read it in book form.

I am fond of anything that brings light and truth into a debate.

This is an example of practice what you preach I think. I will as many of us do speak up for the persecuted and I will never remain silent.

MaizieD apologies again! Its because you both sound the same. I must look at the name more carefully.
It is still a wonderful and moving poem and the sentiment of speaking out and not being intimidated into silence is an outstanding and powerful one.

I didn't post it, Allyg, mostly harmless did.

If you can be confused by two consecutive posters what else can confuse you?

MaizieD This is a poem I read as a teenager, it is very moving. So pleased you found it and reminded me of it, I will re read it in book form.

I am fond of anything that brings light and truth into a debate.

This is an example of practice what you preach I think. I will never remain silent Maizie.

I'm perfectly well able to Google, too. Allyg.
You are fond of non sequiturs, aren't you.

Keeping silent.

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out

Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—

Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

"First they came ..." is a poem written by the German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984). It is about the cowardice of German intellectuals following the Nazis' rise to power and subsequent purging of their chosen targets, group after group.

MaizieD In principle I agree with the essence of "he who is silent is taken to agree". Although it does not always apply see below:

A silence procedure or tacit acceptance procedure (French: procédure d'approbation tacite; Latin: qui tacet consentire videtur, "he who is silent is taken to agree", "silence implies/means consent") is a way of formally adopting texts, often, but not exclusively in international political context.
Silence procedure - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silence_procedure

Tomorrow isn't promised. Why wring your hands now about something that may never come to pass in the way you envisage?
Conversely, why get excited and delusional about things that may never happen? E. g. £350m a week for the NHS, getting rid of immigration, exciting trade opportunities with Albania etc.
As someone who sees Brexit as a roulette game, you must know that the House always wins in the end. Maybe instead of elections, referenda etc we could just throw a dice.

MaizieD, in response to your posting today (12/05/18 @ 10:45) please accept my apologies if I gave you or any other forum member the impression that I wish to see no discussion on Brexit whatsoever. Contrary to the foregoing, I believe that discussion should be held, but on individual issues within the overall Brexit agenda.

However, I see no point at this stage of the process in argument on whether Britian will eventually completely withdraw from the EU, or whether Britain withdraws but in name only, or whether the whole matter is returned to the nation the form of a General Election or further referendum.

In the above, there are so many possible outcomes to so many issues that broad, knowledgeable debate on the overall outcome is, in my humble opinion impossible at this point in time.

So, MaizieD, yes discussion on individual topic's within the overall Brexit debate, but engaging in a heated argument on whether Britain will eventually finnish up in or out of the European Union or somewhere in between is I feel pure guesswork at this point in time.

There was a discussion on the Northern Ireland border issue began on this thread yesterday, which seemed positive in its debate, but somehow that seems to have been lost.

Why do people keep saying that countries within the EU are becoming dissatisfied with it? Since the Brexit vote there is gaining strength for the EU albeit also with the recognition that it does need some reform. This is now being looked at.

Although no one knows exactly how it will all pan out the only likely happenings we have to go on are Govt dept predictions and think tank type of organisations which have been going for years and are as independent as possible. These institutions all seem to be coming to the conclusion that leaving will actually cost the U.K. not save it money and all these trade agreements are just puffs of smoke which are dispersing.
The man in charge of the Galileo project told the parliamentary committee that thousands of jobs will be lost. Then we come down to smaller newer companies such as the Formula E one which the Italian boss was talking about on Thursdays QT and he said he has plans to move out of the U.K. within an hour if the Brexit deal is not good. He said although he only has about 100 direct employees he has thousands of indirect ones. He also said he will offer to take the British engineers with him to whichever EU State he relocates to as he has all good people.

Does the likelyhood of all this not worry people? Even Hannah is greatly toning down his argument and wants to remain in the CU etc.

This is the bit that really upsets Remainers. The absolute refusal of Leavers to face facts. 'Nobody knows' is not a fact

Well, it is actually MaizieD as none of us can predict the future with any certainty.

Many people feel the EU is in danger of imminent collapse. There is much anti EU feeling on the continent. Would binding ourselves to a struggling project benefit us in the long term? Another question we cannot answer.

The fact we are NOT remaining in the EU is what annoys Remainers and they want their ire to be justified.

Let's face it. Trump is annoying Iran, to say the least. Impetuous and narcissistic world leaders have buttons they can press and if we all go up in a puff of smoke next week, all the second guessing of how the UK will be in two , three or four years time, economically, is a bit of a futile exercise.

Tomorrow isn't promised. Why wring your hands now about something that may never come to pass in the way you envisage?

So, for me, all I feel should sit back and watch this mess develop and as we eventually learn what the outcome will be discuss without getting annoyed with others over the matter.

Each to his own, *Grandad8. If that floats your boat it's fine by me.

On the other hand, no-one could ever accuse the more vocal among us anti-Brexit lot of consenting by way of our silence ( a legal maxim 'Qui tacet consentire videtur' - he who is silent gives consent).

I do not understand why some forum members are getting "hot under the collar" with one and another at this stage of the Brexit process. We all now know that the any Brexit agreement before it is signed has to come back to parliament for debate and a vote.

It is in the opinion of many quite likely that any agreement could fail to pass Parliament on any number of clauses and issues. By example to that, here in the south West several MPs have stated that they will not vote in favour of any agreement while the present provisional fishing agreement remains in place. In that, it is very possible that the MPs of all parties will have similar views in North East England.

Similar issues to the above surround Northern Ireland, the Finance Industry, the Aerospace Industry, Gibraltar and the most difficult one of all cross border transport (the customs union).

Within all the above problems it is now recognized that there is no majority in parliament for a hard Brexit even if an agreement should fail to to pass.

It is also to be remembered that all twenty seven members of the EU have to be in acceptance of any drawn up agreement for it to be passed by the Council of Ministers. At the present time it very much appears that Ireland or Spain could vote against any agreement should they not be satisfied with border issues.

In the above, I believe that there is little point in anyone getting annoyed or excited in regard to so many Brexit issues which are a long way from resolve.

I believe that debate on Individual matters such as the Northern Ireland situation is good for discussion on forums such as this. However, in my humble opinion whether Britain will at some time actually leaves the EU, or it does, it will be in little more than name only is certainly some way off from resolve.

So, for me, all I feel should sit back and watch this mess develop and as we eventually learn what the outcome will be discuss without getting annoyed with others over the matter.

So Brexit has directly affected many people’s lives / jobs, just looking on the optimistic side as we are being encourage do to do, at least those medics and their families will broaden their horizons and enjoy a better lifestyle. Trained medics going abroad isn’t new as others have pointed out, yet Brexiteers say they don’t want to poach medics from countries that need them- isn’t this the same thing? Countries like the US, Australia, France and Germany are poaching staff we have trained and need here, but we are being discouraged from employing overseas staff.

Nice choice of place to move to although very expensive for housing etc and parking is a real nightmare but the Metro is great!