The Positive Brexit Thread

[sonyc 5,541]

25 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

It's not pedantry Fen - DBD is simply right. 'Free' movement was not unrestricted although the UK choose to be relaxed about it. The later fact that immigration post Brexit has exploded should tell everybody 'Brexity' that they were at a minimum misled! There were endless studies at the time that proved that immigrants actually paid in more than they ever took out! A net fiscal positive. 

As to GDP per capita - I would suggest that needs a lot of a closer look - we have a growing non working pensioner contingent and as is obvious huge job vacancies in NHS, care and hospitality sectors where many European workers left. Tried to see your GP lately? Then of course we also had the 2008 crash and recession followed by austerity.

Thanks YF. The point I was also making was the hypocrisy of Johnson's nonsense at the time. Blair does have a part role in expanding immigration to countries further east. However, we cannot keep going back so many years and ignoring the immigration story for the last 15! This, too from the party that campaigns on the very issue, using it even before the Brexit vote. Every person knows too where many EU workers were employed. They cared for the UK population and settled and integrated well. That is because our cultural values are quite common, shared.

It was a terribly dishonest campaign by the Leave camp. Now it's all being illuminated. Lit up large.

Edited January 12 by sonyc

[littleyellowbirdie 2,611]

47 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

Hmmm. Blair resigned around 2008 and Cameron became PM in 2010. The referendum was held in 2016 by which point Cameron had won an election outright. But you have decided to ignore those years and blame Blair and Labour. How odd. 

 

 in other words, you accept what I said is true, and shows your original comment to which I replied to be rubbish.

[Yellow Fever 3,848]

2 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Thanks YW. The point I was also making was the hypocrisy of Johnson's nonsense at the time. Blair does have a part role in expanding immigration to countries further east. However, we cannot keep going back so many years and ignoring the immigration story for the last 15! This, too from the party that campaigns on the very issue, using it even before the Brexit vote. Every knows too where many EU workers were employed. They cared for the UK population and settled and integrated well. That is because our cultural values are quite common, shared.

It was a terribly dishonest campaign by the Leave camp. Now it's all being illuminated. Lit up large.

Yes - The whole idea of 'free movement' within Europe (writ large) was of course to help level up weaker economies / regions (c.f Poland which will overtake the UK) allowing labour to move to where the jobs are needed and return in due course all within the 'family'. Blair enlarging the EU East (old Soviet) was all part / parcel of reintegrating these countries (Ukraine and Moldova to follow) into their European birthright from which they'd been absent for 50 plus years.

It no different to people moving within the UK or indeed the states of the USA to follow the work. I also seem to recall 'Auf Wiedersehen, Pet' so it worked in reverse too (pre SM?) 😉

Same cultural values.  

[littleyellowbirdie 2,611]

@Jools, if you ever revisit this forum, I would find it hilarious if you were to rename this thread 'The post-Brexit traumatised remainer cope thread '

[horsefly 4,318]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

@Jools, if you ever revisit this forum, I would find it hilarious if you were to rename this thread 'The post-Brexit traumatised remainer cope thread '

Are you seriously suggesting that when a political decision has been made that brings an end to all future discussion about it? Brexit happened to be the biggest decision and change to this country's political environment since it first joined the European community. It also happens to be a decision the effects of which are massive and very far from being completed. We haven't even got close to implementing all the requirements of the Brexit deal, mostly because the government can't work out how to do them without causing further colossal damage. We're now stuck with this shi*t-show and it is of the first importance that discussion continues in the hope of mitigating against its most malign effects.

[Herman 9,852]

24 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Are you seriously suggesting that when a political decision has been made that brings an end to all future discussion about it? Brexit happened to be the biggest decision and change to this country's political environment since it first joined the European community. It also happens to be a decision the effects of which are massive and very far from being completed. We haven't even got close to implementing all the requirements of the Brexit deal, mostly because the government can't work out how to do them without causing further colossal damage. We're now stuck with this shi*t-show and it is of the first importance that discussion continues in the hope of mitigating against its most malign effects.

To be fair to birdie, if you had sold the country the disaster that is brexit, you'd **** off abroad and try and stop people talking about it. 😁

[littleyellowbirdie 2,611]

54 minutes ago, Herman said:

To be fair to birdie, if you had sold the country the disaster that is brexit, you'd **** off abroad and try and stop people talking about it. 😁

 

1 hour ago, horsefly said:

Are you seriously suggesting that when a political decision has been made that brings an end to all future discussion about it? Brexit happened to be the biggest decision and change to this country's political environment since it first joined the European community. It also happens to be a decision the effects of which are massive and very far from being completed. We haven't even got close to implementing all the requirements of the Brexit deal, mostly because the government can't work out how to do them without causing further colossal damage. We're now stuck with this shi*t-show and it is of the first importance that discussion continues in the hope of mitigating against its most malign effects.

I'm suggesting that the post-Brexit traumatised remainer cope thread would be a better name for this thread. 😘

Just saying 'it's a disaster' again and again doesn't actually make it one.

Edited January 12 by littleyellowbirdie

[Fen Canary 889]

8 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Yes - The whole idea of 'free movement' within Europe (writ large) was of course to help level up weaker economies / regions (c.f Poland which will overtake the UK) allowing labour to move to where the jobs are needed and return in due course all within the 'family'. Blair enlarging the EU East (old Soviet) was all part / parcel of reintegrating these countries (Ukraine and Moldova to follow) into their European birthright from which they'd been absent for 50 plus years.

It no different to people moving within the UK or indeed the states of the USA to follow the work. I also seem to recall 'Auf Wiedersehen, Pet' so it worked in reverse too (pre SM?) 😉

Same cultural values.  

Why is it a Latvian or Austrian persons birthright to work and settle in another sovereign country, especially if they hold no skills that country wants or needs?

In my younger years working abroad I had to apply for work visas to prove my skills were useful to that country otherwise I wasn’t allowed to go there. Having the same cultural values (although I’d argue the likes of Australia, New Zealand and Canada are closer to a Britains cultural values than most EU nations) is completely irrelevant.

Nobody has ever said they don’t want any immigration at all, the UKs birth rate is below replacement level so we’ll always need some however I think we should simply be much more selective in who we take in. Set a number the country is happy with and choose those with the skills we need the most. The current system is just a Ponzi scheme, importing millions of low skilled workers undercutting the local workforce who then in turn require more public services which causes us to import more again, it simply isn’t sustainable.

There’s also something I find quite immoral about stealing numerous health workers trained by poorer nations where they’re arguably needed more but that’s a different argument 

Edited January 12 by Fen Canary

[horsefly 4,318]

4 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 

I'm suggesting that the post-Brexit traumatised remainer cope thread would be a better name for this thread. 😘

Just saying 'it's a disaster' again and again doesn't actually make it one.

Saying it doesn't, reality does.

[Fen Canary 889]

8 hours ago, sonyc said:

Thanks YF. The point I was also making was the hypocrisy of Johnson's nonsense at the time. Blair does have a part role in expanding immigration to countries further east. However, we cannot keep going back so many years and ignoring the immigration story for the last 15! This, too from the party that campaigns on the very issue, using it even before the Brexit vote. Every person knows too where many EU workers were employed. They cared for the UK population and settled and integrated well. That is because our cultural values are quite common, shared.

It was a terribly dishonest campaign by the Leave camp. Now it's all being illuminated. Lit up large.

Why was the shambles of the Tories immigration policy a fault of Brexit? The Tories campaigning on reducing immigration then instead ramping it up has nothing to do with the referendum, it’s purely domestic politics. All leaving the EU did was give the government complete control over who comes through the borders, it’s up to the government of the day how to use that power

[Barbe bleu 837]

13 hours ago, Herman said:

I see that the billions of pounds worth of weapons we sold to the Saudis did their job. 

War is always a failure, sometimes necessary but always a failure.

Still, I'd rather they used billions of pounds of western weapons than have been pushed into relationships with arms manufacturers in Russia or China.

[horsefly 4,318]

             

18 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

 

I'm suggesting that the post-Brexit traumatised remainer cope thread would be a better name for this thread. 😘

Just saying 'it's a disaster' again and again doesn't actually make it one.

Oh dear! It seems even those Brexit champions at The Telegraph, have  caught the "trauma", and failed to realise Brexit is done and dusted:  https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/brexit-fallout-finally-dawns-on-london-s-stock-market/ar-AA1mTHyl?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=03c3e78e2bce40c79c49de832f1453b9&ei=102

[Herman 9,852]

10 minutes ago, horsefly said:

             

Oh dear! It seems even those Brexit champions at The Telegraph, have  caught the "trauma", and failed to realise Brexit is done and dusted:  https://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/other/brexit-fallout-finally-dawns-on-london-s-stock-market/ar-AA1mTHyl?ocid=msedgntp&pc=LCTS&cvid=03c3e78e2bce40c79c49de832f1453b9&ei=102

Some just don't want to know or others to know what is going on.

https://www.itv.com/news/london/2024-01-11/tory-politicians-boycott-brexit-investigation-after-sadiq-khan-claims

He added: "It makes no sense to revisit Brexit. We need to look forward not back. We think this is a waste of time and a distraction."

 

Funnily enough, and to mix a few threads, you could replace the word "brexit" in that sentence with many other words, Hillsborough, Grenfell, PO, etc.etc. etc. and come to a clearer explanation of why the country is in a mess.

[horsefly 4,318]

13 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Why was the shambles of the Tories immigration policy a fault of Brexit? The Tories campaigning on reducing immigration then instead ramping it up has nothing to do with the referendum, it’s purely domestic politics. All leaving the EU did was give the government complete control over who comes through the borders, it’s up to the government of the day how to use that power

Because:

1. Many of those voting for Brexit wanted to stop immigration completely, ignoring the fact that immigration remains essential to the economic flourishing of the UK.

2. Brexit resulted in the end of the Dublin III regulation which enabled the UK to return people arriving by boat to the shores from which they left.

3. (most importantly) Brexit destroyed much of the co-operation with our (then) EU partners in stopping illegal immigration.

4. Outside of the EU policing our borders requires a massive increase in border control staff we don't have and can't afford.

5. We've had to replace EU immigrant workers with those from other countries less culturally aligned with the UK way of life.

Etc, etc, etc. 

 

[sonyc 5,541]

13 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Why was the shambles of the Tories immigration policy a fault of Brexit? The Tories campaigning on reducing immigration then instead ramping it up has nothing to do with the referendum, it’s purely domestic politics. All leaving the EU did was give the government complete control over who comes through the borders, it’s up to the government of the day how to use that power

Do you recall the Farage poster? It wasn't attacked by the Tory Party (the leadership taking the Leave side) but in fact it enabled those furthest right in the party to take stronger positions. Brexit sharpened the whole Tory campaign about 'protecting our borders'. 

Couple of articles here:

https://www.politico.eu/article/tories-brexit-done-uk-conservatives-on-immigration-rishi-sunak/

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants

The fact is we lost EU nationals and a whole lot of business and wealth. A lost era - that's how Brexit will be seen in future years. A terrible owm goal. It was suicidal in a world so unstable. As for posters asking why we are still talking about it, when it affects us all and our children and no doubt their children? That's a laugh isn't it?

The only way forward must be closer alignment - in whatever ways we can. Of course immigration is an issue. We must protect jobs and raise skills levels. We need (needed) to do that within the EU  economic area. 

[Yellow Fever 3,848]

15 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Why is it a Latvian or Austrian persons birthright to work and settle in another sovereign country, especially if they hold no skills that country wants or needs?

In my younger years working abroad I had to apply for work visas to prove my skills were useful to that country otherwise I wasn’t allowed to go there. Having the same cultural values (although I’d argue the likes of Australia, New Zealand and Canada are closer to a Britains cultural values than most EU nations) is completely irrelevant.

Nobody has ever said they don’t want any immigration at all, the UKs birth rate is below replacement level so we’ll always need some however I think we should simply be much more selective in who we take in. Set a number the country is happy with and choose those with the skills we need the most. The current system is just a Ponzi scheme, importing millions of low skilled workers undercutting the local workforce who then in turn require more public services which causes us to import more again, it simply isn’t sustainable.

There’s also something I find quite immoral about stealing numerous health workers trained by poorer nations where they’re arguably needed more but that’s a different argument 

The UK has always needed significant immigrant workers Fen, even more so today with the an aging population - starting with the Irish Navvies (albeit then part of the UK) and progressing right through via Windrush to today's acute issues in the NHS, care, agriculture and hospitality industries. The only real question is where should these people come from? Freedom of movement within the EU simply meant that labour could quickly flow to meet demand where needed - and interestingly largely return unhindered when not. A bit like me working in the US and elsewhere but ultimately returning home! It acted as well to bring up the weaker European economies (and also creasted new markets for us) and helped the stronger NW European ones too. Take a look at Poland for instance.

Now, because of the difficulty for anybody to come to the UK - the cost, time and paperwork - people who do come are likely to be here permanently (and yes with their extended families - duh) from much further afield as opposed to the culturally similar European coming here for few years before returning. Add into that mix the need for an ever increasing base wage (despite the fact the we also have an apparent shortage of lowly paid workers) and its almost a perfect recipe to achieve exactly the opposite of what you set out to do.

For the previous transient European labour pool - much easier simply to go elsewhere where needed - hence we now suck in those from far more distant lands!

 

[Herman 9,852]

The Panama Canal is having troubles. The Suez Canal is having troubles. Importing from next door is getting harder thanks to brexit.

Buckle up people.

[TheGunnShow 6,075]

Well, I have an appointment with the German Embassy in two days. It would have been easier if I'd met Miss TGS before this kerfuffle, but never mind.

[Fen Canary 889]

10 hours ago, horsefly said:

Because:

1. Many of those voting for Brexit wanted to stop immigration completely, ignoring the fact that immigration remains essential to the economic flourishing of the UK.

2. Brexit resulted in the end of the Dublin III regulation which enabled the UK to return people arriving by boat to the shores from which they left.

3. (most importantly) Brexit destroyed much of the co-operation with our (then) EU partners in stopping illegal immigration.

4. Outside of the EU policing our borders requires a massive increase in border control staff we don't have and can't afford.

5. We've had to replace EU immigrant workers with those from other countries less culturally aligned with the UK way of life.

Etc, etc, etc. 

 

1. Nobody wanted to stop immigration completely, everybody knows the country needs some level of inward travel. What people wanted was a much more restrictive immigration system whereby we imported workers with the skills the country was short of that wouldn’t be able to undercut local wages.

Immigrants from the eastern bloc countries that joined in 2004 on average earned over 25% less than the national average while all those extra people put pressure on public services. Who benefits from this arrangement except the already wealthy?

2&3 are in regards to illegal immigration, which is largely seperate from the EU referendum. I’d argue the French have always done very little to stem the flow of those crossing the Channel, and have always weaponised the flow of illegal migrants (not too dissimilar to Putin) whenever Britain did something it didn’t like. All of Europe is also struggling with the numbers of illegals entering (some much more so than Britain) so this is hardly unique. Every proposed solution is also usually shouted down as racist dog whistling so I’d argue the problem lies more with our domestic politics than leaving the bloc.

4. Hiring a few more people for border control is a rather easy fix.

5. This sounds rather racist. By culturally aligned what are you referring to? Religion? Skin colour? How is a Slovakian more culturally aligned to Britain than a Kiwi, Indian or Guyanese? I’d wager if the Farage and co had suggested an immigration system that prioritised one nationality over others because they’re “more like us” you’d have derided them as a bunch of bigots 

[Fen Canary 889]

8 hours ago, TheGunnShow said:

Well, I have an appointment with the German Embassy in two days. It would have been easier if I'd met Miss TGS before this kerfuffle, but never mind.

I don’t mean this in a rude way, but do think you shouldn’t have to go through the same paperwork to get your wife a visa that somebody trying to bring in a partner from Australia does? I understand that it’s frustrating that a few years ago it would have been much easier but do you believe our immigration should be a two tier system that deems some nations more worthy than others? 

[TheGunnShow 6,075]

10 minutes ago, Fen Canary said:

I don’t mean this in a rude way, but do think you shouldn’t have to go through the same paperwork to get your wife a visa that somebody trying to bring in a partner from Australia does? I understand that it’s frustrating that a few years ago it would have been much easier but do you believe our immigration should be a two tier system that deems some nations more worthy than others? 

Wrong way around. The aim is to get a visa so I can live over there. It does look like I satisfy all the criteria from my understanding of them, but that's what an appointment with the Embassy is there to really clear up.

[Fen Canary 889]

2 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Wrong way around. The aim is to get a visa so I can live over there. It does look like I satisfy all the criteria from my understanding of them, but that's what an appointment with the Embassy is there to really clear up.

I don’t envy you there. I’ve had numerous dealings with immigration in various countries over the years, and I’ve come to the conclusion they’re f***ing useless the world over

[Fen Canary 889]

11 hours ago, sonyc said:

Do you recall the Farage poster? It wasn't attacked by the Tory Party (the leadership taking the Leave side) but in fact it enabled those furthest right in the party to take stronger positions. Brexit sharpened the whole Tory campaign about 'protecting our borders'. 

Couple of articles here:

https://www.politico.eu/article/tories-brexit-done-uk-conservatives-on-immigration-rishi-sunak/

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants

The fact is we lost EU nationals and a whole lot of business and wealth. A lost era - that's how Brexit will be seen in future years. A terrible owm goal. It was suicidal in a world so unstable. As for posters asking why we are still talking about it, when it affects us all and our children and no doubt their children? That's a laugh isn't it?

The only way forward must be closer alignment - in whatever ways we can. Of course immigration is an issue. We must protect jobs and raise skills levels. We need (needed) to do that within the EU  economic area. 

My point is we couldn’t do that while a member. Those EU citizens who immigrated from the last bloc of countries to join earned 25% less than the national average, and Britain was powerless to prevent this happening while we were a member.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8069/
 

Im the first to admit our immigration system is a shambles, but to me that’s the fault or the Tories rather than Brexit. There’s no reason we should have lost EU nationals. The ones already here were allowed to stay, and skilled ones can still obtain work visas and/or residency 

[Fen Canary 889]

9 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

The UK has always needed significant immigrant workers Fen, even more so today with the an aging population - starting with the Irish Navvies (albeit then part of the UK) and progressing right through via Windrush to today's acute issues in the NHS, care, agriculture and hospitality industries. The only real question is where should these people come from? Freedom of movement within the EU simply meant that labour could quickly flow to meet demand where needed - and interestingly largely return unhindered when not. A bit like me working in the US and elsewhere but ultimately returning home! It acted as well to bring up the weaker European economies (and also creasted new markets for us) and helped the stronger NW European ones too. Take a look at Poland for instance.

Now, because of the difficulty for anybody to come to the UK - the cost, time and paperwork - people who do come are likely to be here permanently (and yes with their extended families - duh) from much further afield as opposed to the culturally similar European coming here for few years before returning. Add into that mix the need for an ever increasing base wage (despite the fact the we also have an apparent shortage of lowly paid workers) and its almost a perfect recipe to achieve exactly the opposite of what you set out to do.

For the previous transient European labour pool - much easier simply to go elsewhere where needed - hence we now suck in those from far more distant lands!

 

Your description makes the free movement laws sound like a constant supply of transient cheap labour….which is exactly what the bulk of those who voted to leave wanted to stop happening. Why would employers increase pay and working conditions when you can simply import the workers you need from poorer countries? 

[Creative Midfielder 2,004]

11 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

Your description makes the free movement laws sound like a constant supply of transient cheap labour….which is exactly what the bulk of those who voted to leave wanted to stop happening. Why would employers increase pay and working conditions when you can simply import the workers you need from poorer countries? 

Nothing to do with free movement as you can quite easily see by looking at the immigration figures of recent years - we are still importing workers from poorer countries - much poorer countries on the other side of the world and in far greater numbers than when we had free movement.

If that is what you Brexitty idiots voted for then it has massively backfired on you.

[horsefly 4,318]

12 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

1. Nobody wanted to stop immigration completely, everybody knows the country needs some level of inward travel. What people wanted was a much more restrictive immigration system whereby we imported workers with the skills the country was short of that wouldn’t be able to undercut local wages.

Immigrants from the eastern bloc countries that joined in 2004 on average earned over 25% less than the national average while all those extra people put pressure on public services. Who benefits from this arrangement except the already wealthy?

2&3 are in regards to illegal immigration, which is largely seperate from the EU referendum. I’d argue the French have always done very little to stem the flow of those crossing the Channel, and have always weaponised the flow of illegal migrants (not too dissimilar to Putin) whenever Britain did something it didn’t like. All of Europe is also struggling with the numbers of illegals entering (some much more so than Britain) so this is hardly unique. Every proposed solution is also usually shouted down as racist dog whistling so I’d argue the problem lies more with our domestic politics than leaving the bloc.

4. Hiring a few more people for border control is a rather easy fix.

5. This sounds rather racist. By culturally aligned what are you referring to? Religion? Skin colour? How is a Slovakian more culturally aligned to Britain than a Kiwi, Indian or Guyanese? I’d wager if the Farage and co had suggested an immigration system that prioritised one nationality over others because they’re “more like us” you’d have derided them as a bunch of bigots 

1. False. Lot's of Brexiteers wanted an end to immigration , full stop.

2 & 3. False. Brexiteers typically didn't distinguish between illegal and legal immigration. They just hated immigrants full stop. 

4. It's not a few.

5. Not remotely racist, and your comments are offensive. No one denies that Europe has had a very definitive Enlightenment culture since the beginning of the 18th century. It's what made the possibility of a European Union possible. The right of the Tory Party have attempted to exploit cultural differences of those outside of that European heritage in their claims about the failure of multiculturalism. 

[Fen Canary 889]

35 minutes ago, Creative Midfielder said:

Nothing to do with free movement as you can quite easily see by looking at the immigration figures of recent years - we are still importing workers from poorer countries - much poorer countries on the other side of the world and in far greater numbers than when we had free movement.

If that is what you Brexitty idiots voted for then it has massively backfired on you.

I voted to bring control of all immigration back into the hands of the elected government rather than have them bound by EU laws on the matter, which has been achieved.

I must admit I did hope this would lead to a reduction in numbers rather than a vast increase but I hadn’t banked on the Tories being quite as incompetent as they have been. However in the upcoming election at least now I can vote for a party committed to reducing the numbers, especially of the lower skilled variety, something that wasn’t possible while we were a member

[Herman 9,852]

The Reform Party?? You're not as intelligent as some may have thought you were.

[Fen Canary 889]

22 minutes ago, horsefly said:

1. False. Lot's of Brexiteers wanted an end to immigration , full stop.

2 & 3. False. Brexiteers typically didn't distinguish between illegal and legal immigration. They just hated immigrants full stop. 

4. It's not a few.

5. Not remotely racist, and your comments are offensive. No one denies that Europe has had a very definitive Enlightenment culture since the beginning of the 18th century. It's what made the possibility of a European Union possible. The right of the Tory Party have attempted to exploit cultural differences of those outside of that European heritage in their claims about the failure of multiculturalism. 

I’ve heard it all now! Horsefly who has spent the last however many years labelling anybody who disagrees with him as racist, is now offended that somebody points out that his opinions on a two tier immigration policy are largely based on racism! You think a low skilled European is more deserving of living in the UK than a highly skilled one from elsewhere, simply because they’d be “more like us’” How a Slav or somebody from around the Mediterranean is more like us than an Aussie, Kiwi, Canadian or Indian however I’ve no idea.

However you’d no doubt castigate a right winger who questions whether it’s sensible to import lots of people from conservative Muslim countries due to their rather outdated views on equality am I right?

Going back to your other points, most people didn’t want a total ban on immigration, if you’d actually spoken to people who voted to leave rather than try and put words in their mouth you’d understand this. Most wanted to copy the Australian points based system whereby you have to prove you have a useful skill and won’t undercut the local workforce. 

2&3 Yes many people do want illegal immigration stopped, which isn’t an extreme opinion to hold. Opposition to illegal immigration is a major reason many populist parties are becoming a much more powerful force throughout the EU, some of which are openly racist which is something thankfully we don’t see in Britain. The bulk of the EU is drifting right while we look to be pivoting back to Labour.

4 I’ve no idea how many extra would be needed, and unless you work in customs neither do you so we’ll leave that one there

[Fen Canary 889]

4 minutes ago, Herman said:

The Reform Party?? You're not as intelligent as some may have thought you were.

What have Reform got to do with anything? They’ll probably poll higher than they usually would due to the Tories implosion but I know less about their proposed policies than I do Starmers, and that’s saying something!

They’re just a vehicle for Farage to keep himself relevant. I agreed with him on leaving the EU but his Thatcherite financial neoliberalism is something I would never vote for in a general election