Mr. G, I'd dispute that at least to some extent. Power flows from the UK to the EU, but Holyrood has been gaining power (ie it's being devolved rather than centralised). Also, both the previous PM and previous Chancellor were Scottish.
That said, whilst still in favour of the UK, I'm a bit more relaxed about the prospect of Scotland separating were it to happen.
I may yet be proven wrong, but trying to smear Leave with what this dripping wet leadership likes to think of Farage seems to be the wrong message for the working classes of this country who are pleased to hear someone share their concerns. Apart from a few notable exceptions, Field, Stuart and Skinner, Labour have become the party that is pro emoting, but anti governing and anti doing.
If I am right, we'll see huge Leave votes in Wales, the North and Midlands.
+1. It's also interesting locally to see people arguing that Nissan and Hitachi workers will vote remain because their jobs depend on it. Forgetting that those companies are both Japanese.
The European companies who opened up factories in the North East (Siemens I'm looking at you) left at the first sign of an economic downturn to keep their Continental factories open...
It's reasons like that which make me think the size of the Leave vote was originally underestimated. Personally I haven't got a clue what the result will be and I doubt anyone else has....
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations.
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
Hope you get some nice photos to share, Miss Cyclefree. Did you know the Colosseum is partially made of concrete? The port at Ostia is too (the Romans found out how to make concrete which set underwater).
Now, to dispute your points: 1) This was almost certainly true in the past. But we're not in the 1950s. The EU isn't about stopping war in Europe (and the Bosnians and Ukraine might say it's somewhere between useless and harmful in this regard in the modern world), it's about bypassing national democracies to drag power from the accountable politicians of states to the deliberately complex and opaque bureaucracy of Brussels.
The idea the EU = Western civilisation would come as news to the Roman Empire, I am sure.
2) I agree federalism is not inherently evil. But the ends do not justify the means of ignoring referendum results, being deceitful to electorates and throwing funding at supposedly independent groups which then conclude more EU is the answer to every evil. If a federal EU were a good thing, why not make an honest case for it? Could it be that the little people can't be trusted?
3) Some things do require international co-operation. Counter-terrorism is a good example. Our closest partner here is the US. The Five Eyes group is ourselves, the US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.
The EU is totally unnecessary for international co-operation. People who pretend otherwise presumably also believe a wedding is a prerequisite for sex.
4) I agree. However, a market of 65m or so which acts in British interests is better for us making trading deals that advantage the UK than a market of 500m for which we are just 8% of the consideration. A deal which helps Italy, Spain and Poland but screws us would make sense for the EU. But not for us.
MD, just the same as Scottish Independence, if you are 8% you have no power , you just do as you are told and accept the crumbs you are given.
So why are the SNP so keen of being in a union where Scotland is 1% of the population?
Mr. G, I'd dispute that at least to some extent. Power flows from the UK to the EU, but Holyrood has been gaining power (ie it's being devolved rather than centralised). Also, both the previous PM and previous Chancellor were Scottish.
That said, whilst still in favour of the UK, I'm a bit more relaxed about the prospect of Scotland separating were it to happen.
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.
Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?
The concern about immigration is not about immigration per se, but two consequences: alienation/rapid change (the creation of new micro-communities within the country rather than integration) and economic competition for low skilled jobs.
If the balance of of immigration were to shift to high skilled techies - for example - who (I assume) would be more likely to integrate then, regardless of the colour of their skill, the concern about immigration for most would subside.
I think there is no doubt that middle class migrants integrate better.
Everyone is getting steamed up about race in this referendum, this referendum is actually about class.
We are quite happy to have urbane middle class people from India or Romania or Poland Here.
Its Oiks from Poland and Romania that are not wanted.....however our ruling class seems to think that they are more desirable than Oiks from England and Wales, which is not going down well with our own Oiks who have woken up to this.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
I met my Italian wife through Erasmus- an EU sponsored University exchange scheme. She is an exceptional women and has been a highly regarded and conscientious employee for UK companies ever since, paying taxes of course. She has only ever taken the odd day off.
In return whilst living in Oxfordshire in 2005, she had to drive past banner after banner of racist UKIP slogans "No to EU immigration" as she drove home. And now this referendum which has upset her so much she cannot even talk about it.
She'll continue to drive past such slogans for the rest of her life if we remain. They're not going to disappear on Friday.
Thankfully the leaders of the leave campaign (and the MPs that represent Leave in Parliament) have nothing to do with such odiousness so it won't be policy or happen.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Sorry, but that is just dewy eyed idealistic sentimental claptrap.
Vapid Bilge is an understatement
I'd rather Roger's sentimentalism than the likes of yourself, Plato, GeoffM, MikeM and your ilk who cheered on the terrible, and deeply distressing post of Lowlander yesterday.
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.
Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?
Considering the immigration figures for last year show total immigration figures of 288 000 Non-EU migrants last year (177 000 net), I find it hard to believe that the Leave campaigners will support more of this to replace our EU migration. I expect to see a squadron of the porcine air force in formation flying by my window first!
I will.
Leavers on here may do, there are some on here quite happy with immigration. That will not be the attitude of the wider campaign.
How many non-EU migrants over the 177 000 net last year would you be happy with? Enough to take the total to 330 000?
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Wake me up when the USA starts writing Canada's laws against their consent and see what the young Canadian girl thinks then.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Sorry, but that is just dewy eyed idealistic sentimental claptrap.
Vapid Bilge is an understatement
I'd rather Roger's sentimentalism than the likes of yourself, Plato, GeoffM, MikeM and your ilk who cheered on the terrible, and deeply distressing post of Lowlander yesterday.
I would far rather Rogers sentimentalism, but its not the real world just an idealistic utopia. And without exception all attempts to set up idealistic utopias have ended in distaster mass death and misery.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Interesting that the best arguments for Remain come from a Canadian. Nobody living here is capable of making such an argument. In fact ordinary people will read the condescending nature of your post and rush to vote Leave.
If you think my post about a Canadian student will persuade paople to "rush out and vote leave" please feel free to use it.
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.
Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?
The concern about immigration is not about immigration per se, but two consequences: alienation/rapid change (the creation of new micro-communities within the country rather than integration) and economic competition for low skilled jobs.
If the balance of of immigration were to shift to high skilled techies - for example - who (I assume) would be more likely to integrate then, regardless of the colour of their skill, the concern about immigration for most would subside.
I think there is no doubt that middle class migrants integrate better.
I think the Independent did a piece comparing (non-EU) previous immigration in the UK. As I recall the general drift was Middle-class immigrants from Uganda civil service integrated well, unskilled immigrants from (one particular area of) Pakistan had not integrated well. I don't recall any mention of caribbean immigration.
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.
Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?
Considering the immigration figures for last year show total immigration figures of 288 000 Non-EU migrants last year (177 000 net), I find it hard to believe that the Leave campaigners will support more of this to replace our EU migration. I expect to see a squadron of the porcine air force in formation flying by my window first!
I will.
Leavers on here may do, there are some on here quite happy with immigration. That will not be the attitude of the wider campaign.
How many non-EU migrants over the 177 000 net last year would you be happy with? Enough to take the total to 330 000?
Yes and as for the "wider campaign" the campaign ends at 10pm on Thursday.
The argument of points-based migration (like we have for 93% of the world including migrants from Australia where I grew up) is one of quality not quantity.
I may yet be proven wrong, but trying to smear Leave with what this dripping wet leadership likes to think of Farage seems to be the wrong message for the working classes of this country who are pleased to hear someone share their concerns. Apart from a few notable exceptions, Field, Stuart and Skinner, Labour have become the party that is pro emoting, but anti governing and anti doing.
If I am right, we'll see huge Leave votes in Wales, the North and Midlands.
+1. It's also interesting locally to see people arguing that Nissan and Hitachi workers will vote remain because their jobs depend on it. Forgetting that those companies are both Japanese.
The European companies who opened up factories in the North East (Siemens I'm looking at you) left at the first sign of an economic downturn to keep their Continental factories open...
It's reasons like that which make me think the size of the Leave vote was originally underestimated. Personally I haven't got a clue what the result will be and I doubt anyone else has....
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations.
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
Nissan will stay - they have put too much money into a plant which has become an example to the entire global industry about efficiency.
As for Hitachi mentioned earlier, they will go regardless of the vote. Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant screwing together high value imported components. Every train "built" there will add to the deficit side of balance of payments. The suggestion from the company that it's their European production facility is absurd - our narrow loading gauge means that having imported the body shell the electronics traction package and bogies from Japan and the diesel engine and ancillaries from Germany, they then have ship the finished vehicle by road back to the Port of Tyne to ship it to the continent. Regardless of our status in the EU it's an absolute nonstarter which demonstrates that politicians haven't a clue when they trumpet the factory.
Its here to take the vast subsidies on offer, build these IEP trains at the absurd high price "negotiated" by the DfT then they'll be off.
'The message is clear: if you don’t want your communities swamped by brown people, vote to leave the EU. This is racism. And if you wish to argue it isn’t, then I’m going to believe you’re a racist.
Of course, Farage and his fellow travellers – Tory MPs Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, for example – maintain their campaign isn’t about race, it’s about “sovereignty”, it’s about “believing in Britain”, it’s about “taking back control”. But, even if those claims are correct – and I am unconvinced they are – the Leave campaign is, to a very large degree, a racist one.
If you are a Leave voter and offended by this, then please raise your concerns with Farage, Johnson, and Gove. Your desire to leave the EU may not be based on matters of race but the campaign which might yet deliver your dream is. You, whether willingly or not, are on the side of racists.
Good morning all. Have a good holiday in Italy, Cyclefree, but I hope you voted before you go if you are planning more than a few days stay.
As I sent in my postal vote for Leave over a week ago, I'm going to try and be as relaxed as possible until Der Tag.
2 things have vexed me this weekend. My good old printer finally packed up on Friday after 6 years of worthy toil. It's replacement - bought the same day - is faulty and the paper feed doesn't work, so that has to be sent back. Grrrrrrrrrrr!
I may yet be proven wrong, but trying to smear Leave with what this dripping wet leadership likes to think of Farage seems to be the wrong message for the working classes of this country who are pleased to hear someone share their concerns. Apart from a few notable exceptions, Field, Stuart and Skinner, Labour have become the party that is pro emoting, but anti governing and anti doing.
If I am right, we'll see huge Leave votes in Wales, the North and Midlands.
+1. It's also interesting locally to see people arguing that Nissan and Hitachi workers will vote remain because their jobs depend on it. Forgetting that those companies are both Japanese.
The European companies who opened up factories in the North East (Siemens I'm looking at you) left at the first sign of an economic downturn to keep their Continental factories open...
It's reasons like that which make me think the size of the Leave vote was originally underestimated. Personally I haven't got a clue what the result will be and I doubt anyone else has....
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations.
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Interesting that the best arguments for Remain come from a Canadian. Nobody living here is capable of making such an argument. In fact ordinary people will read the condescending nature of your post and rush to vote Leave.
If you think my post about a Canadian student will persuade paople to "rush out and vote leave" please feel free to use it.
Thank you, I will. I'm currently in a busy but run down coastal town full of people struggling to make ends meet. They're certainly not dreaming of "a community unique in the world" from a villa on the Riviera, but ho hum.
Hope you get some nice photos to share, Miss Cyclefree. Did you know the Colosseum is partially made of concrete? The port at Ostia is too (the Romans found out how to make concrete which set underwater).
Now, to dispute your points: 1) This was almost certainly true in the past. But we're not in the 1950s. The EU isn't about stopping war in Europe (and the Bosnians and Ukraine might say it's somewhere between useless and harmful in this regard in the modern world), it's about bypassing national democracies to drag power from the accountable politicians of states to the deliberately complex and opaque bureaucracy of Brussels.
The idea the EU = Western civilisation would come as news to the Roman Empire, I am sure.
2) I agree federalism is not inherently evil. But the ends do not justify the means of ignoring referendum results, being deceitful to electorates and throwing funding at supposedly independent groups which then conclude more EU is the answer to every evil. If a federal EU were a good thing, why not make an honest case for it? Could it be that the little people can't be trusted?
3) Some things do require international co-operation. Counter-terrorism is a good example. Our closest partner here is the US. The Five Eyes group is ourselves, the US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.
The EU is totally unnecessary for international co-operation. People who pretend otherwise presumably also believe a wedding is a prerequisite for sex.
4) I agree. However, a market of 65m or so which acts in British interests is better for us making trading deals that advantage the UK than a market of 500m for which we are just 8% of the consideration. A deal which helps Italy, Spain and Poland but screws us would make sense for the EU. But not for us.
MD, just the same as Scottish Independence, if you are 8% you have no power , you just do as you are told and accept the crumbs you are given.
So why are the SNP so keen of being in a union where Scotland is 1% of the population?
I appreciate you're not personally.
One can only imagine they consider it different, which is odd to me but we all have different opinions.
I would far rather Rogers sentimentalism, but its not the real world just an idealistic utopia. And without exception all attempts to set up idealistic utopias have ended in disaster mass death and misery.
Lowlander is a remainer who reported an anecdotal real like experience and you monstered him for it because you didn't like the message.
Undoubtably for liberals with a small "l", this referendum has been a existential terrible shock to them about how many people in this country do not share their ideals.
If everyone was urbane, liberal and gentle, then liberal ideals would be perfect, however, sadly, only a tiny minority are. The rest are to a lesser or greater extent self interested animals who can behave quite savagely and irrationally when crossed. Liberals seem to think that if you treat such people nicely they will be nice back to you. Sadly that notiion is as absurd as trying it with a crocodile.
This is the tragedy of liberalism. It is a noble ideal but one that starts from a wholly mistaken understanding of what human beings are.
Christianity, Judism and Islam (which are all basically offshoots of each other) for all their flaws, start from the premise that human beings are fallen creatures, with a resultant prediliction or temptation to do evil and only constant fighting against these temptations within can bring about any notion of peace and tranquility, and even in the most virtuous the temptations are there and will out if not resisted. The philosopy of these religions understands the human condition far more which is why they have endured so long and will endure long after this civilization bites the dust like all civilizations do.
For those of you betting on turnout and also those who think it may affect outcome there is heavy rain likely spreading from southern Britain in the morning to the north afternoon. A particularly heavy pulse looks to hit the north-east early evening.
Still lots of uncertainty - I would say south-east of a line from the IOW to Newcastle could have some thunderstorms / torrential rain.
'The message is clear: if you don’t want your communities swamped by brown people, vote to leave the EU. This is racism. And if you wish to argue it isn’t, then I’m going to believe you’re a racist.
Of course, Farage and his fellow travellers – Tory MPs Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, for example – maintain their campaign isn’t about race, it’s about “sovereignty”, it’s about “believing in Britain”, it’s about “taking back control”. But, even if those claims are correct – and I am unconvinced they are – the Leave campaign is, to a very large degree, a racist one.
If you are a Leave voter and offended by this, then please raise your concerns with Farage, Johnson, and Gove. Your desire to leave the EU may not be based on matters of race but the campaign which might yet deliver your dream is. You, whether willingly or not, are on the side of racists.
I may yet be proven wrong, but trying to smear Leave with what this dripping wet leadership likes to think of Farage seems to be the wrong message for the working classes of this country who are pleased to hear someone share their concerns. Apart from a few notable exceptions, Field, Stuart and Skinner, Labour have become the party that is pro emoting, but anti governing and anti doing.
If I am right, we'll see huge Leave votes in Wales, the North and Midlands.
+1. It's also interesting locally to see people arguing that Nissan and Hitachi workers will vote remain because their jobs depend on it. Forgetting that those companies are both Japanese.
The European companies who opened up factories in the North East (Siemens I'm looking at you) left at the first sign of an economic downturn to keep their Continental factories open...
It's reasons like that which make me think the size of the Leave vote was originally underestimated. Personally I haven't got a clue what the result will be and I doubt anyone else has....
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations.
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
The fact that people will tend to vote according to the dictats of their work situation is one of the reasons Remain will edge this. Many of these people will basically put their family situation before personal beliefs.
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.
Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?
Considering the immigration figures for last year show total immigration figures of 288 000 Non-EU migrants last year (177 000 net), I find it hard to believe that the Leave campaigners will support more of this to replace our EU migration. I expect to see a squadron of the porcine air force in formation flying by my window first!
I will.
Leavers on here may do, there are some on here quite happy with immigration. That will not be the attitude of the wider campaign.
How many non-EU migrants over the 177 000 net last year would you be happy with? Enough to take the total to 330 000?
Yes and as for the "wider campaign" the campaign ends at 10pm on Thursday.
The argument of points-based migration (like we have for 93% of the world including migrants from Australia where I grew up) is one of quality not quantity.
I think in general most people who vote Leave would like to see a reduction in levels of immigration. And, despite what the journalist in the Scotsman may think, that's a legitimate aim.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
I met my Italian wife through Erasmus- an EU sponsored University exchange scheme. She is an exceptional women and has been a highly regarded and conscientious employee for UK companies ever since, paying taxes of course. She has only ever taken the odd day off.
In return whilst living in Oxfordshire in 2005, she had to drive past banner after banner of racist UKIP slogans "No to EU immigration" as she drove home. And now this referendum which has upset her so much she cannot even talk about it.
I think that was the scheme the Canadian girl had been on. It was a two minute clip on radio from a Remainer and Leaver who were both Canadian and both part of an EU university scheme.
She was so positive -my two lines are a very short precis- and it was beautiful to listen to. It brought out the inner hippy in me. By contrast the Canadian Leaver was a mean spirited small minded pessimist 'What's mine is mine'. Rather like the ones here.
Enjoy your Italian holiday Cycle Free and another good piece. We were in Ischia last year, a rather stunning Island off Naples. We left a Mac and iPad on a busy shuttle ferry on an early return back. I din't even notice until I came back and there was a message on my answerphone from the captain saying someone had handed it it.
Naplolitans are particularly beautiful looking, even by the very high standards set by Italians.
Hope you get some nice photos to share, Miss Cyclefree. Did you know the Colosseum is partially made of concrete? The port at Ostia is too (the Romans found out how to make concrete which set underwater).
Now, to dispute your points: 1) This was almost certainly true in the past. But we're not in the 1950s. The EU isn't about stopping war in Europe (and the Bosnians and Ukraine might say it's somewhere between useless and harmful in this regard in the modern world), it's about bypassing national democracies to drag power from the accountable politicians of states to the deliberately complex and opaque bureaucracy of Brussels.
The idea the EU = Western civilisation would come as news to the Roman Empire, I am sure.
2) I agree federalism is not inherently evil. But the ends do not justify the means of ignoring referendum results, being deceitful to electorates and throwing funding at supposedly independent groups which then conclude more EU is the answer to every evil. If a federal EU were a good thing, why not make an honest case for it? Could it be that the little people can't be trusted?
3) Some things do require international co-operation. Counter-terrorism is a good example. Our closest partner here is the US. The Five Eyes group is ourselves, the US, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.
The EU is totally unnecessary for international co-operation. People who pretend otherwise presumably also believe a wedding is a prerequisite for sex.
4) I agree. However, a market of 65m or so which acts in British interests is better for us making trading deals that advantage the UK than a market of 500m for which we are just 8% of the consideration. A deal which helps Italy, Spain and Poland but screws us would make sense for the EU. But not for us.
MD, just the same as Scottish Independence, if you are 8% you have no power , you just do as you are told and accept the crumbs you are given.
So why are the SNP so keen of being in a union where Scotland is 1% of the population?
I appreciate you're not personally.
It's a choice of what is given and retained. An independent Scotland in the EU would transfer powers to the EU but would always have the option to leave and thus retain the powers. A devolved Scotland has no power to retain or transfer powers, it only gets what Westminster gives and has no say over what powers are transfered to the EU.
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
Nissan will stay - they have put too much money into a plant which has become an example to the entire global industry about efficiency.
As for Hitachi mentioned earlier, they will go regardless of the vote. Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant screwing together high value imported components. Every train "built" there will add to the deficit side of balance of payments. The suggestion from the company that it's their European production facility is absurd - our narrow loading gauge means that having imported the body shell the electronics traction package and bogies from Japan and the diesel engine and ancillaries from Germany, they then have ship the finished vehicle by road back to the Port of Tyne to ship it to the continent. Regardless of our status in the EU it's an absolute nonstarter which demonstrates that politicians haven't a clue when they trumpet the factory.
Its here to take the vast subsidies on offer, build these IEP trains at the absurd high price "negotiated" by the DfT then they'll be off.
Actually they are looking to start fabricating the bodyshells here too and are also moving into the signalling and telecommunications market in a big way. Undoubtably they are here to stay. There was a technical reason that they couldn't do it for these but I can't remember what .
In any case, it is a misnomer that the bodyshells are that important. There is no money in building bodyshells, the money is in the design, project management fitting out and all the electronic bells and whilstles that all trains have these days.
I remember some months ago now writing a similar list when someone had posted that they couldn't think of a single positive reason to vote remain. It is bordering on tragic that almost no one on the remain side has done so. No attempt has been made to sell a positive vision of the EU. The result is that when remain wins, as I still think it will, our relationship with the EU will be as problematic as ever.
Presumably this was group tested to death and the conclusion was reached that the swing voters in this were more likely to vote remain if they were scared by project fear rather than inspired by project EU. It's sad and there will be negative consequences.
We have not even been asked to stay in the relationship for the sake of the children, we have been asked to stay because we will supposedly be better off by a few quid if we continue to share the bills, friends without benefits, just an economic relationship. Really, who wants that?
Have a good holiday Cyclefree.
It's not a matter of being a few quid better off. It's a matter of avoiding long-lasting economic damage that will cause significant harm to millions of people. It is a negative, but for me and many others it is a very powerful one.
The fact is that we are so integrated into the EU that the case for withdrawal needs to be powerful and inarguable. The benefits need to be concrete and timetabled to make the downsides worth it. But Leave have provided nothing but speculation, conjecture and plainly false promises.
Is it worth doing significant harm to ourselves to achieve insignificant reductions in immigration? I cannot see it. That's why I'm Remain.
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.
Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?
Considering the immigration figures for last year show total immigration figures of 288 000 Non-EU migrants last year (177 000 net), I find it hard to believe that the Leave campaigners will support more of this to replace our EU migration. I expect to see a squadron of the porcine air force in formation flying by my window first!
I will.
Leavers on here may do, there are some on here quite happy with immigration. That will not be the attitude of the wider campaign.
How many non-EU migrants over the 177 000 net last year would you be happy with? Enough to take the total to 330 000?
Yes and as for the "wider campaign" the campaign ends at 10pm on Thursday.
The argument of points-based migration (like we have for 93% of the world including migrants from Australia where I grew up) is one of quality not quantity.
I think in general most people who vote Leave would like to see a reduction in levels of immigration. And, despite what the journalist in the Scotsman may think, that's a legitimate aim.
I think a large proportion if not most who vote Remain would like to see that too. Not me though I appreciate my position is a minority opinion. Either way though I don't think a PM Gove or a PM Johnson will pull up the drawbridge. At the most I expect they'd make visa applications for the EU meet the same existing criteria as non EU migrants. If they even go that far.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
I'd like to build the world a home And furnish it with love Grow apple trees and honey bees And snow white turtle doves
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
I'd like to build the world a home And furnish it with love Grow apple trees and honey bees And snow white turtle doves
A great post and had Remain tried to argue this it would have exposed the Leave campaign tactics which in turn would have had to change.
I think the EU *could* be a force for good. It just isn't at the moment. A European community of nations all friends and trading and cooperating is absolutely a positive. But Europe isn't the EU and I like many people support the idea of the former and not the realities of the latter. Its not expansion that's the concern - a big broad diverse trading area is better than a small and narrow one. Its just that the bigger it gets the more absurd ideas like a single currency or no Borders become
I'm an advocate for a federal UK and have been for 20 years. Its the only viable solution to give the composite nations (and possibly regions) their own identity and voice. But it has to be with consent. Its very very hard to make an argument for a European superstate that demonstrates the consent of the people of Europe in creating it.
Anyway, a positive case for Europe is what we in Labour have tried to make. It went down like a bucket of warm sick. Most people seem to have a negative view of Europe, I can't think where they might have gained such an impression....
Agree with all of that - but didn't you say you were planning to vote Leave? That seems to me a real pity - sure, it's difficult, but it's worthwhile, and if we split off we won't be able to help and may actually do the whole idea real harm. Reconsider?
For those of you betting on turnout and also those who think it may affect outcome there is heavy rain likely spreading from southern Britain in the morning to the north afternoon. A particularly heavy pulse looks to hit the north-east early evening.
Still lots of uncertainty - I would say south-east of a line from the IOW to Newcastle could have some thunderstorms / torrential rain.
Forecasting British weather four days in advance is courageous.
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
Nissan will stay - they have put too much money into a plant which has become an example to the entire global industry about efficiency.
As for Hitachi mentioned earlier, they will go regardless of the vote. Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant screwing together high value imported components. Every train "built" there will add to the deficit side of balance of payments. The suggestion from the company that it's their European production facility is absurd - our narrow loading gauge means that having imported the body shell the electronics traction package and bogies from Japan and the diesel engine and ancillaries from Germany, they then have ship the finished vehicle by road back to the Port of Tyne to ship it to the continent. Regardless of our status in the EU it's an absolute nonstarter which demonstrates that politicians haven't a clue when they trumpet the factory.
Its here to take the vast subsidies on offer, build these IEP trains at the absurd high price "negotiated" by the DfT then they'll be off.
As I recall, the reason that we have British made Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans is because we are in the EU and single market. Our domestic manfacturers were in a very poor way in the 1970's and the Japanese car industry exploited this, but in the EU there were import quotas for Japanese cars in much of the EU, well into the nineties. Only 13 000 Japanese vehicles were imported for Italy in 1991 and 85 000 for France. By setting up factories in the EU, the Japanese producers could bypass these quotas. They set up in Britain with the benefit of the EU and also government regional aid.
They have a lot of infrastructure and other items here now so would not close down, but the origins of the Japanese/UK automotive industry is for EU market access.
Mr. Palmer, the idea the EU will suddenly decide openness, honesty and democracy is the way forward is literally incredible.
If I thought the EU could be reformed, I'd be very doubtful of how to vote. But I'm not, which has made this rather an easy decision for me.
Edited extra bit: to clarify, I haven't voted yet, and a black swan *might* change my mind but nothing has happened which has altered my fundamental view of the EU.
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
Nissan will stay - they have put too much money into a plant which has become an example to the entire global industry about efficiency.
As for Hitachi mentioned earlier, they will go regardless of the vote. Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant screwing together high value imported components. Every train "built" there will add to the deficit side of balance of payments. The suggestion from the company that it's their European production facility is absurd - our narrow loading gauge means that having imported the body shell the electronics traction package and bogies from Japan and the diesel engine and ancillaries from Germany, they then have ship the finished vehicle by road back to the Port of Tyne to ship it to the continent. Regardless of our status in the EU it's an absolute nonstarter which demonstrates that politicians haven't a clue when they trumpet the factory.
Its here to take the vast subsidies on offer, build these IEP trains at the absurd high price "negotiated" by the DfT then they'll be off.
I would very much disagree with your hitachi argument. The route to the port of Tyne is motorway so not really a problem. Hitachi also like the fact their factory is at the home of the railways (it was why the factory went there against far better offers elsewhere).
I think the imported management may be in for a shock though. Newton aycliffe is hardly the most exciting place. Bishop Auckland is rapidly improving however..
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.
Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?
The concern about immigration is not about immigration per se, but two consequences: alienation/rapid change (the creation of new micro-communities within the country rather than integration) and economic competition for low skilled jobs.
If the balance of of immigration were to shift to high skilled techies - for example - who (I assume) would be more likely to integrate then, regardless of the colour of their skill, the concern about immigration for most would subside.
I think EiT is much closer to what most politicians will actually do - they think he's right, and will legislate accordingly. Your preferred solution won't happen is we go for Brexit - the conclusion that will be drawn is that imigration must be reined back from all sides.
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
EiT's point is that the Leave campaign is not talking about these people. It is talking about Turks and other moslems.
Let us assume this referendum settles the matter of our membership for forty years like the last one did? How many member nations where there forty years ago versus now?
How many member nations do you think there will be in forty years time? Could it include Turkey?
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
Nissan will stay - they have put too much money into a plant which has become an example to the entire global industry about efficiency.
As for Hitachi mentioned earlier, they will go regardless of the vote. Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant screwing together high value imported components. Every train "built" there will add to the deficit side of balance of payments. The suggestion from the company that it's their European production facility is absurd - our narrow loading gauge means that having imported the body shell the electronics traction package and bogies from Japan and the diesel engine and ancillaries from Germany, they then have ship the finished vehicle by road back to the Port of Tyne to ship it to the continent. Regardless of our status in the EU it's an absolute nonstarter which demonstrates that politicians haven't a clue when they trumpet the factory.
Its here to take the vast subsidies on offer, build these IEP trains at the absurd high price "negotiated" by the DfT then they'll be off.
Actually they are looking to start fabricating the bodyshells here too and are also moving into the signalling and telecommunications market in a big way. Undoubtably they are here to stay. There was a technical reason that they couldn't do it for these but I can't remember what .
In any case, it is a misnomer that the bodyshells are that important. There is no money in building bodyshells, the money is in the design, project management fitting out and all the electronic bells and whilstles that all trains have these days.
The technical reason being that Hitachi are (understandably) keeping their proprietary welding technology at home.
You miss my point - the only market that Aycliffe can serve is the UK. They already have won contracts to refresh most Intercity trains, and for electric units for Scotland. Other big contracts have gone to Bombardier or Siemens or CAF. Entertainingly our dips hit Tory MP put out a leaflet hailing new trains for Northern (all built in Spain) and Transpennine Express (mostly built in Spain the rest Italy) as a triumph for the Northern Powerhouse industrial strategy!
Once we run out of train contracts for the UK Aycliffe will close. That's not that many years away either.
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
Nissan will stay - they have put too much money into a plant which has become an example to the entire global industry about efficiency.
As for Hitachi mentioned earlier, they will go regardless of the vote. Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant screwing together high value imported components. Every train "built" there will add to the deficit side of balance of payments. The suggestion from the company that it's their European production facility is absurd - our narrow loading gauge means that having imported the body shell the electronics traction package and bogies from Japan and the diesel engine and ancillaries from Germany, they then have ship the finished vehicle by road back to the Port of Tyne to ship it to the continent. Regardless of our status in the EU it's an absolute nonstarter which demonstrates that politicians haven't a clue when they trumpet the factory.
Its here to take the vast subsidies on offer, build these IEP trains at the absurd high price "negotiated" by the DfT then they'll be off.
As I recall, the reason that we have British made Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans is because we are in the EU and single market. Our domestic manfacturers were in a very poor way in the 1970's and the Japanese car industry exploited this, but in the EU there were import quotas for Japanese cars in much of the EU, well into the nineties. Only 13 000 Japanese vehicles were imported for Italy in 1991 and 85 000 for France. By setting up factories in the EU, the Japanese producers could bypass these quotas. They set up in Britain with the benefit of the EU and also government regional aid.
They have a lot of infrastructure and other items here now so would not close down, but the origins of the Japanese/UK automotive industry is for EU market access.
Our whole economy was in a poor way in the 1970s yes, though for most of the 1970s we were a member of the EEC and remained in a poor way. Do you think the winter of 1978 was a great moment in our economic history thanks to our EEC membership?
Cyclefree's article has prompted one other thought....
I potentially would have been willing to give the out campaign a better hearing, but the fact that the Out campaign is essentially an umbrella organisation of fringe, extremist politicians, Tory obsessives, and odd throwbacks to people like Nigel Lawson.........It has recruited only one or two mainstream figures....Dyson, or Guthrie yesterday.
The Out campaign needed to recruit more acceptable figures, across the board...more politicians from the Labour party, more business and economic figures so people like me would have felt some degree of confidence that Leave would be OK for the country. Every time mainstream figures came out to support Remain, we just had the usual attack on elites and the establishment thrown back.
The fact that the Leave campaign hasn't built up a more moderate, wide ranging and publicly acceptable coalition speaks volumes about the merits of the case they are putting forward.
In essence, his mother thought the reaction to Jo Cox's murder was mawkish and overwrought.
I think that's unfair, but he was reporting an opinion, not endorsing it.
Interestingly, my mother was shocked by the news. But she said it surely had nothing to do with the referendum and that anyone trying to connect it would look awful.
Cyclefree's article has prompted one other thought....
I potentially would have been willing to give the out campaign a better hearing, but the fact that the Out campaign is essentially an umbrella organisation of fringe, extremist politicians, Tory obsessives, and odd throwbacks to people like Nigel Lawson.........It has recruited only one or two mainstream figures....Dyson, or Guthrie yesterday.
The Out campaign needed to recruit more acceptable figures, across the board...more politicians from the Labour party, more business and economic figures so people like me would have felt some degree of confidence that Leave would be OK for the country. Every time mainstream figures came out to support Remain, we just had the usual attack on elites and the establishment thrown back.
The fact that the Leave campaign hasn't built up a more moderate, wide ranging and publicly acceptable coalition speaks volumes about the merits of the case they are putting forward.
It's got plenty of mainstream people, you just disregard them all.
Cyclefree's article has prompted one other thought....
I potentially would have been willing to give the out campaign a better hearing, but the fact that the Out campaign is essentially an umbrella organisation of fringe, extremist politicians, Tory obsessives, and odd throwbacks to people like Nigel Lawson.........It has recruited only one or two mainstream figures....Dyson, or Guthrie yesterday.
The Out campaign needed to recruit more acceptable figures, across the board...more politicians from the Labour party, more business and economic figures so people like me would have felt some degree of confidence that Leave would be OK for the country. Every time mainstream figures came out to support Remain, we just had the usual attack on elites and the establishment thrown back.
The fact that the Leave campaign hasn't built up a more moderate, wide ranging and publicly acceptable coalition speaks volumes about the merits of the case they are putting forward.
But, you've already said you couldn't be persuaded by anyone arguing on behalf of Leave. It would be like trying to persuade me to vote Labour.
Cyclefree's article has prompted one other thought....
I potentially would have been willing to give the out campaign a better hearing, but the fact that the Out campaign is essentially an umbrella organisation of fringe, extremist politicians, Tory obsessives, and odd throwbacks to people like Nigel Lawson.........It has recruited only one or two mainstream figures....Dyson, or Guthrie yesterday.
The Out campaign needed to recruit more acceptable figures, across the board...more politicians from the Labour party, more business and economic figures so people like me would have felt some degree of confidence that Leave would be OK for the country. Every time mainstream figures came out to support Remain, we just had the usual attack on elites and the establishment thrown back.
The fact that the Leave campaign hasn't built up a more moderate, wide ranging and publicly acceptable coalition speaks volumes about the merits of the case they are putting forward.
So a few more Labour MPs on board would avoid recession, world war 3 etc, and make Leave OK for the country?
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations
My brother works for Nissan.
Nissan will stay - they have put too much money into a plant which has become an example to the entire global industry about efficiency.
As for Hitachi mentioned earlier, they will go regardless of the vote. Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant screwing together high value imported components. Every train "built" there will add to the deficit side of balance of payments. The suggestion from the company that it's their European production facility is absurd - our narrow loading gauge means that having imported the body shell the electronics traction package and bogies from Japan and the diesel engine and ancillaries from Germany, they then have ship the finished vehicle by road back to the Port of Tyne to ship it to the continent. Regardless of our status in the EU it's an absolute nonstarter which demonstrates that politicians haven't a clue when they trumpet the factory.
Its here to take the vast subsidies on offer, build these IEP trains at the absurd high price "negotiated" by the DfT then they'll be off.
Actually they are looking to start fabricating the bodyshells here too and are also moving into the signalling and telecommunications market in a big way. Undoubtably they are here to stay. There was a technical reason that they couldn't do it for these but I can't remember what .
In any case, it is a misnomer that the bodyshells are that important. There is no money in building bodyshells, the money is in the design, project management fitting out and all the electronic bells and whilstles that all trains have these days.
The technical reason being that Hitachi are (understandably) keeping their proprietary welding technology at home.
You miss my point - the only market that Aycliffe can serve is the UK. They already have won contracts to refresh most Intercity trains, and for electric units for Scotland. Other big contracts have gone to Bombardier or Siemens or CAF. Entertainingly our dips hit Tory MP put out a leaflet hailing new trains for Northern (all built in Spain) and Transpennine Express (mostly built in Spain the rest Italy) as a triumph for the Northern Powerhouse industrial strategy!
Once we run out of train contracts for the UK Aycliffe will close. That's not that many years away either.
Why, with pax numbers continuing to grow will we run out of such contracts?
The Erasmus scheme is a good one, but (like all such EU projects) it spends way more on administration than it should.
By that, I mean there are plenty of exchange schemes independent of the EU. They have a budget, and the fraction of the budget spent on running these scheme is small. This is how it should be -- the money should be spent on the students and the exchange.
All EU programmes end up spending a much larger fraction of the budget on the administration & running of the scheme than other national or supranational schemes.
As with so many things about the EU, the idea is excellent, and the execution is not exactly bad, but really cumbersome and wasteful.
I think both Nissan and Hitachi have put out public statements that the vote will not affect their UK operations
My brother works for Nissan. He's voting Remain because the plant has to put in bids to produce new models, competing with other plants. If we choose Leave, there will be a period in which there will be uncertainty over taxes and tariffs making the Sunderland bids much much weaker.
Nissan will stay - they have put too much money into a plant which has become an example to the entire global industry about efficiency.
As for Hitachi mentioned earlier, they will go regardless of the vote. Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant screwing together high value imported components. Every train "built" there will add to the deficit side of balance of payments. The suggestion from the company that it's their European production facility is absurd - our narrow loading gauge means that having imported the body shell the electronics traction package and bogies from Japan and the diesel engine and ancillaries from Germany, they then have ship the finished vehicle by road back to the Port of Tyne to ship it to the continent. Regardless of our status in the EU it's an absolute nonstarter which demonstrates that politicians haven't a clue when they trumpet the factory.
Its here to take the vast subsidies on offer, build these IEP trains at the absurd high price "negotiated" by the DfT then they'll be off.
They will stay but they may produce less, meaning less work and less jobs
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
I'd like to build the world a home And furnish it with love Grow apple trees and honey bees And snow white turtle doves
Best wishes to @JackW for a speedyish recovery and to @Cyclefree's glorious holiday
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
EiT's point is that the Leave campaign is not talking about these people. It is talking about Turks and other moslems.
Let us assume this referendum settles the matter of our membership for forty years like the last one did? How many member nations where there forty years ago versus now?
How many member nations do you think there will be in forty years time? Could it include Turkey?
Only if the UK government, elected by the British people, permits it. I'd say it's a very long way off and is not remotely imminent.
In essence, his mother thought the reaction to Jo Cox's murder was mawkish and overwrought.
I think that's unfair, but he was reporting an opinion, not endorsing it.
Interestingly, my mother was shocked by the news. But she said it surely had nothing to do with the referendum and that anyone trying to connect it would look awful.
Quite possibly, a passionate election/referendum campaign will persuade a mentally disturbed individual to go off the deep end. But, that's not the fault of the campaigners.
In essence, his mother thought the reaction to Jo Cox's murder was mawkish and overwrought.
I think that's unfair, but he was reporting an opinion, not endorsing it.
It seemed like he was using his mother as a glove puppet. There aren't many who would write that their mother was repulsed by a young MP who was murdered going about her lawful business because she used to work for a charity.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Sorry, but that is just dewy eyed idealistic sentimental claptrap.
Vapid Bilge is an understatement
I'd rather Roger's sentimentalism than the likes of yourself, Plato, GeoffM, MikeM and your ilk who cheered on the terrible, and deeply distressing post of Lowlander yesterday.
You do realise you misunderstood Lowlander's Mum's position?
The manner of someone's death, no matter how tragic, does not obviate what they did in life
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Sorry, but that is just dewy eyed idealistic sentimental claptrap.
Vapid Bilge is an understatement
I'd rather Roger's sentimentalism than the likes of yourself, Plato, GeoffM, MikeM and your ilk who cheered on the terrible, and deeply distressing post of Lowlander yesterday.
You do realise you misunderstood Lowlander's Mum's position?
The manner of someone's death, no matter how tragic, does not obviate what they did in life
In essence, his mother thought the reaction to Jo Cox's murder was mawkish and overwrought.
I think that's unfair, but he was reporting an opinion, not endorsing it.
It seemed like he was using his mother as a glove puppet. There aren't many who would write that their mother was repulsed by a young MP who was murdered going about her lawful business-because she used to work for a charity-just the day before.
Unless they were speaking to their psychiatrist.
My recollection of the post was that she was repulsed by the dianification of someone she did not regard as worthy of such dianification, and the reasons given were the reasons why the dianification was unjustified,
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Sorry, but that is just dewy eyed idealistic sentimental claptrap.
Vapid Bilge is an understatement
I'd rather Roger's sentimentalism than the likes of yourself, Plato, GeoffM, MikeM and your ilk who cheered on the terrible, and deeply distressing post of Lowlander yesterday.
You do realise you misunderstood Lowlander's Mum's position?
The manner of someone's death, no matter how tragic, does not obviate what they did in life
She worked for a charity. Get a grip Charles!
Which some of the population regards as a noble calling and others regard as a well paid cushy number only available to those with the right connections, without the rigours that most people face at work, especially when the charity spends most of the money on running costs
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.
Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?
The concern about immigration is not about immigration per se, but two consequences: alienation/rapid change (the creation of new micro-communities within the country rather than integration) and economic competition for low skilled jobs.
If the balance of of immigration were to shift to high skilled techies - for example - who (I assume) would be more likely to integrate then, regardless of the colour of their skill, the concern about immigration for most would subside.
I think EiT is much closer to what most politicians will actually do - they think he's right, and will legislate accordingly. Your preferred solution won't happen is we go for Brexit - the conclusion that will be drawn is that imigration must be reined back from all sides.
My point is really that the average voter doesn't care whether immigration is 10s of thousands or 100s of thousands. They care about the impact on their lives, not the stats. If politicians don't understand that it's outcomes that matter it's not my fault...
In essence, his mother thought the reaction to Jo Cox's murder was mawkish and overwrought.
I think that's unfair, but he was reporting an opinion, not endorsing it.
No Sean... actually.. Lowlander was reporting that his mother felt contempt for Jo Cox (obviously, so did Mair)...
Lot's have people have commented on the reaction, and whether they think it is appropriate or not. That is fine. But to post that someone feels contempt for Jo Cox, in the aftermath of her brutal murder was really not quite right.
Britain Elects The Leave campaign represents... The establishment: 19% Ordinary people: 26% Both equally: 22% (via YouGov / 16 - 17 Jun)
The Leave campaign understands the concerns of ordinary people... Well: 46% Badly: 35% (via YouGov / 16 - 17 Jun)
Didn't EICIPM have a big lead on "understands our concerns"? Not really predictive question in my view, although I think voters are smart enough to know the difference between a GE and a referendum and so tge factors may play out differently
He's trying to make it Jo Cox Vs Nigel Farage. May work. May backfire.
Edited extra bit: hmm. I may have misread it. Not sure. These are the relevant excerpts:
"Mr Cameron said the EU vote was the "ultimate democracy" and represented what Labour MP Jo Cox, who was killed on Thursday in her West Yorkshire constituency, had stood for.
Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Cameron, who is campaigning for Remain, said Mrs Cox had "embodied Britain at her best - a country that is decent and compassionate"."
and
""Are we going to choose Nigel Farage's vision - one which takes Britain backwards; divides rather than unites; and questions the motives of anyone who takes a different view," Mr Cameron wrote."
Nakedly political and very odious.
Morning Malc.
Indeed.
I just want this referendum over and done with now so we can set about destroying the "victorious" Cameron and Osborne.
The positive argument for the EU is that a glass half full is better than no glass at all. That it is better to have a forum where the fractious countries of Europe can hammer out their differences - diplomatic, economic or legal - than not have one. That it's better to promote democracy and liberal values than not promote them. That the ad hoc good in parts need not be the enemy of the best that no-one wants.
The positive argument for leaving is that we get to be masters of our own ship. Which is simpler.
And those are the only arguments that really count in my view. Peace in our time, greater wealth and control over immigration eeithe follow on from those arguments or are spurious.
In essence, his mother thought the reaction to Jo Cox's murder was mawkish and overwrought.
I think that's unfair, but he was reporting an opinion, not endorsing it.
No Sean... actually.. Lowlander was reporting that his mother felt contempt for Jo Cox (obviously, so did Mair)...
Lot's have people have commented on the reaction, and whether they think it is appropriate or not. That is fine. But to post that someone feels contempt for Jo Cox, in the aftermath of her brutal murder was really not quite right.
To be fair he did label his original post as "not a Safe Space" warning people that they might be offended. Of course he should not expect a "Safe Space" in return.
It's not a matter of being a few quid better off. It's a matter of avoiding long-lasting economic damage that will cause significant harm to millions of people. It is a negative, but for me and many others it is a very powerful one.
The fact is that we are so integrated into the EU that the case for withdrawal needs to be powerful and inarguable. The benefits need to be concrete and timetabled to make the downsides worth it. But Leave have provided nothing but speculation, conjecture and plainly false promises.
Is it worth doing significant harm to ourselves to achieve insignificant reductions in immigration? I cannot see it. That's why I'm Remain.
Leave will win though.
The serious and long lasting damage will happen if we remain. Immigration will continue at an unsustainable rate. Most of that immigration will be low skilled and minimum wage, hard working and ambitious but doing nothing for our productivity. In the meantime training of our indigenous population will continue to be regarded as a waste of money. Our population and GDP will continue to rise but our GDP per head will remain static at best.
Whilst in we risk becoming ever more integrated into a declining and uncompetitive market losing further ground to the rest of the world while we faff about with ever more absurd "rights" making our business less viable. We will continue to find that the current terms of trade provide us with a huge and growing structural trading deficit which gradually impoverishes our country.
We risk facing domination by an integrated Euro zone using QMV to drive through their agenda, not ours. Once the referendum is out of the way the pace of this will pick up again.
We will find it more difficult to negotiate opt outs from the various things that we don't like and there will be plenty of them. We are on a bus where we cannot pick the terminus but we continue to move into an ever more depressing neighbourhood.
And we will see all of this because remain will win. Being right will give me no satisfaction at all.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Sorry, but that is just dewy eyed idealistic sentimental claptrap.
Vapid Bilge is an understatement
I'd rather Roger's sentimentalism than the likes of yourself, Plato, GeoffM, MikeM and your ilk who cheered on the terrible, and deeply distressing post of Lowlander yesterday.
You do realise you misunderstood Lowlander's Mum's position?
The manner of someone's death, no matter how tragic, does not obviate what they did in life
She worked for a charity. Get a grip Charles!
Oxfam is an NGO - it has a very different characteristic to a charity (regardless of the legal form).
MERLIN (which we helped in the early days) was partially set up due to the failings of Oxfam (among others).
Don't forget that my teams reviews and meets with 600+ charities a year, so we have some fairly developed ideas on the sector
Excellent Cyclefree. I've said this for months. The British want a very different sort of relationship with Europe:
"So a prediction: some Leavers may vote Leave not because they necessarily want to leave the EU but because they want any Remain victory to be as small as possible. They want to make it clear that the EU is – as far as Britain is concerned – still on probation. Or because they want a better settlement. They expect Remain to win. If Leave looks like winning it is possible that some Leavers may switch back to Remain. The casting vote may be different to the one where it does not matter. I expect a small Remain win but would not be at all surprised by a Leave one."
Either:
(a) a 51/49 result to Remain (although it could be bigger, the message will be the same) to put our EU membership "on probation", and give the EU 'one last chance' (in hope of more reform) - this is more likely as people get jittery (b) a 51/49 result to Leave that forces the EU and UK to keep talking about significant reform of their relationship (aka previous rejections of EU treaties by other EU nations have led to concessions) and either allows a recasting of our membership in 2017/2018 when the new eurozone treaties come up, or allow a slow managed exit into the EEA-EFTA.
I think that difference in 1-2% of votes is crucial.
I met my Italian wife through Erasmus- an EU sponsored University exchange scheme. She is an exceptional women and has been a highly regarded and conscientious employee for UK companies ever since, paying taxes of course. She has only ever taken the odd day off.
In return whilst living in Oxfordshire in 2005, she had to drive past banner after banner of racist UKIP slogans "No to EU immigration" as she drove home. And now this referendum which has upset her so much she cannot even talk about it.
How is the slogan "No to EU immigration" supposed to be "racist" ?
The slogan doesn't mention any race. It just mentions a geographic region.
The majority populations of all EU countries are the same race as the majority population of the UK. So, there isn't even any implicit racism from mentioning the EU as the source of excessive immigration.
A desire for stringent border controls & supportable levels of immigration doesn't make an opinion "racist".
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.
Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?
The concern about immigration is not about immigration per se, but two consequences: alienation/rapid change (the creation of new micro-communities within the country rather than integration) and economic competition for low skilled jobs.
If the balance of of immigration were to shift to high skilled techies - for example - who (I assume) would be more likely to integrate then, regardless of the colour of their skill, the concern about immigration for most would subside.
I think EiT is much closer to what most politicians will actually do - they think he's right, and will legislate accordingly. Your preferred solution won't happen is we go for Brexit - the conclusion that will be drawn is that imigration must be reined back from all sides.
My point is really that the average voter doesn't care whether immigration is 10s of thousands or 100s of thousands. They care about the impact on their lives, not the stats. If politicians don't understand that it's outcomes that matter it's not my fault...
Certainly the numbers would be better tolerated or even welcomed, if there was adequate infrastructural investment in housing and schools etc.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Sorry, but that is just dewy eyed idealistic sentimental claptrap.
Vapid Bilge is an understatement
I'd rather Roger's sentimentalism than the likes of yourself, Plato, GeoffM, MikeM and your ilk who cheered on the terrible, and deeply distressing post of Lowlander yesterday.
You do realise you misunderstood Lowlander's Mum's position?
The manner of someone's death, no matter how tragic, does not obviate what they did in life
She worked for a charity. Get a grip Charles!
Oxfam is an NGO - it has a very different characteristic to a charity (regardless of the legal form).
Indeed.
Technically speaking, the Head Master of Eton "works for a charity".
"future migrants from Turkey instead of the actual people who everybody agrees can move to Britain because it's in the EU."
If you're in Tokyo, your ignorance is excusable. In Lincolnshire, the immigrants are Polish, Lithuanian, white and Christian and now make up 15 - 20% of the population from a standing start. Remember the reassurance that very few would come?
Is this racism or not? Or is it a matter of class sizes etc?
Edit: Oh, and they're good Catholic lads and lassies. They're also hard-working but I don't live in Boston anymore, so perhaps I shouldn't judge.
The claim that I'm disputing is that if these white, Christian Polish and Lithuanian immigrants weren't allowed in, the UK would allow lots more brown people to enter the country instead. My reading of British politics is that this suggestion is incorrect, as exemplified by the fact that Leave campaigning on fear of hypothetical brown people, rather than the actually existing white people who you mention.
Are you claiming that it's true? Do you think Brexit would result in British voters agreeing to let in lots more brown people?
The concern about immigration is not about immigration per se, but two consequences: alienation/rapid change (the creation of new micro-communities within the country rather than integration) and economic competition for low skilled jobs.
If the balance of of immigration were to shift to high skilled techies - for example - who (I assume) would be more likely to integrate then, regardless of the colour of their skill, the concern about immigration for most would subside.
I think EiT is much closer to what most politicians will actually do - they think he's right, and will legislate accordingly. Your preferred solution won't happen is we go for Brexit - the conclusion that will be drawn is that imigration must be reined back from all sides.
My point is really that the average voter doesn't care whether immigration is 10s of thousands or 100s of thousands. They care about the impact on their lives, not the stats. If politicians don't understand that it's outcomes that matter it's not my fault...
Certainly the numbers would be better tolerated or even welcomed, if there was adequate infrastructural investment in housing and schools etc.
It would certainly reduce the competition for resources (which is at the heart of the issues)
Firstly many thanks for all the kind messages over the past weeks that have been passed onto me. I'm home now but a tad frail but uncommonly pleased to be in a position to be frail and not more deceased than one of Roger's political forecasts.
I'll be lurking for a few months (PB recuperative therapy I'm telling Mrs JackW and the quacks) so play nicely or the vacant Auchentennach dungeons will become available for miscreants and of course LibDems of any shade ....
Cheers for now.
Delighted to hear you on the mend, has quite brightened up my morning!
Thanks cyclefree. Even if we do vote remain, I suspect the EU will view us with suspicion, and our influence will be diminished somewhat (can you imagine a UK EU president?)
The ending of our EU membership is now a matter of when, not if, IMHO.
But if we do vote Remain, I expect we're in for a rather unpleasant few years of membership.
This place is going to be hilarious on friday regardless of the result. The worst traits of human nature will be on display as insults fly and recriminations begin. It'll be an anonymous online version of the Conservative Party.
Could well be. It may not immediately be so after the results have been announced, as the particularly confident remainers and leavers keep their heads down after being so wrong, but given many aren't so confident and are very passionate, yes, it will be vicious. Thankfully I'm at a count on the night then have work in the morning so there's that.
I met my Italian wife through Erasmus- an EU sponsored University exchange scheme. She is an exceptional women and has been a highly regarded and conscientious employee for UK companies ever since, paying taxes of course. She has only ever taken the odd day off.
In return whilst living in Oxfordshire in 2005, she had to drive past banner after banner of racist UKIP slogans "No to EU immigration" as she drove home. And now this referendum which has upset her so much she cannot even talk about it.
How is the slogan "No to EU immigration" supposed to be "racist" ?
The slogan doesn't mention any race. It just mentions a geographic region.
The majority populations of all EU countries are the same race as the majority population of the UK. So, there isn't even any implicit racism from mentioning the EU as the source of excessive immigration.
A desire for stringent border controls & supportable levels of immigration doesn't make an opinion "racist".
For Tyson, calling various people and opinions racist is a sort of religion. In any argument he follows, Abbott, a well known Labour MP and never goes about without his racist card.
In essence, his mother thought the reaction to Jo Cox's murder was mawkish and overwrought.
I think that's unfair, but he was reporting an opinion, not endorsing it.
No Sean... actually.. Lowlander was reporting that his mother felt contempt for Jo Cox (obviously, so did Mair)...
Lot's have people have commented on the reaction, and whether they think it is appropriate or not. That is fine. But to post that someone feels contempt for Jo Cox, in the aftermath of her brutal murder was really not quite right.
To be fair he did label his original post as "not a Safe Space" warning people that they might be offended. Of course he should not expect a "Safe Space" in return.
Fox- you asked me last night about stick or twist....I've checked Betfair....I've stuck so far, but it is still drifting- out to 3.5. I am though hedging to be honest too- I need to buy a wedge of Euros, so what I'll lose on betfair, I'll get something back with the currency transaction.
I'll only cash out Betfair when I am convinced about the result.
The best arguments for Remain that I've seen were made by a young Canadian girl who had been to two European Universities....
........who talked about a unique community of twenty eight nations all with their own culture and language where young people could move freely with shared values of democracy and human rights forming a community unique in the world.
Sorry, but that is just dewy eyed idealistic sentimental claptrap.
Vapid Bilge is an understatement
I'd rather Roger's sentimentalism than the likes of yourself, Plato, GeoffM, MikeM and your ilk who cheered on the terrible, and deeply distressing post of Lowlander yesterday.
You do realise you misunderstood Lowlander's Mum's position?
The manner of someone's death, no matter how tragic, does not obviate what they did in life
She worked for a charity. Get a grip Charles!
Oxfam is an NGO - it has a very different characteristic to a charity (regardless of the legal form).
Indeed.
Technically speaking, the Head Master of Eton "works for a charity".
Techinally a Foundation - he's employed by the Henry VI Foundation not the school - but you point is correct.
It's not a matter of being a few quid better off. It's a matter of avoiding long-lasting economic damage that will cause significant harm to millions of people. It is a negative, but for me and many others it is a very powerful one.
The fact is that we are so integrated into the EU that the case for withdrawal needs to be powerful and inarguable. The benefits need to be concrete and timetabled to make the downsides worth it. But Leave have provided nothing but speculation, conjecture and plainly false promises.
Is it worth doing significant harm to ourselves to achieve insignificant reductions in immigration? I cannot see it. That's why I'm Remain.
Leave will win though.
The serious and long lasting damage will happen if we remain. Immigration will continue at an unsustainable rate. Most of that immigration will be low skilled and minimum wage, hard working and ambitious but doing nothing for our productivity. In the meantime training of our indigenous population will continue to be regarded as a waste of money. Our population and GDP will continue to rise but our GDP per head will remain static at best.
Whilst in we risk becoming ever more integrated into a declining and uncompetitive market losing further ground to the rest of the world while we faff about with ever more absurd "rights" making our business less viable. We will continue to find that the current terms of trade provide us with a huge and growing structural trading deficit which gradually impoverishes our country.
We risk facing domination by an integrated Euro zone using QMV to drive through their agenda, not ours. Once the referendum is out of the way the pace of this will pick up again.
We will find it more difficult to negotiate opt outs from the various things that we don't like and there will be plenty of them. We are on a bus where we cannot pick the terminus but we continue to move into an ever more depressing neighbourhood.
And we will see all of this because remain will win. Being right will give me no satisfaction at all.
Firstly many thanks for all the kind messages over the past weeks that have been passed onto me. I'm home now but a tad frail but uncommonly pleased to be in a position to be frail and not more deceased than one of Roger's political forecasts.
I'll be lurking for a few months (PB recuperative therapy I'm telling Mrs JackW and the quacks) so play nicely or the vacant Auchentennach dungeons will become available for miscreants and of course LibDems of any shade ....
Cheers for now.
Morning Jack,
Nice to hear you are on the mend... We've missed certainly missed being able to view your ARSE these past weeks so hopefully you'll have it all ready to offer up more outpourings soon!
Very interesting post, Cycle free. Your three challenges are particularly "challenging"
I would add a fourth one, which is how do we bring in those that haven't benefited from globalisation, may be have lost from it? It's a challenge if we remain in the EU. A lot of people don't think they have benefited from it. It's possibly an even bigger challenge if we leave. Global competition won't go away, but we will have cut ourselves off a bit more and we will have lost an institution that could provide some stability.
Comments
Mr. G, I'd dispute that at least to some extent. Power flows from the UK to the EU, but Holyrood has been gaining power (ie it's being devolved rather than centralised). Also, both the previous PM and previous Chancellor were Scottish.
That said, whilst still in favour of the UK, I'm a bit more relaxed about the prospect of Scotland separating were it to happen.
I appreciate you're not personally.
We are quite happy to have urbane middle class people from India or Romania or Poland Here.
Its Oiks from Poland and Romania that are not wanted.....however our ruling class seems to think that they are more desirable than Oiks from England and Wales, which is not going down well with our own Oiks who have woken up to this.
Thankfully the leaders of the leave campaign (and the MPs that represent Leave in Parliament) have nothing to do with such odiousness so it won't be policy or happen.
How many non-EU migrants over the 177 000 net last year would you be happy with? Enough to take the total to 330 000?
The argument of points-based migration (like we have for 93% of the world including migrants from Australia where I grew up) is one of quality not quantity.
As for Hitachi mentioned earlier, they will go regardless of the vote. Newton Aycliffe is an assembly plant screwing together high value imported components. Every train "built" there will add to the deficit side of balance of payments. The suggestion from the company that it's their European production facility is absurd - our narrow loading gauge means that having imported the body shell the electronics traction package and bogies from Japan and the diesel engine and ancillaries from Germany, they then have ship the finished vehicle by road back to the Port of Tyne to ship it to the continent. Regardless of our status in the EU it's an absolute nonstarter which demonstrates that politicians haven't a clue when they trumpet the factory.
Its here to take the vast subsidies on offer, build these IEP trains at the absurd high price "negotiated" by the DfT then they'll be off.
Have a good holiday in Italy, Cyclefree, but I hope you voted before you go if you are planning more than a few days stay.
As I sent in my postal vote for Leave over a week ago, I'm going to try and be as relaxed as possible until Der Tag.
2 things have vexed me this weekend. My good old printer finally packed up on Friday after 6 years of worthy toil. It's replacement - bought the same day - is faulty and the paper feed doesn't work, so that has to be sent back. Grrrrrrrrrrr!
To expand on my response to your post
I would far rather Rogers sentimentalism, but its not the real world just an idealistic utopia. And without exception all attempts to set up idealistic utopias have ended in disaster mass death and misery.
Lowlander is a remainer who reported an anecdotal real like experience and you monstered him for it because you didn't like the message.
Undoubtably for liberals with a small "l", this referendum has been a existential terrible shock to them about how many people in this country do not share their ideals.
If everyone was urbane, liberal and gentle, then liberal ideals would be perfect, however, sadly, only a tiny minority are. The rest are to a lesser or greater extent self interested animals who can behave quite savagely and irrationally when crossed. Liberals seem to think that if you treat such people nicely they will be nice back to you. Sadly that notiion is as absurd as trying it with a crocodile.
This is the tragedy of liberalism. It is a noble ideal but one that starts from a wholly mistaken understanding of what human beings are.
Christianity, Judism and Islam (which are all basically offshoots of each other) for all their flaws, start from the premise that human beings are fallen creatures, with a resultant prediliction or temptation to do evil and only constant fighting against these temptations within can bring about any notion of peace and tranquility, and even in the most virtuous the temptations are there and will out if not resisted. The philosopy of these religions understands the human condition far more which is why they have endured so long and will endure long after this civilization bites the dust like all civilizations do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QereR0CViMY
She was so positive -my two lines are a very short precis- and it was beautiful to listen to. It brought out the inner hippy in me. By contrast the Canadian Leaver was a mean spirited small minded pessimist 'What's mine is mine'. Rather like the ones here.
Naplolitans are particularly beautiful looking, even by the very high standards set by Italians.
In any case, it is a misnomer that the bodyshells are that important. There is no money in building bodyshells, the money is in the design, project management fitting out and all the electronic bells and whilstles that all trains have these days.
The fact is that we are so integrated into the EU that the case for withdrawal needs to be powerful and inarguable. The benefits need to be concrete and timetabled to make the downsides worth it. But Leave have provided nothing but speculation, conjecture and plainly false promises.
Is it worth doing significant harm to ourselves to achieve insignificant reductions in immigration? I cannot see it. That's why I'm Remain.
Leave will win though.
And furnish it with love
Grow apple trees and honey bees
And snow white turtle doves
The Remain campaign represents...
The establishment: 41%
Ordinary people: 10%
Both equally: 21%
(via YouGov / 16 - 17 Jun)
The Remain campaign understands the concerns of ordinary people...
Well: 30%
Badly: 51%
(via YouGov / 16 - 17 Jun)
They have a lot of infrastructure and other items here now so would not close down, but the origins of the Japanese/UK automotive industry is for EU market access.
If I thought the EU could be reformed, I'd be very doubtful of how to vote. But I'm not, which has made this rather an easy decision for me.
Edited extra bit: to clarify, I haven't voted yet, and a black swan *might* change my mind but nothing has happened which has altered my fundamental view of the EU.
I think the imported management may be in for a shock though. Newton aycliffe is hardly the most exciting place. Bishop Auckland is rapidly improving however..
How many member nations do you think there will be in forty years time? Could it include Turkey?
The Leave campaign represents...
The establishment: 19%
Ordinary people: 26%
Both equally: 22%
(via YouGov / 16 - 17 Jun)
The Leave campaign understands the concerns of ordinary people...
Well: 46%
Badly: 35%
(via YouGov / 16 - 17 Jun)
You miss my point - the only market that Aycliffe can serve is the UK. They already have won contracts to refresh most Intercity trains, and for electric units for Scotland. Other big contracts have gone to Bombardier or Siemens or CAF. Entertainingly our dips hit Tory MP put out a leaflet hailing new trains for Northern (all built in Spain) and Transpennine Express (mostly built in Spain the rest Italy) as a triumph for the Northern Powerhouse industrial strategy!
Once we run out of train contracts for the UK Aycliffe will close. That's not that many years away either.
George Osborne's suggestion about an emergency budget in the event of a Brexit is probably...
True: 28%
False: 47%
(via YouGov)
If Britain voted to leave, the government should...
Leave the EU quickly: 24%
Spend time negotiating an exit: 56%
(via YouGov)
The #EUref debate so far has been more about the future of...
Britain and the EU: 35%
The Conservative Party: 21%
[Both]: 20%
(via YouGov)
I think that's unfair, but he was reporting an opinion, not endorsing it.
I potentially would have been willing to give the out campaign a better hearing, but the fact that the Out campaign is essentially an umbrella organisation of fringe, extremist politicians, Tory obsessives, and odd throwbacks to people like Nigel Lawson.........It has recruited only one or two mainstream figures....Dyson, or Guthrie yesterday.
The Out campaign needed to recruit more acceptable figures, across the board...more politicians from the Labour party, more business and economic figures so people like me would have felt some degree of confidence that Leave would be OK for the country. Every time mainstream figures came out to support Remain, we just had the usual attack on elites and the establishment thrown back.
The fact that the Leave campaign hasn't built up a more moderate, wide ranging and publicly acceptable coalition speaks volumes about the merits of the case they are putting forward.
By that, I mean there are plenty of exchange schemes independent of the EU. They have a budget, and the fraction of the budget spent on running these scheme is small. This is how it should be -- the money should be spent on the students and the exchange.
All EU programmes end up spending a much larger fraction of the budget on the administration & running of the scheme than other national or supranational schemes.
As with so many things about the EU, the idea is excellent, and the execution is not exactly bad, but really cumbersome and wasteful.
(I was an Erasmus student once as well).
Best wishes to @JackW for a speedyish recovery and to @Cyclefree's glorious holiday
Unless they were speaking to their psychiatrist.
Lowlander's Mum's position?
The manner of someone's death, no matter how tragic, does not obviate what they did in life
The issue was the dianification.
Lot's have people have commented on the reaction, and whether they think it is appropriate or not. That is fine. But to post that someone feels contempt for Jo Cox, in the aftermath of her brutal murder was really not quite right.
Indeed.
I just want this referendum over and done with now so we can set about destroying the "victorious" Cameron and Osborne.
The positive argument for leaving is that we get to be masters of our own ship. Which is simpler.
And those are the only arguments that really count in my view. Peace in our time, greater wealth and control over immigration eeithe follow on from those arguments or are spurious.
Whilst in we risk becoming ever more integrated into a declining and uncompetitive market losing further ground to the rest of the world while we faff about with ever more absurd "rights" making our business less viable. We will continue to find that the current terms of trade provide us with a huge and growing structural trading deficit which gradually impoverishes our country.
We risk facing domination by an integrated Euro zone using QMV to drive through their agenda, not ours. Once the referendum is out of the way the pace of this will pick up again.
We will find it more difficult to negotiate opt outs from the various things that we don't like and there will be plenty of them. We are on a bus where we cannot pick the terminus but we continue to move into an ever more depressing neighbourhood.
And we will see all of this because remain will win. Being right will give me no satisfaction at all.
MERLIN (which we helped in the early days) was partially set up due to the failings of Oxfam (among others).
Don't forget that my teams reviews and meets with 600+ charities a year, so we have some fairly developed ideas on the sector
"So a prediction: some Leavers may vote Leave not because they necessarily want to leave the EU but because they want any Remain victory to be as small as possible. They want to make it clear that the EU is – as far as Britain is concerned – still on probation. Or because they want a better settlement. They expect Remain to win. If Leave looks like winning it is possible that some Leavers may switch back to Remain. The casting vote may be different to the one where it does not matter. I expect a small Remain win but would not be at all surprised by a Leave one."
Either:
(a) a 51/49 result to Remain (although it could be bigger, the message will be the same) to put our EU membership "on probation", and give the EU 'one last chance' (in hope of more reform) - this is more likely as people get jittery
(b) a 51/49 result to Leave that forces the EU and UK to keep talking about significant reform of their relationship (aka previous rejections of EU treaties by other EU nations have led to concessions) and either allows a recasting of our membership in 2017/2018 when the new eurozone treaties come up, or allow a slow managed exit into the EEA-EFTA.
I think that difference in 1-2% of votes is crucial.
The slogan doesn't mention any race. It just mentions a geographic region.
The majority populations of all EU countries are the same race as the majority population of the UK. So, there isn't even any implicit racism from mentioning the EU as the source of excessive immigration.
A desire for stringent border controls & supportable levels of immigration doesn't make an opinion "racist".
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/doctors-ponder-ending-ban-on-assisted-dying-29mtlpfxr
Good terminal care is what is needed, not euthanasia.
Technically speaking, the Head Master of Eton "works for a charity".
Best wishes for continued recovery
But if we do vote Remain, I expect we're in for a rather unpleasant few years of membership.
Fox- you asked me last night about stick or twist....I've checked Betfair....I've stuck so far, but it is still drifting- out to 3.5. I am though hedging to be honest too- I need to buy a wedge of Euros, so what I'll lose on betfair, I'll get something back with the currency transaction.
I'll only cash out Betfair when I am convinced about the result.
Corbyn arguing for unlimited immigration.
Only one winner.
In approval?
What was it?
Nice to hear you are on the mend... We've missed certainly missed being able to view your ARSE these past weeks so hopefully you'll have it all ready to offer up more outpourings soon!
I would add a fourth one, which is how do we bring in those that haven't benefited from globalisation, may be have lost from it? It's a challenge if we remain in the EU. A lot of people don't think they have benefited from it. It's possibly an even bigger challenge if we leave. Global competition won't go away, but we will have cut ourselves off a bit more and we will have lost an institution that could provide some stability.