Brexit referendum result aftermath

[Turns to Stone]

I'd think exactly that, however if the trade and tourism that goes with properly resourced border controls is going to benefit the country then I'd prefer a more mature and professional response from those paid to do maturity and professionalism...........

Well so would I. But then perhaps they would have preferred it if when we were holding our referendum - we hadn't used rhetoric such as 'Taking back control', or 'Stopping the swarm'. That sort of language was coming from the mature and professional who's job it is to be 'diplomatic' and to ensure that relationships with other countries are positive ones. That's the job of our diplomats, our attache's, our government. That's why I continuously ask the question - what is the plan? Because we chose to burn our bridge. That was our choice. And we did it in a pretty aggressive manor. 'Take back control'. What does that imply? It implies that we don't have control. That the EU is in charge and we are being bullied. That we're being pushed around and we have no power. That's a statement that we made and we have to think about the impact that it will have abroad. Just as Sturgeon has to think about the impact of what she says about England and the UK will have during her independence referendum and what might follow.

You can talk all you like about trade and tourism - but that isn't what this is about. This is about a vote that was used to make certain people wealthy. It wasn't about 'the good of the people'. It was about 'power'. f*** the people. And now, all the leaders in the EU are going to use it the same way. Do you think that it's going to be a votewinner in France to be seen to be 'supporting Britain'. 'Helping with Brexit?' 'Spending money to fix the UK's problems?' That won't win any votes. French people don't care about tourism any more than we do. If we really cared about tourism - we wouldn't have left a trading bloc where the majorioty of our tourism comes from. This is about power and votes. It's about manipulating the people and not worrying about the impact that has on you globally as long as individuals get richer. The leave and remain campaign were both awful. There were attacks on both sides - belittling, humiliating comments that hit to the core of people. Sadly - some of those comments were aimed at the EU. And they are the people we are now expecting to show maturity and professionalism....

We made our bed. We have to lie in it. My only question now is what the government who gave us this vote are doing to repair the relationships that this vote has damaged.

[Greatest Cockney Rip Off]

So you think you have horrible politicians that are largely incapable that are somehow going to become capable of these plenty of ideas (like Singapore on Thames, you must be loving that one as a “neo liberal” hater) that are not yet specified. Quality stuff.

It wasn't the politicians so much as a system that relied on cheap labour, kept wages down, shunned apprenticeships and investment in workforces and forced working people to compete over wages. No government over the last two decades, starting with New Labour and continued by Cameron/Osborne were ever going to rock the boat on that one and were happy to just coast along on these shirt tails.

I'm sorry if that doesn't bother you at all but it bothers me.

[chelmsfordhammer91]

It might be valid but it doesn’t mean they get to ignore any criticisms of their decisions or arguments as to why it was a bad one.

Why do you think the hit is temporary? There is nothing to suggest that is the case. What has been done is meant to be permanent.

We have an ageing population. Unless Brexit is going to start producing children, and it isn’t, then you need to source people from somewhere, and you can’t magic them out of thin air. So unless the blue rinse brigade that played a big part in us getting here are going to get behind having old people wipe the arses of even older people, we have a serious long-term issue.

How could it be in the future? Because for it to be good it’ll take a coherent long term plan, and that simply does not exist, so milk and honey is simply a figment of people’s imaginations that are unable to live with both reality and the consequences of their choices.

I'm not saying their views are right or wrong, or brexit is good or bad. It was the primary voting reason for a lot of people I know, but they get tarnished with the racist brush or being thick by not understanding or taking into account the rest of the issues at hand.

The ageing population issue doesn't really figure to those who have seen their wages not just fail to increase over time, but fall considerably. However, I do get that if firms start having to pay proper market rates rather than suppressed wages due to the flow of cheap labour, then it adds to other issues.

The problem with perpetuatuing the ageing population issue is that we aren't building the infrastructure quick enough. You've got around 300k more people a year to accommodate but there is already a huge shortage of housing, school places, hospital beds, social care etc.

[EvilC]

It wasn't the politicians so much as a system that relied on cheap labour, kept wages down, shunned apprenticeships and investment in workforces and forced working people to compete over wages. No government over the last two decades, starting with New Labour and continued by Cameron/Osborne were ever going to rock the boat on that one and were happy to just coast along on these shirt tails.

I'm sorry if that doesn't bother you at all but it bothers me.

The politicians have a hand in creating that system. A significant hand.

Lots of these things bother me. By pursuing destructive policies with no viable policies to follow that up, it’ll make it worse.

Words like “they need to up their game” aren’t going to do anything here. I don’t see some valid political alternative about to ride to the rescue here.

[EvilC]

I'm not saying their views are right or wrong, or brexit is good or bad. It was the primary voting reason for a lot of people I know, but they get tarnished with the racist brush or being thick by not understanding or taking into account the rest of the issues at hand.

The ageing population issue doesn't really figure to those who have seen their wages not just fail to increase over time, but fall considerably. However, I do get that if firms start having to pay proper market rates rather than suppressed wages due to the flow of cheap labour, then it adds to other issues.

The problem with perpetuatuing the ageing population issue is that we aren't building the infrastructure quick enough. You've got around 300k more people a year to accommodate but there is already a huge shortage of housing, school places, hospital beds, social care etc.

I haven’t tarnished them with anything, I’m happy for you to tell me what I have said is wrong.

Any chance of an answer to my questions?

All the infrastructure build isn’t going to be made easier with a lower tax base. It’ll be made harder. And not doing it isn’t going to make the problems of an ageing population easier. It’ll make it harder.

[chelmsfordhammer91]

I haven’t tarnished them with anything, I’m happy for you to tell me what I have said is wrong.

Any chance of an answer to my questions?

All the infrastructure build isn’t going to be made easier with a lower tax base. It’ll be made harder. And not doing it isn’t going to make the problems of an ageing population easier. It’ll make it harder.

I'm not saying you specifically, but the wider reaction (not everyone) to those who voted to leave.

So by temporary, i meant that paying people a fair wage will initially hit the economoy/consumer, but when a 'new normal' is established then the economy would build from there.

Regarding voting for the future, my own vote to leave wasn't really due to the situation the UK was in at the time, it was to what the situation was looking like in the future.

Mostly due to an unsustainable level of 'free movement' that IMO would see those from less economocally developed nations emigrate to more economically developed nations within the EU. Also, although there hasn't been a law yet set by the EU i fundamentally am against, I believe it is high risk to have any national sovereignty out of our hands or issues that can be vetoed by other governments.

Either way, I was more in the middle of the argument, not really entirely bothered either way.

I believe we have to give this time, with a proper government in place with some level of competence.

[woodgreenspur]

It wasn't the politicians so much as a system that relied on cheap labour, kept wages down, shunned apprenticeships and investment in workforces and forced working people to compete over wages. No government over the last two decades, starting with New Labour and continued by Cameron/Osborne were ever going to rock the boat on that one and were happy to just coast along on these shirt tails.

I'm sorry if that doesn't bother you at all but it bothers me.

Good example of that was the building of the Olympic stadium and village,if what i was told is true.
It was suggested that apprenticeships could have been part of the construction,stated in 2008,finished when it was all ready to open. Great opportunity and what an experience for the youngsters working on it. But it was deemed too expensive.

[DrVenk]

It's weird all this. Dover Port Authority took the government to court last year because they flagged this problem about future bottlenecks during checkpoint peak times.

From June 2021
Dover takes legal action against government over check points

"In its submission to the court, Dover said the UK Border Force had warned the new checks could reduce the “flow rate” through Dover’s passport lanes to “50 people per hour, per lane” — about a tenth of pre-Brexit flows of 500 per hour, per lane."


I do find it very weird that this is even a point of contention. There are bottlenecks because of extra transactional times plus lack of capacity on the UK side plus lack of capacity French side.

[Greatest Cockney Rip Off]

The politicians have a hand in creating that system. A significant hand.

Agreed and from the British MEPs in the European Parliament to the domestic government were given the tools to create that system by membership of the European Union. No British MEP from the three main parties ever made any objections to these particular laws and legislation (apart from the Brexit party).

Lots of these things bother me. By pursuing destructive policies with no viable policies to follow that up, it’ll make it worse.

As I said, there was no other way things were going to change and it was made clear that this would be a once in a lifetime vote. Yes you may think it's extreme, but it was the only way to break the cycle of regressive polices for the lowest paid in society and a race to the bottom in terms of wages and working conditions.

Words like “they need to up their game” aren’t going to do anything here. I don’t see some valid political alternative about to ride to the rescue here.

And more of the same wasn't doing anything for me at the time of the vote hence the reason for the way I voted. As I've stated before, the fact we have utter and complete idiots in charge, for me, is not a valid reason to not try and change an unfair system.

[delbert]

Well so would I. But then perhaps they would have preferred it if when we were holding our referendum - we hadn't used rhetoric such as 'Taking back control', or 'Stopping the swarm'. That sort of language was coming from the mature and professional who's job it is to be 'diplomatic' and to ensure that relationships with other countries are positive ones. That's the job of our diplomats, our attache's, our government. That's why I continuously ask the question - what is the plan? Because we chose to burn our bridge. That was our choice. And we did it in a pretty aggressive manor. 'Take back control'. What does that imply? It implies that we don't have control. That the EU is in charge and we are being bullied. That we're being pushed around and we have no power. That's a statement that we made and we have to think about the impact that it will have abroad. Just as Sturgeon has to think about the impact of what she says about England and the UK will have during her independence referendum and what might follow.

You can talk all you like about trade and tourism - but that isn't what this is about. This is about a vote that was used to make certain people wealthy. It wasn't about 'the good of the people'. It was about 'power'. **** the people. And now, all the leaders in the EU are going to use it the same way. Do you think that it's going to be a votewinner in France to be seen to be 'supporting Britain'. 'Helping with Brexit?' 'Spending money to fix the UK's problems?' That won't win any votes. French people don't care about tourism any more than we do. If we really cared about tourism - we wouldn't have left a trading bloc where the majorioty of our tourism comes from. This is about power and votes. It's about manipulating the people and not worrying about the impact that has on you globally as long as individuals get richer. The leave and remain campaign were both awful. There were attacks on both sides - belittling, humiliating comments that hit to the core of people. Sadly - some of those comments were aimed at the EU. And they are the people we are now expecting to show maturity and professionalism....

We made our bed. We have to lie in it. My only question now is what the government who gave us this vote are doing to repair the relationships that this vote has damaged.

For most people the "taking back control" was just that* and the implications were simply that as well, I think you're just interpreting it to mean more. I seem to recall the "stopping the swarm" thingy was in reference to the illegal immigration taking place across the Med.
The aggression came (and continues to come) from the EU as well, remember the way Cameron was bitch slapped when he went cap in hand to the EU prior to the referendum?
Despite some whataboutery on your part the UK/EU border in Calais was exactly what this part of discussion was about, putting aside immigration for one refreshing moment, that border exists for controlling movement of tourists and trade. Having a functioning border isn't just about "helping us with Brexit" by making it easier for those strange UK people that wish to visit France or for UK businesses to trade with them, it helps France as well, it does both.
I expect maturity and professionalism from both sides, not immature harmful posturing. I'm no doubt going to be a disappointed delbert for quite some time.

* The fact our own lot haven't actually done that in any meaningful way is another discussion..........

[Monkeybubbles]

I can't comment on the examples in the construction industry discussed above as I don't know anything about it. I do know a bit about the manufacturing industry though. Anecdotal, I know, but I can say it with my hand on my heart.....lots of my customers (who tend to be large scale tech-based manufacturing facilities) are looking to relocate to the EU. I know this bacause I'm involved in planning their operations.

Partly its because of the extra cost and red tape associated with delivering their products to the EU post-Brexit. Partly its because they're anticipating an increase in overheads (including salaries) that will render the facility uneconomic without massive tax incentives. Those tax breaks may happen, and they may not, but overall it presents an unacceptable risk.

American or European or Japanese (or wherever) conglomerates that own UK facilities don't give a stuff about the UK economy and even less of a stuff about the UK workforce. They'll chase the bottom line.

Yes, there are a few examples of overseas companies currently investing in UK facilities. For every one of those, I could give you thirty that are upping sticks (but I won't, because it's confidential).

So in theory it's good that there is a lever to increase pay, and i'm all for that in principle. In practice, it is potentially fairly destructive.

Also, massive generalisation, Brits don't want to work in factories any more. Eastern Europeans are proud to.

[chelmsfordhammer91]

Good post Monkeybubbles. Although you say anecdotal, it's good to get a first hand experience still.

I agree that British workers on average are less likely to want to work in a factory etc., but I believe a lot of that is due to the poor wages for the effort made.

I appreciate you can only pay certain roles so much, but I know from experience that some EE workers are happy to graft for the relatively poor pay because it's still better than the options 'back home' and also for many it is a temporary problem whilst they can live basic over here and save over time to live more comfortably when migrating back.

We have firms whose business models are based on poor pay, zero hour contracts, knowing that if the workers leave after 6-12 months to pastures new, someone else is there to take on the work with the cycle continuing.

I do feel for the small to medium sized firms that pay a fair market wage but have been subjected to unreasonable overhead increases due to the red tape etc. I know two people personally who had to pretty much overhaul what their company do just to stay afloat.

In reality, with collaboration with the EU it should be able to work. If we have goods and services they want to buy, and they have goods and services we want to buy, deals that are more tailored to us rather than the EU as a whole when we were in it should (massive should) be a viable outcome.

[Turns to Stone]

For most people the "taking back control" was just that* and the implications were simply that as well, I think you're just interpreting it to mean more. I seem to recall the "stopping the swarm" thingy was in reference to the illegal immigration taking place across the Med.
The aggression came (and continues to come) from the EU as well, remember the way Cameron was bitch slapped when he went cap in hand to the EU prior to the referendum?

But when we discuss the Scottish referendum, on these pages for example. How do we view it? Do we view it as simply them 'taking back control'? Or do we view it as something more? I've seen plenty of posts suggesting that Scotland should (and I'm paraphrasing here) 'f*** off on their own and see how well they cope without us'. Now I'm sure that's not everyone's take, but I do think it's a common one. And I do think it's a pretty common take on how the UK is viewed for brexit around Europe. I travel a lot for work. I've been to 19 EU countries since lockdown finished and largely that is the perception from people I meet. Not just that we were 'looking for independence' - but that we came across as being 'better than the EU'. That's what came across - that's how it was spun overseas (their media is just as sneaky as ours). And that's what many in the EU felt. You may disagree and think that the implications were 'simply that', but just as the Scottish referendum makes the English think 'well piss off, then' - that's what the EU felt about us.

I'm not sure where my whataboutery is to be honest. The borders were always going to be a nightmare as our government didn't want to leave the EU therefore didn't want to find a solution. France didn't want to find a solution, as they weren't part of the vote. The truth is that 'we took back control' without the first idea of how we were ever going to take back control at all or how it was going to work. We are now expecting France's professionalism to get us out of a hole that we created. But what are we doing for France in return? Because that's how politics works. You sratch my back, I'll scratch yours. And when we voted out, we told the EU that we'll scratch our own back thank you very much. Except when we have an itch we can't reach and we need their help and expect them to be 'professional' about it.

I'm sure that this will work itself out. Things generally do. But I'm keen to know to what end. I'd really like my kids to have more opportunities than I did, and right now they can't work and study in the EU in the same way that I could. It might well be that if my kids get a trade they will end up with more work than the generation before them got, but truthfully I think that all that will happen will be that those who employ my kids will use this vote to make themselves richer. And sadly, the option of my kids studying and working in the EU won't be there for them in the same way it was for me so they'll have been doubly ****ed.

Anyway. None of us know what might have happened and sometimes it's a nightmare getting to France anyway. But I'd love to think that the bods in charge were working on something to make it better. And it doesn't look like they are to me.

[SammyLeeWasOffside]

It's weird all this. Dover Port Authority took the government to court last year because they flagged this problem about future bottlenecks during checkpoint peak times.

From June 2021
Dover takes legal action against government over check points

"In its submission to the court, Dover said the UK Border Force had warned the new checks could reduce the “flow rate” through Dover’s passport lanes to “50 people per hour, per lane” — about a tenth of pre-Brexit flows of 500 per hour, per lane."


I do find it very weird that this is even a point of contention. There are bottlenecks because of extra transactional times plus lack of capacity on the UK side plus lack of capacity French side.

As I understand it the submission was to up the number of booths from 5 to 10. There are now 10.

That said if they wanted to up it to 20 how would 16 closed booths have eased the situation this week any more than 6 closed booths.

Of course things are going to be slower at times as there are now more checks. If people want to criticize the govt for something then not adequately communicating this would be it imo.

It's also needed a better system for the surrounding area for decades it seems. Sticking plaster solutions for the main transport hub to the continent.

[sendô]

I travel a lot for work. I've been to 19 EU countries since lockdown finished and largely that is the perception from people I meet. Not just that we were 'looking for independence' - but that we came across as being 'better than the EU'. That's what came across - that's how it was spun overseas (their media is just as sneaky as ours). And that's what many in the EU felt.

That's hardly surprising considering we mostly voted in UKIP MEPs, led by Nigel Farage who spent all his time in the European Parliament in Brussels ****ing the EU off whilst doing absolutely f*** all work.

We consistently voted anti-EU MEPs to represent us at the EU and yet were suprised when those same MEPs were unable to use their skills at ****ing people off to get us favourable deals on anything.

[Danny's Dyer Acting]

As I understand it the submission was to up the number of booths from 5 to 10. There are now 10.

That said if they wanted to up it to 20 how would 16 closed booths have eased the situation this week any more than 6 closed booths.

Of course things are going to be slower at times as there are now more checks. If people want to criticize the govt for something then not adequately communicating this would be it imo.

It's also needed a better system for the surrounding area for decades it seems. Sticking plaster solutions for the main transport hub to the continent.

So is the suggestion that all of those additional booths have been shut as well? Seems a stretch to me.

I don't understand why it's so difficult to accept that while there are a multitude of issues at play, Brexit is clearly contributing to issues like this and in a not insignificant way. Feels like until people supportive of this whole idea can do that then they're not going to come up with realistic solutions and will be stuck in this idea that everything is a battle with a need for there to be a winner.

[chelmsfordhammer91]

My understanding is that they only had 5 staff available for the 10 booths (due to sickness and whatever). So a 50% absence rate.

Assuming there were 20 booths, there may only have been 10 people available (extrapolating the absence rate) which would have been enough to clear the backlog (pr prdvent it) even with the increased processing time (the increased time being due to Brexit).

However, I don't get why they would ever have 20 booths up and running if 10 is sufficient the majority of the time.

[OFT]

But when we discuss the Scottish referendum, on these pages for example. How do we view it? Do we view it as simply them 'taking back control'? Or do we view it as something more? I've seen plenty of posts suggesting that Scotland should (and I'm paraphrasing here) '**** off on their own and see how well they cope without us'. Now I'm sure that's not everyone's take, but I do think it's a common one. And I do think it's a pretty common take on how the UK is viewed for brexit around Europe. I travel a lot for work. I've been to 19 EU countries since lockdown finished and largely that is the perception from people I meet. Not just that we were 'looking for independence' - but that we came across as being 'better than the EU'. That's what came across - that's how it was spun overseas (their media is just as sneaky as ours). And that's what many in the EU felt. You may disagree and think that the implications were 'simply that', but just as the Scottish referendum makes the English think 'well piss off, then' - that's what the EU felt about us.

I'm not sure where my whataboutery is to be honest. The borders were always going to be a nightmare as our government didn't want to leave the EU therefore didn't want to find a solution. France didn't want to find a solution, as they weren't part of the vote. The truth is that 'we took back control' without the first idea of how we were ever going to take back control at all or how it was going to work. We are now expecting France's professionalism to get us out of a hole that we created. But what are we doing for France in return? Because that's how politics works. You sratch my back, I'll scratch yours. And when we voted out, we told the EU that we'll scratch our own back thank you very much. Except when we have an itch we can't reach and we need their help and expect them to be 'professional' about it.

The first paragraph in particular

[Turns to Stone]

My understanding is that they only had 5 staff available for the 10 booths (due to sickness and whatever). So a 50% absence rate.

Assuming there were 20 booths, there may only have been 10 people available (extrapolating the absence rate) which would have been enough to clear the backlog (pr prdvent it) even with the increased processing time (the increased time being due to Brexit).

However, I don't get why they would ever have 20 booths up and running if 10 is sufficient the majority of the time.

I'd imagine - as has been my previous experience when travelling to France, that when they have all the booths manned, they did a fair job of checking documentation etc. When they were understaffed though and the lines were getting longer, they just waived 'low-risk' cars through to ensure that things got cleared quickly. With the new expectations though, that sort of independent decision making isn't possible.

[SammyLeeWasOffside]

So is the suggestion that all of those additional booths have been shut as well? Seems a stretch to me.

I don't understand why it's so difficult to accept that while there are a multitude of issues at play, Brexit is clearly contributing to issues like this and in a not insignificant way. Feels like until people supportive of this whole idea can do that then they're not going to come up with realistic solutions and will be stuck in this idea that everything is a battle with a need for there to be a winner.

There were only enough staff to open 4 booths.

I agree with the last bit but it also applies to people who didn't vote for it making every problem a brexit problem.

There were delays regularly before we left so brexit may have added another layer of potential problems but won't be the only thing that causes problems at ports