NHS would be hit by 'significant' costs if UK loses EU data status, warn Lords UK lawmakers have warned the government that if it doesn't continue to harmonize its post-Brexit data rules with the EU, the consequences could be dire. A cross-party committee of the House of Lords – the UK's upper house – said businesses and organizations such as the NHS would be hit by "significant" extra costs and red tape …
Did not Boris promise that we could fund the NHS £350 million extra a week when we leave the EU ?
Lots of places to dig out this data, and it tends to be presented in all sorts of ways with various caveats and such like; this link is just the first I found (and it doesn't appear to be overtly party political):
https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/insight-and-analysis/data-and-charts/nhs-budget-nutshell
Total Department of Health and Social Care spending, Real-terms (2022/2023 prices).
2015/16: 142.1 Billion = £2733mil/wk
2022/23 (with figures not influenced by COVID spending): 185.4 Billion = £3565 mil / week
Thus increase in budget = +£832 million /week.
It really perplexes me why people opposed to Brexit keep reminding everyone that the promise of extra money for the NHS that the leave campaign made has been easily met.
You might want to look at the BMA's take on this.
Healthcare spending per person is dropping (excluding Covid-19 funding).
Intriguing.
I post a link to a site that is non party political, and which shows that the claim on the side of the bus is, fundamentally, true, and you appear to be so blinded by your own political bigotry that you simply declare in effect that reality doesn't suit you, so it doesn't count.
Which I suppose serves me right for attempting to have a rational discussion with anyone still raving inaccurately about what was written on the side of a bus 8 years ago, which, on reflection, was probably not a very sensible thing for me to attempt to do.
What is the claim, that in the fullness of time eventually £350m more will be given to the NHS per week? With population growth and inflation that's a given.
The £350m more could have been spent inside the EU anyway, it wasn't necessary to leave the EU to do that. It was a political choice to not spend that £350m more (austerity) just as it was a political choice to Brexit in the way that the UK did.
We should be talking about the amount given to the NHS per person and that has been continually falling in spite of inflation, but that doesn't fit on the side of a red bus.
> The £350m more could have been spent inside the EU anyway, it wasn't necessary to leave
Exactly. It's a subtle but egregious red herring, a clever twisting of what was actually promised to cover up the fact it wasn't met.
The implication was that the UK would *have* £350m *extra* to spend on the NHS (or anything else).
*Not* that it could choose to spend £350m of *existing* funds on the NHS which - as you note - it could have done anyway, and had nothing to do with EU membership.
I said this at the time, and correctly predicted that this tactic would be used to pretend that the promise had been met, reliant on people with short attention spans and better things to do not spotting the disingenuous bait and switch.
As a nerve-wracked citizen of the US I must protest! Brexit is but one set of lies based on fantasy economics, ethnophobia, and fascist longings for an imaginary past. trump has created entire universes so vast that Farage wants to live in one of them. I will admit that the combination of Brexit and inept governance seems to be bringing the NHS into rough parity with the US southern states (but with abortion), but trump's lies are much biglier. They are the bigliest, though I sincerely wish Britain was winning the contest.
Why are you trying to divert attention from the fact that what was written was true false?
There, FTFY
Starting with the actual amount, which was false, and then moving onto the fact that we could give it to the NHS instead, which was also false, because the costs of leaving the EU far outweigh that number.
Still, brexit is like a religious cult. It doesn't matter how many facts you present these people with, they'll claim the opposite. It;s best not toe engage them. I know I'm breaking this rule right off the bat, but sometimes, the best trolling is poking the (definitely not Russian funded) bear and running away.
We'll be rule takers until we're back in the EU.
Quite a few people don't like that, but the facts don't care about their feelings. They're just facts.
Those same people tended to complain about the EU whilst we were in it, and still complain now we're out. If we have to listen to them complain, we should at least have the benefits of membership as we do so.
@Philip Storry
"We'll be rule takers until we're back in the EU."
That doesnt really work if you think about it. In the EU we are rule takers. We know this as we been there, done that, got the tshirt and finally left because of it. The complaint here being we will not follow the EU rules and we are out of the EU. So we are not rule takers.
"Those same people tended to complain about the EU whilst we were in it, and still complain now we're out."
Absolutely. Leave supporters complained while we were in it and EU fanatics still complain forever and a day. Most people stopped moaning about leave when they realised it was done and not a bad thing. Watching the EU screw up didnt look attractive either but even remainers knew people wouldnt want to rejoin if we left because the EU sucks badly and we would have to participate fully instead of half in with opt outs.
"If we have to listen to them complain, we should at least have the benefits of membership as we do so..."
Easily done. Go move to your glorious EU. If it is so good it is just over there. Many EU countries to choose from but only 1 UK. Leavers only seem to complain when some remain fanatic claims the UK sucks because of some dumb EU adequacy rule we copied.
Most people have not stopped moaning about being in the EU and there is a clear majority in favour of rejoining - you appear to be the fanatic here?
https://www.whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/poll-of-polls-uk-eu/
You also appear to fail to comprehend the impact of a loss of the data adequacy ruling will have. It will result in huge amounts of additional red tape with the trading bloc that comprises 42% of our exports and 53% of our imports.
Talk about cutting off our nose to spite our face to appease a minority of fanatics.
@Gordon 10
"Most people have not stopped moaning about being in the EU and there is a clear majority in favour of rejoining - you appear to be the fanatic here?"
I am responding to another moaner wanting to rejoin. Which seems to be the typical. Maybe I just dont see much complaining about being in the EU since we are out. Not sure how that makes me a fanatic.
"https://www.whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/poll-of-polls-uk-eu/"
However, it should be borne in mind that the wording of the question can make a difference to the pattern of response. In particular, people appear to be a little less likely to say they would vote to (re-)join the EU than they are to say that they would vote Remain.
So no. That is in your own source.
"You also appear to fail to comprehend the impact of a loss of the data adequacy ruling will have. It will result in huge amounts of additional red tape with the trading bloc that comprises 42% of our exports and 53% of our imports."
You might notice I put a comment up for exactly this problem. That the article talks about there being costs but doesnt say anything about how and why. Without that it would seem to be the same stupidity as the remain arguments which said 'costs more because waaa'. So I actually asked in another comment what these costs to the NHS is supposed to be if we dont comply. I didnt even say it with any argument for or against compliance, just to ask the simple question.
You might notice that being TRAPPED in the economic bloc would skew our trade to the block we were TRAPPED in.
"Talk about cutting off our nose to spite our face to appease a minority of fanatics."
I know. Thankfully we stopped and left.
You might notice that being TRAPPED in the economic bloc would skew our trade to the block we were TRAPPED in.
It really wouldn't, as the UK now only has the most (not all) of the same trade agreements that the EU already has, so the UK is more TRAPPED than before. The EU-Australian and EU-NZ agreements require higher quality food standards, unlike the UK-Australian and UK-NZ agreements. Also the UK stopped negotiating with Canada over hormone-treated beef, but the EU-Canada agreement excluded it. When the UK-CPTPP agreement becomes effective in December, there is no exclusion for Canadian hormone-treated beef.
@AC
Your comment claims more trapped than before while writing the opposite. You even point out the UK negotiated what the UK is happy with trading with Aus and NZ while in the EU we are stuck with the EU negotiation. And that we joined CPTPP which the EU hasnt even joined.
while in the EU we are stuck with the EU negotiation
There were UK civil servants, negotiators, MEPs, and representatives in the EU making policy decisions. The UK was not the gimp locked in the basement in Brussels you like to make out it was as part of your rhetoric.
@AC
"There were UK civil servants, negotiators, MEPs, and representatives in the EU making policy decisions."
No. There were UK civil servants, negotiators, MEPs, and representatives in the EU making 1/27th of the policy decisions. 1/27th of the say over the rules that run our country, economy and trade.
Not true Mr Ignorant Troll
The UK had 4 concrete opt outs over huge swathes of EU policy - more than any other country. Thats 100% in those areas.
We also had unilateral veto in several areas and only had to get 13 like minded countries for a Veto in all other areas.
As a provider of 2nd or 3rd largest chunks (depending on year) of the EU budget we also had a disproportionate amount of soft power - 3rd only to France and Germany.
So you're a blinkered liar.
@Gordon 10
"The UK had 4 concrete opt outs over huge swathes of EU policy - more than any other country. Thats 100% in those areas."
I have already mentioned this to others. The EU being so wonderful that the UK opted out. Congrats pointing out the UK didnt want to participate.
"We also had unilateral veto in several areas and only had to get 13 like minded countries for a Veto in all other areas."
Awesome. And the EU represented us so well we voted to leave the EU. As I have repeated.
"As a provider of 2nd or 3rd largest chunks (depending on year) of the EU budget we also had a disproportionate amount of soft power - 3rd only to France and Germany."
Wait a minute I thought the UK was net benefit to all this EU nonsense. And we had such soft power Blair was over a barrel and a joke dealing with the EU and Cameron was joked about having a seat for Merkel when making domestic decisions.
"So you're a blinkered liar."
Nope. Still hitting you with the facts. You still aint happy about it. The world keeps turning but such remains the same.
@Elongated Muskrat
"A rational discussion has the prerequisite of both parties being rational. CJ has never demonstrated much capacity for rational thought."
As per usual thank you for your intelligent contribution to this discussion showing off your prowess for rational thought and discussion. Hope that one line comment wasnt too taxing for you.
-- As a provider of 2nd or 3rd largest chunks (depending on year) of the EU budget we also had a disproportionate amount of soft power - 3rd only to France and Germany. --
We saw just what that soft power was worth when Dave boy asked for a bit of help to keep the UK in.
"No. There were UK civil servants, negotiators, MEPs, and representatives in the EU making 1/27th of the policy decisions. 1/27th of the say over the rules that run our country, economy and trade."
One of my colleagues used to do English language coaching for some Dutch civil servants in the EU. Around the time of the referendum they told her "The UK has a disproportionately large input in the development of EU legislation because they speak English fluently, and that's the language used in most meetings, and UK civil servants often have more subject knowledge than those from other countries. Can't understand why they want to throw that advantage away."
@H in The Hague
"One of my colleagues used to do English language coaching for some Dutch civil servants in the EU. "
One of the more public proofs of the importance of English was one of their fanatical politicians (Draghi??) telling a crowd some funny comment about how English will now be irrelevant in the EU, but had to switch to English to tell them so they would understand.
that CPTPP:
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership
not sure why EU would want to join a fucking trans-pacific partnership.
fucking crazy that we joined, being in the north sea/atlantic area. seems boris sold you a fucking lame pup with rabies, may be thats why your so rabid
@katrinab
"The best thing anyone has ever said about the CPTPP is that it probably won't harm the economy. But it isn't going to deliver any measurable benefits either."
Ok. And it is growing. And while some can assume no measurable benefits they are looking in the crystal ball and guessing. Still its an argument if our EU membership was a positive or negative overall. Economically I think it was Mervyn King who said it wouldnt make much difference.
"You might notice that being TRAPPED in the economic bloc would skew our trade to the block we were TRAPPED in."
Bullshit.
The place I work makes food products. In the last few years, trying to get over the Covid shock, we've really ratcheted up the exports. Plenty to the EU, of course. But growing markets are the Americas and Asia-Pacific. Oh, yes, and some even gets sold within the country, but it's certainly the smaller quantity. The EU hasn't stymied the ambitions to export globally, and indeed judging by the plethora of languages on some of the packs, it's rather a benefit to be able to do local tests and verifications and then ship to Denmark, Belgium, Germany, Spain, etc etc etc and not have to worry about the paperwork for each individual country.
I think the EU preferred competitive pricing and tariffs for stuff sold within the EU, and in return you get no onerous barriers to deal with. That's not the same as actively blocking selling stuff to other continents. I'm not familiar with international trade, it's not my job, but given that we're all doing extra work in the run up to Christmas for international export, I can't help but think that the entire "we can trade with the world outside the EU" argument is bullshit because we're quite happily trading with the world from inside the EU.
This is very good news.
https://www.whatukthinks.org/eu/questions/if-there-was-a-referendum-on-britains-membership-of-the-eu-how-would-you-vote-2/
Your chosen site shows clearly that according to polls in only a few months before the EU referendum in 2016 only 38% of people would vote to leave the EU with remain winning the vote with 45% of people wanting to remain in.
Therefore according to this poll site we didn't leave the EU.
Alas, it would appear that there is a structural problem with the polling methodology that doesn't represent how people actually voted in the past, which would logically raise questions about how useful a similar poll result is now at anticipating what would happen if a vote happened again.
"Easily done. Go move to your glorious EU. If it is so good it is just over there. Many EU countries to choose from but only 1 UK. Leavers only seem to complain when some remain fanatic claims the UK sucks because of some dumb EU adequacy rule we copied."
I would love to, but my freedom of movement seems to have been curtailed
@Locky
"I would love to, but my freedom of movement seems to have been curtailed"
Wait a minute. Are you telling me this glorious utopia of light doesnt want you. It thinks so low of you that it rejects you while having a migration problem from less developed countries! Why didnt you move when we were leaving the EU? You knew it was coming, there was a long transition period. Even I was offered residency. So why dont they like you?
@Doctor Syntax
"Take a look in the mirror."
That doesnt make sense, I recommend reading the comment you are responding to. The EU rejects him apparently, they offered me residency. That they want me and not him is because of me? Am I that friggin amazing? I dont think so.
@AC
"so unless we decided to move years ago, we are now trapped because of you fucking brexshiters."
Why didnt you move? And again you are saying the EU doesnt want you. And crying about it. Your wonderful EU with a migration problem doesnt want you. Why? What is wrong with you?
"good for you getting the offer, fuck you for pulling up the ladder."
I got the offer after brexit. No pulling any ladder and I rejected the offer thanks, I am in the UK.
That doesnt really work if you think about it. In the EU we are rule takers.
The UK set the rules and was on the winning side in votes.
Easily done. Go move to your glorious EU.
Easier said than done, unless it's Ireland. Why? Because of Brexit.
@AC
"The UK set the rules and was on the winning side in votes."
Well that didnt go too well did it since the majority of the population voted to leave. So the UK doesnt seem to have set the rules (for the population) even if the politicians in the EU bent over for it.
"Easier said than done, unless it's Ireland. Why? Because of Brexit."
Go on tell me you dont like the Irish.
Well that didnt go too well did it since the majority of the population voted to leave.
And now they would vote to remain.
Go on tell me you dont like the Irish.
I like Ireland and I also like the other EU countries. So do many other Brits, but Brexit has denied them the choice of living there.
@AC
"And now they would vote to remain."
Except its not an option. We cant remain, it would be rejoin and thats much less appealing.
"I like Ireland and I also like the other EU countries."
You (assuming same AC) said "Easier said than done, unless it's Ireland." so you can go to Ireland to be in the EU. As I said easily done.
"So do many other Brits, but Brexit has denied them the choice of living there."
So I will ask you too- why does the EU, the land of utopia and light, not want you? I was offered residency so what is wrong with you?
You (assuming same AC) said "Easier said than done, unless it's Ireland." so you can go to Ireland to be in the EU. As I said easily done.
You do understand that reducing 26 EU + 4 EEA countries down to 1 is curtailing options?
So I will ask you too- why does the EU, the land of utopia and light, not want you? I was offered residency so what is wrong with you?
What's it like being in your head? A Lovecraftian nightmare with tentacles and scratching-slithering noises?
@AC
"You do understand that reducing 26 EU + 4 EEA countries down to 1 is curtailing options?"
According to you the EU doesnt want you except just that one member. You are not knocking me for reducing your options, you are pointing out the EU doesnt want you. That only 1 country might accept you.
"What's it like being in your head? A Lovecraftian nightmare with tentacles and scratching-slithering noises?"
You are the one saying the EU doesnt want you. My residency offer wasnt for Ireland but I am asking why the EU doesnt want you but would keep me. What is wrong with you?
You have absolutely no idea of where I'm posting from and what nationalty/ies I have. I have no inclination to share it with you either.
I assume this is because you're unable to say why Brexit artificially curtailing options for Brits in the EU and EEA is in Britons' best interests so you're reduced to shouting "Look! A squirrel!".
@AC
"You have absolutely no idea of where I'm posting from and what nationalty/ies I have. I have no inclination to share it with you either."
I have no idea if you are the same coward posting any of this. Assuming you are then you are complaining that you are outside the EU and in the UK. Assuming the same coward you replied to my comment to move to the EU with- "Easier said than done, unless it's Ireland. Why? Because of Brexit." aka implying you are in the UK outside the EU. I dont care where you are from or whatever but based on the coward comments where I assume the same poster you have told me.
"I assume this is because you're unable to say why Brexit artificially curtailing options for Brits in the EU and EEA"
You are the coward saying the EU doesnt want you, assuming you are the same coward throughout this discussion. I am just feeding you back what you say and watching you melt down with insults
I have no idea if you are the same coward posting any of this. Assuming you are then you are complaining that you are outside the EU and in the UK. Assuming the same coward you replied to my comment to move to the EU with- "Easier said than done, unless it's Ireland. Why? Because of Brexit." aka implying you are in the UK outside the EU. I dont care where you are from or whatever but based on the coward comments where I assume the same poster you have told me.
You made all of that up in your head. Where did I say the EU doesn't want me? You can't even read and comprehend, so I'm not surprised you weren't able to recognise the lies painted all over a big red bus.
You are the coward saying the EU doesnt want you, assuming you are the same coward throughout this discussion. I am just feeding you back what you say and watching you melt down with insults
No, you're reading things I posted, claiming I said something completely different, and then demanding I answer a question which is unanswerable because it has nothing to do with me. But any time you feel like you can tell us why Brexit artificially curtailing options for Brits in the EU and EEA is in Britons' best interests.
@AC
"You made all of that up in your head. Where did I say the EU doesn't want me?"
in your comments. Saying you cant move to the EU bar one assuming you are the same coward.
"No, you're reading things I posted, claiming I said something completely different"
If you are not the same coward then why do you assume the response applies to you? If you are the same coward then my responses are to your comments directly. Feel free to not post as coward and then we know that I am responding to you and I dont assume you are the same coward.
"But any time you feel like you can tell us why Brexit artificially curtailing options for Brits in the EU and EEA is in Britons' best interests."
I didnt curtail options, I am responding to cowards and fools telling me the EU doesnt want them. And asking why their glorious EU doesnt want them.
This post has been deleted by its author
Saying you cant move to the EU bar one assuming you are the same coward.
Go back up, the thread, read each post nice and slowly, and find the quote. You won't be able to because it's not there.
I didnt curtail options, I am responding to cowards and fools telling me the EU doesnt want them. And asking why their glorious EU doesnt want them.
Does your house have lead piping which is contaminating the water you drink? Nobody's talking about you curtailing options or the EU not wanting them, it's about Brexit curtailing options for Brits which is something you won't admit has happened.
Er, you do realise you were replying to someone else who used "we" throughout the post to refer to those who aren't in the group of people who "complain about the EU whilst we were in it, and still complain now we're out", right?
You said that the person you replied to or the people referred to in that person's post should go and move to their glorious EU.
And my reply to you was it was easier said than done... for the person you replied to or the people referred to in that person's post.
If you think that anything you said refers to me, I suggest you go back and retake your GCSE English.
@AC
"Er, you do realise you were replying to someone else who used "we" throughout the post to refer to those who aren't in the group of people who "complain about the EU whilst we were in it, and still complain now we're out", right?"
Coward complains coward looks like another coward so reply was to a different coward and not this coward. Spoken by a coward.
Dont like it stop posting as a coward and you will have a thread that people can follow. Otherwise you look like coward, walk like coward, quack like coward so you are assumed to the the coward.
Meanwhile, CJ looks like a goose, steps like a goose...
Lots of people have all sorts of reasons for posting anonymously. Perhaps you should pay more attention to the "anonymous" part, which is pertinent, not the "coward" part which is clearly supposed to be ironic, and not primarily an insult for you to throw around like you've been listening to Andrew Tate.
@AC
"I prefer to remain anon, due to fucking loonatics like you who might take violent actions."
If you prefer to be coward thats your choice, but then dont complain that you look exactly like all the other cowards and I assume you are the same coward posting. I am amused that you think your reg user name would give any means to come cause you any violent actions but you keep wearing your foil it will at least keep your head warm.
"In real life you'd piss yourself"
Yet virtually you already are.
Codejunky, you either do not understand English, or you are a fool.
Before Brexit, if a British citizen wanted to move to the south coast of Spain, they would simply rent somewhere and go.
Now, they would have to apply for a residence visa, which is a lot of paperwork, expense and fairly high likelihood of being denied.
The easiest one to get is probably the "Non-lucrative residence visa". This visa does not entitle you to work in Spain. You must have income of at least €25,560 annually, plus €6,390 per each additional family member.
There are some other possibilities, most of which require sponsorship by an employer.
The post did not say "impossible". They said that it is far, far harder than it used to be.
Sir, you are an idiot.
codejunky> the EU doesnt want you.
Yet another brexitremist who doesn't understand the EU. You apply for residency to the country you want to reside in. Not the EU. You numpty. No wonder it was so easy to convince people to vote leave: Too many thickos hiding in our midst.
@AC
"Yet another brexitremist who doesn't understand the EU. You apply for residency to the country you want to reside in. Not the EU."
So you are claiming being resident of an EU country means you are not living in the EU? If the UK is so doomed and the EU such a land of hope and light you would surely move to be in the EU. The EU may not treat you like an EU citizen but you would be in the EU, wouldnt you?
"You numpty. No wonder it was so easy to convince people to vote leave: Too many thickos hiding in our midst."
Amazing how we can have similar opinions of each other.
"So you are claiming being resident of an EU country means you are not living in the EU?"
No, numpty. I am saying that a British Citizen living in an EU country no longer has the same rights of work and travel that they had before Brexit.
And that as someone who sounds like a Brexit-extremist, you cannot understand that because you still don't understand the benefits of being an EU citizen. So no understanding of what you helped take away from us.
@AC
"No, numpty. I am saying that a British Citizen living in an EU country no longer has the same rights of work and travel that they had before Brexit."
Congrats and what does that have to do with the price of fish? Come back with the goal posts you are just running off arguing with yourself.
"So no understanding of what you helped take away from us."
I didnt take anything from you. Does the EU not want to give you these things even if you go throw yourself on their mercy? It is after all up to them. But back to the conversation I will quote-
If the UK is so doomed and the EU such a land of hope and light you would surely move to be in the EU. The EU may not treat you like an EU citizen but you would be in the EU, wouldnt you?
The more you post, CJ, the more you reveal yourself as someone who doesn't really understand citizenship, residency or working permits. Never actually worked in a foreign country, I'm betting? Or perhaps only worked illegally? (It would be ironic if a brexiteer was actually a formal illegal immigrant.)
Different AC here, but...
> I am just feeding you back what you say and watching you melt down with insults
Sure Jan! ;-)
But let's be honest- you're pretty much exactly what that crappy old meme had in mind when it described What "trolls" want you to believe vs. What is actually happening.
"And now they would vote to remain."
Except its not an option. We cant remain, it would be rejoin
That was a typo on the A/Cs part because the poll was about rejoining.
and thats much less appealing.
Not unappealing enough for your liking, I suppose because the headline on the linked article was that the poll came out with a majority for rejoining.
@Doctor Syntax
"That was a typo on the A/Cs part because the poll was about rejoining."
Ah that is different. So how much bull are we to swallow to believe this garbage? I dont notice in the survey the full fact of no opt outs and joining the EU as a full member including joining the Euro. As with a previous poster- its how you frame the question.
"Not unappealing enough for your liking, I suppose because the headline on the linked article was that the poll came out with a majority for rejoining."
Nope still unappealing enough. That is why there is no serious offers to try and rejoin because it would sink the party offering it as it did previously.
When reading Codejunky anti EU whining, imagine it being spoken in the voice of Zippy from Rainbow to get an accurate idea of the average brexiter.
Or a pubescent Andrew Tate simp desperately calling everything he doesn't like "gay". Bonus points for calling his parents fascists for demanding that he clean his room.
I'd just like to address this particular misdirection:
"joining the EU as a full member including joining the Euro"
Nope.
You have to commit to joining the Euro. Which is quite different. And in a pragmatic way, not just a pedantic way.
You're repeating a lie here. Please stop it.
We can test this easily. Sweden joined the EU in September 1995. They have no opt-out for Eurozone membership. So in what year did Sweden join the Euro?
We both know that they've not joined the Euro. They've not even joined the two year alignment mechanism that they'd need to go into to join the Euro. They're committed to joining the Euro, but it's never quite the right time. And the EU isn't pushing them to join or punishing them for their 29 year delay.
29 YEARS. And no sign of joining the Euro. This is why your statement isn't true. Sweden's not likely to join the Euro in my lifetime, which means that when we rejoin we won't be joining the Euro within the lifetime of anyone reading this in 2024.
When we rejoin the EU we'll just resurrect Brown's five tests and tweak them. We'll require interest rate and inflation alignment, cost of conversion for small businesses to be low, and Boris Johnson to go a day without lying.
OK, maybe that last one was a joke. But if you think out civil service can't find a way to build tests that seem very reasonable but make Eurozone membership almost impossible, then you've really not been paying attention to our government. ;-)
Every year we'll go to the EU, say "Oh sorry, the tests say no" and they'll nod politely and schedule a meeting for next year to check the tests again. We'll both know we're not joining the Euro, both be fine about it, and just let it be. Just like they've done with Sweden.
Please stop repeating the lie that we'll have to join the Euro.
Or at least name the year in which Sweden joined it.
@Philip Storry
"You have to commit to joining the Euro. Which is quite different. And in a pragmatic way, not just a pedantic way."
Ok, so you are saying the UK would have to commit to joining the Euro. A currency the gov rejected and then when the Euro demonstrated it was such a bad idea the population magically agreed. So the UK would be joining the Euro if we join the EU? Not really different but I am sure the attempt to sell rejoining would try to make it sound different.
"We can test this easily. Sweden joined the EU in September 1995. They have no opt-out for Eurozone membership. So in what year did Sweden join the Euro?"
So are you suggesting we join the EU, commit to joining the Euro and then break the agreement? One of the primary complaints of EU membership being that the UK gold plated the EU rules while other countries just ignored them.
As to your question Sweden held a referendum in 2003 where the population rejected joining the Euro by 55.9%. We had a referendum in 2016 over membership of the EU and fanatics are still crying about it now.
"And the EU isn't pushing them to join or punishing them for their 29 year delay."
This is very key wording you seem not to have registered so reread that line without blind optimism. The EU has chosen not to punish them. This is the same petty and childish EU we watched during covid and our exit of the EU.
"Please stop repeating the lie that we'll have to join the Euro."
Stop lying outright that we wont have to join the Euro while at the same time literally saying- "You have to commit to joining the Euro". Your own single comment dug the hole, shot itself and then covered itself over in dirt.
This is very key wording you seem not to have registered so reread that line without blind optimism. The EU has chosen not to punish them. This is the same petty and childish EU we watched during covid and our exit of the EU.
LMAO, your world is a funny one. IT was the UK who fucked up the exit out of EU.
I don't see you naming the year in which Sweden joined the Euro.
I see a lot of projection, deflection, idealism and refusal to accept reality. But no year in which Sweden joined the Euro.
Committing to join is different to joining, No shooting down of my argument there. I even described how we can comply with the commitment whilst never joining the Euro. I take a pragmatic view on this, you take an idealist view on it. But that idealist view is flawed because it starts from a misunderstanding of the requirement.
If people want to spend political capital negotiating an opt-out when the opportunity arises later, then we could do that. But to be frank I think that would be a waste of political capital when we could simply just keep saying that the time isn't right - just as Sweden has done. They're not in breach of anything, they're just saying "not yet". Apparently almost indefinitely. So this isn't an issue.
Prove me wrong with just four digits. When did Sweden join the Euro?
@Philip Storry
"I don't see you naming the year in which Sweden joined the Euro."
After you said- "You have to commit to joining the Euro.". I can use an even better case to you which is when did Sweden get to opt out of joining the Euro? Just because the EU isnt forcing them YET and not punishing them YET doesnt change YOUR statement we both agree with- "You have to commit to joining the Euro.".
"I take a pragmatic view on this, you take an idealist view on it. But that idealist view is flawed because it starts from a misunderstanding of the requirement."
And yet the realistic view, the actual factual reality, was demonstrated during covid and brexit negotiations. Telling me black is white will not change the facts. That you can actually tell the truth followed by being absolutely wrong by contradicting yourself invalidates your argument.
"Prove me wrong with just four digits. When did Sweden join the Euro?"
Go on amuse me. When did Sweden get to opt out of the commitment to join the Euro?
@AC
"Just answer the fucking question, you rambling pile of madness."
Are you Philip Storry but not wanting to use your name anymore? Or just some coward fool? There is no question, he contradicts himself. Hence I asked the actual valid question which is up to Philip Storry to answer. Or are you going to say Sweden is not committed to joining the Euro and they have an opt out?
and there is codejunky at its best, countering questions with questions, insisting its questions must be answered first, all the while frantically moving goalposts, scrambling like a cat on a steep roof, trying to avoid the fall of lacking the answer.
Allways the others fault, isn't it? Look what evil EU made me do to you....
"so you can go to Ireland to be in the EU. As I said easily done"
Yes, one can go to Ireland (and that was my Plan B if Boris really screwed up the negotiations), however there is a big difference between "living in Ireland under the terms of the CTA" and "being an EU citizen". Being in the EU (Ireland) doesn't automatically make you an EU citizen, neither does it restore your rights to live/work/retire in other EU countries (you know, like the shitton of Brits that went to Costa Del Whatever).
"why does the EU, the land of utopia and light, not want you?"
The door isn't open to Brits any more. Some people can still come over, but it's often tied to employment and/or having sufficient resources. In other words, it's like before the EU's freedoms when it was something "the more well endowed could do". For some, the amount of paperwork and money is just too much (and it isn't helped that each country has different ideas of what is required, some aren't hard, others are difficult).
"I was offered residency so what is wrong with you?"
You were offered residency to a country, not to the EU. I have residency (as per the withdrawal agreement). This means I get to stay here and carry on working. It gives me no further rights, I can't travel to other EU countries other than the 90-days-in-180 thing, I can't retire to Spain (too hot for me anyway).
@heyrick
"Yes, one can go to Ireland (and that was my Plan B if Boris really screwed up the negotiations), however there is a big difference between "living in Ireland under the terms of the CTA" and "being an EU citizen"."
Didnt you just reply that you did move to the EU? So why would you go to Ireland if Boris screwed up? That doesnt seem to make sense to me. And its not the UK's fault if the EU doesnt want you.
"The door isn't open to Brits any more"
Aka the EU doesnt want you. The UK didnt remove any rights, its the EU telling you you are not good enough.
"You were offered residency to a country, not to the EU. I have residency (as per the withdrawal agreement). This means I get to stay here and carry on working."
So no need for Ireland for you? And yes that is what was offered. The country I was in at the time offered residency, the country I chose to be in at the time. The UK didnt take any EU perks from me, the EU decided not to offer such perks unless we sold them the country. We are still the same people before and after EU membership but you must sell your country whole to get such a 'benefit'. But you can still work, visit and move to countries that accept you.
*Edit: I agree with the heat thing too. Doesnt agree with me either.
Brits can live and work in Ireland. (Or any single EU country they apply for and meet the criteria.)
But that has NOTHING to do with the EU and does not give them residency or working rights in any other EU country. If you have a job that requires you to work in multiple EU countries and you are a British citizen, you need to apply for a work permit in each country.
Importantly, this also excluded UK citizens who had been living abroad in another EU country for (I think) longer than 8 years. This included a family member, who definitely would not have voted to leave the EU. She has had to pay quite a lot of money to assume Greek citizenship instead, as a result of a vote she was excluded (for not good reason) from, because it was explicitly an advisory referendum (otherwise the terms would have to have included all UK citizens). What a fucking bonus, eh?
It excluded me for that reason, and when somebody else tried to go to court about this, the verdict was that what happens in a UK referendum doesn't materially affect those living outside of the UK.
Because clearly British citizens abroad don't count, might as well not exist, and those dumbfucks in Westminster learned nothing from The Boston Tea Party.
It's astonishing how insular and xenophobic is a nation that once had designs on running the world, almost pulled it off, and still has people talking about the Empire as if it was still a thing.
I have thought about it.
Whilst we were in we had a seat on the European Council, and therefore a hand in what regulations would be worked on. We had the ear of the European Commission, and therefore our concerns were heard. The European Commission consulted not only our government but also our businesses and even consumer groups, charities or other groups when appropriate to determine issues when drafting legislation. And finally we had MEPs who voted on the legislation.
I'd say that made us rule makers. Rule makers alongside 27 other countries, but rule making can be a shared activity despite what some people think.
You can assert that we were rule takers all you damned like. That's not true, and no amount of thinking about it will fulfil your wish that it was true.
As to the rest of your comment - well, it barely makes sense. Why should I move to regain the rights that you removed despite my protests? Why should I have to abandon my family and any obligations I may have? Your failure to understand how the EU works and how the UK benefited from membership is not sufficient reason for me to move.
Already we see public sentiment moving towards rejoin, and those numbers only seem to go up. Numbers for staying out only seem to go down. Support for Brexit is evaporating day by day. So we will rejoin - the numbers make it inevitable. We left on a slim referendum majority that cannot be repeated.
Frankly, the UK rejoining will soon be the EU's to refuse more than anything else.
@Philip Storry
"and therefore our concerns were heard"
So much so that the UK voted leave. The UK population was lied to, told of the apocalypse and even directly threatened by our own government if we dare vote leave and we still voted to leave. Thats how well heard we were.
"I'd say that made us rule makers. Rule makers alongside 27 other countries"
Rule makers as 1/27th of the rule maker. But not rule making but voting approve or reject on rules being given. And thats making the rules? Thats very different to making the rules.
"You can assert that we were rule takers all you damned like. That's not true, and no amount of thinking about it will fulfil your wish that it was true."
Oddly I have the same opinion of you thinking we made the rules.
"Why should I move to regain the rights that you removed despite my protests?"
It doesnt make sense to you that you think the EU is so good that you could just move there? And thats a difficult thought process? Why? I am not saying you have to, if the UK is good enough as it is that moving isnt worth it then of course dont bother moving. But you are the one complaining then pretending its leave voters complaining. Yours is the first comment of our thread and I responded to you who is complaining.
It is amusing.
"Frankly, the UK rejoining will soon be the EU's to refuse more than anything else."
And so is the fanaticism that amuses me. Idiot politicians aint even stupid enough to insist they would rejoin otherwise they lose their voter base. Keep dreaming
It's interesting that in your reply you have to acknowledge that we were rule makers in order to then try to diminish it via the idea of working with 27 other countries being bad.
You then have to rely on the trope of us only having a vote only to approve or reject the rules, despite my having previously pointed out that we were consulted at many levels during the process. (Even news establishments that are openly hostile to the EU acknowledged the consultation and involvement as they mocked the EU - often the consultations themselves were the targets of their mockery.)
This is surely a form of cognitive dissonance. You're trying to deal with it by shifting the goal posts from the discussion of how we were consulted and involved in the rule making towards the idea that we could only rubber stamp them and are somehow lesser when working with others.
Your position is untenable - the facts simply don't support it.
On my moving to the EU - the thought process is not difficult. The lack of Freedom of Movement - which you apparently happily removed from me and millions of others - makes it difficult. As might other issues. Perhaps I have elderly parents who I'd like to be near to assist? Perhaps I have children for whom such a move would be too disruptive? Moving wasn't necessarily simple even when we were EU members, after all.
But that's not really the point. The point is you were happy to removed my rights, whilst I removed no rights from you. Quite why you're so proud of that situation is a mystery to many...
As to your refusal to accept the trend towards rejoining - sure, I'll keep dreaming.
Dreaming won't change the fact that the voters are moving towards rejoining. Polls show that voters think Brexit is a failure, that we were better off in the EU, that they wouldn't vote to leave if they knew how it would turn out, that the number wanting to rejoin is growing, and most interestingly that people don't feel politicians talk about Brexit enough. That last fact suggests that people feel that their concerns about Brexit are being ignored, which cannot end well.
Again, it's a fact that the figures for rejoin keep growing. I think that the tipping point will be around 45-50%. (Don't forget that there will be Don't Knows, so you don't need 50% support to show a clear majority in these polls.)
At that point politicians and the media will undergo a somewhat rapid shift. Just like the one we had in 2016 after a narrow referendum victory. Except in the referendum the figure for Brexit support was around 38% if we include don't knows (those that didn't vote). That's why I say that the the figure will be 45%-50% - that would show a clear majority for rejoin in any referendum, and make staying out politically untenable.
I await your next shifting of the goalposts, but I'm out drinking with friends this evening so won't be able to reply until tomorrow.
@Philip Storry
"It's interesting that in your reply you have to acknowledge that we were rule makers in order to then try to diminish it via the idea of working with 27 other countries being bad."
Why? You claim rule makers and I point out 1/27th at best of making the rules, aka not rule making but rule taking.
"You then have to rely on the trope of us only having a vote only to approve or reject the rules"
Aka not making the rules, only rubber stamping what is presented. So rule taking.
"This is surely a form of cognitive dissonance."
I am seriously thinking it is. You seem to be reading the comment but then imagining it means something else.
"On my moving to the EU - the thought process is not difficult. The lack of Freedom of Movement - which you apparently happily removed from me and millions of others - makes it difficult. As might other issues. Perhaps I have elderly parents who I'd like to be near to assist? Perhaps I have children for whom such a move would be too disruptive? Moving wasn't necessarily simple even when we were EU members, after all."
Aka what I said. The EU doesnt want you and you cry. Also moving may not be worth it when you consider actually having to get up and move. I love the last bit, that is amazing shooting of your own argument (see bold).
"But that's not really the point. The point is you were happy to removed my rights, whilst I removed no rights from you."
I removed no rights from you. Go to the EU if you want to be in it. Stop crying nonsense.
"Polls show that voters think Brexit is a failure, that we were better off in the EU"
Eh? I saw the question brexit handled badly, and you will get leave voters agreeing with that too. Thats not regretting leaving, thats acknowledging the stupidity of trying to appease in and out when they are polar opposites.
"I await your next shifting of the goalposts, but I'm out drinking with friends this evening so won't be able to reply until tomorrow."
I hope you enjoy your night and maybe when you reread these posts tomorrow you might gain some different insight to what you seem to be reading from them.
Firstly a point of pedantry - we were 1/28 of the EU membership. There were 28 members, there are now 27. You're not even getting the figures right in your own argument. Why should I take heed of what you say when you keep making basic mistakes?
Secondly, reducing a collaborative process to a fraction demeans both yourself and the others involved.
Nobody should look around the table at a meeting and be counting the number of people so that they can quote a fraction before flouncing out of the room. No parent should be saying to their kids "Hey, don't blame me, I'm just 50% of the decision." That's just a crappy attitude to parenting. This continual resorting to a fraction isn't an argument - even if you had the right fraction - it's an attempt to belittle and demean your own country and other countries. It's baffling, odd and irrelevant. What matters is the process - which you've continually denied existed despite me explaining it - not the number of nations involved.
We were rule makers. We were involved in the process, consulted, and our concerns often addressed. Sometimes our own legislation was copied and pasted into EU law. These are facts, and mis-stating fractions cannot change that.
You then go off to quote me saying you're relying on a trope of rubber stamping.. to use as evidence of rubber stamping? I had no idea I was so powerful! I should speak a payrise into being for myself this afternoon... just after I speak World Peace into place, obviously. Seriously codejunky, quoting me summarising your position is not the same as providing evidence for your position. Please do better than this.
You then go on to say that I shot my own argument on moving, which I find odd. Freedom of Movement made movement easier, leaving the EU has made movement harder. At no point did I argue it was impossible, nor did I say that there aren't issues. A good friend of mine has lived in Belgium for years, and even when we were in the EU he had occasional hassles with their tax office despite only working in Belgium. Usually around his UK bank account, which they viewed with deep suspicion despite it being almost empty and just being kept around in case he needed to move back to the UK.
I don't see how I shot my own argument down by saying that moving countries can be difficult. That's a pragmatic acceptance of reality. Just like saying that losing EU membership has made moving to an EU country more difficult. Which, to be clear, was my argument. I apologise if I wasn't clear on that.
I'd love to know which polls you're reading which say we were worse off in the EU. I've not found any. Outside of a poll of Daily Express readers or a viewer poll from GBeebies, such a thing doesn't seem to exist. The polling is clear, and the trend is in favour or the EU and rejoining.
I had a great night last night thanks, but am as baffled by your arguments this morning as I was yesterday afternoon.
@Philip Storry
"Firstly a point of pedantry - we were 1/28 of the EU membership. There were 28 members, there are now 27. You're not even getting the figures right in your own argument. Why should I take heed of what you say when you keep making basic mistakes?"
Good catch, thank you for pointing out we were LESS rule making in the EU. I forgot Croatia joined in 2013 but I appreciate you supporting my point.
"Secondly, reducing a collaborative process to a fraction demeans both yourself and the others involved."
Well done you are understanding math. If one of you is trying to make a decision you get a decision. If two of you try to make a decision you compromise. The more you add the more you compromise and the more irrelevant your opinion. Even in the EU they make their parties to group together like enough minds because alone they are irrelevant. And that requires more compromise.
"We were rule makers. We were involved in the process, consulted, and our concerns often addressed. Sometimes our own legislation was copied and pasted into EU law. These are facts, and mis-stating fractions cannot change that."
Congrats for supporting brexit. You were consulted as part of the process and Cameron won the election, had strong political pressure to hold the referendum (your fault) and we voted leave which you now claim responsibility. As you say- Nobody should look around the table at a meeting and be counting the number of people so that they can quote a fraction before flouncing out of the room. No parent should be saying to their kids "Hey, don't blame me, I'm just 50% of the decision." That's just a crappy attitude to parenting. This continual resorting to a fraction isn't an argument - even if you had the right fraction - it's an attempt to belittle and demean your own country and other countries. It's baffling, odd and irrelevant. What matters is the process - which you've continually denied existed despite me explaining it - not the number of nations involved.
So based on your wrong opinion when you said- The point is you were happy to removed my rights you are wrong because you were involved and so it is your fault. You were involved. Do you see how stupid that sounds? Do you see how your watered down piddly contribution is just that no matter how right or wrong you are or how strong you hold your opinion?
"You then go off to quote me saying you're relying on a trope of rubber stamping.. to use as evidence of rubber stamping?"
Sorry I assumed you had read the reply above it which shows you incorrect so quoting that to hammer the point of you being incorrect. Hopefully the above explanation will make this easier for you to understand.
"You then go on to say that I shot my own argument on moving, which I find odd."
I cant help you understand basic English. According to you it was difficult to move while in the EU but spent your moaning comments complaining about losing easy moving. Your argument being that meme riding a bike, putting a stick in the spokes then crying about it. You cant do it so you complain you wont be able to do it but couldnt do it anyway because waaa! Its crying for the sake of crying.
"I had a great night last night thanks, but am as baffled by your arguments this morning as I was yesterday afternoon."
Glad you had a great night (I am sincere). I am not sure I will be able to explain the arguments in a way that you will be able to understand. I can only try
"The UK population was lied to"
Yes, yes it was.
Turkey is about to join the EU - reality: Not likely until the Cyprus situation is resolved, but that threat was basically blatant Islamophobia.
Hospital waiting will cease to be a thing outside of the EU - reality: Most of the EU nursing staff left, the ones that remain have been on various strikes because pay and conditions are awful and, well, each government pledges to bring down waiting lists but it seems they'd rather piss away obscene amounts of money on half baked IT projects than support the people that actually do the work. hospitals are about fixing illnesses, the tech is secondary to that, it's a support, not the reason.
Take back control of our borders - reality: How's that working out for you? Small boats / stop the boats was just not a thing before Brexit. Sure, clandestines have always sneaked across since before there even was an EU, but the scale now is ridiculous. You can argue that the EU should have done more (and I think they're slowly realising the scope of the problem) or whatever, but the fact was that prior to the referendum unlawful immigration wasn't really a thing on most people's minds, nor was the EU to be honest. A bit of lying, scare stories, and flag shagging turned a minor thing into a major crisis complete with fake photos of queues of people. You voted out to control the borders and... ended up with queues of people because your border control is a joke and your fervent objections to having citizen's ID mean that - so long as one can speak reasonably good English - it's a country where it's very easy to get lost in. Just say you're from Bracknell/Coventry/etc, it's not as if people necessarily have any useful form of ID (I didn't until I got a passport in order to move to France in 2002).
What it said on that bus - reality: Due to rebates, the £350M/week figure was a fantasy, and it neglected to mention the benefits of being in the EU (that didn't have a simple monetary value). If all of that nonexistent £350M/week went to the NHS, where are the new hospitals that were promised? Why did the Tories hike up NI contributions for a social care fund? The figures don't add up.
Free British businesses from damaging EU regulations - reality: Speaking of buses, this was definitely throwing British businesses (particularly smaller ones) under a bus. Instead of one accreditation that's good everywhere, it's endless and ridiculous red tape per country...for those businesses that didn't simply give up on their export ambitions or simply give up entirely as rather a number did. As for the import checks, has that even been implemented yet or has it been deferred yet again?
"told of the apocalypse"
It's easy to see your level of gullibility by the words you choose. The pro-EU side gave predictions of what would happen that was dismissed by shouts of "Project Fear". As soon as the referendum result was known, it was jumped upon by Leavers saying "see? none of this happened, you were all lying".
Fast forward to when the UK actually left the EU, having negotiated an astonishingly piss-poor agreement because four years was used more for posturing than getting anything done, and we're starting to see those predictions happening.
"and even directly threatened by our own government if we dare vote leave"
Citation needed.
"Thats how well heard we were."
I was told by the government that it had nothing to do with me, get lost. I was told by Brexit supporters "don't come back, we don't want people like you". So you can take your so-called democracy and shove it right where the sun doesn't shine.
That's how well heard I was, and I'm not alone.
@heyrick
"Turkey is about to join the EU - reality: Not likely until the Cyprus situation is resolved, but that threat was basically blatant Islamophobia."
That seems a hell of a reach. How is it Islamophobia? Considering the issue seemed to be the huge number of people who can just come over being added to by another country it sounds like an issue of open borders.
"Hospital waiting will cease to be a thing outside of the EU"
Who the hell said that? I would love to see that quote. There is disbelief, either of that being said or in someone being so stupid as to say it.
"Take back control of our borders"
This is an interesting issue. This is the intentional effort of the gov to not secure our borders. Even those who should be protecting the border have been caught out helping people float over and even stating they refuse to enforce the border. The Rwanda idea was an expensive insanity but the reason behind it is the difficulty of kicking people out when they shouldnt be here. The extra strain cannot be helping with the legitimate migration of people wanting to be here.
"What it said on that bus"
This one was answered by someone else, we already give the NHS more than what was on the bus. The bus also said could not would, although someone once showed me a picture of Boris doing a speech with 'would' on a poster.
"Free British businesses from damaging EU regulations"
This is definitely something should be done, trying to appease the EU and EU supporters never works. Talk about removing the regs causes screeching and not removing it makes them screech that we should have remained. Diverging over time will probably make it a bit easier but as we watch the EU sink it will probably be easier to sell not doing stupid.
"It's easy to see your level of gullibility by the words you choose. The pro-EU side gave predictions of what would happen that was dismissed by shouts of "Project Fear". As soon as the referendum result was known, it was jumped upon by Leavers saying "see? none of this happened, you were all lying"."
Yes. Aka the pro-EU spouted a lot off bull (I also admit the official leave bulled a lot too) and we rejected the lies. And of course once the FUD didnt happen we did point this out. I only exaggerate a little as one of the EU fools was predicting WW3 because we left.
"Fast forward to when the UK actually left the EU, having negotiated an astonishingly piss-poor agreement because four years was used more for posturing than getting anything done, and we're starting to see those predictions happening."
What? What planet are you on? After negotiating a piss poor deal which was made to try and appease both sides as May made clear, we are still better off out. We are watching the Eurozone struggle (EU proper). The immediate benefits of leaving (yes the covid jab) showed the difference of calibre between politicians in individual countries and the ones they send to the EU.
"Citation needed."
You may have missed it not being here but Osborne/Cameron realised they were losing people to the leave vote and explicitly and publicly threatened the population with something labelled the 'punishment budget'. It was called out and rejected outright for being such a blatant threat against the population if they dare vote the wrong way.
"In the EU we are rule takers."
The prime difference being that you had some say in the matter, the exclusive "opt-outs" for things that weren't of interest (like the Euro and anything to do with it), and since the basic idea was some form of harmonisation, the rules were supposed to be followed by all of the countries.
Now? Well, you have the sovereign right to go your own way, just as the EU has the right to say "unacceptable" and close the door. When further rules are made or amended, you might be able to apply some soft diplomatic pressure but you no longer have a seat at the table. You walked away from that, and now the more right leaning want to walk away from the ECHR as well which is not going to endear you to anybody.
In other words: made your bed, now lie in it.
@heyrick
"The prime difference being that you had some say in the matter"
1/27th at best. Mostly in rubber stamping capacity. And it was soooooo good that people voted to leave after being lied to, warned of some FUD apocalypse and then even directly threatened by out own government if we vote leave. And yet we voted to leave.
"the exclusive "opt-outs" for things that weren't of interest (like the Euro and anything to do with it)"
Not of interest to us to join the EU fully. Opt out of fully joining the project because it was so bad. And I was called eurosceptic during the Euro arguments where devotees told us all the FUD above if we didnt join and thank freaking god we didnt because the Euro was and is a disaster. Rejoin would require joining fully.
"and since the basic idea was some form of harmonisation, the rules were supposed to be followed by all of the countries."
Supposed. Except we gold plated the rules and others ignored them. Even the French president went to a little fishing village to tell them they will not need to comply with EU stupidity.
"Now? Well, you have the sovereign right to go your own way"
Yes. I consider that a good thing.
"In other words: made your bed, now lie in it."
Damn comfy thanks.
@AC
"Not offered. Something that a person who really had been looking to work abroad would know..."
Wrong. As I was at the time of the transition agreement living in a country in the EU I was sent an official letter offering residency if I visit their official offices to do so. I went as far as temporary residency during the transition period (we didnt know how long that would go on) but no interest in permanent as I intended to come back. Now you would have to apply but if the EU is so great then surely people will go do so...
Wrong. As I was at the time of the transition agreement living in a country in the EU I was sent an official letter offering residency if I visit their official offices to do so. I went as far as temporary residency during the transition period (we didnt know how long that would go on)
This fails the smell test.
The transition period was 31/1/20 to 31/12/20.
So you were resident in "an EU country" some time in that transition period. That period was set to end 31/12/20. ("We did not know how long that would go on" is poppycock.)
What "temporary residency" had you applied for? If you only had temporary leave to stay you may have been prompted to apply for residency. That's not an offer. That's just the withdrawal agreement. It's not some special Willy Wonka Golden Ticket.
Which country where you in? Come, come. Out with it. Otherwise people may think it's all bullshit.
@AC
"So you were resident in "an EU country" some time in that transition period. That period was set to end 31/12/20. ("We did not know how long that would go on" is poppycock.)"
The brexit vote was 2016.
"What "temporary residency" had you applied for? If you only had temporary leave to stay you may have been prompted to apply for residency. That's not an offer. That's just the withdrawal agreement."
Yes.
"Which country where you in? Come, come. Out with it. Otherwise people may think it's all bullshit."
You are a coward who wont even tag their posts. A coward who somehow feels entitled to information I aint sharing with you. A coward who thinks their opinion has much value. Believe or not doesnt change the facts nor your increased irrelevance as a coward. You would just post the same question next time as all cowards do.
So your claim of winning some Willy Wonker Golden Residency offer is indeed bullshit then.
Thank you for exposing your own deceit.
(And as you won't name the EU country it's probably likely you were never really there for actual residency/work. Long vacation? Very nice.)
The brexit vote was 2016.
Did you have to look that up?
@AC
"So your claim of winning some Willy Wonker Golden Residency offer is indeed bullshit then.
Thank you for exposing your own deceit."
What deceit? I have made no claim of some daft golden ticket nonsense you mention. I just mentioned I was contacted to get residency, which I went to their office as offered in the letter and got the temporary residency. Then I got a follow up at some point for permanent which I didnt take up. Anything else is in your mind.
"(And as you won't name the EU country it's probably likely you were never really there for actual residency/work. Long vacation? Very nice.)"
That is the part that amuses me most, I wasnt there for work and didnt intend to stay forever. Just a couple of years. And yet people who seem to wish to have stayed in the EU seem to find it oddly impossible for them to have gone.
"Did you have to look that up?"
Nope I remember the brexit vote in 2016 and as you point out the transition period ended 31/12/20 hence ad I said we didnt know how long this nonsense would go on. Because it seemed never ending.
codejunky> I just mentioned I was contacted to get residency, which I went to their office as offered in the letter and got the temporary residency.
Was "their office" the local police station? In many countries foreigners must register with the local police if staying for more than 90 days. Otherwise they can get deported.
@AC
"Was "their office" the local police station? In many countries foreigners must register with the local police if staying for more than 90 days. Otherwise they can get deported."
Nope. Official offices with what looked like an area they specifically carved out for dealing with temporary residency (I might be wrong, maybe thats how they do things). Arrive, they update their system with basic details, took a photo and gave me a residency card. I still have it here with its expiry of 09/2025.
'they update their system with basic details, took a photo and gave me a residency card'
This is the standard operating procedure for foreigners in many European countries (apart from EU nationals in EU countries) who are requesting to stay longer than 90 days.
Nothing to do with Brexit at all then.
And this doesn't allow you to work in that country.
Very disingenuous on your part to suggest this is some special "offer" of residency you received, don't you think?
@AC
"Nothing to do with Brexit at all then."
The letter inviting me to go to the office to get temporary residency was due to brexit. The card itself states it is part of the residence document withdrawal agreement art 18 with the type of permit being article 50 TEU. That sounds fairly conclusive its due to brexit.
"Very disingenuous on your part to suggest this is some special "offer" of residency you recieved, don't you think?"
What special offer? I am stating simple facts of what happened and you seem to be making up garbage and then arguing against your garbage. The point I am making is it isnt a special offer. Hence those wanting to be in the EU so much and the UK so bad should have moved. Then people cried how hard it was because the EU didnt want them. I am simply pointing out the facts that even I was offered residency. No apply and beg and pray to remain, a simple letter sent to me to go to the official office to get the temporary residency permit. I got a follow up for permanent residency which I didnt do and maybe that process might have been more involved if I went to the official office, I dont know as I never intended to remain there.
You seem desperate to claim I am lying for some reason. You seem desperate to claim I am saying something other than what I am writing so you can argue against it for some reason. It was nothing special, it was nothing more than what I said, I dont know why it upsets you so.
"Hence those wanting to be in the EU so much and the UK so bad should have moved"
This kind of statement, from brexit fundementalists, sums up their absolute inability to understand what the EU offered and what they in effect stole from generations of UK citizens to come.
Being an EU citizen means you can reside in your home (or any other EU) country and at the same time go and work in any EU country.
This is something you CANNOT now do as a UK citizen resident in an EU country.
Thanks a lot, you shower of malcontent headbangers.
@codejunky
Was this you?
https://www.cityam.com/british-expats-flee-spain-to-avoid-deportation-as-post-brexit-rules-turn-them-into-illegal-immigrants/
Shaun Cromber was one of them, telling the platform that, despite voting for Brexit, he did not think the UK’s departure from the EU would have an impact on his legal status in Spain.
“Yes I voted out, but I didn’t realise it would come to this, my application has been rejected and we are on our way home – the wife is in tears, she’s distraught and if I’m honest and I’m not too happy at the prospect of returning back to the UK,” Cromber reportedly said.
"Arrive, they update their system with basic details, took a photo and gave me a residency card."
You missed the fingerprinting...
"The card itself states it is part of the residence document withdrawal agreement art 18 with the type of permit being article 50 TEU."
Those weren't offered. Those had to be applied for. It's become a problem for some of the older less mentally capable who somehow managed to miss this necessity.
At best you might have been told you'd need a different card upon going to renew whatever you had in the past. A more generous local authority might have sent you a reminder letter, but this won't have been an offer, more a "go do this now" request.
Given the short validity, I'm guessing you didn't actually have any EU rights (those open after five years of residence, that the UK couldn't make this work is the UK's fault, not the EU's) otherwise your card would be permanent (with a face validity of ten years, like the passports).
@heyrick
"You missed the fingerprinting..."
You have an issue with that? Add to that the push towards biometric data anyway.
"Those weren't offered. Those had to be applied for. It's become a problem for some of the older less mentally capable who somehow managed to miss this necessity."
Ok I had to apply. The process-
>I get letter inviting me to go to the official building with directions to the officials brexit area
>No question of eligibility just taking of basic details and a photo
>Got card and temporary residency
That sounds very much like an offer as it took no application from me but hey ho. I also got a letter pretty much the same for permanent residency but I never had any intention of getting that so didnt bother.
"Given the short validity, I'm guessing you didn't actually have any EU rights (those open after five years of residence, that the UK couldn't make this work is the UK's fault, not the EU's) otherwise your card would be permanent (with a face validity of ten years, like the passports)."
I am pretty sure I have mentioned it was for temporary residency. And if the UK is so screwed from leaving then surely you would want to move to live in the EU. You say you have, I am making others aware that instead of moaning they could have moved.
Residency was a precondition of applying for the Withdrawal Agreement. If you had no residency by the 31st of December 2020 then you had to leave the country by the 31st of March 2021.
If you already had temporary (first five years) residency it was because you'd already applied for it, it wasn't offered to you.
If you wanted to take advantage of the Withdrawal Agreement, it was up to you to apply for it before the end of your host country's grace period (end of June, September, or December 2021). If your host country knew of your existence as a British resident they might have sent you a letter asking you to apply, but until you applied they didn't offer you anything.
So I put it to you that if you voluntarily left within your first five years, you couldn't hack it anyway. It's pretty obvious why, looking at these posts.
I still don't think codejunky was ever living/working in the EU. It's just a tall tale they use to try and muddy the waters about how brexiters stole/threw away our EU rights.
Otherwise why hide the actual country? (Other than to be shown not to know the actual procedures for applying for (and being granted) residency in country.)
We can't, because you ruined it for us. That's on you, not on us, and your trite "if you love the EU so much, why don't you marry it" school yard arguments are tedious. You and your brexiter ilk are directly at fault in this regard, yet you will never even acknowledge it, let alone apply a little self-reflection and humility.
@Patrician
"Care to post all the, measurable, positives the UK has benefitted from since leaving the EU?"
Guessing you havnt been around for long? This has been posted so many times for years and leads to a whole new level of fanatical copium arguing. It really goes into a deep rabbit hole of trying to claim such benefits aint benefits or aint real or mental gymnastics that I really dont fancy rerunning the argument.
Feel free to look through my long post history and maybe reply to one of the old threads that this has been answered.
Why the fuck would anyone want to read through thousands of lines of utter bullshit to prove a negative?
The onus is on you, as the one making the claims, to demonstrate them. Your response is always "I have already proved that", but you never actually have. You really are a tedious and pathetic little troll.
So, not a single solitary benefit to Brexit. Not one.
Not even muh vaccines because a) that was disproven in the same week and b) you probably refused on the grounds of the 5G chips in the vaccine send tracking messages back to Bill Gates.
"This has been posted so many times for years"
Yes, yes it has. And it's always people asking "Name a Brexit benefit" to be met with silence, subterfuge, or "oh we've already done this so many times!".
Years are ticking by, sunlit uplands never found, just name something positive that Brexit has delivered other than idiotic Little Englanders getting to feel smug about themselves?
@heyrick
"Yes, yes it has. And it's always people asking "Name a Brexit benefit" to be met with silence, subterfuge, or "oh we've already done this so many times!"."
Not sure what rock you have been hiding under but I am fairly sure you have been here long enough to have read about them. My favourite one is the covid vaccine purchase/distribution and severe EU misbehaviour. So far it seems to make remain fanatics apoplectic so hopefully it wont have that effect on you.
That somebody else somewhere else acted like a twat is not a Brexit Benefit, and that you need to go to "they tried to steal our medecine" as something good that Brexit has done shows what an utter sham the whole shitshow really was (and here I'm referring to both Brexit and Covid!).
@heyrick
"That somebody else somewhere else acted like a twat is not a Brexit Benefit"
Eh? Severely bad behaviour by a government is more than just someone acting like a twat (be careful with your language, you might get an Elongated Muskrat clutching his pearls at you). That we left that governments control is absolutely a benefit.
"and that you need to go to "they tried to steal our medecine" as something good that Brexit has done shows what an utter sham the whole shitshow really was (and here I'm referring to both Brexit and Covid!)."
Can you explain this? How would you put a positive spin on the UK procuring the vaccine while the EU tried to steal it after colossal failure? Especially considering the concerns of the time that covid was a great life threatening virus compared with serious population die outs in history.
@Gordon 10
"For a suggestion though - less co-operation on supply of Medines and supplies."
So the EU isnt going to sell to us? Do they not sell outside the EU? Especially if its easier to sell to us than the EU (assume less regulation or compliance messing etc). The EU kinda sucks then, good job we can deal with the companies in pretty much any country in the world.
Maybe this is why the EU is a shrinking portion of the worlds wealth?
I'm sorry to but into what is almost a private fightclub but might I point out that the value of EC co-operation on medicines was such that they, under the aegis of Ursula Van Lieden, attempted to hijack vaccines that had been developed in Cambridge and produced in Belgium for their own citizens (mertitocrats and beurocrats first?) against their own rules and only backed down under extreme pressure. The NHS is not perfect or good at many things including treating me, but at least I don't have to worry about them stealing (sorry, misappropriating) my medicines for their political convenience.
> Ok so I read that there will be extra costs to the NHS. What costs?
In Northern Ireland the "Health Service" (not called NHS, called HSC NI) co-operate with the Irish Health Service in various ways (i.e emergency ambulances crossing the border, some patients having surgery in the other country, etc). Obviously any loss of Adequacy will have some impact (and therefore likely have additional related costs) on that.
That's just one example off the top of my head.
I mentioned above the example of the "Health Service" in Northern Ireland having co-operation arrangementswith the Irish Health Service.
For example some HSC NI cancer patients are treated in a Dublin hospital (and this would obviously involve portions of their HSC NI health record being transferred to the Irish Health Service).
There are also likely to be vice versa situations where patients of the Irish Health Service may be treated by HSC NI - I believe some patients in County Donegal (Ireland) may be treated just across the border in (HSC NI) Altnagelvin Hospital in Derry (UK).
It's a "he". The proof, if required, is the post, which got moderated away some time ago, when I reported it, where he called Gina Miller a "bitch". He's a nasty little sexist as well as a RWNJ.
It's acceptable to explain your position, and have disagreements, misogyny is never acceptable. Sadly, that sort of thing that goes with the mindset of superiority of the little-englander who believes that people from his particular country are naturally better, more honest, and more capable than dirty Johnny foreigner. It's the very root of the belief that "Brussels" is somehow corrupt, yet the UK political system is beyond reproach, despite being less accountable, elected by the rotten FPTP system, and having a wholly unelected second house filled with political appointees and representatives of a single sect of a religion that most people in the country do not belong to.
I wonder how any proposed UK data protection changes will cope with the situation that, due to the Good Friday Agreement, everyone in Northern Ireland is still lawfully entitled to the *same* (i.e. EU GDPR) data protection rights that they had at the time of that Agreement's signing. Any reduction in those rights that the UK government may propose would be unlawful (the Good Friday Agreement was an internationally recognised legal agreement) with regard to the people in Northern Ireland .
The appendices to Rickett's letter (ref in article) detail the evidence, or at least opinion of their witnesses. The TLDR answer is that there is some extra cost in paperwork dealing with UK citizens in EU and vice versa, and more importantly it will put barriers in the way of co-operative research such as large scale clinical trials, companies that want to sell services into the EU or the NHS buying services from the EU.
In fact, most of the letter is concerned with other areas, the NHS is only one element.
(FWIW I wasn't in favour of Brexit but it's done now and we aren't going back anytime soon, so we've got to make the best of things with what we've got.)
@Elongated Muskrat
"Maybe he didn't want to wade through pages of CodeJunky arguing with people?"
I can understand that. I did post 1 top level comment asking a valid question about the article which didnt bother with any pro/anti EU stuff. After that I replied to someone who cant get over brexit and people have been responding and asking me questions/discussing with me since. Which of course you have now joined the threads with your toxic garbage and projecting. You posted 8 comments in about 30 minutes mostly crying about me and how you cant 'not see' comments you dont like.
There is a simple solution but dont hurt yourself while thinking about it.
Yes, there has been a customary rerun of Brexit…
The challenge the UK government has given itself here, is the responsibilities of freedom/sovereignty. Yes they have the freedom to change the law and thus diverge from prior arrangements, but that has consequences.
The problem is that on the one hand the UK said by being independent it could have better and higher standards of data protection, one the other its actions are to reduce those protections, ie. politicians really believe our future prosperity requires UK citizens to become the product and have no meaningful protection from state/commercial exploitation; just like US citizens…
Absolutely right, Roland. It was a relief to see the back of the Tories' Data Protection and Digital Information Bill; its eagerness to dilute citizens' data protection rights and to hand personal data (particularly NHS patient data) to researchers risked the UK's adequacy status with the EU. The HoL are right to highlight the bureaucratic complications that could result. I was very much hoping that Labour could be relied upon to keep in step with our European partners, but the early pronouncements from the Starmer administration sound discouragingly like this might be yet another area in which its policies are indistinguishable from its predecessor.
...that the forums here don't allow you to block or mute people, because it's incredibly tedious wading through pages and pages of comments from a very small number of commenters, who seem to be determined to have public arguments with anyone who doesn't share their own unpopular opinions. There's one in particular on this thread who seems determined to repeatedly tell everyone about how much he hates the EU. There's another who likes to comment on anything even tangentially related to Russia, with pro-Kremlin talking points.
There might be some interesting, intelligent, opinions posted here, but they're swamped by the same, tired, old lies and right-wing propaganda and xenophobia.
The forums would really be a better place for it. I'm sure the facility to do so would not be particularly difficult, as long as a user is logged in. Store a list of blocked user IDs, filter or hide those posts/replies from those people. Allow us to read the comments we are interested in and not all this drivel.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
