Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So, more resignations this morning. More Labour ministers and 1or2 cabinet members.

 Monokuma wrote:


Migration will become more controllable, with countries able to select people with beneficial skills to ensure people aren't being flooded. This would have stopped the Migrant Crisis. We will actually know who is in the country, with correct details, and we won't have to deal with the likes of Abu Hamza again. I can't see a downside to this for our country.

You realise the Abu Hamza was an Egyptian that entered our Country legally in 1979 on a valid student visa with all the correct details. So strictly speaking we did select this person on the basis we thought he would be beneficial to society... The EU had no say, it was the UKS decision solely on whether we let him into the Country. To raise this as an issue for leaving the EU is just plainly false.

This is why there can't be a rush to invoke Article 50.

Alistair Darling (former Chancellor of the Exchequer) wrote:"We've got no government, no Opposition and the people who got us into this mess have run away," former Labour chancellor and Remain supporter Alistair Darling tells Today.
...

"How can we have taken this decision and have no plan for the future?" he asks, accusing Boris Johnson of treating the EU referendum "as a game".

Corbyn is appointing new Shadow Cabinet ministers as fast as the old ones are resigning, however more are resigning later this morning. He clearly has lost the support of a big chunk of the parliamentary Labour party.

George Osborne wrote: "Only the UK can trigger Article 50. And in my judgement, we should only do that when there is a clear view about what new arrangements we are seeking with our European neighbours.

"In the meantime, during the negotiations that will follow, there will be no change to people's rights to travel and work and to the way our goods and services are traded or to the way our economy and financial system is regulated."

Bojo also agrees things have to go slowly, saying that exit supporters have to accept that the 52-48 result was "not entirely overwhelming".

 Selym wrote:

 notprop wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Monokuma wrote:
Merkel said previously that she was seeking trade deals with the UK post-Brexit. This is interesting. The French even more so, they usually try to sabotage things.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Monokuma wrote:

I did notice the anglophobia in how the United Kingdom is expected to accept more migrants than other nations.

You know that it doesn't, right?

That is why I said 'Expected'. The Germans did intend to push more Syrians onto us. We already have enough unchecked mass migration to deal with.

Yes, 0.5% of the population is definitely "unchecked mass immigration"

You know that is per annum right?

I was never concerned by the immigration issue (the last three Governments have had clear reason to promote it), but effect upon the nations infrastructure is clear. In the same decade that has seen 0.5% per annum immigration the BSF funding has dried up, new Hospital projects (as in additional not replacement) are few and far between and house building is at a low.

Also whomever said we have plenty of undeveloped land is confused. Most population per km2 will rate the UK as the most crowed and tar aced space on the planet. Planning laws here are deliberately set to prevent further encroachment on the Green belt.

Which ends up happening anyway, cause there's no bloody space.
If a spot on British soil isn't covered by housing, it's got a farm or uninhabitable (for various reasons) territory.

There is plenty of space. We only lack space because of a refusal to readdress the green belt. The U.K. is by no means densely populated, it's just that there is no political will to disrupt the planning laws that are way out of date. The green belt was created over 50 years ago and is needs to be looked at again. We could very easily build plenty more houses where they are needed, but the government do not dare to upset people like the CPRE and their core older voters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Whirlwind wrote:

 Monokuma wrote:


Migration will become more controllable, with countries able to select people with beneficial skills to ensure people aren't being flooded. This would have stopped the Migrant Crisis. We will actually know who is in the country, with correct details, and we won't have to deal with the likes of Abu Hamza again. I can't see a downside to this for our country.

You realise the Abu Hamza was an Egyptian that entered our Country legally in 1979 on a valid student visa with all the correct details. So strictly speaking we did select this person on the basis we thought he would be beneficial to society... The EU had no say, it was the UKS decision solely on whether we let him into the Country. To raise this as an issue for leaving the EU is just plainly false.

There has been quite a lot of these. People pointing to illigal immigrants, terrorists and other people that are nothing to do with the EU for a reason to leave.

 Monokuma wrote:
Merkel said previously that she was seeking trade deals with the UK post-Brexit. This is interesting. The French even more so, they usually try to sabotage things.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Monokuma wrote:

I did notice the anglophobia in how the United Kingdom is expected to accept more migrants than other nations.

You know that it doesn't, right?

That is why I said 'Expected'. The Germans did intend to push more Syrians onto us. We already have enough unchecked mass migration to deal with.

And what is the concern here? These people are fleeing for their lives form a country in turmoil. It's called asylum and its about other nations supporting human beings like you and me from being persecuted and killed by something outside of their control.

If our government started dropping 1000lb bombs on your head; that you had to risk your life to go out and buy a loaf of bread that's meant to keep you and your family alive for the next week; that you've got to live in fear every moment of the day that it could be your last living moment, then I think you might want other countries to reciprocate and offer you support to get out of the mess. The only reason these people come here is because they want to get away from this sorry mess, they would have never left if there wasn't a civil war, Syria was a prosperous country before it collapsed. These people need our help and we should gladly offer it because we hope for the same if the situation as reversed, a bit of empathy would go a long way as to what they have been through!

I live in a medium size rural market town (Henley on Thames.)

We have got 470 new homes being imposed on us by 2027 by the county council, which are being imposed on them by the government. That will add over 10% to the population. The plan has been accepted by the population via a local referendum, but mainly because the alternative was worse. It isn't popular.

The problem here isn't space, though, it is sustainable development.

There already is a serious problem with transport and parking. The town has serious traffic congestion, a bad shortage of parking spaces, and fairly poor public transport.

The other issue is the quality of the new homes and fitting them into the town and village environments in an attractive way. People don't want to ruin their urban environment with unsympathetic development.

Words from the Germans:

BBC wrote:German MP Michael Fuchs, a senior ally of Chancellor Angela Merkel, spoke to the Today programme a short time ago.

With a chuckle, he made it clear things were going to have to change.

"Either you are in a club or you are out of a club. If you are in a club you have to follow the rules. If you are out of the club, there will be different rules," he said.

Asked if it would be possible for the UK to retain access to the single market, he replied: "It will be possible, of course, but not for free.

"You have to see with Norway, with Switzerland, you have to pay a certain fee. And the per capita fee of Norway is exactly the same as what Britain is now paying into the EU. So there won't be any savings."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-36570120

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Corbyn is appointing new Shadow Cabinet ministers as fast as the old ones are resigning, however more are resigning later this morning. He clearly has lost the support of a big chunk of the parliamentary Labour party.

Did he actually ever have their support or have they just been biding their time until they can get rid. The big risk of course is that the population that voted him in aren't going anywhere so not only will we have divided Tory party but also a divided Labour party at the same time.

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Bojo also agrees things have to go slowly, saying that exit supporters have to accept that the 52-48 result was "not entirely overwhelming".

I think he might be waking up to the fact that there may have been a lot of protest votes and that people didn't really want to leave they just wanted to show their displeasure of the government. I honestly think that if you reran the vote again on Thursday the result would be entirely different...

In a joint paper, French foreign minister Jean-Marc Ayrault and his German counterpart Frank-Walter Steinmeier will argue for measures including joint EU taxes.
They will say Europe needs to concentrate on ensuring the safety of its citizens as well as ‘creating a stable and community framework for the management of migration and refugee flows’.
They will also push for ‘the convergence of our economies to achieve sustained growth’.

Corbyn was never voted in by MPs but by Labour supporters. The MPs have had to tow the line or look like they are distanced from the common Lanour member.

He has never been supported by many labour MPs.

That's said His stance on the EU vote has undermined any credability he had as being "a new type of politician" and I'm sure this is what Hilary Benn is counting on.

ATTENTION ALL USERS! YOU READ NOW!!

We are now into the post-referendum era. We have three overlapping threads in the forum on the topic of UK politics which currently is dominated by the fallout from the referendum.

In order to keep the forum tidy, the moderators have decided to close this thread so the discussion can continue in the forward looking thread: British Politics: The Year Ahead.

The Post-Brexit Poll thread will be allowed to stay open until the end of its fortnight of life, then locked.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
ATTENTION ALL USERS! YOU READ NOW!!

We are now into the post-referendum era. We have three overlapping threads in the forum on the topic of UK politics which currently is dominated by the fallout from the referendum.

In order to keep the forum tidy, the moderators have decided to close this thread so the discussion can continue in the forward looking thread: British Politics: The Year Ahead.

The Post-Brexit Poll thread will be allowed to stay open until the end of its fortnight of life, then locked.

I demand a referendum on this issue.