The result of the EU referendum:

[Rhiannon]

http://newsthump.com/2016/06/16/river-thames-dies-of-embarrassment/

Wankered has become a verb.

[ProfessorDavey]

That is one question attempted but doesn't really address it, I'll rephrase that one hopefully making more difficult for you to obfuscate.

1. I seem to recall you claiming we could do a free trade deal with China independent of the EU?

2. I suspect the EU will try to keep us in, as a matter of interest if we get a leave vote will you be campaigning for a new deal, or, just blindly insisting that it isn't possible?

Sorry Jakswan - it is you who is engaging in classic obfuscation.

You asked me a very specific question - whether the UK could sign trade deals with China independent of the EU. I answered it factually and clearly, and with evidence. You don't like the answer (because it doesn't fit with your dogma) and therefore you ignore my answer but ask a completely different question.

If we vote to leave I fully expect that we will leave, but I hope that we will negotiate a position outside of the EU that is as close to being in it as possible. So effectively being in the EEA.

That said, in my opinion, the most likely way to get concessions from the EU is to vote to remain. That we nearly left would have frightened the life out of the EU and it will look to do what it can to encourage others not to leave. And to do so rather than give a great deal to a country that has voted to leave the EU will 'reward' us for staying.

Interestingly that kind of mood music is already coming out from the EU - effectively that the changes we wanted to remain in the EU will be pushed through as rapidly as possible if we vote remain.

[ProfessorDavey]

That is one question attempted but doesn't really address it, I'll rephrase that one hopefully making more difficult for you to obfuscate.

1. I seem to recall you claiming we could do a free trade deal with China independent of the EU?

2. I suspect the EU will try to keep us in, as a matter of interest if we get a leave vote will you be campaigning for a new deal, or, just blindly insisting that it isn't possible?

By the way your evasion tactics are noted.

You will remember that I provided the relevant data on EU vs non EU net migration that demonstrated that our 'supposed' controlled migration from non EU countries has risen by the same (if not more) than net migration from the 'supposed' uncontrolled EU countries.

So were we to have adopted exactly the same migration 'controls' for EU migrants as for non EU migrants it wouldn't make one jot of difference to the net migration figures. Which is what we see in other countries, such as Australia and Canada (which the Breixiters use as the gold standards) which have net immigration levels way higher than our.

[jakswan]

Sorry Jakswan - it is you who is engaging in classic obfuscation.

You asked me a very specific question - whether the UK could sign trade deals with China independent of the EU. I answered it factually and clearly, and with evidence. You don't like the answer (because it doesn't fit with your dogma) and therefore you ignore my answer but ask a completely different question.

If we vote to leave I fully expect that we will leave, but I hope that we will negotiate a position outside of the EU that is as close to being in it as possible. So effectively being in the EEA.

That said, in my opinion, the most likely way to get concessions from the EU is to vote to remain. That we nearly left would have frightened the life out of the EU and it will look to do what it can to encourage others not to leave. And to do so rather than give a great deal to a country that has voted to leave the EU will 'reward' us for staying.

Interestingly that kind of mood music is already coming out from the EU - effectively that the changes we wanted to remain in the EU will be pushed through as rapidly as possible if we vote remain.

I'm asking you two questions, I thought the free trade deal was implied but you decided it wasn't.

1. I seem to recall you claiming we could do a free trade deal with China independent of the EU? Not yet answered this.

2. I suspect the EU will try to keep us in, as a matter of interest if we get a leave vote will you be campaigning for a new deal, or, just blindly insisting that it isn't possible? So you won't be campaigning for a new deal but insisting we leave, interesting.

[jakswan]

By the way your evasion tactics are noted.

You will remember that I provided the relevant data on EU vs non EU net migration that demonstrated that our 'supposed' controlled migration from non EU countries has risen by the same (if not more) than net migration from the 'supposed' uncontrolled EU countries.

So were we to have adopted exactly the same migration 'controls' for EU migrants as for non EU migrants it wouldn't make one jot of difference to the net migration figures. Which is what we see in other countries, such as Australia and Canada (which the Breixiters use as the gold standards) which have net immigration levels way higher than our.

You asserted that 'the 'controlled' non EU migration is no more controlled than the 'non controlled' EU migration'. Why are the migrants in Calais doing? If the controls are the same they will show their passport and enter.

The issue with migration is about control not about numbers.

[ProfessorDavey]

You asserted that 'the 'controlled' non EU migration is no more controlled than the 'non controlled' EU migration'. Why are the migrants in Calais doing? If the controls are the same they will show their passport and enter.

The issue with migration is about control not about numbers.

No it is absolutely about numbers.

Just ask those going on and on about 'all those migrants' - do you really think they'd go, 'job' done if EU migrants were subject to the same 'control' as non EU migrants but net migration didn't change one iota. Of course not.

What drives migration is economics - so if you actually look at the statistics net migration goes up and down with the performance of the economy (and therefore the supply of jobs that can't be filled by people from the UK) - as I've ably demonstrated but you still haven't addressed both EU migration and non EU migration go up and down in the same pattern and certainly over the past few years where there hasn't been a change in the EU member states, in an identical proportional level.

[ProfessorDavey]

1. I seem to recall you claiming we could do a free trade deal with China independent of the EU? Not yet answered this.

For crying out loud - yes I did - in reply 2023 - to reiterate:

'We can and we do:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/24/britains-deals-with-china-billions-what-do-they-mean

As do many other EU countries. I gather that Germany has been particularly aggressive in penetrating the Indian market and developing a whole range of trade deals.'

[ProfessorDavey]

Don't think so:-
https://www.mfa.is/foreign-policy/trade/free-trade-agreement-between-iceland-and-china/

You do understand that Iceland has something rather unique that is critically important to China.

The UK on the other hand has nothing of that nature that is uniquely important to China.

The EU does on the basis of the size of the economic block.

[L.A.]

The Bilderberg Group have long been subject to all sorts of consiracy theories - if you want an interesting take on it try Jon Ronson's book Them and his documentary series The Secret Rulers of the Worlds

I think that if the Bilderberg Group were as powerful as some would like to believe, we might have seen the unexpected demise of a number of prominent Brexit figures (though I suppose the real devotee might consider Farage's plane crash a near miss)

[Nearly Sane]

I think that if the Bilderberg Group were as powerful as some would like to believe, we might have seen the unexpected demise of a number of prominent Brexit figures (though I suppose the real devotee might consider Farage's plane crash a near miss)

No matter what happens it was the Bilderberg Group/Illuminati/Stonecutters wanted it

[Nearly Sane]

Market moved back to 15/8 on Stay. I fear this is being pushed by violence

[Hope]

26911.

This is the number of words that some Brexiters have suggested make up an EU document on the sale of cabbages.  It also, I believe, appeared in a UKIP documenty a year or so before the General Election.

It is interesting how similar it is to a figure that dates to the early 1950s, regarding the cost of cabbages during the 2nd World War in the US of A.

I listened to some of this morning's 'More or Less' on Radio 4 and this mythical figure was discussed and dissected.

Apparently, the figure was nearer 2700 words and the topic was the fixing of the cost of cabbage seed; a process that was repealed shortly after the end of WW2.  It was, apparently, 'resurrected' as a way of arguing against the Korean War and multiplied by a factor of 10!!

The question was why should this 'resurrected' figure have begun to be applied to the EU and its legislation?

[Rhiannon]

Good blog from Alex Massey at the Spectator.

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/england-gone-mad/

[wigginhall]

Many people suspending their campaign, after the shooting of Labour MP Jo Cox.   

[Spud]

We already have complete control over non EU immigration. How's that working out for you, reduced to a trickle, hardly anyone coming here from India, or Nigeria, or China, or Mexico. Nope, with complete control non EU immigration remains higher that the non controlled EU migration. And most importantly the trends in both EU and non EU immigration mirror each other.

Conclusion - the 'controlled' non EU migration is no more controlled than the 'non controlled' EU migration.

Why - because the key driver isn't whether or not we have nominal controls - nope it is economic - if there are job vacancies that can't be filled by UK people, either because they won't take them or because they don't have the skills we will fill those vacancies from overseas and any 'controlled' immigration policy will always allow this or otherwise the government will be telling potato famers that their unpicked crops will have to rot and their livelihood destroyed. The government will be telling you that you elderly mother in law won't have any carer coming to visit her on her essential care package - the government will be telling you that you cannot see a GP for months because they haven't been able to fill the vacancies when their two senior partners retired.

Thanks for the explanation... all quite logical. But if that is the case, why did  government pledge, not so long ago, to reduce immigration to under 100,000? Did these job vacancies appear just as Romania and Bulgaria joined the EU? Im pretty sure that prior to that there was no indication that we were desperate for potato diggers, carers and doctors etc

[Spud]

Wrong it is demonstrably true.

So lets look over the past 3 year or so. Specifically using the start point when Croatia joined the EU in 2013 - sensible as this means that the overall countries and population of the EU (and therefore potential migrants) is stable.

This is also useful as it coincides rather well with the government push to reduce migration to the tens of thousands. Now if EU migration is uncontrolled, but non EU migration is controlled (in practice) then you'd expect that the government would have curtailed net non EU migration (which is can control) but would have been unable to do anything about EU migration. So that non EU migration would have stabilised or even fallen (under government control) while EU migration would have continued to rise.

Problem is that changes in the two (EU and non EU) net migration pretty well perfectly mirror each other.

So at that point in mid 2013:
Net migration: Non EU - 138k
Net migration: EU - 131k

By 2015 (latest figures) there had been a big increase, but interestingly the increase is actually greater for the (apparently) controlled non EU migration than for the (apparently) uncontrolled EU migration.

So by the end of 2015 non EU net migration had risen by 38% compared to that 2013 figure, EU migration had risen by only 31% in the same timeframe.

So much for controlled vs non controlled.

Sorry, once again to puncture your ill informed dogmatic balloon with actual data and actual evidence. But hey Brexiters aren't really interested in facts and reality.

What is the source of these figures, please? How reliable are they, especially the figure for EU migration? How do we know there aren't more, and what checks are done on people coming into the country that give us the figure (as opposed to visa checks for non-eu folks)?

[ProfessorDavey]

What is the source of these figures, please? How reliable are they, especially the figure for EU migration? How do we know there aren't more, and what checks are done on people coming into the country that give us the figure (as opposed to visa checks for non-eu folks)?

Office for National Statistics - in other words the official figures.

No-one can enter the UK without a passport check.

[jakswan]

For crying out loud - yes I did - in reply 2023 - to reiterate:

'We can and we do:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/oct/24/britains-deals-with-china-billions-what-do-they-mean

As do many other EU countries. I gather that Germany has been particularly aggressive in penetrating the Indian market and developing a whole range of trade deals.'

That is not a free trade deal.

[ProfessorDavey]

That is not a free trade deal.

So its the wrong kind of trade deal is it. What kind of trade deal fits the bill then Jakswan. This is very clearly a trade deal entered into on a bilateral basis between the UK and China - independently of the EU.

Your question has been answered - tough that you don't like the answer, but that's not my problem.

[jakswan]

No it is absolutely about numbers.

It really isn't Australia filters who enters the country for those it deems it needs. If we need plumbers then we leave plumbers in, we don't have an open door for low skilled workers from one part of the world and slam the door in the face for those from other parts of the world, everyone should be given equal opportunity.

[jakswan]

So its the wrong kind of trade deal is it. What kind of trade deal fits the bill then Jakswan. This is very clearly a trade deal entered into on a bilateral basis between the UK and China - independently of the EU.

Your question has been answered - tough that you don't like the answer, but that's not my problem.

The UK is unable to negotiate a trade deal where tariffs are set or relaxed, a free trade deal. Which is why Iceland has a free trade deal with China and we, as part of the EU doesn't.

Have you a link for the Swiss - China deal you mentioned earlier.

[Jack Knave]

If the Leavers win and David Cameron gets deposed, I think the Tory Party will collapse. I heard on the news a weaker two ago that some of the pro EU Torys in Parliament will side with the pro EU people from other parties and effectively block any attempt to start the process of leaving which they can do because, excepting party lines, Remain has a big majority in the HoC.

Another possibility is that Boris is only pro Leave because he thinks that is the easiest way to get Cameron's job. Once he's got Cameron's job, he will go  to the other EU countries and ask for a better deal and when we get one, he'll decide we should stay in. The Tory Party will still collapse.

As PD says, I think this is big trouble for the Tories no matter which way it goes unless Remain gets a big majority, which we won't.

As I said before we should have a GE fairly soon after the referendum and before 2020. It needs 66% majority in the HoC, and if there is chaos with the Tory party (with all the bitterness that has been spat during the referendum), then there may be a chance it is achieved.

[Jack Knave]

You do both get that this is if renegotiating happens after a Leave vote. So you are both wanting any leave vote to be ignored and then be happy with any fall out from that?

We were talking about the collapse of the Tory party.

[Jack Knave]

Rupert Murdoch, and George Galloway, and Putin  your friends then?

This Putin thing is just stupid because he is not part of the Leave campaign and team or has any stake in Britain or anything else either.

Galloway - Well he is a bit of a loose canon but can come up with some sharp observations and his stance on the EU is of course a far left one.

Murdoch - In his case we'll take all the help we can get. At least this time his press-boys are telling the truth.

[SweetPea]

Dear SweetPea,

Thankyou for your post, my reason for remaining, I am a Christian.

Our Lord suffers no borders, Our Lords laughs at mans plans, Our Lord knows that being a Christian is not the easy path, Our Lord knows that we stand outside prejudice, Our Lord knows that we are all sinners, Our Lord stands above politics, Our Lord knows our place is only to help the down trodden, that is what it means when we take up the Cross, we serve, servants of Christ, we do not serve politicians.

For me as a Christian there is only one vote, remain, we remain to serve, not the politicians but Christ, Christians offer the hand of friendship, Christians turn no one away, no matter creed, colour, religion or sexual orientation, we serve God, how do we serve God, we serve man.

Gonnagle.

That's a wonderful post Gonners, and thank you.... if ever there was a man of God, it is you.

Immigration doesn't faze me particularly apart from the fact that no doubt some terrorists will be donning our shores.

It's the bigger picture, that I've tried to show, that concerns me.