How's about that then

[kisa]

Hear, hear, good post:)

[andy01424]

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

[explodingaardvark]

McIngy,

Well said. I didn't have a vote as I have been out of UK in various countries for more than 15 years. If I had had a vote I would have been for Brexit. Not because of the EU migrant fairy story (EU migrants contribute more to the UK economy than they take out), but because of the undemocratic way that the EU Commission operates, i.e. undemocratically and in some cases contrary to what member states have democratically decided.

[Dexter]

My vote was for Brexit but like the majority of the world, including the Leave campaign, I didn't think it would happen.

My take on all this:

The weaker, less productive Nations within the UK and the EU wanted the status quo to continue.
The UK finally told Brussels that the Euro is a mathematical impossibility and that the strong helping the weak only works if the weak are not lazy, scheming tax dodgers.
Other Nations had the option to leave the EU in the last few years and weren't prepared to take the risk, which in the short term would have been devastating for them but ultimately the right thing to do.

The higher educated citizens of the UK voted to stay within the EU which you can take two ways. Their education means they are better able to decide the best route to take but equally the poorly run EU has less impact on them than the working classes.

Good result IMHO.

[Firefly]

Great result for we Brexit voters. There are some in the remain camp having a very childish attitude this morning, one blonde on the news today with Norman Tebbit, ranted, 'I'm not going to listen to this' as Norman was speaking, whoever she is, she needs a lesson in manners.

Jackie

[cymart1]

Playing on fear is a very bad and potentially dangerous way to manipulate people-this is what happened here in the 2004 referendum and let's hope it will not be used again by the same people here to get a similar result in the next one?Whatever people supported in the U.K. referendum yesterday-personally I was with the 'remain' camp- it now remains to be seen what the repercussions will be?My main reason for my opinion is not because I am blind to the many faults of the E.U. which definitely need reforming, but on the principle that it is better to be within a larger group and try to support change from within by collaberating with others who also want change,rather than leap into dark.My other concern is the solidarity and stability of Europe as a whole against threats such as Putin and co. and the Islamic extremists and surely better together than alone?

[kili1]

Cymart,
Good post which I agree with. Well put!
As a result of the referendum which led to the Brexit, we may now be about to see the break up of the United Kingdom since both Scotland and N. Ireland voted to Remain in The EU! Maybe they won't do anything now, but in the future. First the UK Govt will have to try and sort out the chaos which is the immediate result.

Dee

[tynecastle]

I'm old enough to have voted in the referendum 40 years ago when we were supposedly joining a 'common market'. I was then on the losing side by voting 'no'. I was disappointed but life went on and lived with it. 40 years on, my opinion has not changed and I voted Brexit, this time I am on the winning side.

I feel it was mainly thanks to a 'Brexit Team' of politicians such as Nigel Farage, Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Andrea Leadsom, Daniel Hannan, Gisele Stuart, and all the others who supported the leave cause.

Now Britain needs to take its time to negotiate our 'exit' bringing together an experienced 'cross party team' to get us the best result for the country.

I didn't believe all the scare stories of the 'Remainers' during the referendum so can ignore the scaremongers now when they forecast doom and gloom in the future. There is a bright future ahead, we have to now get on with it!!!

[ronk]

>Tynecastle ..agree with your last 2 sentences..

on a factual note re your " in the referendum 40 years ago when we were supposedly joining a 'common market'" however:

The United Kingdom EC referendum of 1975, also known as the Common Market referendum and EEC membership referendum was a referendum held on 5 June 1975 in the United Kingdom to gauge support for the country's continued membership of the European Communities (EC), often known as the Common Market at the time, which it had entered in 1973 under the Conservative government of Edward Heath. Labour's manifesto for the October 1974 general election promised that the people would decide "through the ballot box"[1] whether to remain in the EEC. The electorate expressed significant support for EEC membership, with 67% in favour on a 65% turnout. This was the first referendum held throughout the entire United Kingdom, and remained the only UK-wide referendum until the 2011 referendum on alternative voting.

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ki ... ndum,_1975

[kili1]

Tynecastle,
Great idea in theory, but how do you find a team of experienced negotiators cross -party at a moments notice to negotiate wth the EU? Many of the parties leaders have never served in an elected political party, except as MP's.
We also need to wait until a new PM is found to invoke Article 50 and lead the negotiators.

Dee

[Alan Else]

I was like many on here residing in the UK when we went into the EU, considering that we were promised great benefits out of joining the EU along with the coming North Sea Oil and Gas bonanza that came on line we expected much in the new promised golden age of prosperity.
What we got was inflation running riot, mounting interest rates that rose for a short time to 14% at the beginning of the 80s (just after we took on a mortgage) and our PM going cap in hand to borrow from the world bank.
So if we got nothing we certainly couldn't lose nothing on leaving the EU.

[keving]

John, maybe you missed out?

All that wealth flowing into the country from the 1980s onward allowed the government to reduce the top rate of income tax from 98% to 50%.

[Alan Else]

McIngy1

Excellent post that sums it up very well, we did one thing right a couple of days before the referendum and that was that Val cashed her remaining tracker ISAS.

[Alan Else]

kevin

What year did they do that Kev? I'm talking about the 70s when we went into the EU and North Sea Oil & Gas flowed interest rates rose and inflation ran amok.

Didn't the tax rates drop after the wicked witch sold off the utilities at a knock down price?

Selling people something that they already owned now that was genius.

[Jim]

Are you exit voters still happy about life?, I bet not, probably THE worst decision UK people have ever made, now just look we cannot even beat Iceland at footie..bad times ahead for us all I fear, and no I do not think it is going to settled down in any hurry, remember what you voted for..You did it!

[kili1]

There seems to be chaos in the UK, not just the dissenters to the vote. The brexit is affecting many things. There is no PM now for the next 3 months. Mr Cameron is now a care taker PM, though he is meeting other EU leaders tonight in Brussels. The Labour party is in meltdown, deeply divided as their leader refuses to resign.
This plus the fact that leaving the EU is a collossal undertaking which will take 2 years, once Artical 50 is signed. The British pound currency is de valuing! Stock Markets all over the world are mostly affected.
Some big banks in London are talking about sending thousands of their staff to EU cities such as Frankfurt as they will not be able to service their EU clients from the UK......
The Brexiteers have spoken and Cameron has accepted the will of the people. He is an honourable man.

It seems as if it will be several years before the UK will recover financially.
For us expats life will be very uncertain as we don't know how the conditions of the Brexit will impact on us.
Dee

[Sinbad]

As an out voter , I am very happy with my life , I don't watch sport so whatever happened with football has no interest to me . Hands up I am one of the many who did it .

Cameron is not an honourable man , he said he was going to trigger article 50 straight away if the public voted out .

Perhaps someone will start a petition to get the match replayed if people don't like the result ?

[Firefly]

Sinbad

My sentiments exactly re. Cameron. As far as the match goes, I couldn't care less.

Jackie

[Firefly]

M1

Spot on.

Jackie

[explodingaardvark]

I find it difficult to disagree with Mcingy1.

I think the way MPs, especially those in the Labour Party, have behaved is opportunistic and shameful. Those who have shown no confidence in their democratically recently elected leader should return to their constituencies and seek a vote of confidence in their actions. Will they? Not on your nelly, they will do anything but that, it would be like turkeys voting for Xmas.

[Mike Strand]

Will Brexit happen? Possibly not! The Independent on Monday ran a story about how the Brexit can happen legally;

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 05181.html

If this is fact & referendums are purely advisable & not legally binding, do as I have done and write to your UK MP and let your view be known, as it seems that it will require Parliament to vote 'for' or 'against' invoking Article 50 to leave the EU.

If you don't know who your MP is, find him or her here, https://www.mysociety.org/wehelpyou/who ... Gwod3PsL4g
It is important that you state your current or previous UK address and that you are an expat & entitled to vote in the UK elections/referendums.

[explodingaardvark]

Mike Strand,

I think you will find that if the result of the referendum is not followed through as is, you will have a constitutional crisis of mega proportion on your hands.

[Firefly]

I dread to think what would happen if Brexit didn't go ahead, I imagine the silent majority won't be so silent anymore. To the incoming P.M. I would say, ignore this vote at your peril.

Jackie

[Lofos-5]

What a Prime Minister Boris Johnson should do next

On May 22, one Boris Johnson gave his forecast for the UK’s post-referendum future: “Given the choice between taking back control or being sucked ever deeper into the federal superstate, the British voted for independence on June 23. To no one’s very great surprise, Project Fear turned out to be a gigantic hoax. The markets were calm. The pound did not collapse.” Alas, untrue. After the biggest ever proportional two-day decline, the pound touched a 30-year low against the dollar. Standard & Poor’s and Fitch have downgraded UK public debt. Investors have savaged bank shares. So far, the experts, dismissed by Michael Gove, justice secretary, have been proved right.

Mr Johnson is to economic forecasting what England is to football. Any well-informed person knew that a vote for Brexit would inflict medium-term pain on the economy. The Treasury might even have been underestimating the shock. It would be astonishing if there were to be no recession. This self-inflicted folly will hurt millions of innocent people. It is likely that buyers’ remorse will soon set in. Voters might conclude that the leaders of the Leave campaign were fools or liars.

It is easy to sympathise with the view of Harvard’s Kenneth Rogoff that the hurdle for a change to the status quo had to be far higher than 50 per cent of votes in a referendum on an issue as profound as this one. As it is, 36 per cent of eligible voters have been allowed to decide “without any appropriate checks and balances”. This is just one aspect of the irresponsibility shown by David Cameron, Britain’s prime minister, throughout this immensely important process. It is not surprising, for example, that he found it hard to argue credibly for Remain after spending more than five years denigrating almost everything about the EU. He has proved calamitously short-sighted.

Might it be possible to abort the entire process? Legally, yes. As Brexiters rightly say, the UK is a parliamentary, not a plebiscitary, democracy. The step that must be taken, if the UK is to leave the EU, is for it to issue a declaration under Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty, to trigger the process. In law, a referendum is solely advisory. Only parliament can do this, because only it makes valid law.

After selection of a new leader by the Conservative party, and perhaps even a general election, Prime Minister Johnson might, to paraphrase Emperor Hirohito’s remarks at the end of the second world war, declare that, given the “unexpected” economic damage and the risk of a break up of the UK, the situation “had developed not necessarily to the UK’s advantage”. He might forget the whole thing or, alternatively, call another referendum, merely to make sure the people remained as determined. The desire of the Leave side not to trigger Article 50 and the determination of EU leaders not to negotiate until it does could then give the time needed to change minds.

Politically, however, this option would surely be too slippery, even for Mr Johnson. If so, a second option would be to suggest to the rest of the EU that the principle of unrestricted movement might be reconsidered. What, the UK might ask, about a safeguard arrangement? After all, UK membership and continued (if modestly restricted) access to the UK labour market would be better than Brexit and a tightly restricted entry. Moreover, only with safeguards on movement might Turkish or Ukrainian membership ever be feasible. The US could quietly indicate to the EU how much is at stake. Then there could be a referendum on new terms and so the UK might remain in the EU.

Yet it is probable that the EU will rule out restrictions on movement. If so, Brexiters must recognise something they prefer to deny: they cannot have their cake and eat it. Mr Johnson insists there will be “democratic control of immigration policy”. He also states that there will be “free trade, and access to the single market”. But, if the EU sticks to its current policies, then the access to the single market the UK has today is unavailable, because that is incompatible with controls on EU immigration. Mr Johnson needs to make a choice.

“Access to the single market” are weasel words. Most will take it to mean the access the UK now enjoys. But it might mean the more limited access that the US, say, has. If that is all the UK seeks, it must say so. But leaving the EU and seeking to retain current access to the single market, while accepting free movement of labour, would be mad. If the UK were willing to accept all this, it should stay inside the EU, since it would continue to possess a voice in the single-market regulations that would affect it.

Controls on immigration are the crux. If they are inescapable for the post-referendum UK and if the EU will not shift on the issue, then the UK must lose its access to the single market. It should, instead, open discussions on the best trade agreement to allow such controls.

Right now, however, the best thing to do is nothing. The UK must work out what it wants. The EU must consider whether free movement is inviolable. The UK should avoid triggering Article 50: that would eliminate its leverage and would push it out of the EU within two years, probably with no further trade agreement. Any such stalemate cannot continue forever. But there could be benefits, for both sides, in avoiding too hasty and brutal an ending.

The story goes that a man condemned to death told his king: “I could teach your horse to sing, within a year.” The king replied: “Very well. But if the horse is not singing a year from now, you will be executed.” Upon the criminal’s return, his cellmate remonstrated: “You know you can’t teach that horse to sing.” He replied: “I have a year I didn’t have before. A lot of things can happen in a year. The king might die. The horse might die. I might die. “And, who knows? Maybe the horse will sing.”

I suggest we try that year or so.

(From http://www.ft.com/ Columnist section)

[ronk]

> Firefly..agreed..given the way the voting went in England in particular it doesn't bear thinking about for the Tory party and for Labour..UKIP could be presented with a fantastic opportunity to gain a significant number seats in Parliament at any upcoming General Election.
That's apart from the "carnage" on the streets..s'cuse the pun.. but I could see them burning all over the UK quite easily...Wat Tyler anyone?!

[big bad chris]

Digby Jones' views are quite interesting.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyd31Zt82K8