web analytics

FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT “TO END IMMEDIATELY”

By Pete Moore On August 18th, 2019

Freedom of movement by European Union nationals into the UK will be end overnight from October 31 in the event of a no deal Brexit, Priti Patel has signalled.

(by European Union “nationals” …)

She’s the Home Secretary, but a Tory Home Secretary, so we’ll reserve judgement while preparing for disappointment.

But let’s assume for the moment that it happens, that on 1st November EU nationals with their EU passports no longer have freedom of movement into our newly liberated kingdom. How wonderfully refreshing it would be, and how astonishing.

It’s a measure of how deeply the EU distorts what the world takes for granted, that reinstating such a mundane and normal thing would feel so revolutionary.

94 Responses to “FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT “TO END IMMEDIATELY””

  1. It would be sad and regressive. It also of course would mean the freedom of Britons to live work study and move capital throughout Europe without any govt. interference would also be ended. But hooray for freedom loving Pete and his desire for greater European national government restrictions bureaucracy and controls over people.

  2. So, hypothetically my bosses’ daughter who’s an NHS nurse in Manchester could be called home in an emergency on the 25th of October and be refused entry to the UK if she was to return one week later?

    At least the Brexit priority list shows what the referendum was really all about.

  3. As discussed, British ( and US ) healthcare is dependent on foreign staff

  4. So, hypothetically my bosses’ daughter who’s an NHS nurse in Manchester could be called home in an emergency on the 25th of October and be refused entry to the UK if she was to return one week later?

    Seems so!

  5. //But let’s assume for the moment that it happens, that on 1st November EU nationals with their EU passports no longer have freedom of movement into our newly liberated kingdom. How ……//

    …. would that be enforced if there was no hard border in Ireland, and you told us, Pete, that there wouldn’t be one?

    How would they stop Irish people, or Poles or anyone else with an EU passport, crossing into NI and from there crossing to Britain?

    Or how are they going to allow Irish people, and only Irish people, travel directly to Britain without documents? Will they ask them to sing a few Pogues’ songs at the border or what?

    There are inter-state treaties allowing such free travel, remember. Is the UK now going to revoke these agreements unilaterally?

  6. Paul

    That won’t happen, not even with the venomous Priti Patel at the home office and Pete knows that won’t happen but the wider point about boasting about plans to restrict freedom of movement in Europe is still a pathetic backward proposal that won’t make anyone’s lives better but will simply satisfy the most basic of nationalist hatreds.

  7. Well, it seems like the gloves are off then.

  8. Noel

    Don’t they Sometimes check passports on flights between Belfast and England now?

  9. Colm, I sense it won’t happen but with this Brexit thing I wouldn’t rule anything out.

    The thing that the UK needs to understand in the face of such fortress entrenchment is the principle of reciprocity and I suspect that almost superhuman patience and goodwill that the EU has treated the UK with would disappear overnight like snow off a ditch.

  10. “Don’t they Sometimes check passports on flights between Belfast and England now?”

    Not passports technically. All flights between Belfast and Britain have to show photo ID. So most people use their passport. They could use a drivers license for example.

  11. Paul

    That would probably happen yes, but Brexit supporters are so pig ignorant and stubborn , even if all the worst case scenarios came true and it had numerous negative impact on their lives and livelihoods they would still probably not regret their decision as they would still remain satisfied by the atmosphere of conflict, friction and hostility with European neighbours that a disruptive Brexit would create.

  12. Ah

    I’ve taken those flights and I showed my passport

    Thanks

    ( If I lived there, I would show my drivers license and leave the passport at home So that there is zero possibility of losing it. Since you always will carry your drivers license anyway )

  13. All legal EU residents resident in the UK should have their status grandfathered in, and vice versa

    Even in the absence of a deal, the UK and EU Should do this

    Be smart

  14. Phantom

    EU residents working here can without cost automatically have their full rights guaranteed for life. No EU workers are going to be kicked out.

  15. Phantom, on August 18th, 2019 at 9:21 PM Said:

    As discussed, British ( and US ) healthcare is dependent on foreign staff

    If that’s the case, it reveals the extent of the political-class’s betrayal of its own people.

  16. How would they stop Irish people, or Poles or anyone else with an EU passport, crossing into NI and from there crossing to Britain? Or how are they going to allow Irish people, and only Irish people, travel directly to Britain without documents? Will they ask them to sing a few Pogues’ songs at the border or what? There are inter-state treaties allowing such free travel, remember. Is the UK now going to revoke these agreements unilaterally?

    The free travel area between Ireland and Britain will remain unaffected. Just as tourists will be able to travel freely from Calais to Dover as they can now.

    The abolition of freedom of movement relates to the freedom to reside and work, not the freedom to travel, so what will change is that work permits will be required for all EU citizens except those from Ireland. This will cause major economic disruption for sure. UK firms that rely on a continual supply of cheap labour from Poland will have to train and recruit native workers or go out of business. They have had three years to get ready for this so any that fail will deserve their fate.

  17. “They have had three years to get ready for this so any that fail will deserve their fate.”

    Nonsense. This government has only been in place since the end of July. They have barely had 3 weeks to get ready for this.

    “This will cause major economic disruption for sure. UK firms that rely on a continual supply of cheap labour from Poland will have to train and recruit native workers or go out of business.”

    Why should a business have to pay higher wages to local workers for lesser standards of work? And why should the economy of the society suffer the resulting drop in productivity (and thus living standards) that arises out of that?

  18. Colm 1102

    Thank you

    Smart move on the part of the UK, For multiple reasons, including stability at workplaces

  19. Nonsense. This government has only been in place since the end of July. They have barely had 3 weeks to get ready for this.

    No, Brexit was voted for in June 2016. It was clear then that free movement would end and this was confirmed by Theresa May’s Lancaster House speech in January 2017.

  20. Why should a business have to pay higher wages to local workers for lesser standards of work?

    Who said anything about lesser standards? Why should a business not train local workers instead of advertising solely aborad for cheap labour, as many of them have been doing for years? This was globalisation in action and that business model is over.

  21. The Lancaster House speech promised many things. It was the government’s starting negotiating position. Many things could have (and should have) been sacrificed in the negotiations. The first thing it promised was certainty. Well three years down the line we still don’t have that.

  22. “Who said anything about lesser standards?”

    You did. By pointing out the need to train local workers.

    “Why should a business not train local workers instead of advertising solely aborad for cheap labour, as many of them have been doing for years?”

    Because free movement of labour, and people moving to where their skillset is best suited, means that better work is done for the same inputs. It is what grows the economy. Actually grows it. Doing work better than you did before. Paying people the same for inferior work, or paying people more for the same work, or even worse your lunatic plan of paying them more for inferior work, will only reduce productivity.

    That is why they shouldn’t do it. Because it is bad for their business, it is bad for the economy as a whole, and it is bad for living standards.

  23. The Lancaster House speech made it clear that freedom of movement would end. It also (stupidly) committed the UK to leaving the Customs Union and Single Market as if they were one and the same. But any business that depended on cheap labour from Poland should have started to plan for a new world. If they are going out of business now they deserve their fate.

  24. “Who said anything about lesser standards?”

    You did. By pointing out the need to train local workers.

    You are an unashamed neoliberal globalist. We are not going to agree.

  25. “The Lancaster House speech made it clear that freedom of movement would end. It also (stupidly) committed the UK to leaving the Customs Union and Single Market as if they were one and the same.”

    They are, certainly with regards to the Single Market. If you want to end freedom of movement then you have to leave the Single Market. The two are the same thing. One of the key underpinning rules of the Single Market is freedom of movement.

    If the UK stays in the Single Market then it keeps freedom of movement. Staying in the Single Market has always been a possible outcome of the Brexit talks. So why should businesses have been clairvoyant enough to know what the exact outcome of the talks would be?

    “But any business that depended on cheap labour from Poland should have started to plan for a new world.”

    Given that they couldn’t know, and still don’t know, what that “new” world is going to look like then that would be problematic.

    “If they are going out of business now they deserve their fate.”

    And many of them will go out of business. Not because they couldn’t plan properly. But because they cannot hire adequately skilled people to do their jobs. Your callous disregard for the very businesses that make up the economy is astounding.

  26. “You are an unashamed neoliberal globalist. We are not going to agree.”

    Yes because you keep talking shite. And then throw around labels because you can’t back up your arguments with facts.

    So again – Why should a business have to pay higher wages to local workers for lesser (untrained or needing of training) work?

  27. There are large numbers of long-term unemployed in northern Ireland and in mainland UK

    Shouldn’t they receive preference in hiring, As opposed to somebody coming from another country?

  28. The two are the same thing.

    I was referring to the Single Market and Customs Union. They are not the same thing.

    Given that they couldn’t know, and still don’t know, what that “new” world is going to look like then that would be problematic.

    They knew in January 2017 that freedom of movement was ending. If I had been running a business that depended on cheap Polish labour in January 2017 I would have started to plan a transition to a different business model so that my business would still be in existence after that cheap labour source came to an end.

  29. Yes because you keep talking shite.

    Oh dear, back to throwing your toys out of the pram again? You are so predictable.

  30. “There are large numbers of long-term unemployed in northern Ireland and in mainland UK”

    Structural unemployment is at a low (the UK has largely speaking reached statistical full employment). There are long term unemployed however the overwhelming majority of them are not looking for work.

    “Shouldn’t they receive preference in hiring, As opposed to somebody coming from another country?”

    Should they? What is the other person is better skilled? More suited to the job? Willing to work harder? Willing to accept minimum wage?

  31. So again – Why should a business have to pay higher wages to local workers for lesser (untrained or needing of training) work?

    A sense of community values? Some idea of obligation to society? A refusal to go for maximun profit above all other values?

    Yawn

  32. Phantom

    Seamus elevates profit above all other considerations, a kind of golden calf. He’s a neoliberal mouthpiece, end of.

  33. If the long-term unemployed in northern Ireland or the UK ( or the US ) are not willing to work, Then why not cut off all their benefits

    That might focus the mind

  34. “I was referring to the Single Market and Customs Union. They are not the same thing.”

    And I was referring to freedom of movement and the Single Market. Which are the same thing. Or the former is part and parcel of the later. You can’t be in the Single Market without freedom of movement.

    “They knew in January 2017 that freedom of movement was ending.”

    No they didn’t. They UK could have always agreed to remain in the Single Market. Nothing was ever clear. The UK Government said they were ending freedom of movement in January 2017. They also said a great many things, including mutually exclusive ideas (leaving the Single Market, no border in the Irish Sea, and keeping the border in Ireland open). So how could a business decide which stuff was really a promise and which stuff was just somthing they said.

    “Oh dear, back to throwing your toys out of the pram again? You are so predictable.”

    It isn’t throwing toys out of anything. You talk shite. I call it out. If you don’t like it then don’t talk shite. You are the one throwing around labels like they were insults (how very GOP of you).

  35. Peter

    Yes

    The efficiency of businesses is not the only good

  36. “A sense of community values? Some idea of obligation to society? A refusal to go for maximun profit above all other values?”

    You can’t eat community values.

    And it isn’t about maximising profit. As you have pointed out, quite callously, they will go out of business if they lose access to skilled labour from the EU.

    And their obligation to society is to provide high productivity jobs. Productivity grows living standards. Reduce productivity and you reduce living standards. Going from skilled, cheaper labour from the EU (you seem to have quite the little racist problem with Poland don’t you) and transition to less skilled, more expensive labour from the UK and you will reduce productivity.

    “If the long-term unemployed in northern Ireland or the UK ( or the US ) are not willing to work, Then why not cut off all their benefits”

    Most are long term unemployed for legitimate reasons. 13% are retired. 26% are students. 23% are disabled. 24% are carers.

  37. “The efficiency of businesses is not the only good”

    It isn’t the only good. However without it the rest of it is just window dressing. If a business is unproductive it goes to the wall. And you lose all the benefits it brings.

  38. You can’t be in the Single Market without freedom of movement.

    No shit Sherlock? Where did I suggest otherwise?

  39. “No shit Sherlock? Where did I suggest otherwise?”

    The Lancaster House speech made it clear that freedom of movement would end. It also (stupidly) committed the UK to leaving the Customs Union and Single Market as if they were one and the same.

    You pointed out the UK government committed to ending freedom of movement. You then called them stupid for also committing to leaving the Single Market.

  40. I bet you have a lot of fake disability Jerry Springer watchers

    There are a. Zillion fake disability cases here. The rate of disability claimants has gone through the roof of the last few decades

    There are many in the red states, Including lots of trumper bigmouths

    I know a number of these type of people personally.

    http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/

    No one is talking about forcing retired people to work,come off it

  41. You talk shite. I call it out. If you don’t like it then don’t talk shite. You are the one throwing around labels like they were insults (how very GOP of you).

    You are a foul-mouthed debater who resorts to ad-hominems when you get annoyed. Try to be polite, you will feel better if you do.

    I hate the present GOP, as you would know if you followed my comments hereabouts. How very ignorant of you.

  42. The South Korean economy has been super efficient for a long time, During wish no foreigners had any right to move there and take a job

  43. Which

  44. ou then called them stupid for also committing to leaving the Single Market.

    Read the sentence again: “It also (stupidly) committed the UK to leaving the Customs Union and Single Market as if they were one and the same.”

    That clearly refers to the CU and SM.

  45. You could always, always, always have had a single market in goods and many services that did not include free movement of labor

    For all intents and purposes, the US and Canada have had a single market for a pretty long time, at least since NAFTA, No Canadian has any right to move here, and no American has the right to move there

    That was a very successful two nation model staring you right in the face all along

  46. You could always, always, always have had a single market in goods and many services that did not include free movement of labor

    For all intents and purposes, the US and Canada have had a single market for a pretty long time, at least since NAFTA, No Canadian has any right to move here, and no American has the right to move there

    That was a very successful two nation model staring you right in the face all along

  47. “I bet you have a lot of fake disability Jerry Springer watchers”

    Probably. Do you have a way of weeding out the fake ones from the legitimate cases? Because many of these can’t be. And they brought over zealous testing of it in a few years ago in the UK and there are horror stories emerging from it. People with six months to live due to terminal cancer being classed as fit to work and things like that.

    “You are a foul-mouthed debater who resorts to ad-hominems when you get annoyed. Try to be polite, you will feel better if you do.”

    You are the one who started throwing around insults (or what you think are insults) when you couldn’t come up with anything better. So people in glass houses and all that.

    “I hate the present GOP, as you would know if you followed my comments hereabouts. How very ignorant of you.”

    You would almost think I had read all your comments and thought comparing you to the GOP would be like waving a red flag to a bull. If you don’t like being compared to the GOP then don’t act like them.

    “The South Korean economy has been super efficient for a long time, During wish no foreigners had any right to move there and take a job”

    Sure. But the UK model hasn’t been like that. Largely due to poor skills education and a lack of investment in employability skills in schools. Which means that for many jobs people in other countries can often be better skilled for the job than a UK worker would be.

  48. Yes Phantom, good point.

  49. “That clearly refers to the CU and SM.”

    It doesn’t clearly do anything.

    “You could always, always, always have had a single market in goods and many services that did not include free movement of labor”

    You could have. But the EU would have said no.

  50. Shouldn’t they receive preference in hiring, As opposed to somebody coming from another country?

    Are you suggesting that people’s nationality should give them preferential treatment in employment?

    A similar system was endemic in certain sections of the labour market since the inception of the state and for quite a few years thereafter.

  51. Of course I think that the local population should be given first preference

    That’s a first duty of any proper government

  52. And if one person (a foreign person) is better skilled? So should the NHS hire a local guy with no qualifications before hiring a foreign heart surgeon?

  53. You are the one who started throwing around insults (or what you think are insults) when you couldn’t come up with anything better. So people in glass houses and all that.

    Where did I accuse you of talking shite?

    You would almost think I had read all your comments…If you don’t like being compared to the GOP then don’t act like them.

    I don’t. I couldn’t give a **** if you read my comments or not but don’t accuse me of being a GOP supporter without evidence to back it up.

  54. You seriously think that a better qualified, more experienced, motivated candidate should be be given second preference over a local one?

  55. “Where did I accuse you of talking shite?”

    You didn’t. But when I put forward a facts based position your response was not to respond with a fact based position. Your response was to say:

    You are an unashamed neoliberal globalist

    So again, people in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.

    “I don’t. I couldn’t give a **** if you read my comments or not but don’t accuse me of being a GOP supporter without evidence to back it up.”

    I didn’t accuse you of being a GOP supporter. I said “how very GOP of you”. For the slow reader in the room that means I accused you of acting like the GOP, not supporting them.

  56. So should the NHS hire a local guy with no qualifications before hiring a foreign heart surgeon?

    The correct question to ask is why does the NHS not train more local surgeons and doctors and nurses? The globalisation model that you support says we don’t need to, we can import them all from abroad and close down the medical schools cut taxes by the amount of money saved.

  57. Seamus

    You’re not making any sense at all. Has someone hacked your account, you are normally the best debater here

    I am not a opposing all emigration

    And if the best heart surgeon available comes from Paraguay I think that the NHS should hire him or her

    But I want the local population to have the benefit of every doubt in my country and yours in every situation, If you are opposed to that, then La dee dah

  58. I didn’t accuse you of being a GOP supporter. I said “how very GOP of you”. For the slow reader in the room that means I accused you of acting like the GOP, not supporting them.

    LOL.

  59. “The correct question to ask is why does the NHS not train more local surgeons and doctors and nurses? The globalisation model that you support says we don’t need to, we can import them all from abroad and close down the medical schools cut taxes by the amount of money saved.”

    UK medical training is growing, and has been for decades. There are now 3 times as many medical school places as there were in 1960. The cutting of local places never actually happened. What happened was that the NHS grew to such an extent that local medical staff were no longer numerous enough to fill all the places.

  60. “And if the best heart surgeon available comes from Paraguay I think that the NHS should hire him or her

    But I want the local population to have the benefit of every doubt in my country and yours in every situation, If you are opposed to that, then La dee dah”

    Ok. So we have established than when it comes to heart surgeons that the best candidate should be hired (no matter where they come from). So lets go for another job – an office worker or a factory worker. If a foreign candidate is better skilled for the job should they be passed over for a local, less skilled candidate?

  61. Seamus

    You are being too clever by half

    I want the local population To be given the benefit of every doubt, esp In areas with long-term on appointments such as N Ireland

    If the UK pays for someone’s medical training, Does the new doctor have to practice in the UK for a given Number of years

  62. I want the local population To be given the benefit of every doubt,

    And when there is no doubt to be given?

  63. “If the UK pays for someone’s medical training, Does the new doctor have to practice in the UK for a given Number of years”

    No but then the UK also charges them tuition fees to study medicine.

  64. Does the tuition recapture the full cost of the training?

    Unsubsidized medical training is very expensive

    It would be very unfair for the UK to subsidize the medical training of a doctor who then went on to work say in America or Bermuda Where the pay was much higher

    As I’ve mentioned before, I know a hospital administrator who used to work for the NHS. She took a job in Bermuda for twice the salary in a no income tax location.

  65. I want the local population To be given the benefit of every doubt, esp In areas with long-term on appointments such as N Ireland

    It’s been tried before only the qualifying factors were religion and / or political allegiance.

  66. Paul

    You’re intentionally missing the entire point, And win the Patrick award of the night

    I’m not talking about doing that or anything like that and you know it

  67. I have no problem with EU Nationals already living and working here. Those that are no longer working can return home.

    But at last may soon have a situation where EU and other foreign nationals will be treated equally. Although personally seeing the number of non-EU nationals they are waving through I’d doubt under this Conservative government we will see any change.

  68. //It would be very unfair for the UK to subsidize the medical training of a doctor who then went on to work say in America or Bermuda Where the pay was much higher//

    In several EU countries, there are no tuition fees for the study of medicine (or anything else), and any doctor can then travel anywhere he wants to work.

    BTW. Until a few years back, I knew quite a few German medical specialists who used to fly regularly (like once a week) to the UK to do certain work, like ops. They called themselves “flying doctors”. They did it because of the extra pay and the lack of bureaucracy in working in Britain compared to Germany.

    I haven’t heard of any doing it in the past few years, maybe things have changed (but not beacause of Brexit)

    Greetings from the wild but gentle city of Amsterdam.

  69. Peter

    “The correct question to ask is why does the NHS not train more local surgeons and doctors and nurses?” That is not any comfort if you need a heart operation today or tomorrow.

  70. Pete Moore

    What do you think of Yellowhammer? Have you stowed away enough food and medicine for after October 31st?

  71. Peter,

    “No, Brexit was voted for in June 2016. It was clear then that free movement would end”

    No it wasn’t. Free movement was not on the ballot paper. Only leaving the EU was.

    There are many models of leaving the EU which do not end free movement. It was clear in 2016 and is still clear today that there is no majority for ending it at all costs.

    You are of course quite entitled to argue for ending free movement, but it is untrue and dishonest to pretend the referendum provided a mandate for it.

  72. Phantom,

    “The South Korean economy has been super efficient for a long time, During wish no foreigners had any right to move there and take a job”

    And it would have been more efficient again if it had allowed that.

    And yes it matters. If you want to help the local population then instead of lighting money on fire, just give them the money directly. It would be more honest. There is no dignity in getting a pretend job by suppressing competition anyway.

  73. I’m not talking about doing that or anything like that and you know it

    Well, I suspect that you’re not intentionally talking about however what you are suggesting is that the deciding factor in someone being employed is not educational qualifications, experience, motivation or ability but their national background.

    For much of its life such an employment practice existed in many areas of the labour market in the state of NI where in many cases employment was given on the basis of religion and / or political opinion, (which was really used as an indicator of national allegiance).

    You may not be talking about it but it’s precisely the same principle.

  74. You are of course quite entitled to argue for ending free movement, but it is untrue and dishonest to pretend the referendum provided a mandate for it.

    Taking back control of our money, borders and laws was the central theme of the Leave campaign, which won. It has a mandate.

    Remainers have been banging on now, for three years, about how the vote to leave the EU was motivated by racism and xenophobia. Yet all of a sudden, controlling immigration was nothing to do with it.

    Yes it was. Controlling immigration had alot to do with it. Brexiteers know it and Remainers know it.

  75. I agree with Pete , the single biggest motivation behind the pro Brexit vote was a loathing of foreigners living and working here.

  76. Colm,

    “I agree with Pete , the single biggest motivation behind the pro Brexit vote was a loathing of foreigners living and working here.”

    Oh I agree with that too … but it’s completely irrelevant to the point I was making. A significant minority of people who loathe foreigners voted remain, too. That’s because they don’t loathe them enough to torpedo their own welfare.

    The vote was to leave the EU, nothing more. It was not to elect the leave campaign, or put those leave voters who shout the loudest in charge of every subsequent decision for the next 50 years. Nor was it to ignore the views of remainers forevermore on any question under the sun. I know because I voted leave and I didn’t vote to end FOM and nor did I vote to elect the leave campaign, or commit to whatever some leave talking head said on TV one day in 2016. Norway is outside the EU and still has FOM. I’ll be happy with that, so will many who voted leave.

    The fact that a majority of *leavers* may wish to end FOM at all costs does not mean that a majority of the *country* does. And it doesn’t. I’m not the only one who voted as I did, a significant minority of leave voters voted the same way. Together with the remain voters, that represents a pretty clear majority in favour of keeping FOM, compared to ending it at massive cost.

  77. “The fact that a majority of *leavers* may wish to end FOM at all costs”

    I should add…I’m not even sure that much is true!

  78. // the single biggest motivation behind the pro Brexit vote was a loathing of foreigners living and working here.//

    Yes, but Brexiters are interpreting the Referendum result by the letter, saying out means out and means crash out etc, and deliberately ignoring nuance and differences within the Leave vote.
    They can’t have it both ways: if the result means Out and only Out, then it isn’t also a mandate for ending free movement.

  79. Frank

    I also agree with your point. The referendum of 2016 was essentially a giant but flimsy opinion poll. It had no substance behind it other than a broad brush hands up if you like being in the EU or not. Anyone could read whatever sort of future relationship they wanted out of it because the referendum had no future relationship indication about it at all. A proper solid meaningful referendum about something so substantial would have involved a detailed proposed framework spelling out the terms of leaving with campaigns either to accept or reject the framework. Without that, no one can legitimately claim what the Brexit vote meant in terms of policy detail.

  80. Colm,

    “hands up if you like being in the EU or not”

    haha…fair point!!

    I’m curious as to what you think should happen now, as the resident official voice of reason 🙂

  81. No one thought Leave would win, especially Leave campaigners. It was more about personal routes to power for them (Farage trying to turn UKIP into a major political force, Gove and Johnson both jostling to be the next Prime Minister). As a result there wasn’t a central Leave idea. It was scattershot approach. One minute Leave meant ending globalism and protecting local jobs. The next minute Leave would allow Britain to create a free trade nirvana. They would be like Norway, or Canada, or Switzerland. Most of these ideas then evaporated after the referendum and being like Norway or Switzerland would be a betrayal of the Leave vote.

  82. Frank

    I’m not very reasonable when it comes to what I think should happen next. I think Parliament should revoke article 50 and do its job of professionally leading rather than following ill informed public opinion. Most MPs believe leaving the EU is a retrograde step. They should be honest enough to admit they think the referendum and its outcome was a damaging error and admit they don’t want to implement it.

    They have a professional job to govern in the way they honestly believe is in the country’s best interests . In that case they should vote to keep us in , have the courage to explain their decision to their electorate and risk the electoral consequences . If the people really do want a full on no deal no CU no SM no free movement Brexit let them elect a Parliament full of MPs who genuinely believe in that.

  83. As a result there wasn’t a central Leave idea.

    Yes there was. It was to take back control of our money, borders and laws. It was pumped out endlessly by the Leave campaign, round the clock.

    Frank –

    The vote was to leave the EU, nothing more. It was not to elect the leave campaign, or put those leave voters who shout the loudest in charge of every subsequent decision for the next 50 years. Nor was it to ignore the views of remainers forevermore on any question under the sun.

    Tell Paul McMahon, who appears to think that the referendom put Brexiteers in charge of government.

    On the question of whether or not we leave the EU we certainly can ignore Remainers, because they lost and they have no mandate to block or overturn our decision.

  84. I’m not very reasonable when it comes to what I think should happen next.

    You’re not at all reasonable. You’re an anti-democratic extremist.

  85. Pete,

    “On the question of whether or not we leave the EU we certainly can ignore Remainers, because they lost and they have no mandate to block or overturn our decision.

    I agree with that. But there’s still a lot of detail on how, and everyone is entitled to have their say on that.

  86. Pete

    You always regarded the decision to Join the EEC as illegitimate, a political betrayal of UK sovereignty. You said it here many times. The 1975 referendum ratifying it was also dismissed by you as irrelevant. Fair enough at least you had a principled view. Now all of a sudden it’s the democratic mandate of 2016 that is sacrosanct. Your principles have been abandoned.

  87. “As a result there wasn’t a central Leave idea. It was scattershot approach.”

    Pete was claiming at the time that the UK would not be leaving the single market.

  88. Colm –

    I say again, I’d rather that the ECA 1972 be repealed and we just leave. No Article 50, no two years, no wrangling and negotiations, just walk away. In the absence of that, I’ll take the referendum result.

    But this outrage at FOM being (possibly) abolished is fake outrage. It’s guff.

    A sovereign UK, wholly outside of the EU, could unilaterally declare FOM to certain classes. It could apply to EU nationals. Or, it could apply to US nationals. Every argument that Remainers make for FOM for EU nationals applies for (say) Americans.

    In fact more so.

    Our ties with the US are deeper and greater than ever could be with the EU. Americans are at least as wealthy, healthy and well educated as EU nationals, and they don;t have any historical hang ups about us saving them in both world wars. And Americans, of course, are heirs to our common Anglosphere inheritance.

    But the people who are horrified at the FOM ending for EU nationals would be equally horrified at FOM being offered to Americans. So it’s not FOM at all. It’s a cultural thing, deep down. They want us to be less British, and flooding the country with Europeans is a way to achieve that, a way to further tilt us away from what makes us us.

  89. Pete

    You certainly can waffle a load of crap to deflect from your own hypocrisy I’ll give you that.

  90. Tell Paul McMahon, who appears to think that the referendom put Brexiteers in charge of government.

    What? What on earth are you talking about man?

    That’s (another) absolute, shameless untruth.

    Pete was claiming at the time that the UK would not be leaving the single market

    He also stated categorically, (as many prominent leave campaigners similarly did), that a vote to leave the EU was not a vote to leave the EEA.

  91. Paul –

    Many times you have blamed Leavers for the failings of May’s (Remain) government.

  92. With maybe the exception of the DUP humiliatingly slapping May down over the ‘backstop’ I’d say none.

    I’d say I’ve blamed Brexit for the utter confusion, chaos and polarisation that the UK society, Westminster Parliament and Brit politics in general finds itself in.

  93. I blame the ignorant easily deluded minority of the population who voted for Brexit, a ‘ majority ‘ decision enabled aided and abetted by the other minority who couldn’t be bothered to vote. It’s Time the real informed majority – Parliament , stepped up to the plate and cancelled this idiocy.

  94. “Time the real informed majority – Parliament , stepped up to the plate and cancelled this idiocy.” Well said. It may happen yet. There should never been a referendum on such a complex and important matter