Glad your source is from a serious news reporting service.
Seriously I have to put up with the negative impact on my life that PC and the woke, genZ offspring of entitled freaking snowflakes cause.
So those who didn't want Brexit can do the same, suck it up, accept it's done and crack on instead of constantly regurgitating pathetic diatribe in a pointless attempt to be proven right.
If the people moaning and pointing fingers put as much effort into finding answers to the problems we may well get solutions.
Glad I got that off my chest, rant over, have a peachy day.
So the people who didn't vote for the absolute car crash that is Brexit should now try and find solutions for it?
Perhaps the utter tools who voted for it should take some responsibility for making an awful decision and they come up with solutions?
Unfortunately there are many who voted for it who will simply not admit to it being a disaster.
Happy to hear of any Brexit benefits though, if anyone has any....I'm all ears.
Like pretty much everything in life, there are benefits and burdens.
I agree entirely with your comments about the lies that were told that caused us to leave. As has been mentioned on this thread before, there were people who wanted to blame their own inadequacies/failures on being in the EU. And somehow believed that leaving the EU would change all that.
But, regrettably, we have just swapped that excuse for another, equally daft, one. We now look to blame Brexit for everything we don't like. In exactly similar stupid circumstances. The ARM example is an example of this. London has been losing market share in this sort of thing since before 2016. The listing hasn't gone to the EU. It's gone to the USA. So-"If the people moaning and pointing fingers put as much effort into finding answers to the problems we may well get solutions."
Leaving the EU wasn't the magic bullet. In exactly the same way as rejoining would not be-quite apart from the fact that the EU (understandably) would not want us back.
Personally, I wish we had never left. But we did. We left due to a bunch of lies. But then, to be frank, we joined due to a bunch of lies, too. We joined in 1973, and only held a vote about "joining" in 1975.
The economic arguments about being in the EU are pretty clear-cut. If money is the key, we are better off in. However much the Tories claim we are better off out, and Labour tries to pretend it isn't particularly relevant.
But it is not just economics. It is no longer the European Economic Community. Or the European Community. It is the European Union. A political, as well as economic, union. Which, rightly or wrongly, as an island nation, we are distinctly uncomfortable with. The whole movement towards 1 currency, 1 army, follow the rules decided by Europe, and largely driven by Germany/France and the rules that suit a Continental land mass, as opposed to an island, is not for us.
There are benefits to being outside the EU. Not the rubbish about trying to remove all EU laws, just having the ability to choose. Are they a price worth paying? Right now, short answer, no. But going forward? More difficult question.
The sad bit is that we do not need to be at loggerheads. There are options where we could negotiate being part of the EEA. Switzerland has, like us, been notoriously unwilling to ally with the rest of Europe, but has managed to negotiate a better compromise than us.
I wish we had never left. But we have. And we need to move forward on that basis.
I appreciate that we are where we are, and we are currently stuck with it. Although both the main parties are constantly talking about growth. You therefore have to wonder how long it will take for one of them to see re-joining as a means of achieving a substantial increase. We may also see a different Tory Party subsequent to the next general election, particularly if they lose a few Eurosceptics.
If the EU were as intransigent as many people have accused them of being, do you think we would have had a referendum under the following circumstances? David Cameron approaches them and tells them of his plan for a referendum. They reply that this is fine, but be warned, if we leave there would be a land border in Ireland, and that it would not be possible for one bit of the UK to stay in the SM/CU.
If Stormont was to vote against the protocol next year, what do you think any possible alternative could be?
Northern Ireland protocol: consent mechanism
What happens if consent is not given? If consent is not given, the protocol will cease to apply after two years.
In this case, the Joint Committee established under the Withdrawal Agreement to oversee the protocol will make recommendations to the UK and the EU on alternatives for avoiding a hard border and protecting the Good Friday Agreement. What options are available will depend on the nature of any EU-UK trade agreement in place at the time.
Glad your source is from a serious news reporting service.
Seriously I have to put up with the negative impact on my life that PC and the woke, genZ offspring of entitled freaking snowflakes cause.
So those who didn't want Brexit can do the same, suck it up, accept it's done and crack on instead of constantly regurgitating pathetic diatribe in a pointless attempt to be proven right.
If the people moaning and pointing fingers put as much effort into finding answers to the problems we may well get solutions.
Glad I got that off my chest, rant over, have a peachy day.
So the people who didn't vote for the absolute car crash that is Brexit should now try and find solutions for it?
Perhaps the utter tools who voted for it should take some responsibility for making an awful decision and they come up with solutions?
Unfortunately there are many who voted for it who will simply not admit to it being a disaster.
Happy to hear of any Brexit benefits though, if anyone has any....I'm all ears.
Like pretty much everything in life, there are benefits and burdens.
I agree entirely with your comments about the lies that were told that caused us to leave. As has been mentioned on this thread before, there were people who wanted to blame their own inadequacies/failures on being in the EU. And somehow believed that leaving the EU would change all that.
But, regrettably, we have just swapped that excuse for another, equally daft, one. We now look to blame Brexit for everything we don't like. In exactly similar stupid circumstances. The ARM example is an example of this. London has been losing market share in this sort of thing since before 2016. The listing hasn't gone to the EU. It's gone to the USA. So-"If the people moaning and pointing fingers put as much effort into finding answers to the problems we may well get solutions."
Leaving the EU wasn't the magic bullet. In exactly the same way as rejoining would not be-quite apart from the fact that the EU (understandably) would not want us back.
Personally, I wish we had never left. But we did. We left due to a bunch of lies. But then, to be frank, we joined due to a bunch of lies, too. We joined in 1973, and only held a vote about "joining" in 1975.
The economic arguments about being in the EU are pretty clear-cut. If money is the key, we are better off in. However much the Tories claim we are better off out, and Labour tries to pretend it isn't particularly relevant.
But it is not just economics. It is no longer the European Economic Community. Or the European Community. It is the European Union. A political, as well as economic, union. Which, rightly or wrongly, as an island nation, we are distinctly uncomfortable with. The whole movement towards 1 currency, 1 army, follow the rules decided by Europe, and largely driven by Germany/France and the rules that suit a Continental land mass, as opposed to an island, is not for us.
There are benefits to being outside the EU. Not the rubbish about trying to remove all EU laws, just having the ability to choose. Are they a price worth paying? Right now, short answer, no. But going forward? More difficult question.
The sad bit is that we do not need to be at loggerheads. There are options where we could negotiate being part of the EEA. Switzerland has, like us, been notoriously unwilling to ally with the rest of Europe, but has managed to negotiate a better compromise than us.
I wish we had never left. But we have. And we need to move forward on that basis.
Ok....
I appreciate you didn't want to leave. Not directed at yourself, but I'd love to hear of one tangible benefit we've had since leaving the EU. Or even one tangible benefit on the horizon. I remember the odious JRM saying something about not reaping the benefits for another 50 years or similar.
Which is absolutely fantastic, when most of us will be dead.
The reality is it's been a disaster, and will continue to be a disaster for decades to come.
You don't put a decision as important as that to a population filled with flagshaggers and little Englanders.
Monday's debate in Westminster Hall gave MPs an opportunity to discuss these issues, with most speakers criticising Brexit and those who backed it.
The discussion was led by Martyn Day, an SNP MP whose party wants an independent Scotland to rejoin the EU.
He said "concerns have been expressed that no impact assessment has been carried out to assess the damage that Brexit has created".
He cited comments made by Richard Hughes, the chairman of the Office for Budget Responsibility, who recently told the BBC Brexit had been similar to the Covid pandemic in its impact.
The latest forecast by the OBR assumes Brexit will lead to a 4% reduction in the potential productivity of the UK economy, with the reduction building "over time with the full effect felt after 15 years".
"The economic fallout from Brexit is stark," Mr Day said.
"From my perspective, Brexit has been an unmitigated disaster—politically, economically and socially, for Scotland and the rest of the UK.
Like Mr Day, she cited analysis by the OBR which, in its latest forecast, assumes that "UK imports and exports will both be 15% lower in the long run than had we remained in the EU".
That position is anathema to Brexit-backing Conservative MPs like Adam Holloway, who spoke in favour of leaving the EU during the debate.
The Tory MP said the biggest benefit of Brexit was that "our sovereignty has been repatriated".
He said EU membership had brought "social problems" and "enormous stress on public services", which some MPs in the room did not understand.
"It is easy to undervalue sovereignty if the areas in which it was surrendered to the EU do not actually impact one's life," Mr Holloway said.
"It is easy to disdain patriotism if someone is economically and socially mobile and derives their self-worth from a well-paid job, or if their life is made easier by cheap labour as a result of free movement."
Leo Docherty, Conservative MP for Aldershot, was the minister put forward to represent the government in the debate.
He said the government did "not believe that it would be appropriate to hold an inquiry into the impact of Brexit".
He said: "Britain left the EU to do things differently and make our own laws, but this was not just political theory: our laws and tax framework and the way we spend our money all make a real difference to people's lives."
Net migration predicted to reach twice the pre-Brexit figures
Migration levels could soar to twice the numbers seen before Brexit, immigration experts have said.
They are predicting that net migration – the number entering the UK minus those leaving – could hit a record high of 675,000, double the pre-Brexit peak of 331,000 eight years ago. This would surpass the previous high of 504,000 set in the year to June 2022.
The jump has been fuelled by a continued sharp increase in non-EU migrants entering the UK to work, study, escape conflict or oppression and join relatives. The increase has more than compensated for the fall in EU citizens whose numbers have slumped since Brexit ended freedom of movement.
Glad your source is from a serious news reporting service.
Seriously I have to put up with the negative impact on my life that PC and the woke, genZ offspring of entitled freaking snowflakes cause.
So those who didn't want Brexit can do the same, suck it up, accept it's done and crack on instead of constantly regurgitating pathetic diatribe in a pointless attempt to be proven right.
If the people moaning and pointing fingers put as much effort into finding answers to the problems we may well get solutions.
Glad I got that off my chest, rant over, have a peachy day.
So the people who didn't vote for the absolute car crash that is Brexit should now try and find solutions for it?
Perhaps the utter tools who voted for it should take some responsibility for making an awful decision and they come up with solutions?
Unfortunately there are many who voted for it who will simply not admit to it being a disaster.
Happy to hear of any Brexit benefits though, if anyone has any....I'm all ears.
Like pretty much everything in life, there are benefits and burdens.
I agree entirely with your comments about the lies that were told that caused us to leave. As has been mentioned on this thread before, there were people who wanted to blame their own inadequacies/failures on being in the EU. And somehow believed that leaving the EU would change all that.
But, regrettably, we have just swapped that excuse for another, equally daft, one. We now look to blame Brexit for everything we don't like. In exactly similar stupid circumstances. The ARM example is an example of this. London has been losing market share in this sort of thing since before 2016. The listing hasn't gone to the EU. It's gone to the USA. So-"If the people moaning and pointing fingers put as much effort into finding answers to the problems we may well get solutions."
Leaving the EU wasn't the magic bullet. In exactly the same way as rejoining would not be-quite apart from the fact that the EU (understandably) would not want us back.
Personally, I wish we had never left. But we did. We left due to a bunch of lies. But then, to be frank, we joined due to a bunch of lies, too. We joined in 1973, and only held a vote about "joining" in 1975.
The economic arguments about being in the EU are pretty clear-cut. If money is the key, we are better off in. However much the Tories claim we are better off out, and Labour tries to pretend it isn't particularly relevant.
But it is not just economics. It is no longer the European Economic Community. Or the European Community. It is the European Union. A political, as well as economic, union. Which, rightly or wrongly, as an island nation, we are distinctly uncomfortable with. The whole movement towards 1 currency, 1 army, follow the rules decided by Europe, and largely driven by Germany/France and the rules that suit a Continental land mass, as opposed to an island, is not for us.
There are benefits to being outside the EU. Not the rubbish about trying to remove all EU laws, just having the ability to choose. Are they a price worth paying? Right now, short answer, no. But going forward? More difficult question.
The sad bit is that we do not need to be at loggerheads. There are options where we could negotiate being part of the EEA. Switzerland has, like us, been notoriously unwilling to ally with the rest of Europe, but has managed to negotiate a better compromise than us.
I wish we had never left. But we have. And we need to move forward on that basis.
Ok....
I appreciate you didn't want to leave. Not directed at yourself, but I'd love to hear of one tangible benefit we've had since leaving the EU. Or even one tangible benefit on the horizon. I remember the odious JRM saying something about not reaping the benefits for another 50 years or similar.
Which is absolutely fantastic, when most of us will be dead.
The reality is it's been a disaster, and will continue to be a disaster for decades to come.
You don't put a decision as important as that to a population filled with flagshaggers and little Englanders.
Glad your source is from a serious news reporting service.
Seriously I have to put up with the negative impact on my life that PC and the woke, genZ offspring of entitled freaking snowflakes cause.
So those who didn't want Brexit can do the same, suck it up, accept it's done and crack on instead of constantly regurgitating pathetic diatribe in a pointless attempt to be proven right.
If the people moaning and pointing fingers put as much effort into finding answers to the problems we may well get solutions.
Glad I got that off my chest, rant over, have a peachy day.
So the people who didn't vote for the absolute car crash that is Brexit should now try and find solutions for it?
Perhaps the utter tools who voted for it should take some responsibility for making an awful decision and they come up with solutions?
Unfortunately there are many who voted for it who will simply not admit to it being a disaster.
Happy to hear of any Brexit benefits though, if anyone has any....I'm all ears.
Like pretty much everything in life, there are benefits and burdens.
I agree entirely with your comments about the lies that were told that caused us to leave. As has been mentioned on this thread before, there were people who wanted to blame their own inadequacies/failures on being in the EU. And somehow believed that leaving the EU would change all that.
But, regrettably, we have just swapped that excuse for another, equally daft, one. We now look to blame Brexit for everything we don't like. In exactly similar stupid circumstances. The ARM example is an example of this. London has been losing market share in this sort of thing since before 2016. The listing hasn't gone to the EU. It's gone to the USA. So-"If the people moaning and pointing fingers put as much effort into finding answers to the problems we may well get solutions."
Leaving the EU wasn't the magic bullet. In exactly the same way as rejoining would not be-quite apart from the fact that the EU (understandably) would not want us back.
Personally, I wish we had never left. But we did. We left due to a bunch of lies. But then, to be frank, we joined due to a bunch of lies, too. We joined in 1973, and only held a vote about "joining" in 1975.
The economic arguments about being in the EU are pretty clear-cut. If money is the key, we are better off in. However much the Tories claim we are better off out, and Labour tries to pretend it isn't particularly relevant.
But it is not just economics. It is no longer the European Economic Community. Or the European Community. It is the European Union. A political, as well as economic, union. Which, rightly or wrongly, as an island nation, we are distinctly uncomfortable with. The whole movement towards 1 currency, 1 army, follow the rules decided by Europe, and largely driven by Germany/France and the rules that suit a Continental land mass, as opposed to an island, is not for us.
There are benefits to being outside the EU. Not the rubbish about trying to remove all EU laws, just having the ability to choose. Are they a price worth paying? Right now, short answer, no. But going forward? More difficult question.
The sad bit is that we do not need to be at loggerheads. There are options where we could negotiate being part of the EEA. Switzerland has, like us, been notoriously unwilling to ally with the rest of Europe, but has managed to negotiate a better compromise than us.
I wish we had never left. But we have. And we need to move forward on that basis.
Ok....
I appreciate you didn't want to leave. Not directed at yourself, but I'd love to hear of one tangible benefit we've had since leaving the EU. Or even one tangible benefit on the horizon. I remember the odious JRM saying something about not reaping the benefits for another 50 years or similar.
Which is absolutely fantastic, when most of us will be dead.
The reality is it's been a disaster, and will continue to be a disaster for decades to come.
You don't put a decision as important as that to a population filled with flagshaggers and little Englanders.
Glad your source is from a serious news reporting service.
Seriously I have to put up with the negative impact on my life that PC and the woke, genZ offspring of entitled freaking snowflakes cause.
So those who didn't want Brexit can do the same, suck it up, accept it's done and crack on instead of constantly regurgitating pathetic diatribe in a pointless attempt to be proven right.
If the people moaning and pointing fingers put as much effort into finding answers to the problems we may well get solutions.
Glad I got that off my chest, rant over, have a peachy day.
So the people who didn't vote for the absolute car crash that is Brexit should now try and find solutions for it?
Perhaps the utter tools who voted for it should take some responsibility for making an awful decision and they come up with solutions?
Unfortunately there are many who voted for it who will simply not admit to it being a disaster.
Happy to hear of any Brexit benefits though, if anyone has any....I'm all ears.
Like pretty much everything in life, there are benefits and burdens.
I agree entirely with your comments about the lies that were told that caused us to leave. As has been mentioned on this thread before, there were people who wanted to blame their own inadequacies/failures on being in the EU. And somehow believed that leaving the EU would change all that.
But, regrettably, we have just swapped that excuse for another, equally daft, one. We now look to blame Brexit for everything we don't like. In exactly similar stupid circumstances. The ARM example is an example of this. London has been losing market share in this sort of thing since before 2016. The listing hasn't gone to the EU. It's gone to the USA. So-"If the people moaning and pointing fingers put as much effort into finding answers to the problems we may well get solutions."
Leaving the EU wasn't the magic bullet. In exactly the same way as rejoining would not be-quite apart from the fact that the EU (understandably) would not want us back.
Personally, I wish we had never left. But we did. We left due to a bunch of lies. But then, to be frank, we joined due to a bunch of lies, too. We joined in 1973, and only held a vote about "joining" in 1975.
The economic arguments about being in the EU are pretty clear-cut. If money is the key, we are better off in. However much the Tories claim we are better off out, and Labour tries to pretend it isn't particularly relevant.
But it is not just economics. It is no longer the European Economic Community. Or the European Community. It is the European Union. A political, as well as economic, union. Which, rightly or wrongly, as an island nation, we are distinctly uncomfortable with. The whole movement towards 1 currency, 1 army, follow the rules decided by Europe, and largely driven by Germany/France and the rules that suit a Continental land mass, as opposed to an island, is not for us.
There are benefits to being outside the EU. Not the rubbish about trying to remove all EU laws, just having the ability to choose. Are they a price worth paying? Right now, short answer, no. But going forward? More difficult question.
The sad bit is that we do not need to be at loggerheads. There are options where we could negotiate being part of the EEA. Switzerland has, like us, been notoriously unwilling to ally with the rest of Europe, but has managed to negotiate a better compromise than us.
I wish we had never left. But we have. And we need to move forward on that basis.
Ok....
I appreciate you didn't want to leave. Not directed at yourself, but I'd love to hear of one tangible benefit we've had since leaving the EU. Or even one tangible benefit on the horizon. I remember the odious JRM saying something about not reaping the benefits for another 50 years or similar.
Which is absolutely fantastic, when most of us will be dead.
The reality is it's been a disaster, and will continue to be a disaster for decades to come.
You don't put a decision as important as that to a population filled with flagshaggers and little Englanders.
Idiot.
Why?
Flagshagger, little Englander, ffs where are we Nursery School.
The vast majority of laws passed by the EU are actually either overwhelmingly dull or entirely necessary, regardless of whether we are in or out of the EU.
The previous default position was both naive and incredibly stupid. Regardless of whether you would prefer to be in or out of the EU.
We have some of the biggest challenges the UK has ever faced. A massive cost of living crisis. Rampant inflation. Corporate greed at unprecedented levels. A level of strike action not seen since the 1970s.
But the Government appeared to want to bind itself to reviewing every single EU Law in the next 7 months, or automatically repealing all not approved. An impossible, and entirely unnecessary task. So-for example-if in 3 months' time the Govt had not expressly approved an EU Law providing a requirement for exports to the EU for a particular industry, a UK business would be forced to leave the UK to ensure survival.
The UK needs to pick its battles with the EU in relation to divergence extremely carefully. Considering a whole host of things, such as cost, benefit, and optimal time to diverge.
As opposed to backing itself into a really stupid (and unnecessary) corner.
They could go into the next election on an anti-migrant, anti-EU ticket. But, if they are seen to be prioritising those things above the real challenges facing this country, they would get absolutely mullered.
There are interesting parallels between now and the 1945 election.
Prior to the Election, the Conservatives had a big majority.
The Conservatives campaigned on the fact that they had won the War, and on Churchill's popularity. Ignoring the fact that the Wartime Govt was an all-Party one.
The Labour campaign centred on the future. On domestic issues. How to ensure we would win the Peace, and how to move forward now the War was over.
Result? Largest ever Labour Majority. Tories lost more than 200 seats. Labour gained nearly 250.
Comments
Although both the main parties are constantly talking about growth.
You therefore have to wonder how long it will take for one of them to see re-joining as a means of achieving a substantial increase.
We may also see a different Tory Party subsequent to the next general election, particularly if they lose a few Eurosceptics.
If the EU were as intransigent as many people have accused them of being, do you think we would have had a referendum under the following circumstances?
David Cameron approaches them and tells them of his plan for a referendum.
They reply that this is fine, but be warned, if we leave there would be a land border in Ireland, and that it would not be possible for one bit of the UK to stay in the SM/CU.
If Stormont was to vote against the protocol next year, what do you think any possible alternative could be?
Northern Ireland protocol: consent mechanism
What happens if consent is not given?
If consent is not given, the protocol will cease to apply after two years.
In this case, the Joint Committee established under the Withdrawal Agreement to oversee the protocol will make recommendations to the UK and the EU on alternatives for avoiding a hard border and protecting the Good Friday Agreement. What options are available will depend on the nature of any EU-UK trade agreement in place at the time.
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/article/explainer/northern-ireland-protocol-consent-mechanism
I appreciate you didn't want to leave.
Not directed at yourself, but I'd love to hear of one tangible benefit we've had since leaving the EU. Or even one tangible benefit on the horizon.
I remember the odious JRM saying something about not reaping the benefits for another 50 years or similar.
Which is absolutely fantastic, when most of us will be dead.
The reality is it's been a disaster, and will continue to be a disaster for decades to come.
You don't put a decision as important as that to a population filled with flagshaggers and little Englanders.
Monday's debate in Westminster Hall gave MPs an opportunity to discuss these issues, with most speakers criticising Brexit and those who backed it.
The discussion was led by Martyn Day, an SNP MP whose party wants an independent Scotland to rejoin the EU.
He said "concerns have been expressed that no impact assessment has been carried out to assess the damage that Brexit has created".
He cited comments made by Richard Hughes, the chairman of the Office for Budget Responsibility, who recently told the BBC Brexit had been similar to the Covid pandemic in its impact.
The latest forecast by the OBR assumes Brexit will lead to a 4% reduction in the potential productivity of the UK economy, with the reduction building "over time with the full effect felt after 15 years".
"The economic fallout from Brexit is stark," Mr Day said.
"From my perspective, Brexit has been an unmitigated disaster—politically, economically and socially, for Scotland and the rest of the UK.
Like Mr Day, she cited analysis by the OBR which, in its latest forecast, assumes that "UK imports and exports will both be 15% lower in the long run than had we remained in the EU".
That position is anathema to Brexit-backing Conservative MPs like Adam Holloway, who spoke in favour of leaving the EU during the debate.
The Tory MP said the biggest benefit of Brexit was that "our sovereignty has been repatriated".
He said EU membership had brought "social problems" and "enormous stress on public services", which some MPs in the room did not understand.
"It is easy to undervalue sovereignty if the areas in which it was surrendered to the EU do not actually impact one's life," Mr Holloway said.
"It is easy to disdain patriotism if someone is economically and socially mobile and derives their self-worth from a well-paid job, or if their life is made easier by cheap labour as a result of free movement."
Leo Docherty, Conservative MP for Aldershot, was the minister put forward to represent the government in the debate.
He said the government did "not believe that it would be appropriate to hold an inquiry into the impact of Brexit".
He said: "Britain left the EU to do things differently and make our own laws, but this was not just political theory: our laws and tax framework and the way we spend our money all make a real difference to people's lives."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-65384431
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/greg-hands-warns-keir-starmer-could-reopen-brexit-in-wake-of-disastrous-local-elections/ar-AA1aNdjQ?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=df72f8970bb444f0867fb51ed86ccdc1&ei=7
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/revealed-labour-won-back-swathes-183358297.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/lib-dems-may-demand-brexit-rerun-as-price-of-coalition-with-labour/ar-AA1aROZ1?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=176c23b2ba9143ebb17c775767339048&ei=11
Migration levels could soar to twice the numbers seen before Brexit, immigration experts have said.
They are predicting that net migration – the number entering the UK minus those leaving – could hit a record high of 675,000, double the pre-Brexit peak of 331,000 eight years ago. This would surpass the previous high of 504,000 set in the year to June 2022.
The jump has been fuelled by a continued sharp increase in non-EU migrants entering the UK to work, study, escape conflict or oppression and join relatives. The increase has more than compensated for the fall in EU citizens whose numbers have slumped since Brexit ended freedom of movement.
https://uk.yahoo.com/style/net-migration-predicted-reach-twice-165315078.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/snp-would-undo-brexit-as-far-as-possible-if-election-returns-hung-parliament/ar-AA1aUYsS?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=7f53d468667243718f54af3423df0923&ei=24
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/ministers-u-turn-on-plans-for-bonfire-of-4-000-pieces-of-eu-law-inherited-after-brexit-by-the-end-of-the-year/ar-AA1aXEgQ?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=ee2dfc0ef39e41ce99149bec730082f1&ei=73
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/05/09/uk-digital-markets-competition-consumers-bill-big-tech-eu/
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/lee-anderson-issues-stark-brexit-warning-if-starmer-enters-no10-after-next-election/ar-AA1aWOw7?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=ee2dfc0ef39e41ce99149bec730082f1&ei=17
https://uk.yahoo.com/news/government-announces-major-brexit-climbdown-143857470.html
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/how-rishi-threw-rival-badenoch-and-her-leadership-ambitions-under-a-bus-marked-brexit/ar-AA1b19Vu?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=82ce253f23f54cf3bae4c9a6510f38e6&ei=67
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/uk-government-s-handling-of-brexit-blasted-by-former-senior-ni-civil-servant/ar-AA1b0xuj?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=595d38595e404be8b9aa6325e863a9b8&ei=34
The vast majority of laws passed by the EU are actually either overwhelmingly dull or entirely necessary, regardless of whether we are in or out of the EU.
The previous default position was both naive and incredibly stupid. Regardless of whether you would prefer to be in or out of the EU.
We have some of the biggest challenges the UK has ever faced. A massive cost of living crisis. Rampant inflation. Corporate greed at unprecedented levels. A level of strike action not seen since the 1970s.
But the Government appeared to want to bind itself to reviewing every single EU Law in the next 7 months, or automatically repealing all not approved. An impossible, and entirely unnecessary task. So-for example-if in 3 months' time the Govt had not expressly approved an EU Law providing a requirement for exports to the EU for a particular industry, a UK business would be forced to leave the UK to ensure survival.
The UK needs to pick its battles with the EU in relation to divergence extremely carefully. Considering a whole host of things, such as cost, benefit, and optimal time to diverge.
As opposed to backing itself into a really stupid (and unnecessary) corner.
They could go into the next election on an anti-migrant, anti-EU ticket. But, if they are seen to be prioritising those things above the real challenges facing this country, they would get absolutely mullered.
Prior to the Election, the Conservatives had a big majority.
The Conservatives campaigned on the fact that they had won the War, and on Churchill's popularity. Ignoring the fact that the Wartime Govt was an all-Party one.
The Labour campaign centred on the future. On domestic issues. How to ensure we would win the Peace, and how to move forward now the War was over.
Result? Largest ever Labour Majority. Tories lost more than 200 seats. Labour gained nearly 250.
Try replacing the word "War" with "Brexit".