Current Affairs EU In or Out

[abelard]

All I'm saying is that many of these areas have been in the doldrums for a very long time, and successive governments have failed to revitalise them, so there's a risk of conflating correlation and causation by saying austerity caused Brexit, when pre-austerity those places were doing no better than they are now (hence my papering over the cracks remark).

Yes, that's fair enough - poverty and alienation are often long-term challenges. But almost by definition, these places are doing significantly worse as a result of austerity. That's the whole point. The evidence of how austerity has harmed the economy is overwhelming, at this point.

We can lecture them or sneer at them from London or the ivory tower all we like, but as Brexit should remind us, there will be political consequences if these grievances are not addressed, and they are not usually consequences that people like you and I tend to enjoy.

Brexit was spun as a means of addressing this sense of alienation and neglect. If we want to avoid outcomes like Brexit, or worse (and the early twentieth century is nothing if not a vivid array of the possibilities), then we need to present a better story.

We might even have to (gasp!) re-invest funds in deprived areas rather than withold them, and in reducing the physical, economic and cultural chasm between them and the more productive centres you describe - possibly by (double gasp!) reversing the Tory tax cuts on the people almost uniquely capable in the history of the entire species of contributing more.

 

[edge]

But if there is a second referendum - something is going to have to give.

Maybe if people felt that had another chance they would be open to revising their view (I'm not talking about the usual suspects on this thread) but more moderate voters - who were unsure in the last ref.

Having said that the real key would probably just to get the under 25's to vote in the same numbers as the over 70's.

Cant see there being a second vote to be honest, all it would achieve is an about face if the remain vote won,
the leave vote start asking for another one as soon as it were over, and have the added ammunition of saying we vote out they are ignoring your vote, I would worry it would awaken nationalist politics that seem to be gaining around Europe.
Sadly whichever side we are on we are being let down by a government that in its heart doesn't really want to leave the status quo, but has to be seen to go with the vote or collapse.
should have had a cross party committee to put a united plan together , and took on board both sides of the argument, I voted leave but it doesn't mean my wishes should be imposed fully without any regard for other peoples views, its become very polarised lately , its like two people arguing with each other getting louder and louder without listening to the other one, other than to make sure you are loudest.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

Yes, that's fair enough - poverty and alienation are often long-term challenges. But almost by definition, these places are doing significantly worse as a result of austerity. That's the whole point. The evidence of how austerity has harmed the economy is overwhelming, at this point.

We can lecture them or sneer at them from London or the ivory tower all we like, but as Brexit should remind us, there will be political consequences if these grievances are not addressed, and they are not usually consequences that people like you and I tend to enjoy.

Brexit was spun as a means of addressing this sense of alienation and neglect. If we want to avoid outcomes like Brexit, or worse (and the early twentieth century is nothing if not a vivid array of the possibilities), then we need to present a better story.

We might even have to (gasp!) re-invest funds in deprived areas rather than withold them, and in reducing the physical, economic and cultural chasm between them and the more productive centres you describe - possibly by (double gasp!) reversing the Tory tax cuts on the people almost uniquely capable in the history of the entire species of contributing more.

The irony of that being, that it’s those very communities that will suffer the most from a hard Brexit.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Yes, that's fair enough - poverty and alienation are often long-term challenges. But almost by definition, these places are doing significantly worse as a result of austerity. That's the whole point. The evidence of how austerity has harmed the economy is overwhelming, at this point.

We can lecture them or sneer at them from London or the ivory tower all we like, but as Brexit should remind us, there will be political consequences if these grievances are not addressed, and they are not usually consequences that people like you and I tend to enjoy.

Brexit was spun as a means of addressing this sense of alienation and neglect. If we want to avoid outcomes like Brexit, or worse (and the early twentieth century is nothing if not a vived array of the possibilities), then we need to present a better story.

We might even have to (gasp!) re-invest funds in deprived areas rather than withold them, possibly by (double gasp!) reversing the Tory tax cuts on the people almost uniquely capable in the history of the entire species of contributing more.

I don't doubt that we need to do things differently if communities are to be revitalised, and I think we both agree that leaving the EU isn't the answer. Equally however, I don't believe simply raising funding is the answer either because the way the government has spent money in these areas over the past 40 years hasn't made much difference.

The challenge is exacerbated by most of the forces of globalisation focusing prosperity on areas of scale (ie cities, and often capital cities). Knowledge, finance and all manner of other things that contribute to an areas prosperity tend to benefit from the network effect. The government have tried things like Local Enterprise Partnerships to spread economic activity around (https://www.lepnetwork.net/about-leps/the-38-leps/), but how effective they've been I couldn't say, and instinctively I suspect they remain largely concentrated around universities, so the Lincolnshire effort has revolved around the University of Lincoln rather than Brexit hotspots like Boston.

 

[abelard]

I don't doubt that we need to do things differently if communities are to be revitalised, and I think we both agree that leaving the EU isn't the answer. Equally however, I don't believe simply raising funding is the answer either because the way the government has spent money in these areas over the past 40 years hasn't made much difference.

The challenge is exacerbated by most of the forces of globalisation focusing prosperity on areas of scale (ie cities, and often capital cities). Knowledge, finance and all manner of other things that contribute to an areas prosperity tend to benefit from the network effect. The government have tried things like Local Enterprise Partnerships to spread economic activity around (https://www.lepnetwork.net/about-leps/the-38-leps/), but how effective they've been I couldn't say, and instinctively I suspect they remain largely concentrated around universities, so the Lincolnshire effort has revolved around the University of Lincoln rather than Brexit hotspots like Boston.

The first principle of government should always be "first do no harm".

The Tories have cut council funding by up to 77% in some areas (!!!). It should be axiomatic at this point that policies like these are causing harm, and that they should be overturned immediately.

Then, after a measure of sanity is restored, the merits of programs like what you describe can be tested and compared. There are plenty of countries which started from far behind the UK, and which have since achieved far more, and we should seek to learn from them as well. Of course, shrewd government investment has been central to each and every one of them.

In other words: to improve running performance, one can debate the impact of diet, or weight-lifting regimes, or different models of trainers, but first, one needs to intervene in order to prevent the doctor from sawing the patient's legs off sans anesthetic.

 

[Anders_Limpar]

Cant see there being a second vote to be honest, all it would achieve is an about face if the remain vote won,
the leave vote start asking for another one as soon as it were over, and have the added ammunition of saying we vote out they are ignoring your vote, I would worry it would awaken nationalist politics that seem to be gaining around Europe.
Sadly whichever side we are on we are being let down by a government that in its heart doesn't really want to leave the status quo, but has to be seen to go with the vote or collapse.
should have had a cross party committee to put a united plan together , and took on board both sides of the argument, I voted leave but it doesn't mean my wishes should be imposed fully without any regard for other peoples views, its become very polarised lately , its like two people arguing with each other getting louder and louder without listening to the other one, other than to make sure you are loudest.

I think there will be - if only because I can't really see another option to get it through Parliament.

There is clearly no majority in the house for Mays deal and there is nowhere near a majority in the house for no-deal. I know a lot of people seem to think that if the leader changed and a true believer was in charge - this would make a difference, but at this stage, I don't think it would, they still have to get the votes.

Fundamentally we are heading to a big roadblock in the house at some point later this year. The only way to clear would be a GE or another ref - think the Tories would rather risk anything over a Corbyn government - so a ref it will be. Difference being is that it would be binding with hopefully clearer, planned out, options.

Agree completely on the government - it's been a shambles. It was a tight 48-52 result on an advisory ref - they should have immediately looked at the Norway option which would have honoured the referendum result and exited the policy union whilst not throwing an atom bomb at our economy. This would have enabled us over time to either pull away even further or get closer depending on how things looked. Most people would have probably not been completely happy but it would have stopped the insanity, that as you point out, we are currently in...

 

[Number_25]

I've just read through potential debates for the Labour Party conference this year, and a People's Vote is being put forward for vote.

Strange one, Labour wasn't even able to get the so-called Tory rebels to vote on basic amendments - what chance would they have in getting them to vote for that?

 

[Anders_Limpar]

I would worry it would awaken nationalist politics that seem to be gaining around Europe.

I think that this is fully reawakened and emboldened anyway, caused in part, by this whole Brexit debacle.

The likes of Rees-Mogg are the acceptable face of nationalism and I don't think the best way of getting rid of them is to give them exactly what they want.

 

[Anders_Limpar]

I've just read through potential debates for the Labour Party conference this year, and a People's Vote is being put forward for vote.

Strange one, Labour wasn't even able to get the so-called Tory rebels to vote on basic amendments - what chance would they have in getting them to vote for that?

Timing?

If Labour proposes this after Mays deal is voted down (mainly by the ERG in her own party) in October then this will seem like a very sensible option to way more Tories than those 10 or so. If only in that it takes the pressure of them having to actually make a decision.

 

[Old Blue 2]

errmm these are the tactics used to get people to vote leave

Get real: both sides!

 

[Old Blue 2]

you mean like this, right?

In the sense that everything nowadays is 'soundbites', yes.

But he was no worse than the Remain side, with Carney's doom and gloom prediction, and the then Chancellor saying he would impose a swingeing budget if the vote was to leave.

How about some balance for once, ffs. Or is that not within the ambit of Remainers thinking...?

 

[neil999]

Get real: both sides!

Well why bring it up then?

 

[Old Blue 2]

For those who have not yet twigged it, my posting of that quote re patriotism was directed at the subject of joey's post, who rattled on about the difference between patriotism and nationalism, to take a swipe at others who did not share his views.

 

[Old Blue 2]

Well why bring it up then?

What ARE you talking about?

See my previous post...

 

[neil999]

What ARE you talking about?

See my previous post...

you posted an inflammatory quote, then said both sides did this, so what is the point of the quote?