Current Affairs EU In or Out

In or Out

  • In

    Votes: 688 67.9%
  • Out

    Votes: 325 32.1%

  • Total voters
    1,013
Status
Not open for further replies.
"So where migrants were not present, it appears they were held partly to blame for the all-too-real, but much deeper-seated, economic difficulties experienced by locals".

A proviso to that is that increased number of migrants were present in areas that voted to leave. It also show how bad austerity has been for a large chunk of the population, so that a very small increase in immigration has such an effect, when resources are being squeezed. Only 33% said they voted leave due to immigration.

There is inadequate funding for the population that is now in the UK. Funding is based on the 2011 census figures - even though councils said there were many that didn't fill in their forms. The population was put down as an estimate of 63.1 million with population estimate in June 2015 at 65 million. That means there are 2 million more people - probably more - in the UK but no increase in funding, but an increase in needs of services, which leads to even more squeeze on resources. So it is not surprising that people will 'blame' immigration. What is quite revealing is that only 33% voted leave due to immigration.
The EU will eventually fall into a trading block the parliaments will dissolve as a superstate IMO!
 
"So where migrants were not present, it appears they were held partly to blame for the all-too-real, but much deeper-seated, economic difficulties experienced by locals".

A proviso to that is that increased number of migrants were present in areas that voted to leave. It also show how bad austerity has been for a large chunk of the population, so that a very small increase in immigration has such an effect, when resources are being squeezed. Only 33% said they voted leave due to immigration.

There is inadequate funding for the population that is now in the UK. Funding is based on the 2011 census figures - even though councils said there were many that didn't fill in their forms. The population was put down as an estimate of 63.1 million with population estimate in June 2015 at 65 million. That means there are 2 million more people - probably more - in the UK but no increase in funding, but an increase in needs of services, which leads to even more squeeze on resources. So it is not surprising that people will 'blame' immigration. What is quite revealing is that only 33% voted leave due to immigration.

One can point to a lack of funding but one can also point to the huge borrowing debt inherited debt from the previous administration.

There is hardly ever a straight forward answer as there can be so many factors involved.
 
On LBC this am saying ATM Brexit has pushed our exports positively upwards worldwide, and an EU economist came on to say Italy is the next Greece its spent the bail out package from Germany the Euro is in meltdown- it's LBC breakfast show quite a balanced telephone in some were complaining Brexit was bad majority saying it was causing a boom in manufacturing exports!

Pardon my ignorance mate, but what is LBC? As for our exports they will IDC cost more as imported raw materials will increase in price.
 
From that information the funding for Graphene research in Manchester comes not from the CIty but,

FUNDING
Investment in graphene
Funding for the NGI includes £38m from the Government, as part of £50m allocated for graphene research. The remaining £23m was awarded to the University by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).

The NGI will operate as a 'hub and spoke' model, working with other UK institutions involved in graphene research.

Individual research projects are funded by a number of organisations, including EPSRC, theLeverhulme Trust, BBSRC, the European Commission (EC) and its European Research Council (ERC) and The Royal Society".

Patience is certainly required and the £1 billion Chinese investment in Manchester shows they are in for the long term. As far as financing industries goes there is maybe a regional dimension to where City funds go.

I think it's more the nature of the investment than any regional bias. I'm no expert in graphene, but it doesn't seem to be something that has spun-out a huge number of startups thus far, and the Nesta paper I shared earlier only highlighted 10 I think in the UK. If it's a case that this will primarily be driven by large incumbents than small start-ups then that's likely to be funded by the reserves of those big companies than the City.

Likewise, if we're still at a relatively pure science stage of things then that also isn't something that the City tends to look at, hence why things like the research councils and the EC are so important to fill in until the commercial aspects of research is more apparent. I'd say we're still at a very early stage and so shouldn't rule things out just yet.
 
"So where migrants were not present, it appears they were held partly to blame for the all-too-real, but much deeper-seated, economic difficulties experienced by locals".

A proviso to that is that increased number of migrants were present in areas that voted to leave. It also show how bad austerity has been for a large chunk of the population, so that a very small increase in immigration has such an effect, when resources are being squeezed. Only 33% said they voted leave due to immigration.

There is inadequate funding for the population that is now in the UK. Funding is based on the 2011 census figures - even though councils said there were many that didn't fill in their forms. The population was put down as an estimate of 63.1 million with population estimate in June 2015 at 65 million. That means there are 2 million more people - probably more - in the UK but no increase in funding, but an increase in needs of services, which leads to even more squeeze on resources. So it is not surprising that people will 'blame' immigration. What is quite revealing is that only 33% voted leave due to immigration.

If we take as read that, on average, migrants contribute to the exchequer more than they consume, one would imagine the funding situation would be even worse if they weren't there though. I wonder if the issue isn't more to do with the distribution of funds, and particularly the agility in adapting to what can be quite rapid changes. For instance, if the population of a town changes rapidly, does funding adapt to reflect that or does it wait 10 years for the next census?
 
If we take as read that, on average, migrants contribute to the exchequer more than they consume, one would imagine the funding situation would be even worse if they weren't there though. I wonder if the issue isn't more to do with the distribution of funds, and particularly the agility in adapting to what can be quite rapid changes. For instance, if the population of a town changes rapidly, does funding adapt to reflect that or does it wait 10 years for the next census?
Bruce are you googling again by any chance?lol
When you say immigrants contribute to the exchequer I agree with you, but their is know information on what benefits they take out in tax credits, housing benefits, NHS, education etc
All in which they are entitiled to by the way, but it's the hidden strain Labour did have a policy of giving local authorities extra cash in high imagration areas which with austerity the Tories cut out completely!
 
Last edited:
On LBC this am saying ATM Brexit has pushed our exports positively upwards worldwide, and an EU economist came on to say Italy is the next Greece its spent the bail out package from Germany the Euro is in meltdown- it's LBC breakfast show quite a balanced telephone in some were complaining Brexit was bad majority saying it was causing a boom in manufacturing exports!

Between April and May exports decreased.

"Summary of latest UK trade statistics
Monthly analysis

The deficit on trade in goods and services in May 2016 was £2.3 billion, compared with a deficit of £2.0 billion in April 2016. The trade position reflects exports minus imports; the widening of the deficit was attributed to a decrease in both exports and imports between April 2016 and May 2016.

Between April 2016 and May 2016, total exports decreased by £2.0 billion to £43.1 billion (4.4%); this decrease comprised a £2.1 billion (8.2%) fall in the exports of goods and a £0.1 billion (0.7%) rise in the export of services. Total imports decreased by £1.7 billion to £45.4 billion (3.5%) over the same period, reflecting a £1.6 billion decrease in imports of goods.

The deficit on trade in goods was £9.9 billion in May 2016, widening by £0.5 billion from April 2016. This widening reflected a decrease in exports (down £2.1 billion to £23.7 billion) and a decrease in imports (down £1.6 billion to £33.5 billion). The decrease in exports was mainly attributed to a £1.2 billion decrease in unspecified goods*, a £0.4 billion decrease in chemicals and a £0.4 billion decrease in machinery. The decrease in imports was mainly attributed to a £0.5 billion decrease in both chemicals and ship and aircraft (combined), and a £0.3 billion decrease imports of machinery.

Exports of goods to EU countries decreased by £0.3 billion between April 2016 and May 2016. There was a £0.2 billion decrease in exports of oil and a £0.1 billion decrease in chemicals. Imports of goods from EU countries increased by £0.1 billion, to £18.8 billion in May 2016.

Between April 2016 and May 2016, exports of goods to countries outside the EU decreased by £1.8 billion. There was a £1.3 billion decrease in exports of unspecified goods* and a £0.3 billion decrease in chemicals. Imports from countries outside the EU decreased by £1.8 billion. The decrease was mainly attributed to a £0.4 billion decrease in machinery, and a decrease in both chemicals and fuels of £0.3 billion.

*Unspecified goods includes parcel post and low value trade – and – most notably, non monetary gold.

I think what they were talking about was the 3 month trend, February to May, which was before the vote.

3 monthly analysis

Between the 3 months to February 2016 and the 3 months to May 2016, the total trade deficit (goods and services) narrowed by £2.5 billion to £8.2 billion. The trade position reflects exports minus imports; the narrowing of the deficit was attributed to a larger increase in exports than imports.

The deficit on trade in goods narrowed by £2.7 billion to a deficit of £30.6 billion between the 3 months to February 2016 and the 3 months to May 2016. Exports of goods increased by £4.5 billion (6.5%), to £73.3 billion. This increase reflected a £1.4 billion increase in exports of unspecified goods*; a £0.8 billion increase in machinery; a £1.1 billion increase in aircraft to a record 3 monthly high of £4.3 billion; and a £0.4 billion increase in cars to a record 3 monthly high of £7.3 billion. Imports increased by £1.7 billion (1.7%) due to a £1.8 billion increase in machinery; a £0.8 billion increase in material manufactures; a £0.7 billion increase in aircraft; a £0.5 billion increase in food, beverages and tobacco; a £0.3 billion increase in miscellaneous manufactures; and a £0.4 billion increase in oil. These increases were offset by a £2.6 billion decrease in imports of unspecified goods* and a £0.7 billion decrease in both and cars and chemicals.

Between the 3 months to February 2016 and the 3 months to May 2016, exports of goods to EU countries increased by £2.0 billion due to exports of cars, increasing by £0.6 billion to a record 3 monthly high of £3.3 billion; machinery increasing by £0.4 billion; chemicals increasing by £0.3 billion; and a £0.2 billion increase in aircraft to a record 3 monthly high of £1.9 billion. For the same period, imports from the EU increased by £1.9 billion. This increase reflected a £1.0 billion increase in machinery; a £0.4 billion increase in food, beverages and tobacco; and a £0.7 billion increase in material manufactures. These increases were offset by a decrease in chemicals of £0.9 billion. This resulted in a small narrowing of the trade in goods deficit with EU countries by £0.1 billion.

There was a trade in goods deficit with non-EU countries of £8.2 billion in the 3 months to May 2016, a narrowing of £2.6 billion from the 3 months to February 2016. Exports of goods to countries outside the EU rose by £2.5 billion; this was the result of a £1.4 billion increase in unspecified goods*; a £0.9 billion increase in aircraft to a record 3 monthly high of £2.4 billion; and a £0.4 billion increase in machinery. These increases were offset by a £0.3 billion fall in material manufactures and a £0.2 billion fall in cars. Imports of goods from countries outside the EU fell by £0.2 billion; most notably there was an increase in imports of both machinery and aircraft which increased by £0.8 billion each. This increase was offset by a decrease in unspecified goods* of £2.8 billion.

*Unspecified goods includes parcel post and low value trade, and, most notably, non monetary gold.
 
Between April and May exports decreased.

"Summary of latest UK trade statistics
Monthly analysis

The deficit on trade in goods and services in May 2016 was £2.3 billion, compared with a deficit of £2.0 billion in April 2016. The trade position reflects exports minus imports; the widening of the deficit was attributed to a decrease in both exports and imports between April 2016 and May 2016.

Between April 2016 and May 2016, total exports decreased by £2.0 billion to £43.1 billion (4.4%); this decrease comprised a £2.1 billion (8.2%) fall in the exports of goods and a £0.1 billion (0.7%) rise in the export of services. Total imports decreased by £1.7 billion to £45.4 billion (3.5%) over the same period, reflecting a £1.6 billion decrease in imports of goods.

The deficit on trade in goods was £9.9 billion in May 2016, widening by £0.5 billion from April 2016. This widening reflected a decrease in exports (down £2.1 billion to £23.7 billion) and a decrease in imports (down £1.6 billion to £33.5 billion). The decrease in exports was mainly attributed to a £1.2 billion decrease in unspecified goods*, a £0.4 billion decrease in chemicals and a £0.4 billion decrease in machinery. The decrease in imports was mainly attributed to a £0.5 billion decrease in both chemicals and ship and aircraft (combined), and a £0.3 billion decrease imports of machinery.

Exports of goods to EU countries decreased by £0.3 billion between April 2016 and May 2016. There was a £0.2 billion decrease in exports of oil and a £0.1 billion decrease in chemicals. Imports of goods from EU countries increased by £0.1 billion, to £18.8 billion in May 2016.

Between April 2016 and May 2016, exports of goods to countries outside the EU decreased by £1.8 billion. There was a £1.3 billion decrease in exports of unspecified goods* and a £0.3 billion decrease in chemicals. Imports from countries outside the EU decreased by £1.8 billion. The decrease was mainly attributed to a £0.4 billion decrease in machinery, and a decrease in both chemicals and fuels of £0.3 billion.

*Unspecified goods includes parcel post and low value trade – and – most notably, non monetary gold.

I think what they were talking about was the 3 month trend, February to May, which was before the vote.

3 monthly analysis

Between the 3 months to February 2016 and the 3 months to May 2016, the total trade deficit (goods and services) narrowed by £2.5 billion to £8.2 billion. The trade position reflects exports minus imports; the narrowing of the deficit was attributed to a larger increase in exports than imports.

The deficit on trade in goods narrowed by £2.7 billion to a deficit of £30.6 billion between the 3 months to February 2016 and the 3 months to May 2016. Exports of goods increased by £4.5 billion (6.5%), to £73.3 billion. This increase reflected a £1.4 billion increase in exports of unspecified goods*; a £0.8 billion increase in machinery; a £1.1 billion increase in aircraft to a record 3 monthly high of £4.3 billion; and a £0.4 billion increase in cars to a record 3 monthly high of £7.3 billion. Imports increased by £1.7 billion (1.7%) due to a £1.8 billion increase in machinery; a £0.8 billion increase in material manufactures; a £0.7 billion increase in aircraft; a £0.5 billion increase in food, beverages and tobacco; a £0.3 billion increase in miscellaneous manufactures; and a £0.4 billion increase in oil. These increases were offset by a £2.6 billion decrease in imports of unspecified goods* and a £0.7 billion decrease in both and cars and chemicals.

Between the 3 months to February 2016 and the 3 months to May 2016, exports of goods to EU countries increased by £2.0 billion due to exports of cars, increasing by £0.6 billion to a record 3 monthly high of £3.3 billion; machinery increasing by £0.4 billion; chemicals increasing by £0.3 billion; and a £0.2 billion increase in aircraft to a record 3 monthly high of £1.9 billion. For the same period, imports from the EU increased by £1.9 billion. This increase reflected a £1.0 billion increase in machinery; a £0.4 billion increase in food, beverages and tobacco; and a £0.7 billion increase in material manufactures. These increases were offset by a decrease in chemicals of £0.9 billion. This resulted in a small narrowing of the trade in goods deficit with EU countries by £0.1 billion.

There was a trade in goods deficit with non-EU countries of £8.2 billion in the 3 months to May 2016, a narrowing of £2.6 billion from the 3 months to February 2016. Exports of goods to countries outside the EU rose by £2.5 billion; this was the result of a £1.4 billion increase in unspecified goods*; a £0.9 billion increase in aircraft to a record 3 monthly high of £2.4 billion; and a £0.4 billion increase in machinery. These increases were offset by a £0.3 billion fall in material manufactures and a £0.2 billion fall in cars. Imports of goods from countries outside the EU fell by £0.2 billion; most notably there was an increase in imports of both machinery and aircraft which increased by £0.8 billion each. This increase was offset by a decrease in unspecified goods* of £2.8 billion.

*Unspecified goods includes parcel post and low value trade, and, most notably, non monetary gold.
Another Goggler! The debate was about post Brexit?
 
Bruce are you googling again by any chance?lol
When you say immigrants contribute to the exchequer I agree with you, but their is know information on what benefits they take out in tax credits, housing benefits, NHS, education etc
All in which they are entitiled to by the way, but it's the hidden strain Labour did have a policy of giving local authorities extra cash in high imagration areas which with austerity the Tories cut out completely!

Oxford Migration Watch is the place to go for this. They say they contribute more than they consume, and that includes the A8 group of recent additions to the EU.
 
If we take as read that, on average, migrants contribute to the exchequer more than they consume, one would imagine the funding situation would be even worse if they weren't there though. I wonder if the issue isn't more to do with the distribution of funds, and particularly the agility in adapting to what can be quite rapid changes. For instance, if the population of a town changes rapidly, does funding adapt to reflect that or does it wait 10 years for the next census?

If there are more people coming into an area and there is the same number of doctors surgeries/school places/housing it will put a strain on those resources. And the local population will say, 'I have to wait for a doctors appointment longer now there are more people' or 'My child's class size has gone up because their are more children in the school'.

Funding is based on the Barnett formula which councils complain about doesn't take into account needs or rapid increases in population in the local area. Under this formula London, Scotland and Northern Ireland do very well out of it, all voted to remain.
 
Another Goggler! The debate was about post Brexit?

The trade figures they quoted today were to do with what happened between April and May and between February and May. It is too early to say what affect Brexit had on trade to the EU or the rest of the world. No one will say, 'in the last 2 weeks the UK has sold x billions more goods and service due to the Brexit vote.
 
The trade figures they quoted today were to do with what happened between April and May and between February and May. It is too early to say what affect Brexit had on trade to the EU or the rest of the world. No one will say, 'in the last 2 weeks the UK has sold x billions more goods and service due to the Brexit vote.
So we were already on the slide before Brexit then?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top