Brexit!

[Ali Begbie]

18 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Because your plans will have the same failing. How are you going to have an informed decision? What if the people pick "wrong" again? Why does remain get an option when it's already lost? Are you informing people based on predictions that have been wrong time and again? Or are we somehow hoping these predictions are right this time? 

 

I know it keeps getting said, and keeps getting dismissed, but leave won the referendum, and we should leave. What happens after that needs to be decided after that. Then we can see where we are and what needs doing. We're judging no deal on the same shitetastic information we were given about what would happen after the leave vote.

 

Leave won. Leave without a deal did not.

The problem (for both sides) is that there was only a single word on the ballot paper in 2016. “Leave”. No-one owns Brexit and no-one has a mandate to  say that we should leave either with or without a deal.

The closest thing we have to an mandate is the Conservative Party 2017 manifesto commitment to an ‘orderly Brexit’. That’s what people voted for. That’s what “won”!

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

A quick question Jon, one that I've been looking for an answer for before...in the world as it exists today, do you believe the falling apart of the EU is desirous and why?

I am neutral on it to be honest as to whether it is a desirous outcome - the fundamental problem is that I don't believe you can sustain the Eurozone without aligned fiscal and monetary policy, and I don't believe the governments of any EU members will sign up for that.  It just doesn't work in the long term.  So you have EU federalists on one path, and they are in every single EU organisation at all levels - they believe very strongly in the project, and then you have the people and the governments of the EU28 as now, which don't really believe is much more than a free trade area with regulatory alignment.

 

For example, i don't beluieve the Eastern European nations will want to keep playing when they have to pay to be part of the club.  Currently they benefit a lot, and tolerate it as a result.  The net costs will increase over time (especially post Brexit) and that will end that project.  I can see a much smaller Eurozone / EU with a wider free trade area in the future, but that zone doesn't have much growth in it, so not all that appealing to be in.

[Jon the Hat]

This thread is informative on the actual risks of no deal.. Not a disaster, so can we stop calling it one?

 

https://twitter.com/Sapere_vivere/status/1168964684764131328

[Guest Fktf]

12 hours ago, UniFox21 said:

I agree with what you're saying; its just a nagging feeling that simply voting again will come back to haunt us in the future. 

 

But as I've said in another comment; I've never been one for politics, I may be looking at this from the wrong angle and spouting complete bull. I probably should just stick to football or science 

I think it's good you seem to have, at the very least, a passing interest in how this pans out. A no deal brexit will have a really detrimental impact on universities in the UK, and the effects of any no deal will be felt quite quickly by both staff and students.

[Dames]

37 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

You'd have to ask all the MP's who rejected it. 

 

All I know is when this shitshow started, it did under the understanding that if a deal wasn't reached, we would leave without a deal. It has been 3 years with no deal, and we're no closer to having one. It's time to leave. You want people to have an informed choice, show them the alternative. Predictions and forecasts only go so far, we've seen that too over the last 3 years. 

 

Give us a chance, then we can all make a choice. If it's as crap as the doomsday predictions, we can go back with our tails between our legs to the cheers of the remainers. Without mass divisions, dodgy political ploys or potential civil unrest. 

Even if it doesn't work the right wing element of the leave camp will never let the country simply go back to the EU without civil unrest. Its been turned into a full blown flag waving ultra nationalistic movement within far right circles and to go back, no matter how fair of a crack Brexit is given would be seen as the ultimate surrender and treason in their eyes.

[Jon the Hat]

5 minutes ago, Fktf said:

I think it's good you seem to have, at the very least, a passing interest in how this pans out. A no deal brexit will have a really detrimental impact on universities in the UK, and the effects of any no deal will be felt quite quickly by both staff and students.

Perhaps you can explain why a no deal Brexit will have a detrimental impact on Universities in the UK?

[Innovindil]

3 minutes ago, Dames said:

Even if it doesn't work the right wing element of the leave camp will never let the country simply go back to the EU without civil unrest. Its been turned into a full blown flag waving ultra nationalistic movement within far right circles and to go back, no matter how fair of a crack Brexit is given would be seen as the ultimate surrender and treason in their eyes.

And then you'll be dealing with a true minority. Instead of 52%. 

[Nick]

4 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Perhaps you can explain why a no deal Brexit will have a detrimental impact on Universities in the UK?

What a ‘no deal’ Brexit might mean for universities 

If the Brexit negotiations end without a deal in place, then: 
 

• there would be great uncertainty on the scale and scope of the government's enacting of specific commitments agreed as part of the Draft Withdrawal Agreement on continued participation in Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+
• there would be no agreement on implementing a transition period between the date of Brexit and 31 December 2020, during which time it was envisioned that freedom of movement would essentially still apply
• there would be no certainty on what the UK’s future relationship with the EU would look like, including in areas like the mobility of citizens and access to EU programmes

Any impact from a no deal Brexit could result in the following outcomes taking effect on exit day:

• EU nationals entering the UK for more than three months would need to apply for European Temporary Leave to Remain and, if intending to stay for more than three years for study or work reasons, might need to apply for a visa to cover any period of stay beyond three years 
• the UK would no longer be eligible to receive EU funding through Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+ programmes
• the continued mutual recognition of professional qualifications covered by the current EU Directive would be uncertain

[UniFox21]

4 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

Perhaps you can explain why a no deal Brexit will have a detrimental impact on Universities in the UK?

Many universities get funding and grants based on the research they carry out. The funding to carry out research is on many occasions given by the EU and funds set up by them. Losing access to these funds potentially reduced the amount of funds universities have to spend on both education and research.  

On top to this, funding for PhD's is also potentially at risk for the same reasons

 

And everything @Swan Lesta wrote in his post.

[Jon the Hat]

1 minute ago, Swan Lesta said:

What a ‘no deal’ Brexit might mean for universities 

If the Brexit negotiations end without a deal in place, then: 
 

• there would be great uncertainty on the scale and scope of the government's enacting of specific commitments agreed as part of the Draft Withdrawal Agreement on continued participation in Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+
• there would be no agreement on implementing a transition period between the date of Brexit and 31 December 2020, during which time it was envisioned that freedom of movement would essentially still apply
• there would be no certainty on what the UK’s future relationship with the EU would look like, including in areas like the mobility of citizens and access to EU programmes

Any impact from a no deal Brexit could result in the following outcomes taking effect on exit day:

• EU nationals entering the UK for more than three months would need to apply for European Temporary Leave to Remain and, if intending to stay for more than three years for study or work reasons, might need to apply for a visa to cover any period of stay beyond three years 
• the UK would no longer be eligible to receive EU funding through Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+ programmes
• the continued mutual recognition of professional qualifications covered by the current EU Directive would be uncertain

So basically a funding gap?  Easily fixed.  Student visas already exist, and more people have been recruited to process them.  I should think most people coming to the UK to join courses would start in September, so 10 months to sort that out.  Or indeed the government could just agree to continue with the programs noted above, or waive the visa requirement for EU students.

[Jon the Hat]

Just now, UniFox21 said:

Many universities get funding and grants based on the research they carry out. The funding to carry out research is on many occasions given by the EU and funds set up by them. Losing access to these funds potentially reduced the amount of funds universities have to spend on both education and research.  

On top to this, funding for PhD's is also potentially at risk for the same reasons

 

And everything @Swan Lesta wrote in his post.

So if the government guaranteed to match EU funding for 2-5 years that would be ok?

[UniFox21]

4 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

So if the government guaranteed to match EU funding for 2-5 years that would be ok?

I may have only written on the funding; but it's not just that. 

 

Lack of freedom of movement and all that will make collaborations harder due to travel restrictions etc etc 

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

So if the government guaranteed to match EU funding for 2-5 years that would be ok?

If the government guaranteed to enable by whatever means any and all scientific and research collaboration that exists with the EU at the present time, including funding, for at least five years, then that would be ok. Perhaps.

 

20 minutes ago, Jon the Hat said:

I am neutral on it to be honest as to whether it is a desirous outcome - the fundamental problem is that I don't believe you can sustain the Eurozone without aligned fiscal and monetary policy, and I don't believe the governments of any EU members will sign up for that.  It just doesn't work in the long term.  So you have EU federalists on one path, and they are in every single EU organisation at all levels - they believe very strongly in the project, and then you have the people and the governments of the EU28 as now, which don't really believe is much more than a free trade area with regulatory alignment.

 

For example, i don't beluieve the Eastern European nations will want to keep playing when they have to pay to be part of the club.  Currently they benefit a lot, and tolerate it as a result.  The net costs will increase over time (especially post Brexit) and that will end that project.  I can see a much smaller Eurozone / EU with a wider free trade area in the future, but that zone doesn't have much growth in it, so not all that appealing to be in.

Thank you for the response.

 

I'm actually going to post what I think about the matter at large in the unpopular opinions thread, as I think it belongs there.

[Nick]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

So basically a funding gap?  Easily fixed.  Student visas already exist, and more people have been recruited to process them.  I should think most people coming to the UK to join courses would start in September, so 10 months to sort that out.  Or indeed the government could just agree to continue with the programs noted above, or waive the visa requirement for EU students.

Yeah that's part of it though UK Universities make far more money from international students currently so fee structure would I would imagine be an issue as would Visa's to remain studying here.

 

Erasmus is an exchange programme embedded in to some courses and for others is a year or so in a foreign country so many courses would be pretty screwed as would be the students undertaking them.

 

The Horizon stuff and research funding is massive - UK Universities bid for EU funding for a massive amount of research projects and revenue - this would potentially impact on ability to bid and receive income and potentially disrupt current projects many of which have a lifespan of 2-8 years and employ and fund hundreds of researchers.

 

None of these are a particularly quick fix.

[Donk]

17 minutes ago, Innovindil said:

Because your plans will have the same failing. How are you going to have an informed decision? What if the people pick "wrong" again? Why does remain get an option when it's already lost? Are you informing people based on predictions that have been wrong time and again? Or are we somehow hoping these predictions are right this time? 

 

I know it keeps getting said, and keeps getting dismissed, but leave won the referendum, and we should leave. What happens after that needs to be decided after that. Then we can see where we are and what needs doing. We're judging no deal on the same shitetastic information we were given about what would happen after the leave vote.

Because if we "just leave" amidst making the vast majority of the country poorer, we also send the message to everyone we want to trade with that we will break our agreements with them, that we wont pay what we owe them, and that we will threaten them with all kinds of nonsense in the hope of getting our own way because hey, Britannia rules the waves something something.

 

What do you think is a more informed basis to make a decision on, breaking point posters and shitty meaningless slogans, or actual factual information like the economy shrinking, government impact assessments that have been written in part by some of the absolute leaders of their fields, plus the heads of huge multinational manufacturers, retailers, a multitude of others who 99% of them are telling you EXPLICITLY that no deal would be a disaster and why.

 

What would be the point in lying? WHY? whats to gain from pretending something good will be very very bad?

 

And it only takes a modicum of research into these issues to inform yourself as to why theyre telling the truth.

 

You could easily find out what trade deals we have, you could easily find out what immigration arrangements individual countries have and what powers we have that we can use if we choose to, you can easily look into eu law proposals and what weve adopted, you can easily look at what the common fisheries policy does, you can easily look at what eu projects we have already committed to with regards to the £39 billion figure people band around.

 

Its not some smoke and mirrors made up fabrication, like propaganda to balance out an argument.

 

Why does remain get an option when its already lost?

 

Because people are blatantly not being given the type of leave that was campaigned upon and it affects every single person in this country.

 

If you were to go into a restaurant and ordered everyone in your group dover sole, and then everyone was actually brought out a plate of sardines, do you think people would say oh well stuff it, its fish, its close enough.

 

Millions of people were led to believe they were getting something they clearly aren't going to get. its fact. Its not even something anyone tries to deny. 

 

Ken Clarke's proposal was close to finding a majority, so presumably it only needed some additional tweaks and assurances and it would have been workable. It would deliver brexit whilst not cutting all our ties instantly with the EU and would have kept trade flowing.

 

Wouldn't it be better to start from a starting point of something that looks like it could gain a majority consensus, rather than something that is clearly divisive, something that will be forced onto people regardless of how they voted, and something that is completely at odds with what was promised.

 

I think a large proportion of remainers would be happy to leave with a sensible deal. I certainly would accept that. Of course I want to remain, but I can accept a sensible leaving deal to fulfll the referendum result.

 

As long as you persevere with "Just leave", you will continually see resistance

 

 

[hackneyfox]

6 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

Labour stood in the last election on a Leave ticket.  

Boris can apparently go ahead with a simple majority if required by bringing a new bill saying “Notwithstanding the fixed term parliament act the date of the next general election will be the 15th October 2019.”

Any Bill can have add-ons applied by Parliament like 'there will be no No Deal' they can also screw him on the date.

[hackneyfox]

3 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

What would your approach be to an EU army? 

It really doesn't take much research to find out that this is a complete myth and always has been.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/25/brexiters-european-army-myths-franco-german

[Guest Fktf]

@Jon the Hat@UniFox21@Swan Lesta

As ever, the devil is in the detail. Funding for universities is the crux of it, but staying within the existing research funding schemes won’t be a simple process. For instance, in the pharma sector, we’ll need regulatory alignment with the EU on drugs in order to continue with shared drugs trials (and access to funds, research facilities in the EU). Across every research sector, it could take years to set up a deal, and in the meantime we’ll see a reduction in the quality and quantity of UK research because 1) even with current govt pledges on funding we'll be down around half a billion over the next few years and 2) we wouldn't have access to the same research infrastructure as we currently do.

[leicsmac]

4 minutes ago, Fktf said:

@Jon the Hat@UniFox21@Swan Lesta

As ever, the devil is in the detail. Funding for universities is the crux of it, but staying within the existing research funding schemes won’t be a simple process. For instance, in the pharma sector, we’ll need regulatory alignment with the EU on drugs in order to continue with shared drugs trials (and access to funds, research facilities in the EU). Across every research sector, it could take years to set up a deal, and in the meantime we’ll see a reduction in the quality and quantity of UK research because 1) even with current govt pledges on funding we'll be down around half a billion over the next few years and 2) we wouldn't have access to the same research infrastructure as we currently do.

 

But, as if scientific research collaboration matters, eh?

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, UniFox21 said:

I may have only written on the funding; but it's not just that. 

 

Lack of freedom of movement and all that will make collaborations harder due to travel restrictions etc etc 

Bullshit.  We will be free to travel to Europe and Vice versa for conferences and meetings.

[Jon the Hat]

1 hour ago, Donk said:

Because if we "just leave" amidst making the vast majority of the country poorer,

Utter utter crap.  Even the most apolocalyptics forecasts suggest an impact of 0.5% of GDP growth.  Which is sod all in the greater scheme of things.

[Jon the Hat]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

But, as if scientific research collaboration matters, eh?

It matters a huge amount, and should and no doubt will be a foundation of our growing status in the world as a centre of scientific and technical innovation.

Sorry if that doesn't fit your view of leavers as idiots.

[Steven]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

Perhaps you can explain why a no deal Brexit will have a detrimental impact on Universities in the UK?

The quality of a University is based on the quality of its research.

 

1 hour ago, Jon the Hat said:

So if the government guaranteed to match EU funding for 2-5 years that would be ok?

But they are using that 350 million on the NHS. 

[Guest Fktf]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

It matters a huge amount, and should and no doubt will be a foundation of our growing status in the world as a centre of scientific and technical innovation.

We're already world leaders on many metrics, but we'll struggle to keep that going following a no deal.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, Jon the Hat said:

It matters a huge amount, and should and no doubt will be a foundation of our growing status in the world as a centre of scientific and technical innovation.

Sorry if that doesn't fit your view of leavers as idiots.

Then why would leavers take a course of action that so blatantly disregards the realities and the possibilities of such collaboration for the future? The days of individual nations - outside perhaps the US and China - being a force for scientific progress are over, and TBH such isolated research hinders progress in that field anyway.

 

Leavers aren't idiots IMO, but they certainly don't seem to be prioritising this matter, do they? I'll say again:

 

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

If the government guaranteed to enable by whatever means any and all scientific and research collaboration that exists with the EU at the present time, including funding, for at least five years, then that would be ok. Perhaps.