Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

Foofie is a turd stirrer--it doesn't know anything about history, or current events, or other nations, or any of the other topics upon which it pontificates. It's just trying to get a rise of of someone . . . anyone.

Must I fight for my opinion to be accpeted by others, as I find on the forum all too often.

And, that's why Germany is the leader of the EU, in MY OPINION.

Leaders of the cross-party campaign that persuaded the British people to leave the EU have dropped their pre-referendum pledge of a £350m-a-week spending bonanza for the NHS.

Many of those who headed the Vote Leave campaign, including its former chair, Labour MP Gisela Stuart, and Michael Gove, the Tory former justice secretary, are re-forming this weekend, creating a new pressure group called Change Britain.

Other top names involved in the organisation, which says it is being established to help “deliver the UK’s referendum result in the most effective way”, include former chancellor Nigel (Lord) Lawson, Digby Jones, former head of the CBI, and David (Lord) Owen, the former Labour foreign secretary.

But despite the NHS pledge having been at the heart of their message in the run-up to the 23 June vote, and displayed on the official Vote Leave battlebus, the Change Britain website made no mention of the NHS in its manifesto about how to make a success of Brexit.

Instead, Change Britain said on its “Brexit Means Brexit” page that any savings made as a result of no longer having to pay into the EU budget (assuming the UK leaves the single market) should be spent on guaranteeing “continued funding for farming, science, universities and poorer regions of the UK”. The website was taken down, although cached versions of its pages were still accessible through search engines.

Boris Johnson has endorsed a new cross-party campaign created by prominent pro-Brexit politicians aimed at pressuring Theresa May into fully delivering on the promise that Britain leaves the EU.

Johnson, a prominent leave campaigner who is now foreign secretary in May’s government, said the Change Britain campaign, led by the pro-Brexit Labour MP Gisela Stuart, would ensure the UK gained control over “laws, borders, money and trade” as it exited the EU.
[...]
Adding to the pressure on May this weekend, the former culture secretary, John Whittingdale, said in an interview on Sunday that she should invoke article 50, which trigger the formal process for EU departure, within weeks, rather than waiting for next year.

It also emerged that the new manifesto for Change Britain makes no mention of the leave campaign’s pledge of a £350m-a-week bonanza for the NHS if Britain left the EU.
[... ... ...]
In his message for Change Britain, Johnson said: “On June 23 the people of this country voted to leave the European Union and they voted for change.

“They did so by a clear majority. But there were many people who also voted for remain. So it’s absolutely vital that we work together, leavers and remainers, as we seize the opportunities that this country now has to forge a positive and exciting new relationship, not just with the European Union, but also with the rest of the world; changing Britain and making it global again.

“Now more than ever we need to show the British people that as politicians we are listening to what they have to say.

“Brexit means Brexit and that means delivering on their instructions and restoring UK control over our laws, borders, money and trade.”

Britons could be forced to pay to travel to the continent after the UK leaves the European Union, the Home Secretary has admitted.

Asked about a Brussels plan for a US-style visa waiver system – requiring online applications after Brexit – Amber Rudd said: “We don’t rule it out.”

Ms Rudd admitted British people would be “surprised” to learn the free-and-easy travel to the EU they have enjoyed for decades is now in peril.
[...]
At present, UK nationals – as citizens of an EU but non-Schengen country – must show a valid passport to enter the zone, but can then travel freely within it.

After Brexit, however, Britons would have to apply through a future ETIAS scheme and pay to visit the continent, legal experts suggested – something Ms Rudd has now confirmed is a real possibility.
[...]
It is thought the only guaranteed way for British citizens to avoid the system would be to accept a Norway-style deal allowing free movement, something Theresa May has rejected.
... ... ...

The pledge by Vote Leave to spend £350m a week on the NHS after Brexit was just an “example” of how such cash could be allocated, the organisation’s chair has said.

Gisela Stuart, who co-chaired the official campaign to leave the EU, downplayed the policy, which her organisation emblazoned on the size of a large red bus during the campaign.
[...]
A poll conducted a week before the referendum by Ipsos MORI found that 47 per cent of the public believed the false claim that the UK pays £350m a week to the EU.

Just 39 per cent realised the figure, which formed the centerpiece of the Leave campaign, was false, while 14 per cent did not know.

Sir Andrew Dilnot, chair of the UK Statistics Authority, said in May that he was disappointed that the Brexit campaign continued to make the claim as it was “misleading and undermines trust in official statistics”.

The figure in fact neither includes Britain’s rebate, nor money paid back to the UK through the Commons Agricultural Policy, regional development funding, scientific grants, or cultural grants. It also does not take into account the benefits to the public finances of increased economic activity that comes from being a part of the EU.

In fact, the independent and respected Institute for Fiscal Studies has said the net effect of leaving the EU would be for a £36bn black hole in the public finances to open up during the spending period as a result of lower growth and tax revenue.

The Government is now considering how exactly Britain will leave the EU, although it has not yet officially secession triggered negotiations.

[... ... ...]
His comments suggest the government is actively considering the option of accepting and imposing tariff barriers in trade relations with EU countries.

Davis admitted his department was “stepping on absolutely everybody’s toes”, but claimed all of Whitehall accepted that the Brexit was an enormous and important priority.

He said the issue of leaving the EU was “the sexiest area of politics at the moment”, arguing that he could get the best brains working on the problem.

Foofie wrote:

And, that's why Germany is the leader of the EU, in MY OPINION.

A German is the leader of the EU-Parliament, he got elected.

SPIEGEL: Dass Sie gehen, hat also mit dem politischen und gesellschaftlichen Klima in Großbritannien zu tun?

Roth: Ja, auch. Ich bin 1955 geboren, in einer Zeit, als Europa anfing zusammenzuwachsen, ich fühle mich als gebürtiger Europäer. In einem Land zu leben, das sich gegen Europa entschieden hat, ertrage ich im Alltag nicht. London schien immer eine der besten Städte zu sein, in denen man leben kann. Doch jetzt gibt es fremdenfeindliche Übergriffe, körperlich, verbal. Leute mussten sich anhören: "Sie sind aus Spanien? Wird Zeit, nach Hause zu gehen." Das kam von jetzt auf gleich, irrwitzig schnell.

SPIEGEL: Großbritannien schien eine ganze Zeit lang ein Vorzeigeland fürs multikulturelle Zusammenleben zu sein. Auch bei Ihnen sind Menschen aus vielen Nationen tätig. Wie läuft es in Ihrem Museum?

Roth: Wie offenbar fast überall gibt es auch in Kultureinrichtungen Probleme. Menschen beschimpfen ihre Kollegen - wobei wir hier sofort Mails verschickt und sehr, sehr deutlich vor einem solchen Verhalten gewarnt haben. Es ist in Großbritannien derzeit aber insgesamt noch merkwürdiger, es gibt in diesem Land quasi keine Flüchtlinge, aber doch eine ausgeprägte Flüchtlingsphobie. Verstehen Sie mich nicht falsch, eigentlich liebe ich die Briten heiß und innig. Aber die ganze Welt scheint verrücktzuspielen. Und ich kann nicht von anderen verlangen, ihr Verhalten infrage zu stellen. Ich muss es auch selbst tun.

Overheard in the men’s loo outside the cabinet room.

Business minister Why does the PM keep insisting that there will be no backsliding? I thought she was for remain.

Brexit minister It’s because she believes in democracy. The people have spoken.

Business minister Why can’t they speak again?

Brexit minister We can’t challenge the result of a vote just because we don’t like it. That’s obviously undemocratic.

Business minister Why is it undemocratic to give the public a chance to change their minds? That’s what happens every time we have an election. Every five years, in fact.

Brexit minister We don’t hold elections on constitutional issues. That’s not the British tradition. Once we’re in power we say: “We have a mandate,” and we just go ahead and change the constitution if we feel like it. Like Blair did. Lords reform. Or devolution. But this was a referendum on a specific issue. This is different. We have to stick to it.

Business minister We said it wasn’t binding. Only advisory.

Brexit minister We said that when we thought we would lose. Now we’ve won, it’s binding.

Business minister A referendum isn’t even in our constitution. Parliament is supposed to be sovereign. I thought that’s why we wanted to leave Europe. So we don’t lose our sovereignty.

Brexit minister Right. We’re getting our sovereignty back. So, we can’t have an election about it later, the people might change their minds. Then where would we be? Chaos.

Business minister There’s no chaos now?

Brexit minister If we lost a second referendum and stayed in the EU, we would lose our sovereignty all over again.

Business minister How could we lose our sovereignty if our sovereignty depends on a sovereign parliament and the sovereign parliament votes to remain?

Brexit minister You’re confusing things.

Business minister That’s what we’ve always called democracy. Till now.

Brexit minister That’s a different kind of democracy. That’s a parliamentary democracy. We’ve moved on from that. We’re cutting out the middle man. Now, it’s just the people and us.

Business minister We should be asking parliament if we can trigger article 50.

Brexit minister We can’t put triggering article 50 to parliament because parliament might refuse until they know the terms we’ve negotiated. And the lawyers say that triggering article 50 is the royal prerogative, nothing to do with parliament.

Business minister That sounds really democratic.

Brexit minister I just don’t understand your problem.

Business minister My problem is that I don’t think the people understood what they were voting for.

Brexit minister I agree – we handled that really well, don’t you think?

Jonathan Lynn is the co-creator of Yes Minister. @mrjonathanlynn

Committee chairman Lord Lang of Monkton said: "The referendum result was clear and it is right that the Government are preparing to take Britain out of the EU. However, our constitution is built on the principle of parliamentary sovereignty and the decision to act following the referendum should be taken by Parliament.

"Parliament should be asked to approve the decision to trigger Article 50.

"Parliament's assent could be sought by means of legislation or through resolutions tabled in both Houses of Parliament.

"An Act of Parliament would give greater legal certainty and could be used to enshrine the `constitutional requirements' required by Article 50, allowing for the setting of advantageous pre-conditions regarding the exit negotiations to be met before Article 50 could be triggered.

"A resolution could be simpler and quicker to secure but might not provide the same watertight legal authority. We consider that either would be a constitutionally acceptable means of securing parliamentary approval for the triggering of Article 50.

"Parliament and the Government will need to work together to ensure that the UK achieves the best possible outcome when it withdraws from the EU.

"It is therefore important that Parliament plays a key role in scrutinising the Brexit negotiations once Article 50 is triggered.

"We all want the negotiations to produce a deal that works for both the UK and the EU, and Parliament must be involved in holding the Government to account in delivering that."

Downing Street rejected the peers' demand for a parliamentary vote.

Leading barrister tells Lords panel that UK may have to consider compensation for Britons abroad if they lose some rights
[...]
The chances of EU citizens settled in Britain retaining all their rights to live, work and retire in the UK after Brexit have been rated as zero by legal experts.

A leading barrister who specialises in international public law told a House of Lords panel on Tuesday it was “inconceivable” that the laws would survive entirely intact.

Prof Alan Vaughan Lowe QC said this was the price millions of people – including 1.3 million Britons abroad and 3 million non-Britons living in the UK – were likely to pay for Brexit.
[...]
Safeguarding all EU rights might not be best strategy, said Lowe. It might be that the government would have to step in to offer protection for Britons abroad.

“If [they] lose rights to access to a free health system, then maybe that is something the British government should pick up,” he said. “I can’t see any practical possibility whatsoever of getting a withdrawal agreement that ties up all the legal issues.”

Douglas-Scott said it was not clear who would be leading the negotiations on acquired EU rights – whether it was a government minister or a collective body that would include experts and opposition politicians.

Both Douglas-Scott and Lowe stressed that EU rights would fall away unless specifically protected under new British law.