EU referendum...THE RESULT...and aftermath...

Rickler wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

When we go to, say, India (or Brazil or China or anywhere) to negotiate one of these wonderful post-Brexit deals the first thing they will say is "we want freedom of movement between our countries - deal or no deal?".
.

Rubbish.  Does Britain have that deal currently with the USA?  With Japan?  With countless other Non - Eu countries it trades with?

The reality is that we will probably offer easier movement as part of our bargaining strategy. This was already happening long before the referendum. Indian and Chinese nationals require visas to enter the UK and I would predict that these requirements would be relaxed as part of a trade deal.

America and Japan have access to the registered traveller scheme which is a form of freedom of movement (at a price).

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

And yet again Franny ignores all the arguments he doesn't have a hope in hell of winning and starts to bang the immigration drum again. Not the racism one the anti immigrant one. Don't feed the troll.

I don't think I have mentioned the r word at all nor have I accused anybody of anything.

I'd be grateful if you could supply me with a list of topics not verboten to me and I'll see if I can comply.

And any advice as to how I can discuss the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] important factor to voters factors regarding Brexit without actually mentioning it or considering its implications would be welcome.

The [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] inportant factor? Now I see why you are so out of touch, you seem to have us mixed up with the residents of Jaywick or maybe one of the Northern towns. I think it is true to say that the people of Jaywick did vote mainly on an immigration platform, why they did that is not for me to say maybe you could go there and find out yourself? Immigration has always been lower down the problem list for me although I do thinkit should be controlled. My reason for leaving is the endless procession of our money going back and forth and ultimately ending up in the hands of beaurocrats.
Having an unelected extra government also taking money off us to make laws for us in another one.
Getting back our fishing waters is another one.
Then probably immigration.
It's not surprising you are so out of touch you fail to acknowledge any other argument, you voted out, probably racist end of. Weak as piss.
And no subject is verboten what is verboten is constantly trolling the race angle then getting all hurt when you get trolled yourself.

There you go again... banging on about race all the time.

For someone who says he more or less doesn't give a damn about it you mention it all the time. Others give a damn. Many others. Overwhelming numbers of others.

Another thing: when i mention the Leave campaign or Brexit then that is what I am talking about. I am not talking about you or any other person. I don't know you. How could I possibly know how or why you have made any decision? All I can do is talk in general terms.

You have repeatedly missed this fact despite my having repeatedly explained it.

The problems you have with my views are entirely all of your creation. They are a bizarre fantasy. A concoction conceived of and built between your ears Ears.

Still you keep building that Straw Man and you keep burning him down. Just as long as it makes you happy. Not that it seems to.

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

When we go to, say, India (or Brazil or China or anywhere) to negotiate one of these wonderful post-Brexit deals the first thing they will say is "we want freedom of movement between our countries - deal or no deal?".
.

Rubbish.  Does Britain have that deal currently with the USA?  With Japan?  With countless other Non - Eu countries it trades with?

The reality is that we will probably offer easier movement as part of our bargaining strategy. This was already happening long before the referendum. Indian and Chinese nationals require visas to enter the UK and I would predict that these requirements would be relaxed as part of a trade deal.

America and Japan have access to the registered traveller scheme which is a form of freedom of movement (at a price).

It is a reality Frank but if we sign a trade deal with India it will not allow free movement of all people between India and the UK. We have already cracked down on the amount of Indians coming over for university as it turns out that lots of them didn't go to uni and more didn't want to go home after uni. In return the Indians have been making it harder for us to even get tourist visas. I was told this by a guy at the Indian visa office.
The key word is control. I've always said that we need some immigration as we have a skills gap in this country so we need to attract the skilled people we lack. What we don't need is to have to find homes for a few million unskilled people. Despite the perception of some people who should know better we do have a shortage of housing, our doctors and hospitals are creaking under the weight of people to boot.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

There you go again... banging on about race all the time.

For someone who says he more or less doesn't give a damn about it you mention it all the time. Others give a damn. Many others. Overwhelming numbers of others.

Another thing: when i mention the Leave campaign or Brexit then that is what I am talking about. I am not talking about you or any other person. I don't know you. How could I possibly know how or why you have made any decision? All I can do is talk in general terms.

You have repeatedly missed this fact despite my having repeatedly explained it.

The problems you have with my views are entirely all of your creation. They are a bizarre fantasy. A concoction conceived of and built between your ears Ears.

Still you keep building that Straw Man and you keep burning him down. Just as long as it makes you happy.

Dear of dear. This is what happens when you ignore most of what I say then when I reply to one of your posts, you know the ones banging on about immigration and race then I'm obsessed?
I'm sorry but I missed the huge numbers of people coming out in support of you regarding my slur on you the other day? It looked to me like I had it bang on and the majority of posters on here tending to agree with me. You have banged the racist drum and trolled like fook for weeks. Change the record mate.

You are far more likely to be treated by an immigrant in an NHS hospital than to be denied treatment because of one.

Our schools and hospitals are creaking because they have suffered under-investment in for decades.

And there you go again blaming immigration for everything in direct contradiction to your assertion just a few moments ago that it really doesn't matter very much at all.

I despair.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

There you go again... banging on about race all the time.

For someone who says he more or less doesn't give a damn about it you mention it all the time. Others give a damn. Many others. Overwhelming numbers of others.

Another thing: when i mention the Leave campaign or Brexit then that is what I am talking about. I am not talking about you or any other person. I don't know you. How could I possibly know how or why you have made any decision? All I can do is talk in general terms.

You have repeatedly missed this fact despite my having repeatedly explained it.

The problems you have with my views are entirely all of your creation. They are a bizarre fantasy. A concoction conceived of and built between your ears Ears.

Still you keep building that Straw Man and you keep burning him down. Just as long as it makes you happy.

Dear of dear. This is what happens when you ignore most of what I say then when I reply to one of your posts, you know the ones banging on about immigration and race then I'm obsessed?
I'm sorry but I missed the huge numbers of people coming out in support of you regarding my slur on you the other day? It looked to me like I had it bang on and the majority of posters on here tending to agree with me. You have banged the racist drum and trolled like fook for weeks. Change the record mate.

We're not allowed to mention the R word. It's the debate we aren't allowed to have.

"Slur".

Admitting you have done wrong is the first step to addressing the wrong.

Try to keep on going towards genuine apology and see how well you can do.

I suspect it isn't very well at all but I hope to be wrong.

Let me tell a story about a job I did about twelve years ago, to me it shows a lot of what is wrong with the EU and why I want out. I already wanted out ast this stage but his really drove home how fooked up it was becoming.
I was part of a £3m job in the Tamar valley to protect our mining heritage and provide access for people to enjoy it. We had a building firm working on an engine house to make it safe and re point it. We had some guys with machines to improve the tracks and roadways the you had myself and another guy from Cornwall providing traditional Chestnut post and rail fencing around the mines and beside the pathways.
For me it was a great contract hundreds and hundreds of metres of high quality and high value work.
After the work was nearing completion we started to wonder where the next phase of the work would be? Shorely we hadn't spent £3m on this project? It just didn't seem big enough.
Anyway we soon found out that this was it. We had a grand opening and all the contractors to invited. It soon became obvious where the money was going for every contractor there seemed to be about five suits. They came from everywhere Archeologists from English Heritage, Speccy newt lovers from Natural England, people from Devon County Council, Plymouth City council, West Devon Borough council all on the payroll to draw down funding from the EU and match funding from our own coffers. We then had the EU lot who sit on similar desks in Brussels who draw down the funding from EO coffers that we then spend thousands of man hours on drawing that funding down from them.
In short the actual work done on that site came in at about £800k yet the price for the job was £3m. We had to provide half of that money whilst the shortfall of £1.5m came from the EU. Our side of the £1.5m was match funded by our councils who guess what got their money off us? We had already paid a lot of that money to Europe which again employed a load of civil servants to take it off us then send it to them.
I would love to know why for every £800k we spend we need £2.2m for paying the civil servants is such good business? The £800k washes around in the lower end of the economy creating wealth where it is needed whilst the suits just Hoover it up and redistribute it amoungst themselves with at least half of it finding it's way back to Brussels. This is just the tip of the iceberg we do this with billions of pounds every year.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

"Slur".

Admitting you have done wrong is the first step to addressing the wrong.

Try to keep on going towards genuine apology and see how well you can do.

I suspect it isn't very well at all but I hope to be wrong.

Jog on, why don't we have a referendum and ask the public who needs to apologise first? A pointless exercise as we all know you would only accept the vote of it went in your favour.
I'm amazed you haven't realised the lack of support you have in this?

I couldn't give a damn if I was the only person in the world who thought what I do.

I have a viewpoint and I am making the case for it. It is called "debate".

It's what a messageboard is for.

If you don't want to read an opposing opinion then try a messageboard somewhere else that I don't use - which happens to be every single one other than this one. Once there insult people like you have here and see how long it takes for you to be banned.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I couldn't give a damn if I was the only person in the world who thought what I do.

I have a viewpoint and I am making the case for it. It is called "debate".

It's what a messageboard is for.

If you don't want to read an opposing opinion then try a messageboard somewhere else that I don't use - which happens to be every single one other than this one. Once there insult people like you have here and see how long it takes for you to be banned.

Lol you seem to have missed about three pages of opinion penned by me Pat and Gaffer with you only choosing to debate the fact that Gaffer took four days to reply. You then go banging on about immigration again. That's not debate.
You can try debating my story outlined above, I doubt you will though.

OK so apart from making some topics verboten to me you also wish to dictate the ones I am am able to reply to.

Would you like to pen the responses permissible to me too?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

There you go again... banging on about race all the time.

For someone who says he more or less doesn't give a damn about it you mention it all the time. Others give a damn. Many others. Overwhelming numbers of others.

Another thing: when i mention the Leave campaign or Brexit then that is what I am talking about. I am not talking about you or any other person. I don't know you. How could I possibly know how or why you have made any decision? All I can do is talk in general terms.

You have repeatedly missed this fact despite my having repeatedly explained it.

The problems you have with my views are entirely all of your creation. They are a bizarre fantasy. A concoction conceived of and built between your ears Ears.

Still you keep building that Straw Man and you keep burning him down. Just as long as it makes you happy.

Dear of dear. This is what happens when you ignore most of what I say then when I reply to one of your posts, you know the ones banging on about immigration and race then I'm obsessed?
I'm sorry but I missed the huge numbers of people coming out in support of you regarding my slur on you the other day? It looked to me like I had it bang on and the majority of posters on here tending to agree with me. You have banged the racist drum and trolled like fook for weeks. Change the record mate.

We're not allowed to mention the R word. It's the debate we aren't allowed to have.

Really? Perhaps you would be so good as to show the evidence for that.

As for immigration: it was the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] important factor for those who chose to vote Leave.

It would be bizarre not to mention it.

I suppose it is just like Nigel Farage saying nearly every time he was on Question Time over the last 20 years: 

"Immigration is the debate we are not allowed to have."

... before going on to debate it endlessly and blame everything on foreigners.

PlymptonPilgrim wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

There you go again... banging on about race all the time.

For someone who says he more or less doesn't give a damn about it you mention it all the time. Others give a damn. Many others. Overwhelming numbers of others.

Another thing: when i mention the Leave campaign or Brexit then that is what I am talking about. I am not talking about you or any other person. I don't know you. How could I possibly know how or why you have made any decision? All I can do is talk in general terms.

You have repeatedly missed this fact despite my having repeatedly explained it.

The problems you have with my views are entirely all of your creation. They are a bizarre fantasy. A concoction conceived of and built between your ears Ears.

Still you keep building that Straw Man and you keep burning him down. Just as long as it makes you happy.

Dear of dear. This is what happens when you ignore most of what I say then when I reply to one of your posts, you know the ones banging on about immigration and race then I'm obsessed?
I'm sorry but I missed the huge numbers of people coming out in support of you regarding my slur on you the other day? It looked to me like I had it bang on and the majority of posters on here tending to agree with me. You have banged the racist drum and trolled like fook for weeks. Change the record mate.

We're not allowed to mention the R word. It's the debate we aren't allowed to have.

Really? Perhaps you would be so good as to show the evidence for that.

 I was told, and I quote:



"Ears was only responding to your own constant inference that all brexiteers are racists.

Is there a way you could perhaps modify this theme?"



No I can't because I have never said that all Brexiteers are racist.

It is impossible for me to modify in any way something that I have never said.

I have said that racism runs through the DNA of the Leave campaign like letters through a stick of rock.

I have said that every racist political organisation

BNP
EDL
Britain First
UKIP
Ku Klux Klan etc

... is pro-Brexit.

I have said that the poster Farage stood in front of was lifted directly from Leni Riefenstahl's Nazi propaganda.

I have said that Turkey could never have joined the EU while we were in it because we had a veto and could stop them if we so wished.

I have said that the whole Turkish thing was conceived to pander to Islamophobia.

I have said that white supremacist murderers like Thomas Mair and his mates have been empowered and emboldened by the entire Brexit debate.

I have said that racist scum like Tommy Robinson always vote Brexit if they manage to tick the box they intended to.

I have said all of those things.

What I have never said is that Ears is racist.

Or that all Brexiteers are racist.

Therefore modifying the way I discuss these things is impossible because everything I have said is factually accurate and entirely true and the only way forward for me is not to discuss the issue at all.

Which until now I have not.

SFD - 'As for immigration: it was the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] important factor for those who chose to vote Leave'.

It is not my reason.


STD - 'because everything I have said is factually accurate and entirely true'

clearly not.


It would better to have said 'As for immigration: it was the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] important factor for many of those who chose to vote Leave' would it not?
.

How can I explain this yet again...

A bicycle is a form of transport. Not all journeys involve riding a bicycle.

Probably not clear enough.

All men are human; not all humans are men.

That's simpler.

All racists vote Brexit (with the caveat that they probably find ticking the right box difficult); not all Brexiteers are racist.

It really is not complicated at all.

The only person who has pointed the finger at Ears is Ears himself.

PatDunne wrote:

SFD - 'As for immigration: it was the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] important factor for those who chose to vote Leave'.

It is not my reason.


STD - 'because everything I have said is factually accurate and entirely true'

clearly not.


It would better to have said 'As for immigration: it was the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] important factor for many of those who chose to vote Leave' would it not?
.

Now you are being mischievous.

I used "those who chose to vote Leave" to define them all as a cohort not any of them as an individual.

As you well know.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Frank Bullitt wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

When we go to, say, India (or Brazil or China or anywhere) to negotiate one of these wonderful post-Brexit deals the first thing they will say is "we want freedom of movement between our countries - deal or no deal?".
.

Rubbish.  Does Britain have that deal currently with the USA?  With Japan?  With countless other Non - Eu countries it trades with?

The reality is that we will probably offer easier movement as part of our bargaining strategy. This was already happening long before the referendum. Indian and Chinese nationals require visas to enter the UK and I would predict that these requirements would be relaxed as part of a trade deal.

America and Japan have access to the registered traveller scheme which is a form of freedom of movement (at a price).

It is a reality Frank but if we sign a trade deal with India it will not allow free movement of all people between India and the UK. We have already cracked down on the amount of Indians coming over for university as it turns out that lots of them didn't go to uni and more didn't want to go home after uni. In return the Indians have been making it harder for us to even get tourist visas. I was told this by a guy at the Indian visa office.
The key word is control. I've always said that we need some immigration as we have a skills gap in this country so we need to attract the skilled people we lack. What we don't need is to have to find homes for a few million unskilled people. Despite the perception of some people who should know better we do have a shortage of housing, our doctors and hospitals are creaking under the weight of people to boot.

We do have control. Tier 2 visa's allow highly skilled migrants into the UK on a points based system. Tier 3 allows unskilled migrants but its never been used. Tier 4 is for students and Tier 5 replaced the old working holiday maker scheme. Tier 1 is for entrepreneurs.

I don't agree with your opinion about the few million unskilled people. The vast majority of them are here to work, they pay tax and they are net contributors to the UK. If there weren't jobs available they wouldn't be here.

I didn't say a trade deal with India will result in freedom of movement. We might well make it easier for them to travel here, possibly by making visit visas easier to acquire or by doing away with them entirely. The bogus students situation came about when we allowed bogus colleges to operate without control - but the points based system had a lot to answer for that as well. Visas were being issued regardless of the genuine intent to study - as long as you had enough points you qualified.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

PatDunne wrote:

SFD - 'As for immigration: it was the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] important factor for those who chose to vote Leave'.

It is not my reason.


STD - 'because everything I have said is factually accurate and entirely true'

clearly not.


It would better to have said 'As for immigration: it was the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] important factor for many of those who chose to vote Leave' would it not?
.

Now you are being mischievous.

I used "those who chose to vote Leave" to define them all as a cohort not any of them as an individual.

As you well know.

But it wasn't my no1 factor in deciding to leave you've decided that for me.

PatDunne wrote:

Brexit and Trump: A disaster for liberalism caused by liberal elites


by Robert Wragg

2016 has borne witness to perhaps the biggest rise in anti-establishment anger in a generation, but it hasn’t come from the usual suspects. No longer is it the radical left protesting the political elite, but rather it is regular working class voters, and they’re looking to the right. Culminating in the British public’s vote to leave the European Union, and the election of Donald Trump in the USA, liberal left parties are struggling to gather enough support from the electorate. The same is true on both sides of the pond, as in many others countries. So why is this happening?

In both the EU referendum and US presidential election, socially democratic and liberal parties failed to recognise that they had lost the support of the working-class voters, or where they did accept this, proclaimed those people to be simply ‘wrong’ in their growing dissatisfaction with liberal ideas, framing them as racists or bigots with neither the numbers nor the power to influence the vote. Proponents of liberalism refused to engage with them. Instead, they continued to provide more of the same moral superiority and neo-liberal economic, socially liberal package, with an ‘end of history’ style arrogance. In doing so they appealed only to those whose vote they had already won, their ideas bouncing around the echo chamber that is social media, reinforcing their feelings of righteousness.

Alienation of working class voters from the establishment in the UK, and alienation of white non-college educated individuals from the establishment in the USA – the story is the same; a political elite pushing a hegemonic ideology of social liberalism with such hubris that it either doesn’t notice, or chooses to ignore, the fact that huge swathes of the population simply no longer agree with the dominant position, largely because it hasn’t offered them anything. It is no surprise that the same individuals look elsewhere for opportunities to hit back at the establishment.

No-one considered the possibility that those with socially conservative views might have been talking from a meaningful position. Equally, no-one considered why those of a lower socio-economic position are less inclined towards liberal values than many middle class, college and university educated liberals, and as such, no one sought to understand the roots of their positions, they simply deemed them ‘wrong’ and moved on without them. And so, the protest voter is born, and it grows rapidly.

Debate this then Frank.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Here's another point of view, from The Guradian,

t’s all about immigration. It’s not about trade or Europe or anything like that …” boldly declares an interviewee on a Channel 4 news video going viral on Facebook. He continues: “The movement of people in Europe – fair enough. But not from Africa, Syria, Iraq, everywhere else, it’s all wrong.” I don’t know what’s more astounding – the fact that this man’s xenophobia was the sole motive for his Brexit vote or the fact that he is so uninformed, he doesn’t realise that his vote has actually secured the opportunity for more migrants from Africa, Syria, and Iraq.

UK voted for Brexit – but is there a way back?
Read more
If this were a view shared by the 52% of those who voted in the referendum to leave the EU, I might be able to identify with the fury and frustration directed towards Brexit supporters. However, this just isn’t the case. The Brexit populace consists of more than grumpy white 55-year-old men who reside in northern England and are angry at eastern Europeans for taking all the jobs they never applied for. I – a 20-something member of an ethnic minority who works in London – am a case in point.

My decision was far from easy. The democratic deficit and national sovereignty were issues of concern, especially given the trajectory of the EU. The European commission consists of unelected officials who lack democratic accountability. And given how far we’ve come since joining the EEC in 1973, it’s at least a little unnerving to consider how much more politically integrated the EU will be in 10 or 15 years’ time. Our politicians may still make awful decisions, but at least they are accountable to us.

Economics and trade were also factors in my decision-making. Although, make no mistake, I didn’t view the short-term economic implications through rose-tinted spectacles. The stakes were always high – with a large number of UK-based firms relying on access to the single market, and particularly the banks on passporting rights, its removal was likely to result in jobs being moved elsewhere within the EU. And the shock of a Brexit victory (accompanied by uncertainty) was always going to have a detrimental effect on markets. However, given our economic strength within the EU, and the level of trade that currently takes place between the UK and the EU, I believe the UK can negotiate a favourable deal. And greater control of immigration would allow for better planning of public services, and would provide more opportunities for non-EU migrants. Although I won’t pretend that the degree of control doesn’t depend on any deal made with the EU.

Sadly, many remain voters care little for the reasoning or rationale behind the decision of Brexit voters. I’ve seen Brexiters being grouped together and called “idiot”, “racist”, and other derogatory terms, simply by virtue of being Brexit voters. Their rationale is redundant, and their motives irrelevant. The only thing being placed on trial is the positioning of their X on the ballot paper.

Some remain voters have descended into the barbarism and intolerance that they fight against so valiantly in others
These remain voters have descended into the barbarism and intolerance that they fight against so valiantly in others. They condemn the notion that all Muslims should be held responsible for the atrocious actions of Isis, but then proceed to implicate all Brexiters in the recent post-Brexit racist attacks. They advocate the importance of tolerance and an understanding of different viewpoints. And yet, I can’t help but notice the intellectual arrogance that has exuded from many remain voters, and their failure to distinguish between Brexiters desiring to make “Britain white again” and those who made a genuine attempt to consider all the arguments and implications before casting their vote. Among the latter, you’ll find voters who did their best to make an informed decision; whose parents are immigrants; and who abhor the racist motivations of other Brexiters just as much as remain voters do.

Moving forward, the UK needs a leader entering into these impending negotiations with the understanding that he or she represents the whole nation, not merely the 52% who voted for Brexit. The new prime minister will need to work with prominent figures across the leave-remain divide to obtain the most favourable outcome for the UK. But we as a nation, made up of both remain and leave voters, must engage in dialogue, accompanied by mutual respect, in order to heal the deep divide exposed by this Brexit outcome.

And this.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Let me tell a story about a job I did about twelve years ago, to me it shows a lot of what is wrong with the EU and why I want out. I already wanted out ast this stage but his really drove home how fooked up it was becoming.
I was part of a £3m job in the Tamar valley to protect our mining heritage and provide access for people to enjoy it. We had a building firm working on an engine house to make it safe and re point it. We had some guys with machines to improve the tracks and roadways the you had myself and another guy from Cornwall providing traditional Chestnut post and rail fencing around the mines and beside the pathways.
For me it was a great contract hundreds and hundreds of metres of high quality and high value work.
After the work was nearing completion we started to wonder where the next phase of the work would be? Shorely we hadn't spent £3m on this project? It just didn't seem big enough.
Anyway we soon found out that this was it. We had a grand opening and all the contractors to invited. It soon became obvious where the money was going for every contractor there seemed to be about five suits. They came from everywhere Archeologists from English Heritage, Speccy newt lovers from Natural England, people from Devon County Council, Plymouth City council, West Devon Borough council all on the payroll to draw down funding from the EU and match funding from our own coffers. We then had the EU lot who sit on similar desks in Brussels who draw down the funding from EO coffers that we then spend thousands of man hours on drawing that funding down from them.
In short the actual work done on that site came in at about £800k yet the price for the job was £3m. We had to provide half of that money whilst the shortfall of £1.5m came from the EU. Our side of the £1.5m was match funded by our councils who guess what got their money off us? We had already paid a lot of that money to Europe which again employed a load of civil servants to take it off us then send it to them.
I would love to know why for every £800k we spend we need £2.2m for paying the civil servants is such good business? The £800k washes around in the lower end of the economy creating wealth where it is needed whilst the suits just Hoover it up and redistribute it amoungst themselves with at least half of it finding it's way back to Brussels. This is just the tip of the iceberg we do this with billions of pounds every year.

And this.

Earwegoagain wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

PatDunne wrote:

SFD - 'As for immigration: it was the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] important factor for those who chose to vote Leave'.

It is not my reason.


STD - 'because everything I have said is factually accurate and entirely true'

clearly not.


It would better to have said 'As for immigration: it was the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] important factor for many of those who chose to vote Leave' would it not?
.

Now you are being mischievous.

I used "those who chose to vote Leave" to define them all as a cohort not any of them as an individual.

As you well know.

But it wasn't my no1 factor in deciding to leave you've decided that for me.

No I have not.