Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

UK music industry, bands, work permits and Brexit

Yes in theory it is, but “we were sold it”
Not at all, we were led to believe our decision would be honoured.

Please tick the “I have read the terms and conditions” box before purchase.

Unstated “the immigrants and muzzie wuzzies will be deported” features may not be installed in your version of the purchased product - please consult manual for details.
 
Indeed - Brexit poses a number of challenges, some of which could be serious and longstanding, some serious and temporary, as well as potential opportunities and lucky escapes - however some jobbing bands deciding not to tour France as a result of Brexit causes not a flicker on my give-a-fuck-o-meter...
Such as? I can think of not a single one.
 
Not for me - I always knew that it was advisory in theory, as was the Scottish referendum and all other UK referenda, but I've never believed it was advisory in practice.

As far as I'm concerned it's a done deal, with the only get-out being a GE in which a party that opposed the result winning by a landslide - that's not happened, so the result stands.
It couldn't be advisory in theory - that makes no sense whatsoever - so it HAD to be advisory in practice.

And what that means - in practice - is that the vote advised the govt to seek to negotiate an acceptable settlement with the EU for the terms our secession.

So it follows logically that if the govt can't reach a settlement then the referendum result is void. And if the govt can agree a settlement (a deal) then the public should be granted a final say on whether or not to accept it. That's both the most logical and democratic outcome of the process.
 
Yes in theory it is, but “we were sold it”
Not at all, we were led to believe our decision would be honoured.
Cameron made a big schtick about 'taking his instructions from the British people' at the time, so yes, I agree with this. Technically it may not have been true, but it was certainly the impression given by Cameron.
 
Re all that 'binding' stuff:

It would be interesting to see where on the advisory/binding spectrum you think a 'yes' result would have been in the Scottish referendum, or indeed one relating to Railway Nationalisation...

I'm afraid I just smell rank hypocrisy - that if it had gone the way of remain you'd be happily dismissing 'leave' protests that it was only an advisory referendum as politically illiterate sour grapes...
 
Could you stop being so patronising, first of all. Secondly explain to me why your decision to remain is more binding than my decision to leave.

Please read the thread before making unwarranted assumptions - your reading experience is important to us.
 
Could you stop being so patronising, first of all. Secondly explain to me why your decision to remain is more binding than my decision to leave.
What kind of leave, though? Why not a leave that leaves the UK's borders open to the rest of Europe? Why does leaving the EU have to involve erecting borders?

That's where this whole thing falls down for me. There was nothing about the kind of leave that was going to happen on the ballot paper. If you oppose the border-erecting, immigration-checking leave that is on the table, what do you say? Oh, the ref has to be honoured? Or fuck that, there are more important issues at stake here than EU membership, and the things that are being pushed through with brexit should be opposed?
 
Its bubbled up as the likely reality of lower house prices and negative equity gets ever closer.

It’s been bubbling continuously as far as I can see. It’s no surprise that it should be coming to the boil around now.
 
What kind of leave, though? Why not a leave that leaves the UK's borders open to the rest of Europe? Why does leaving the EU have to involve erecting borders?

That's where this whole thing falls down for me. There was nothing about the kind of leave that was going to happen on the ballot paper. If you oppose the border-erecting, immigration-checking leave that is on the table, what do you say? Oh, the ref has to be honoured? Or fuck that, there are more important issues at stake here than EU membership, and the things that are being pushed through with brexit should be opposed?
As you’ll no doubt be aware because it’s been done to death, the type of remain we will get isn’t clear either. Lots of things have been sneaked in since the last time people were given a vote on EU... well, EEC membership, the move towards the EU was a pretty massive constitutional change no one was consulted on... so both Brexit and remain come with uncertainty. So what we are left with is the predictions of leading economists... famously err, reliable...
 
...acceptable...

Determined by who?

The Guardian? Some people off the internet?

There's was nothing on the ballot paper about acceptability, it was merely a 'do you want to leave the EU?' question, that was it, no qualifiers, no caveats.
 
Determined by who?

The Guardian? Some people off the internet?

There's was nothing on the ballot paper about acceptability, it was merely a 'do you want to leave the EU?' question, that was it, no qualifiers, no caveats.

They might as well have asked “would you like to increase the activity of cytochrome P450 by an unspecified amount?”.
 
As you’ll no doubt be aware because it’s been done to death, the type of remain we will get isn’t clear either. Lots of things have been sneaked in since the last time people were given a vote on EU... well, EEC membership, the move towards the EU was a pretty massive constitutional change no one was consulted on... so both Brexit and remain come with uncertainty. So what we are left with is the predictions of leading economists... famously err, reliable...
Not really true that. 'remain' meant no change. The kinds of changes that the UK might have faced via the EU would have been like any other change that time brings, EU or no. Brexit involving the erecting of borders, which is the only brexit on the table at the moment, brings a very specific kind of change.

I don't disagree btw that the relationship with the EU has been massively changed in a sneaky way over the last 20 or so years, with Maastricht and Lisbon. But let's not kid ourselves - the UK was right at the vanguard pushing for changes that extended and formalised the neoliberal agenda. Brexit isn't some ideological break from that. It's not a break from the drift towards the nasty populist right around the world, either. It's a manifestation of it.
 
Please tick the “I have read the terms and conditions” box before purchase.

Unstated “the immigrants and muzzie wuzzies will be deported” features may not be installed in your version of the purchased product - please consult manual for details.
I can’t quite believe your edit here, well out of order. I consider my refusal to be part of the EU on a par with my refusal to never vote Tory, I couldn’t live with a decision to vote remain given the sheer effort and money they pour into keeping refugees away from Europe.
And yes, I appreciate the numerous complexities and contradictions within this argument, there’s not one you can bring up that I haven’t mulled over and over.
 
Not really true that. 'remain' meant no change. The kinds of changes that the UK might have faced via the EU would have been like any other change that time brings, EU or no. Brexit involving the erecting of borders, which is the only brexit on the table at the moment, brings a very specific kind of change.

I don't disagree btw that the relationship with the EU has been massively changed in a sneaky way over the last 20 or so years, with Maastricht and Lisbon. But let's not kid ourselves - the UK was right at the vanguard pushing for changes that extended and formalised the neoliberal agenda. Brexit isn't some ideological break from that. It's not a break from the drift towards the nasty populist right around the world, either. It's a manifestation of it.
I’ve no doubt the ref to remain part of the EEC “meant no change” too, but that’s not how it played out in practice.
 
They might as well have asked “would you like to increase the activity of cytochrome P450 by an unspecified amount?”.

Not really, it's the just the conversation you have with yourself before you walk into a solicitors office and say 'hi, I've decided that I'd like a divorce...'. it's a hugely complex, nuanced decision that will have both up and down sides, and only an idiot would walk into either a divorce or continuing with an unhappy marriage and assume that everything will be vanilla - but it does, eventually, come down to a yes or no answer.
 
I’ve no doubt the ref to remain part of the EEC “meant no change” too, but that’s not how it played out in practice.
That ref was what, two or three years after joining the EEC. It was more like ratifying a change that had already happened and that could be quite straightforwardly undone.

If you were to say that you think some of the treaties that have been signed since were pushed through in a profoundly undemocratic manner, I would agree with you. But at the same time, when you're entering time measured in decades, of course there is change. Brexit is a specific change with a time-frame, and that's what was being voted on. tbh I think that's a large reason why it won - generally in referendums people who think things are ok vote no change, those that think they are being shat on vote change, almost regardless of the question.
 
Determined by who?

The Guardian? Some people off the internet?

There's was nothing on the ballot paper about acceptability, it was merely a 'do you want to leave the EU?' question, that was it, no qualifiers, no caveats.
Acceptable to the public obvs - we have a right to decide whether or not any deal the govt comes up with is acceptable. Only another vote can reconcile that.
 
That ref was what, two or three years after joining the EEC. It was more like ratifying a change that had already happened and that could be quite straightforwardly undone.

If you were to say that you think some of the treaties that have been signed since were pushed through in a profoundly undemocratic manner, I would agree with you. But at the same time, when you're entering time measured in decades, of course there is change. Brexit is a specific change with a time-frame, and that's what was being voted on. tbh I think that's a large reason why it won - generally in referendums people who think things are ok vote no change, those that think they are being shat on vote change, almost regardless of the question.
You’d have to really switch off to think one vote posed “no change”
I know this works for a sort of academic argument but the fact is either choice comes with a shitload of uncertainty.
Now if you wanted to try and remain a sort of left wing pro working class sort it’s best to prepare for either result rather than kidding yourself just switching back to remain means no change and a reversal of poor fortune. Even if that were true, what a shitty prospect. Lots needs to change.

I need to stop here, it’s been a long shite day!
 
I can’t quite believe your edit here, well out of order. I consider my refusal to be part of the EU on a par with my refusal to never vote Tory, I couldn’t live with a decision to vote remain given the sheer effort and money they pour into keeping refugees away from Europe.
And yes, I appreciate the numerous complexities and contradictions within this argument, there’s not one you can bring up that I haven’t mulled over and over.

I edited pretty quickly, but that's fair enough. That said, principled or otherwise you were playing right into their hands.

You can comfort yourself with the thought that your stance of choosing principle over practice made absolutely no difference whatsoever, though.

As did mine.
 
Not really, it's the just the conversation you have with yourself before you walk into a solicitors office and say 'hi, I've decided that I'd like a divorce...'. it's a hugely complex, nuanced decision that will have both up and down sides, and only an idiot would walk into either a divorce or continuing with an unhappy marriage and assume that everything will be vanilla - but it does, eventually, come down to a yes or no answer.

Your analogy is pretty much exactly as flawed as mine.
 
I edited pretty quickly, but that's fair enough. That said, principled or otherwise you were playing right into their hands.

You can comfort yourself with the thought that your stance of choosing principle over practice made absolutely no difference whatsoever, though.

As did mine.
Obvs. It’s everything around the shitey vote that’s important, but, what’s worrying me atm is the EU are doing shit like building the second longest fucking wall in the world to keep out migrants and now no one is looking, indeed they are waving their shitey flags.
 
Back
Top Bottom