BREXIT! BREXIT! BREXIT!

[Rum]

[Brian Peacock]

That's very good.

[Svartalf]

Oddly appropriate

[Scot Dutchy]

As I have always said about the British electoral system:

More than 9 million eligible UK voters 'not correctly registered'

Electoral Commission research prompts renewed calls for automatic registration

That's only the ones they have discovered. The system is a mess. Democracy

[Brian Peacock]

The Tories changed the rules around registration in 2016.

[Scot Dutchy]

Of course they did.

[Scot Dutchy]

Johnson's border plans:

Boris Johnson's 'secret Irish border plans' dismissed as non-starter

Report cites leaked proposals for clearance areas 5-10 miles from border and real-time tracking of goods

Boris Johnson’s secret plans to solve the Irish border Brexit challenge involve customs sites on both sides of the border and real-time tracking devices on lorries, it has been reported.

The ideas, which mark a departure from his promise not to put infrastructure on the border, are part of four unofficial papers submitted by the UK to Brussels by Johnson’s team.

The broadcaster RTÉ, which has had sight of the the tightly guarded proposals, is reporting that customs clearance sites would be sited five to 10 miles from the border to the north and the south to deal with imports and exports.

This is going to stop smuggling and not restart the Trouble? Dream on.

[Svartalf]

well, with the troubles starting again the tories could coast on a security and repression platform and stay in power for decades. especially if the culprits are the orangemen that they would secretly support.

[Rum]

There is no escaping the logic that a customs border is inevitable in a no deal scenario. In fact I’m sure one of the reasons the no dealers want no deal is because any deal ropes the UK into EU rules.

The question is how visible and intrusive the measures are likely to be.

I think an upsurge in trouble is inevitable. Let’s hope it is temporary.

[rainbow]

The question is how visible and intrusive the measures are likely to be.

Not really. Bojo might have the idea of hiding the border posts behind some barrier, but they will still be there. The trucks will still have to stop, be inspected, off-loaded if the paperwork doesn't meet the WTO rules, sent back if there are any discrepancies on the weighbill.

Plus the whole idea of controlling the border to stop 'tanned' people entering the UK. Will the UK start roadblocks to make sure that no poor refugees enter?
If not, what was the point?

on the other hand What was the point?

[Svartalf]

Well, one good point if we get a no deal is that France will no longer be held liable for tanned people reaching blighty as our obligation to keep in those who want to go on to there will be over.

[Rum]

The question is how visible and intrusive the measures are likely to be.

Not really. Bojo might have the idea of hiding the border posts behind some barrier, but they will still be there. The trucks will still have to stop, be inspected, off-loaded if the paperwork doesn't meet the WTO rules, sent back if there are any discrepancies on the weighbill.

Plus the whole idea of controlling the border to stop 'tanned' people entering the UK. Will the UK start roadblocks to make sure that no poor refugees enter?
If not, what was the point?

on the other hand What was the point?

The ‘tanned people’ issue has taken a bit of a back seat of late. Weirdly there is s sense arising that we ‘need’ immigration so long as we control it.

[Svartalf]

well, given that the english produce too few young, they need to import nurses for the excess of old people; plus how will you have Curry houses if you don't import people from the Indian subcontinENt?

[Rum]

Most curry places are run by second and even third generation immigrants, though the industry does import a lot of workers, as of course, you point out do other service industries.

There are targets set for reducing immigration. They have failed so spectacularly however they are hardly ever referred to by the government these days.

[Brian Peacock]

The argument that immigrants were coming over here and taking our jobs while simultaneously claiming all our benefits was always a red herring, but though things have gone quiet on that front let's not forget that it was a primary concern for a lot of people - particularly in deprived or depressed communities in decline with a disproportionately larger amounts of unemployment and low paid jobs as well as in rural and semi-rural middle class areas where there are almost no immigrants. In other words it was always the story about the others from outside that was used to fire people up rather than the facts.

"They're stealing our jobs" :: employers and agencies have a labour shortfall in menial low-paid work often on zero-hours contracts for less than minimum wage.
"They're NHS tourists" :: immigrants are less likely to interact with public service like the NHS, housing, and benefit.
"They're criminals" :: immigrants are less likely to commit and/or report crime and are more likely to be the victims of crime.
"They're destroying the high street" :: no, they're a symptom of the economic decline of our town centres not the cause, and do you remember when you could only buy popadoms and garam masala in specialist 'Indian supermarket'.
"They smell funny" :: that's called soap and water.

I don't think the people who were primed over last 2 decades or so to distrust 'the other' where necessarily racist in their personal outlook or actions - they just fell for the relentless repetition of bigoted narratives presented as fact and, crucially, they had little to no direct experience of immigrants. Research has show that social resistance to immigrants and immigrations is actually lower in areas with higher populations of immigrants.

Having said that, I don't think these narratives have gone away and I can imagine them continuing to a part in political brinkmanship as the economic effects of Brexit start to bite.