There are a lot of weighty political and constitutional matters on people’s minds right now, but one of the things we’re wondering about here at road.cc is what it’ll all mean to bike and cycling component prices.
Yes, you’re right, there are other important issues on the agenda at the moment, like exactly how and when the UK will leave. Who will be the next prime minister and when will they be elected? And will the vote trigger another Scottish independence referendum? Of course, these are massive questions… but we’re really interested in bikes too.
The most often quoted timescale for Britain’s leaving of the EU is two years, although no one can be certain. But the actual exit process is not the only issue at stake here. The pound has fallen to levels not seen for over 30 years in the wake of the exit vote, and share prices have also been hit by the uncertainty surrounding the economy.
Shares in Halfords, Britain’s biggest bike retailer, for example, were priced at over £4 at the close of trading on Thursday, 23 June. They reopened at £3.20 on Friday morning, following the Brexit result announcement, and they’ve not been above £3.50 since. London’s FTSE 250 index (it tracks 250 mid-sized companies) lost 7.2% over the day.
These could be just short term results of the exit vote, who knows? Will there be much of an upshot for the bike consumer?
“[The Brexit vote] won’t have an immediate effect on the price of goods as the 2016 stocks are already bought and paid for,” said Clive Gosling, marketing manager at CSG, which looks after Cannondale, Charge and Sugoi, among other brands.
“We are, however, just about to price the 2017 bikes that we will launch to dealers early August. We will have to speculate what the cost of these will be, based on the devalued GB pound against the US dollar, as most bicycles, parts, accessories and clothing are bought in US dollars.
“We will have to consider where the currency looks like settling rather than looking at the knee-jerk Brexit level – which, of course, is speculation on our part.
“Short term, I think 2017 bikes will be marginally higher priced. Longer term, bikes can be sourced out of markets where there are current EU dumping levies so it could mean lower factory prices to offset the currency if it doesn’t recover, hence no net increases over current prices. It might even make prices lower down the line.
“It’s all a step into the unknown but we don’t think you will see the dramatic price increases that people are speculating.”
When road.cc visited 3T a couple of weeks ago we were given a price for the new Exploro based on the UK remaining within the EU. We were told that the price would need to be reviewed if the UK left, although 3T would honour any orders made before the announcement.
We’ve contacted a whole host of other bib bike/component brands to ask about the implications of the Brexit vote, but they all say that it’s too early to comment.
“Officially, it’s still no comment,” said one. “Our internal UK message is to keep on keeping on.”
In truth, it looks like any changes to duty are a way off yet, and if pro-leave politicians like Boris Johnson are to be believed, the UK can spend the next couple of years negotiating trade deals to minimise the impact on prices.
What about EU Standards? We’re used to seeing them on stickers and packaging for all kinds of products, including bike helmets and lights, for instance. All bike helmets sold in the UK currently have to conform to EN1078 European standard.
This European Standard is overseen by the European Committee for Standardization which has 33 national members. As well as all of the current EU states, non-EU states Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Macedonia and Turkey are members. Does that mean the UK will still be a member when it leaves the EU? We imagine so but we’re not entirely sure because no sovereign state has ever left the EU before.
We’ll be returning to this issue in the coming days.



















87 thoughts on “Brexit: what does it mean to you and your bike?”
Quote:
That is the biggest “if” in recent political history. I’d say there are 350 million reasons to never believe a word he says.
handlebarcam wrote:
That is the biggest “if” in recent political history. I’d say there are 350 million reasons to never believe a word he says.
Are those gross or net reasons not to believe him?
We will have to see what
We will have to see what happens when trading restarts on Monday…
Hopefully it will recoup the losses and provide the utopia predicted by Farage and Johnson.
LegalFun wrote:
Ahahahahahahahahaha….breathes….ahahahahahahahahahahaha
MattEdd wrote:
http://www.xe.com/currencycharts/?from=GBP&to=USD&view=1M
It’s a harsh one day loss but it’s definitely not the end of the world
In the short term exchange
In the short term exchange rates and shares will recover to similar prices as the intrinsic value of the UK hasn’t disappeared, unlucky if you are overseas this week and go to the Bureau but nothing to be worried about. Just keep an eye on Canyon prices.
The terribly weak non-entity that is Jeremy Corbin who did nothing to support Remain and pursued Labour voters to remain has just vacated the opposition to the right wing of the Conservative party and UKIP and betrayed the working people of the UK. The Tories will ‘rationalize’ to stimulate the economy. No one believes that likely Chancellor Michael Gove will put a single penny into the NHS. He is on record saying he would dismantle the NHS. The £350 million claim by Leave was debunked by everyone, but still allowed to stand. Cycling infrastructure projects will likely suffer the same fate under small government conservatism, and don’t expect them to resist the car lobby.
The majority of young people voted to stay, and now will see their country ‘rationalized,’ marginalized and split up. I won’t even talk about Immigration/free trade or Scottish independance. It was an emotive campaign that was created and highjacked by the right, now we need to work out this clusterfudge.
#Nomorereferendums
Leviathan wrote:
Have to take issue with that. Amongst 18-24 year olds, 75% of the 36% who bothered to turn out voted Remain. That’s just over a quarter of young people.
Leviathan wrote:
Yet another significant hole in your post, I’m afraid.
This is an often repeated piece of sloppy journalism that has its origins in a book, written in 2009 mostly by Daniel Hannan, who is a member of the European parliament. As he had made a small contribution to the publication Michael Gove is named as a co-author.
Mr Hannan made the assertion that the NHS should be dismantled as it was a, “Sixty year mistake.” When the book was released Gove immediately distanced himself from this point, saying, “I certainly do not share Dan’s view of the NHS.”
Just how much more explicit would you like him to be?
mike the bike wrote:
Yeah, it’s a tricky one isn’t it. On the evidence of Hannan in the last few days he can’t really be trusted to be explicit either. He’s taking a month off twitter now as well as he can’t, it appears, handle the “bants.”
It is a sad and historical
It is a sad and historical fact but younger people never vote in the numbers that they should. I was 20 in the 1997 General Election, voted and always have done. That doesn’t mean the percentage for Remain is not reflective of their opinion. Many people are having Buyers-regret or non-voters remorse.
@Leviathan
@Leviathan
There’s no evidence of widespread “buyers regret”, just a few anecdotes.
ComRes poll for today’s Sunday Mirror showed more people happy with result than unhappy with it and a majority of people not wanting a second referendum.
As for the “debunked” £350 million claim, we won’t know how the EU contributions will be spent until we have negotiated our exit and the first post Brexit budget has been announced.
How we spend the additional money will be decided by the elected government at the time, it was never going to be the decision of random people in Vote Leave, anyone with a basic grasp of how our democracy works would have realised that.
If we leave the EU completely and all else remains equal (a big if admittedly) there will be an additional £350m to spend though.
Rich_cb wrote:
No there bloody won’t. We get a rebate, so the amount we pay is not £350m. Have you really managed to get to this point without understanding this?
Bikebikebike wrote:
No there bloody won’t. We get a rebate, so the amount we pay is not £350m. Have you really managed to get to this point without understanding this?— Rich_cb
See my post above yours.
I did miss out the rebate but even without it we’re talking multiple billions of pounds.
Rich_cb wrote:
“We never made any commitments. We just made a series of promises that were possibilities.” says IDS today.
Of course, you’re right. We take the gross figure now, when we stop paying it, then we have to pay for the stuff that we either a) promised to pay for b) already do pay for and c) the stuff that europe paid for.
And, of course, it’s quite a lot of stuff to quite a lot of people. The NHS, yes, then pesky stuff like University grants, science funding, farmers, new swimming pools and infrastructure. All things being equal, of course. And if all things are equal that’s great. Thing is, Westminster is a bit like an austere dad. Never gives you the fun stuff. So you have to go and ask your nice Grandad in Europe and he’s a bit better. You feel a bit cut off from Dad. We’re back to asking Dad again now so we ahve to make sure he remembers his promises (of possibilities) and is a bit nicer to us.
Thing is, dad just changed jobs and had a bit of a pay cut.
bendertherobot wrote:
“We never made any commitments. We just made a series of promises that were possibilities.” says IDS today.
Of course, you’re right. We take the gross figure now, when we stop paying it, then we have to pay for the stuff that we either a) promised to pay for b) already do pay for and c) the stuff that europe paid for.
And, of course, it’s quite a lot of stuff to quite a lot of people. The NHS, yes, then pesky stuff like University grants, science funding, farmers, new swimming pools and infrastructure. All things being equal, of course. And if all things are equal that’s great. Thing is, Westminster is a bit like an austere dad. Never gives you the fun stuff. So you have to go and ask your nice Grandad in Europe and he’s a bit better. You feel a bit cut off from Dad. We’re back to asking Dad again now so we ahve to make sure he remembers his promises (of possibilities) and is a bit nicer to us.
Thing is, dad just changed jobs and had a bit of a pay cut.— Rich_cb
As I said before, only a government can make spending decisions so why people would believe that Farage etc would suddenly be writing the budget post Brexit is beyond me.
Our net spend on the EU is £8.5bn. That’s after all the stuff Europe pays for, all the farm subsidies etc.
If we leave completely we will now be able to elect a government to decide how to spend that money.
They may decide to fund the NHS, use it for overseas aid or tax cuts or anything really.
The point is it will be a democratically elected British government making those decisions.
I’ve got to be honest, but I
I’ve got to be honest, but I don’t think my bike cares about Brexit one way or t’other.
Did I say debunked, I mean
Did I say debunked, I mean LIE. Did I not see IDS on Marr this morning denying he said it? Obviously it must all be a conspiracy between the BBC, Twitter, Buzzfeed, Youtube and The Guardian, and those 3 million people who have signed a parlimentary petition that has to be debated.
At least it looks like we will have a Brunch of the long knives and remove Corbyn and see if we get a decent opposion for once.
@Leviathan
@Leviathan
Again, it was not for Vote Leave to dictate how the money would be spent.
That will be the decision of whichever government is in power once we have actually left.
This should have been obvious.
Also, that petition is being investigated as fraudulent. Looks like someone has run an automatic script to artificially inflate the number of signatories. Story is on BBC website.
Rich_cb wrote:
What money? There isn’t any extra money to spend. “All things being equal” we never gave 350million in the first place. How are you still being fooled this?
@Leviathan
@Leviathan
So we’re not a net contributor to EU funds?
According to fullfact.org (usually pretty impartial) we made a net contribution of £8.5bn last year.
We do send circa £350m a week to the EU but we do get a lot back (including the rebate).
Using the gross figure (pre rebate) rather than the net is a bit sneaky but hardly unusual tactics in politics.
If all else remains equal we will have £8.5bn extra to spend post Brexit.
So there will be plenty of extra money to spend.
Rich_cb wrote:
Thing is, when Government’s spend money it doesn’t go as well as you’d like. So, all things do need to be equal. It’s all very complex as well, with a lot of linkage. So, the BOE made £250 billion available in liquidity on Friday to protect the markets and currency. That has to come from somewhere eventually.
bendertherobot wrote:
Thing is, when Government’s spend money it doesn’t go as well as you’d like. So, all things do need to be equal. It’s all very complex as well, with a lot of linkage. So, the BOE made £250 billion available in liquidity on Friday to protect the markets and currency. That has to come from somewhere eventually.— Rich_cb
But we’re talking about money being spent in this country rather than being spent abroad.
Government spending is not a panacea but it is surely better to have our government spending it than someone else’s?
Liquidity is normally in the form of credit swaps, so the BOE is taking on risk but not spending money as such.
Rich_cb wrote:
Thing is, when Government’s spend money it doesn’t go as well as you’d like. So, all things do need to be equal. It’s all very complex as well, with a lot of linkage. So, the BOE made £250 billion available in liquidity on Friday to protect the markets and currency. That has to come from somewhere eventually.
— bendertherobot But we’re talking about money being spent in this country rather than being spent abroad. Government spending is not a panacea but it is surely better to have our government spending it than someone else’s? Liquidity is normally in the form of credit swaps, so the BOE is taking on risk but not spending money as such.— Rich_cb
There is no economic case for leaving the EU. Every credible study has shown it is likely to make things worse. The question is how much worse. Please argue it might be good for some other reason, as trying to argue the economic case just makes you look like a mendacious tool.
Bikebikebike wrote:
As soon as you start with personal insults you’ve basically lost the debate.
As I’ve said before I voted leave to restore sovereignty. The economic arguments were far less important in my opinion.
You didn’t bother addressing my previous points so I don’t see the point in continuing this.
Rich_cb wrote:
Restore sovereignity? Sorry, what exactly does that mean? We’re already a sovereign state under international law. We have an elected Government. A currency, a head of state. How much more sovereign do you want to be?
You’ve not done anything about “restoring sovereignity”. You’ve caused the one of the biggest financial crashes and currency devaluation in history with associated repercussions for a decade to come.
Resortoing to insults is not a sign that you’ve won an argument, it’s simply a sign that 52% of the population were drawn in by a campaign of lies, deceit, spin and outright bullshit and were too fucking stupid to see past it.
crazy-legs wrote:
I don’t see why you feel the need to insult anyone who disagrees with you?
Different people have different motivations for voting. That does not make them wrong and you right.
Democracy only succeeds when we accept that our fellow citizens have opinions that are as valid as our own.
Challenge those opinions if you disagree and attempt to convince them otherwise but once you resort to insulting people you will never win the argument.
As to your question. I wish to live in a country where laws are made by directly elected politicians who can be voted out of office easily.
In the current EU laws are made by the unelected European Commission. The European Parliament cannot create nor repeal laws.
If I disagree with a law created by the commission I cannot vote for an alternative.
That is, in my mind, undemocratic and so I voted to leave the EU.
Surveys done after the vote found that the restoration of sovereignty was the most common reason given for voting Leave.
Rich, Yes we are net
Rich, Yes we are net contributors, but not £350m a week. It might well be a campaign tactic, but it is untrue none the less. There may well be savings “All being equal”, or course, things aren’t equal and never can be. There will be a cost in terms of inward investment and trade, what that will be is impossible to predict, but I doubt it will lead to the boosts in investment promised (“We could build a hospital every week.”) The most probable result is that it has little impact on government spending.
Feel free to remember their promises in three years time and review the 2019 budget for extra spending. #BrexitBoost or #BrexitLies
Leviathan wrote:
Hasn’t Farage already said “Yeah, about that £350m … Sorry but we lied and should not have said it” or words to that effect?
Leviathan wrote:
I intend to. Need to keep them in check!
Personally I voted leave in order to restore sovereignty so didn’t scrutinise the £350m claim too closely as it was irrelevant to my voting intention.
I accept the figure (minus rebate) is lower but it will still be a substantial sum of money (all things being equal) and we will hopefully be able to decide how to spend it ourselves.
Rich_cb wrote:
Noting the amount wiped off the value of UK.PLC (FTSE100, currency reserves, savings, pensions etc etc – all boring stuff, sorry) on Friday was higher than the sum total paid to the EU over the last ***40 YEARS*** (£380Bn).
And that’s before the predicted 25% slump in house prices (no bad thing for those trying to buy house)
Not 100% sure where you think this ‘substantial sum’ is coming from.
KiwiMike wrote:
Noting the amount wiped off the value of UK.PLC (FTSE100, currency reserves, savings, pensions etc etc – all boring stuff, sorry) on Friday was higher than the sum total paid to the EU over the last ***40 YEARS*** (£380Bn).
And that’s before the predicted 25% slump in house prices (no bad thing for those trying to buy house)
Not 100% sure where you think this ‘substantial sum’ is coming from.— Rich_cb
The FTSE and government spending are completely different things.
Attempting to conflate the two is fairly nonsensical.
If you do want to focus on the FTSE look at its value over the last 12 months. It always fluctuates and its current level is not actually unusual for the year.
Likewise for the value of the pound.
It’s not an issue if we build
It’s not an issue if we build some amazing British brands. But we won’t. We’ll only invest in the finance sector.
Where’s our Apple, Tesla, Google etc?
We’ve got a handful of old engineering firms and that’s about it. Even out patents for graphene are virtually all overseas. Comedy.
We can’t even get a desireable bike brand out, just some niche markets. Hoy and Boardman were well placed to create something special, but ended up going for lower and middle markets, which are already catered nicely to here. If Cipollini can retire and put out special bikes, then so could those guys.
Why’s everything here so… half-hearted.
That’s why Britain isn’t going to do any better outside of the EU, because we don’t make enough amazing stuff to import any more. We have the talent, we just don’t have the investment.
unconstituted wrote:
I saw a rather tasty looking range of Pace bikes in a bike shop today.
unconstituted wrote:
We can’t even get a desireable bike brand out, just some niche markets. Hoy and Boardman were well placed to create something special, but ended up going for lower and middle markets, which are already catered nicely to here. If Cipollini can retire and put out special bikes, then so could those guys. — unconstituted
Cipollini got his bikes under pro European teams, both male and female. Most bikes these days are functionality roughly equivalent and up to the job, it’s the marketing that makes the brand.
If Boardman bikes could be ridden by Sky or even Pro One team and say Wiggle-Honda, then it would start to build European awareness. It’s not Chris Boardman’s call, it’s up to Halfords marketing decisions though. Done correctly, Boardman could be a desirable brand for the European market, just as Cipollini brand is now.
I’m not going to go into
I’m not going to go into politics as I’m already extremely angry, to the point I’m seriously considering leaving the UK.
Anyway, I have a bike on order from Rose. I’m concerned that they will not honour the price and ship it considering the exchange rate dive
Trickytree1984 wrote:
Yeah you and the other 16m other people who don’t like the result. It’s going to be a very empty place when you’ve all decamped to the continent.
For all those saying we
For all those saying we should stop concentrating on the negatives of Brexit and start emphasising the postitives, here are all the positives in one handy list:
1. Cameron goes.
burtthebike wrote:
You have left a very large space full of nothing.
I’m curious what “restoring sovereignty” is and how it will benefit anyone other than the ruling class and corporate bodies?
Butty wrote:
IMO no country which trades internationally and on the international money markets can now be truly sovereign.
I don’t know about Farage, but I think Boris quite likes the idea of turning us into a proper offshore tax haven.
Nothing in it for “normal ” people, of course, but what do you expect when we’ve spent the last thirty years dismantling our manufacturing and production industries…?
burtthebike wrote:
If I’d been Cameron I would have gone in front of the cameras on Friday morning and announced that I’d invoked article 50 to the EU, that I resigned with immediate effect, that the keys to number 10 are under the flowerpot, I was taking the family on an extended holiday in Panama, and could Boris and Michael please take care of things now they’ve got what they (said) they wanted.
burtthebike wrote:
Is it Boris Johnson or Michael Gove, you would prefer as PM?
Reaction: Knee jerk…. FCS
Reaction: Knee jerk…. FCS it’s not even been a week!!!!! Traders trade, the rich want to get rich etc etc. Everyone just needs to calm down, rumour and speculation are pointless, it just adds fuel to the fire,and, the media are the masters of it. At least we will be able to buy odd shaped fruit and veg.
There is a much bigger world out there, and let’s face facts, no matter how many times Brussels say it was a bad marriage, they are far more worried about losing us than we are about leaving.
This country will be fine, and if the Scots want to leave let them, it’s their choice. It’s not like we have been together that long in the great scheme of things.
And, the biggest warning sign for me about Brussels was the formation of an EU independent military, not a Fcuking chance. The whole thing will disintegrate anyway, as you can’t take the tribe out of tribal and that is what every country is whether you like it or not.
Anyone any thoughts about
Anyone any thoughts about cycling…?
Seriously road.cc, why did
Seriously road.cc, why did you think this was a good ides for an article?
drosco wrote:
To keep it contained? Or like a good helmet debate to generate a few click when nothing can actually be resolved?
Meanwhile, makes me wonder, in the Scottish Referendum, SNP had a Leave Manifesto. It was like a general election, there were actual policy points to debate and argue about, like currency, debt share, oil revenues etc. This time Leave had no actual plans (perhaps that was why they won) in reality all this ‘waking up to the reality’ backchat is because we were given no realistic idea of what comes next.
Cameron not being compelled to enact Article 50 was a stab in the back to his successor, they can take the blame for what will happen.
Leviathan wrote:
So, the leave campaign lied about many things, primary £350m a week (which we dont send to the EU) being used on the NHS, meanwhile sonmeonehow covering the costs of all the things the EU pay for here. But also about Turkey joining imminently, and the entire prospect of keeping trade as normal while preventing free movement.
But Cameron should be the one toi enact artical 50? and not one of the leave campaign when they become PM.
Question – IF leave is such a good idea, why is it a stab in the back for Cameron to allow his succesor to take the credit?
wycombewheeler wrote:
I didn’t say it was a good idea, its a bad one. It is a stab in the back because it is a bad idea and Johnson will get the blame, he can take the credit if I’m wrong. Its almost like you didn’t read my post.
Leviathan wrote:
Why shouldn’t he get the blame as a leading member of the leave campaign? My point was, as Boris (or whichever leave politician steps up) was campaigning for Brexit, THEY wouldon’t see it as a stab in the back. Whereas starting the 2 year clock now, before the negotiators were ready and the country has no leadership would not be in anyone’s interest.
This Is a cycling website.
This Is a cycling website. If you want to go over and over the rights and wrongs of the referendum result, do it elsewhere.
CXR94Di2 wrote:
If you don’t want to read an article about Brexit or comments on said article then don’t click on it.
Getting back to cycling
Getting back to cycling relevance: Many bike shops as well as component manufacturers are small or medium-sized businesses and benefit from EU free trade.
We don’t know the future arrangements yet, but if the UK-EU relation reverts to WTO standard that might well mean that small shops find it too much paperwork to import components directly from EU manufacturers.
There will likely be import companies and distributors who handle the paperwork (as happens now for imports from non-EU countries), but it will add to costs, small companies might decide it’s not worth it, and some less common components might become much more difficult to source.
Stephan Matthiesen wrote:
No problem, our Chinese friends with whom we are relying on our post-Brexit economy will be happy to import lots of high-quality components that are the equal of anything genuine. Who needs things like ‘EU standards’, eh?
In 2015 the UK government
In 2015 the UK government paid £13 billion to the EU budget, and EU spending on the UK was £4.5 billion. So the UK’s ‘net contribution’ was estimated at about £8.5 billion.
Which equates at 163 million a week which is now surplus. A tidy amount by anyones standards.
A large number of business “experts” said not joining the single currency was a disaster and companies would leave the uk in droves, guess what they were wrong and the same people are saying similar things now.
I, for one, am very pleased we voted to leave.
AWPeleton wrote:
[b]IF YOU’RE GOING TO GO FULLY DAILY MAIL, TO THE EXTENT OF PUTTING QUOTE MARKS AROUND THE WORD EXPERTS, YOU REALLY NEED TO SWITCH TO ALL CAPS, AS JUST USING BOLD ISN’T ENOUGH TO CONVINCE EVERYBODY YOU ARE RIGHT.[/b]
(And I don’t recall there being anything like the consensus among independent financial authorities regarding the benefits of joining the Euro as there has been on the effect of Brexit ranging from bad to calamitous.)
AWPeleton wrote:
To put that £160ishM a week ( Ive seen other estimates at 120, but we’ll go with 160), weekly spends are:
Defence 821M
Education 1.4Bn
Nhs 2.4Bn
Pensions 3.6Bn
The 160 is about 15% of the nhs spend – not chickenfeed, but it remains to be seen what the rest of the effect of brexit is on tax revenues, so that 160 may not exist anyway.
To use some **very**rough/ready figures as a ballpark figure: London finance sector employs about 360,000 (I was surprised); speculation is that 40,000 -100,000 jobs might move elsewhere – and obv. it may be a lot less but let’s go with that as a first instance. Let’s say ave 100k salary (prob many less than this but some a whole lot more), 40% income tax is 77M per week. And that doesn’t include nat. Ins or tax income from spent salary. Obv. a 40,000 job loss would be a lot less, my salary estimate is *very* approximate – but investment banks will be a lot higher and then there’s significant bonuses.
Indeed, ERM business didn’t cause the upheaval that was expected, but equally we’re in uncharted territory – and in a globalised world (my last employer had significant numbers of employees in numerous geolocations) , pulling employees out to Dublin or elsewhere in the eu may not be a big deal.
I see the most annoyed are
I see the most annoyed are also those who, if the voting analysists are to be believed, didn’t bother voting.
You can’t complain democracy has failed the people who didn’t actually take part in it.
As for bikes….I’m a peasant, won’t make much difference to me since I’m not really in the market for anything but chains and tyres for a while.
The referendum demographics
The referendum demographics data, especially level of education and income, explain why some voters have problems with numbers 😉
Rich_cb writes:
Like the democratically elected House of Lords and our democratically
elected head of state, the Queen?
Or do you mean the democratically elected House of Commons, as voted for by
you and your fellow window-licking morons?
The problem with democracy is that half the population has an IQ of less than
100. A significant portion have an IQ that barely approaches room-temperature.
Like you.
It was said repeatedly during the campaign, that no longer would we have to
put up with laws made by “unelected Brussels bureaucrats”.
Unfortunately for you it’s not true; if we’re going to continue to trade with
the EU where ~40% of our exports go. Also, the unelected bureaucrats have a
rather better track record at producing sensible legislation than our elected
representatives. Dangerous Dogs Act? Makes me proud to be British. Not.
But of course, we get to spend the grand sum of 8.5 billion quid on ourselves!
Big win. It represents less than 1% of government expenditure and if we’re
going to remain part of the single market, we’ll still have to pay it,
probably more so as to encourage others who think about exiting.
But, you say, we’ll kick out those revolting immigrants! Sorry. The EU has
made it abundantly clear that free movement of labour is a prerequisite of
staying in the single market.
So the only thing we’ve “won” is that in 2 years time we will have no
influence on what the EU does and we’ve got another self-serving Old Etonian
as PM. That is, if we’re lucky.
I suggest it will be significantly worse than that. Nobody in their right mind
is going to invest in a country where the population are so ignorant that they
resemble a load of turkeys who will happily vote for Christmas. To say nothing
of the years more of uncertainty: anathema to business.
I (along with many others, I suspect) are going to take our STEM
qualifications and move abroad and leave you mouth-breathers to it.
I will buy a big bag of popcorn and watch the country I once loved do a
nosedive into the crapper over the next few years.
I will of course mock you and your fellow little Englanders mercilessly as you
wave your flags and shout “Sovereignty” on your barren rock in the Atlantic.
BTW, you fucktard, tell me again how I’ve obviously lost the argument because
I’ve called you out for exactly what you are: a clueless c*nt.
freebsd_frank wrote:
You’ve lost the argument.
Rich_cb wrote:
Rich_cb writes:
Like the democratically elected House of Lords and our democratically
elected head of state, the Queen?
Or do you mean the democratically elected House of Commons, as voted for by
you and your fellow window-licking morons?
The problem with democracy is that half the population has an IQ of less than
100. A significant portion have an IQ that barely approaches room-temperature.
Like you.
It was said repeatedly during the campaign, that no longer would we have to
put up with laws made by “unelected Brussels bureaucrats”.
Unfortunately for you it’s not true; if we’re going to continue to trade with
the EU where ~40% of our exports go. Also, the unelected bureaucrats have a
rather better track record at producing sensible legislation than our elected
representatives. Dangerous Dogs Act? Makes me proud to be British. Not.
But of course, we get to spend the grand sum of 8.5 billion quid on ourselves!
Big win. It represents less than 1% of government expenditure and if we’re
going to remain part of the single market, we’ll still have to pay it,
probably more so as to encourage others who think about exiting.
But, you say, we’ll kick out those revolting immigrants! Sorry. The EU has
made it abundantly clear that free movement of labour is a prerequisite of
staying in the single market.
So the only thing we’ve “won” is that in 2 years time we will have no
influence on what the EU does and we’ve got another self-serving Old Etonian
as PM. That is, if we’re lucky.
I suggest it will be significantly worse than that. Nobody in their right mind
is going to invest in a country where the population are so ignorant that they
resemble a load of turkeys who will happily vote for Christmas. To say nothing
of the years more of uncertainty: anathema to business.
I (along with many others, I suspect) are going to take our STEM
qualifications and move abroad and leave you mouth-breathers to it.
I will buy a big bag of popcorn and watch the country I once loved do a
nosedive into the crapper over the next few years.
I will of course mock you and your fellow little Englanders mercilessly as you
wave your flags and shout “Sovereignty” on your barren rock in the Atlantic.
BTW, you fucktard, tell me again how I’ve obviously lost the argument because
I’ve called you out for exactly what you are: a clueless c*nt.
— freebsd_frank You’ve lost the argument.
You’ve fucked the future of an entire generation, and you can’t even stand a bit of name calling?
Bikebikebike wrote:
The name calling doesn’t bother me in the slightest.
As a general rule though once you resort to personal insults it is a sign you’ve lost the argument.
Addressing your point;
I voted based on what I believed was best for the country.
The majority of those who voted agreed with me.
That’s democracy for you.
If you don’t like democracy feel free to go and try living under an alternative system.
Bikebikebike wrote:
That’s ridiculous quite frankly unless you have a crystal ball.
My bike is Italian, is it
My bike is Italian, is it going to be deported now?
Setting my stall out, I live
Setting my stall out, I live in a strongly Remain area, and voted remain, as did almost all of my mates. Gutted – most of my cycling heroes and heroines are European, and I’ve met lots of amazing people from Europe through cycling. I want a T shirt shouting “I’m Sorry We Heart You Europe”.
As far as Brexit directly affects cycling – some parts are going to get more expensive and possibly harder to source. European tours might get a bit trickier – how many visas is the Trans Europe going to need? (not that I’d ever be able to do that :D). Pros crossing the Channel either way might have problems getting work visas, depending on what gets negotiated as regards freedom of movement of labour.
In the long term, the whiff of the right wing coup coming from the back of the Leave camp leads me to suspect that we won’t see much improvement in cycling infrastructures – physical, legal and political – that promote utility cycling, and if anything a shift towards the Australian model.
1 hard cold fact, and it is
1 hard cold fact, and it is bicycle related:
I will not be making any uneccessary expenditure in the next few months until the position of my job becomes clear. This includes cycle related discretionary spending.
Unfortunately I work in an industry that is based upon collaborative research with large international pharmaceutical companies. Some of that research is materially affected by EU grants whilst the majority is funded directly from the research budgets of those companies. We have noted a marked downturn in project proposals in the last few months due to the lack of clarity over the implications of a possible Brexit. Now that it has become a reality we face at least another 30 months of uncertainty that at best will delay research investment and possibly send it outside the UK. Already some of our major clients are talking about relocating some of their research groups. This may or may not happen, but the reality is that funding has been put on hold until positions are assessed and decisions made.
1 speculative oipinion:
Brexiteers will become the new scapegoat for the UK’s ills. We seem to have moved from bankers to migrants and brexiteers will be next. How is this cycle related? Well it means that either everyone will become more generally angry and we will suffer the consequences as road rage or the daily rags will stop villifying cyclists as they concentrate on organising a posse to lynch Boris.
I feel as if I have lost my country. It is painful to discover that the majority of my countrymen and women don’t share the same values as I do, or possibly didn’t bother to look beyond the narrow soundbite messages they were being sold by self serving politicians before making such a monumental decision. My pride in wearing the Union Jack and carrying it on my bike is diminished.
I don’t think my bikes have any opinion on the matter. Two are Italian, they are very beautiful, the other is American. Well I say that they are Italian and American, but they are good bikes because they are a mix of components produced from countries thousands of miles apart, working and trading collaboratively. Both have many wonderful attributes. However sentience is not one of them.
Rich_cb writes:
Rich_cb writes:
That’s because you’ve got a head akin to a box of rocks.
I’ve found that as a general rule, people who start a sentence with “As a general rule…” are making an entirely fallacious appeal to authority and are talking shite.
I voted based on what I believed was best for the country.
That’s the problem. You wouldn’t know what was best for yourself and your
country if it hit you on the head.
Yes. And 90% of Germans voted for the Nazi party in the ’30s. They were so obviously in the right too, weren’t they?
If you don’t like democracy feel free to go and try living under an alternative system.
You have such a touching faith in democracy; it’s like a child’s belief in the tooth fairy.
You think you live in a democracy, even though I’ve pointed out to you 2 institutions involved in passing this country’s legislation which have precisely fuck all to do with democracy. You clueless muppet.
You’re so thick that you voted out to “increase democratic accountability” or
whatever gibberish. But what you’ve ended up with is worse laws being passed by
institutions with even less accountabilty and a doomed economy. Give yourself
and your fellow Brexiteers a pat on the back and regale your children with
tales about how you stood up for “democracy” whilst simultaneously pissing all
over their future.
freebsd_frank wrote:
That’s the problem. You wouldn’t know what was best for yourself and your
country if it hit you on the head.
Yes. And 90% of Germans voted for the Nazi party in the ’30s. They were so obviously in the right too, weren’t they?
If you don’t like democracy feel free to go and try living under an alternative system.
You have such a touching faith in democracy; it’s like a child’s belief in the tooth fairy.
You think you live in a democracy, even though I’ve pointed out to you 2 institutions involved in passing this country’s legislation which have precisely fuck all to do with democracy. You clueless muppet.
You’re so thick that you voted out to “increase democratic accountability” or
whatever gibberish. But what you’ve ended up with is worse laws being passed by
institutions with even less accountabilty and a doomed economy. Give yourself
and your fellow Brexiteers a pat on the back and regale your children with
tales about how you stood up for “democracy” whilst simultaneously pissing all
over their future.
A lot of us are angry with our fellow Brits for making what we think is a brain dead decision, worried for our futures and frustrated at the way that the campaigns on both sides were coducted in an environment of hollow promises, false information and allowing people to believe what they wanted to hear rather than setting out a clear set of policies on what they were actually choosing between. However this sort of language and personal abuse does not help.
freebsd_frank wrote:
That’s the problem. You wouldn’t know what was best for yourself and your
country if it hit you on the head.
Yes. And 90% of Germans voted for the Nazi party in the ’30s. They were so obviously in the right too, weren’t they?
If you don’t like democracy feel free to go and try living under an alternative system.
You have such a touching faith in democracy; it’s like a child’s belief in the tooth fairy.
You think you live in a democracy, even though I’ve pointed out to you 2 institutions involved in passing this country’s legislation which have precisely fuck all to do with democracy. You clueless muppet.
You’re so thick that you voted out to “increase democratic accountability” or
whatever gibberish. But what you’ve ended up with is worse laws being passed by
institutions with even less accountabilty and a doomed economy. Give yourself
and your fellow Brexiteers a pat on the back and regale your children with
tales about how you stood up for “democracy” whilst simultaneously pissing all
over their future.
The insults continue.
If you’re hoping to get a rise out of me you are going to even more disappointed than you were last Friday.
A few points.
Yes the House of Lords is undemocratic. Give me a vote to abolish that and I’ll take it.
The Head of State is also undemocratic but as it’s a largely ceremonial role and the Royal Family generate a huge amount of soft power I’m prepared to let that slide.
The vast majority of the power within the UK system is concentrated within the House of Commons, all of whose members are directly elected.
So our democracy isn’t perfect but then which democracy is?
I’m curious as to your preferred system of government?
You clearly feel yourself superior to your fellow citizens and believe that there is a problem with democracy so what system would you prefer?
As a final point, prior to the enabling act (which gave Hitler dictatorial powers and effectively abolished democracy) I don’t think the Nazi’s ever got above 45% of the vote. Strange that someone as intelligent as yourself would make such a basic mistake.
Maybe you’re not always right about everything?
I am just looking forward to
I am just looking forward to some cheap shopping in UK shops and maybe a weekend trip to London in the next months.
Sadly Wiggle has not adjusted their Euro pricing (yet).
Nobody knows what is going to happen, you have to make the best out of what you got now.
(still happy in Spain, with a German passport and I loved my years in London)
@rich_cb
@rich_cb
you’ve got your hands full so don’t want to gang up on you, as I do think what a lot of what you’re saying makes plenty of sense.. but..
Think you shot yourself in the foot when you claimed rightly that the Monarchy wields huge soft power, is unelected, yet you not only will let it slide, but seemed to imply is was a good thing.
That is wholy unacceptable, undemocratic, corrupt and has no place in a modern political system. The height of privilege, unearned and is everything that a meritocratic progressive country should be aghast at.
Yet, you [i]let it slide.[/i]
But those beaurocrats in Brusells. So bad. out to get us right?
Really wish you hadn’t fallen into the little Englander stereotype. Hates Brussels yet waves their little flag at the Royals. Nothing more sickening than those types.
Lots of respect for critical democratic observers though who’re principled through and through. And there is plenty of criticism that can be levelled at Brussels and the beaurocracy. Shame..
@rest
Note on sovereignty. In law we always have been sovereign. That said, sovereignty is used as a by-word, shorthand for criticisms about influence. And yes Brussels does influence us and that’s the trade off in a global economy. The same can be said of all countries. I’d say that the US has taken our ‘sovereignty’ to more alarming degrees than the EU has.
@unconstituted
@unconstituted
I appreciate that my position on the royals may seem a bit hypocritical so I thought I’d elaborate a bit.
Essentially if we replaced the royals with an elected but equally ceremonial head of state almost all of the costs associated with the royals (security/pomp and ceremony/travel etc) would remain but simply be transferred to the new president.
We would however lose a good source of soft power.
So it seems to me that the royals are better value for money!
Rich_cb wrote:
Well yeah coming from a position of what’s best for the country in terms of global power, I’d agree that the Royals are a bargain. And we couldn’t replace them with anything stronger, elected or otherwise, as much as it pains me to say it.
As a democrat, (a real one, not a loon that wants to change rules after they don’t get what they want, ie. the 2nd EU ref crybabies) I want to see the back of them anyway. Also I have issues with what the represent and toppling them would be a nice start to dismantling the class system. But that’s all another story, and don’t want to drag you off course! 🙂
unconstituted wrote:
Crybabies ? – or people pissed off with a Leave campaign base on lies, various Leave campaingners they’ve now rowed back on the 350M and immigration. So apart from some ‘factual’ stuff sold to voters, that’s ok then..
‘Course, it may interest you to know that Farage wanted a rerun in the event of Leave losing 52:48
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/nigel-farage-wants-second-referendum-7985017
and that the 2nd referendum petition was started by a leave campaigner worried that leave would lose, and is now complaining about his petition being ‘hijacked’ 😀 (Oh, and for Rich_cb, there was an investigation into multiple voting and 77k of the 3.7M or whatever it is now have been annulled..)
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/william-oliver-healey-referendum-petition_uk_576f8b28e4b0232d331e1b39
JonD wrote:
Cheers for the update, let me know when it hits 17,410,743…
JonD wrote:
Oh politicans lied. Cry me a river. None of which matters in the slightest. All campaigns spin a lot of nonsense to get votes. Only a donkey would believe an iota of any of the ‘facts’ presented.
Democracy isn’t a dice you roll until you get the result you want. I voted remain, but I woud be aghast if there was a second referendum on the issue without a significant and material change in circumstances, ie. with the Scottish Referendum which clearly needs be redone.
Irrational crybabies with no clue about democracy and have no interest in constiutional affairs until after the fact are as low a breed to me as a racist far-right EDL member.
Both are the bane of our country and the reason why there is no significant movement in constitutional development for decades which is badly needed. How many of the millions who signed that peition are a member of the ERS or Republic? Less than 1% I’d wager. Bunch of rabid, knee-jerk, airheads.
Means I’m buying a new Campy
Means I’m buying a new Campy Record groupset from UK. Never seen prices so low, but I’m in America.
@Rich_cb.
@Rich_cb.
https://clairebroadley.com/2016/06/26/so-you-want-me-to-be-happy/
That puts it more eloquently than I’m prepared to at the moment. I’m still on the “fucking stupid idiot” stage of things right now.
@crazy-legs
@crazy-legs
It’s eloquently written but mostly nonsense.
We will still be able to do all the things she says she cannot, they may be marginally more difficult that is all.
Ask yourself if you know of anyone from outside the EU who now lives in the EU?
If so, how did they manage it if it is now going to be impossible to move to the EU?
Do many people from outside the EU travel widely in Europe?
How do they do it if that too is now going to be impossible?
As for the conjecture about house prices and food prices… If the author is so confident of those predictions she should invest accordingly.
Finally she states that we will not be able to have free trade without agreeing to abide by European rules. A huge EU-Canada free trade agreement is in the process of being ratified. If Canada can have trade without all the rules why can’t we?
Rich_cb wrote:
the trade deal Canada has is nothing like having access to the common market. It wouldn’t allow out financial services industry to function properly, for example. It’s incredibly clear, as it has been for months, that we cannot have access to the common market without making a large contribution to the EU budget and accepting free movement of labour. If people understood that, then the result of the referendum would have been different.
Bikebikebike wrote:
We could tailor our negotiations based on our needs, Switzerland have voted to opt out of free movement but still want to maintain free trade so we would have an ally if we decided to negotiate on that basis.
We could alternatively decide to join EFTA (and accept free movement) or the customs union without free movement or go completely alone and simply trade based on WTO rules which would limit any tariffs paid.
I think we would thrive outside the common market so losing access to it would not make a great deal of difference in long run.
This thread is petering out.
This thread is petering out. Rich, your economic arguments might (might) have some merit, but it is marginal at best and probably negative. The idea we will regain sovereignty is a fantasy. Whether you are controlled from Brussels or Eton is immaterial. As we are seeing Leave had no plan, and we cannot have Free Trade without free movement of people. You cannot extort a deal from the other members.
I am happy to be on the loosing side if I am not with the racists, liars and murderers.
Leviathan wrote:
Where to start…
Firstly, trying to smear all leave voters as racists, liars and murderers is an example of the hateful politics that Jo Cox actually campaigned against.
Once you start down that road it can be used as a justification for violence and hatred against your political opponents.
Ironic.
The Eton comment is equally ridiculous.
Yes our democracy has flaws but at least we can directly elect our MP’s. How many members of the EU commission are elected?
Reducing the number of unelected officials writing our laws definitely seems like a step towards restoring democratic accountability and sovereignty.
Of course we don’t know what our post Brexit relationship with the EU will be like.
Negotiations have not (officially) started yet and will probably have to wait until after the Conservative leadership campaign is over.
Until then (and possibly even after) no members of the Leave campaign are in a position to negotiate so how can you accuse them of having no plan when they have not had the opportunity to begin negotiations yet?
We have a wide range of trade options, some will include free movement, some will not.
If we withdrew completely from the common market we would be able to trade under WTO rules (with minimal tarriffs). We would also be able to trade freely with the rest of the world.
That would be my preferred option but we shall have to wait and see.
In the meantime maybe we could just try and discuss the issues without resorting to slurs, insults and inflammatory statements.
Rich, I said “with” not all.
Rich, I said “with” not all. The true beliefs of many Leave voters are coming out of the woodwork, or haven’t you seen the news. I didn’t advocate violence in anyway, I accused Leave of condoning rascism and violence. It is contemptuous the way you try to reverse others statements and redefine what they have said. Nice try, but it wasn’t a Remain voter who murdered Jo Cox.
Funny, I seem to remember the SNP had a whole Independence manifesto. Meanwhile we have had 5 days of Leave leaders rolling back their promises, including on the very issues you say are core to your choice. Keep spinning this and you might convince yourself. Good Luck.
@Leviathan
@Leviathan
The SNP were in power in Scotland, the entire SNP parliamentary party backed leave and the leader of the leave campaign was the Scottish First Minister.
It’s not really a comparable situation.
Trying to pretend that your remark was not a smear is ridiculous.
It was blatantly an attempt to associate any leave voter with racism etc. That somehow voting the same way as a tiny number of nutters leads to guilt by association.
The demonising of those who disagree with you politically is exactly what led to Jo Cox’s murder.
Trying to backtrack once your hypocrisy was called out doesn’t make it any better.
Rich, I haven’t backtracked
Rich, I haven’t backtracked at all. You associated yourself with the nutters when you voted Leave. You knew it when you voted, you held your nose and hoped the medicine would work. Thats twice you have said I advocate violence; then you use words like ironic and hypocritical; that is an irony worth of Alanis Morrisette. Reap what you sew.
You can have the final word…
Leviathan wrote:
I never said you advocated violence but remarks such as yours create an atmosphere in which violence is far more likely to occur.
Trying to associate all leave voters with a murderer and confer guilt by association is, in itself, the exact type of behaviour that has been blamed for the very murder you were using to smear leave voters.
Your attempt at virtue signalling led to you behaving in the exact same way as those you were condemning.
That was the ironic/hypocritical part.
As a final point, I didn’t base my voting decisions on how some random nutter was planning to vote.
I based it on what I thought was best for the country.
The vote is over and the decision has been made.
We all need to respect both the decision and our fellow voters, whichever way they voted.
That is the basis of democracy.
“What does brexit mean to me
“What does brexit mean to me and my bike?”
We are both very pissed off about it and despise the very word itself. It sounds like something you’d buy in ratners