On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 17:18:38 +0100, Optimist
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 15:01:25 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:

Optimist wrote:
On 15 Jul 2016 18:20:48 GMT, Jeremy Double wrote:


Also, remember that companies, as well as universities, are partners in
collaborative projects funded by the EU. I have been involved in projects
where UK companies have benefitted from the expertise of partners
(companies and universities) from other EU countries. The UK will lose out
if it doesn't remain part of the European research funding system (as
non-EU-member Switzerland is).


Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when
they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are
precedents for exclusion.

According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein,
Macedonia, Norway & Turkey.


And there's no reason why the UK won't follow Switzerland's example.
Leaving the EU will save £10
billion a year net so lack of money need not be an issue.


I thought all of that was going to be spent on the NHS?

That will be the decision of the elected government

So the Brexiteers lied ?

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 00:17:33 +0100, Charles Ellson wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 17:18:38 +0100, Optimist
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 15:01:25 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:

Optimist wrote:
On 15 Jul 2016 18:20:48 GMT, Jeremy Double wrote:


Also, remember that companies, as well as universities, are partners in
collaborative projects funded by the EU. I have been involved in projects
where UK companies have benefitted from the expertise of partners
(companies and universities) from other EU countries. The UK will lose out
if it doesn't remain part of the European research funding system (as
non-EU-member Switzerland is).


Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when
they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are
precedents for exclusion.

According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU Iceland, Liechtenstein,
Macedonia, Norway & Turkey.


And there's no reason why the UK won't follow Switzerland's example.
Leaving the EU will save £10
billion a year net so lack of money need not be an issue.


I thought all of that was going to be spent on the NHS?

That will be the decision of the elected government

So the Brexiteers lied ?

The campaign was on the question Leave or Remain, it was not a general election which decides the
government.

On 2016-07-18 07:42:41 +0000, Optimist said:

The campaign was on the question Leave or Remain, it was not a general
election which decides the
government.

Doesn't really answer the question.

There were many, many lies on both sides. The entire campaign was
utterly filthy - worse than a typical General Election one - and
everyone on both sides should be utterly ashamed of themselves for it.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 09:24:31 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:

On 2016-07-18 07:42:41 +0000, Optimist said:

The campaign was on the question Leave or Remain, it was not a general
election which decides the
government.

Doesn't really answer the question.

There were many, many lies on both sides. The entire campaign was
utterly filthy - worse than a typical General Election one - and
everyone on both sides should be utterly ashamed of themselves for it.

Neil

Point is that the Leave side were not in a position to say how the money WOULD be spent, just how it
COULD be spent.

On 2016-07-18 08:53:10 +0000, Optimist said:

Point is that the Leave side were not in a position to say how the
money WOULD be spent, just how it
COULD be spent.

Correct, but that was not how they portrayed it. You could call it
twisting the truth, but whatever you call it it was dishonest.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 10:13:18 +0100, Neil Williams wrote:

On 2016-07-18 08:53:10 +0000, Optimist said:

Point is that the Leave side were not in a position to say how the
money WOULD be spent, just how it
COULD be spent.

Correct, but that was not how they portrayed it. You could call it
twisting the truth, but whatever you call it it was dishonest.

Neil


The taxpayer-funded booklet sent to every household at the start of the campaign stated quite
clearly that this was a referendum on whether to stay in or leave the EU.

It said "This is your decision. The Government will implement what you decide."

It was not a consultation on what the alternatives could be.

In a general election the parties will set out their stalls.

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On 2016-07-18 07:42:41 +0000, Optimist said:

The campaign was on the question Leave or Remain, it was not a general
election which decides the
government.

Doesn't really answer the question.

There were many, many lies on both sides. The entire campaign was utterly
filthy - worse than a typical General Election one - and everyone on both
sides should be utterly ashamed of themselves for it.

+1

tim

Optimist wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2016 00:17:33 +0100, Charles Ellson wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 17:18:38 +0100, Optimist
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 15:01:25 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:

Optimist wrote:
On 15 Jul 2016 18:20:48 GMT, Jeremy Double wrote:


Also, remember that companies, as well as universities, are partners in
collaborative projects funded by the EU. I have been involved in projects
where UK companies have benefitted from the expertise of partners
(companies and universities) from other EU countries. The UK will lose out
if it doesn't remain part of the European research funding system (as
non-EU-member Switzerland is).


Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when
they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there are
precedents for exclusion.

According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU
Iceland, Liechtenstein,
Macedonia, Norway & Turkey.


And there's no reason why the UK won't follow Switzerland's example.
Leaving the EU will save £10
billion a year net so lack of money need not be an issue.


I thought all of that was going to be spent on the NHS?

That will be the decision of the elected government

So the Brexiteers lied ?

The campaign was on the question Leave or Remain, it was not a general
election which decides the
government.

Although, funnily enough, with or without a general election, it has
completely changed the government. More cabinet ministers have changed
following the referendum than did after the election of the new Tory
government replacing the coalition last year.

"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 17:18:38 +0100, Optimist
wrote:

On Sun, 17 Jul 2016 15:01:25 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
wrote:

Optimist wrote:
On 15 Jul 2016 18:20:48 GMT, Jeremy Double
wrote:


Also, remember that companies, as well as universities, are partners
in
collaborative projects funded by the EU. I have been involved in
projects
where UK companies have benefitted from the expertise of partners
(companies and universities) from other EU countries. The UK will
lose out
if it doesn't remain part of the European research funding system (as
non-EU-member Switzerland is).


Switzerland was excluded from the Erasmus student exchange programme when
they voted to restrict free movement of people two years ago. So there
are
precedents for exclusion.

According to the Erasmus website participating countries include non-EU
Iceland, Liechtenstein,
Macedonia, Norway & Turkey.


And there's no reason why the UK won't follow Switzerland's example.
Leaving the EU will save £10
billion a year net so lack of money need not be an issue.


I thought all of that was going to be spent on the NHS?

That will be the decision of the elected government

So the Brexiteers lied ?

They were optimistic.

The campaign didn't make any promises, just suggestions

That you were supposed to (and did) take them as promises is another matter

tim