UKH

"We are sorry that membership renewal for 2021 has been delayed due to a Brexit-related issue. We are working with colleagues in Austria to resolve this as soon as possible. Thank you for your patience". 

Because you don't have reciprocal health care anymore....  who's going to pay your bills?

Yes. One in a thousand unwelcome consequences of this dismal Brexit.

But we were told that this would be the 'best possible deal' - except for the one that took numerous European wars, two World Wars and 40 years of trial and error to sort out.  

Your travel insurance?

So that's nice of them. Obviously, premiums won't change!

Premiums will undoubtedly increase if there’s no reciprocal health agreements between the UK and the EU.

However, as I can currently get an annual worldwide travel insurance policy which includes the USA - not exactly noted for its cheap healthcare - for my wife and me for £140, I’m not going to lose much sleep over it.

Think you should check the small print about the type of activities you are intending doing above 6000ft altitude first.

If that includes rock climbing, where do I sign?

Yes. AAC, BMC etc ARE travel insurance policies, more expensive because of the activities covered. With the demise of reciprocal healthcare, these and any other travel insurance will become more expensive. 

Good luck on the side of El Cap with your family holiday insurance.

E

That’s what the AAC insurance is for.

I think that it’s you who needs to check the AAC website and what it has to say about travel insurance.

It doesn’t and that’s why people should have something like AAC insurance in addition to and not as a replacement for normal travel insurance.

The AAC website states that it isn’t travel insurance.

See my previous replies to other posters about why people should have normal travel insurance and something like AAC cover.

But you knew that already, didn’t you?

not the end of the world, we are covered until the end of january on last years subscription.

Life continues to get just a bit shittier 

EHIC covered pre-existing conditions.

Commercial insurance often excludes pre-existing conditions or can be prohibitive for the individual concerned.

Jesus wept, you've only said that SINCE my post. You posted saying you and your wife were happy with annual travel insurance.

Forgive me for assuming that on a website called UK Climbing, on a thread about a specialist insurance company which insures, wait for it, climbers, that this news from AAC might be shit for, wait for it, climbers.

Crikey I do it time and time again - arguing with brexiteers. Like playing chess with a pigeon.

E

I use the insurance that suits my needs.

Since I’m not an alpiniste or into big walls I don’t need insurance that covers me for that.

You as an experienced, well travelled mountain man had no idea what AAC insurance actually covers and when exposed as the smart arse that you tried to be you resorted to insults.

Grow up.

You must be very excited. Sunlit uplands just three weeks away. I am sure you can’t wait.

In essence, the "EU rate" will go away, and it'll be the "world including US" rate only.  So if that's what you already have, you won't notice.

Sunlit uplands is it?

You obviously have a crystal ball.

Seeing as you seem to know something that even the PM and the head of the EU aren’t privy to.

Worth noting that the cover for medical was never high with AAC, I think £20k or thereabouts. Which I imagine wouldn't go far in a private hospital anywhere, including Europe, and is why a stated condition of cover is/was (I believe) that you call their specified support number to coordinate rescue.

World excluding US (unless going to the US) presumably. Basically premiums will increase in the light of loss of reciprocal health cover.

Given that a high percentage of claimants on those 'world' policies will likely be in Europe it would be logical that the vast majority of the cost covers the insurer's expenses for for non-European accidents only. Thus if Europe stops being 'free' then the cost of a world policy will increase drastically.

Fairly typical brexiteer response - f*ck you Alpinistes and Big Wallers, it doesn't affect me.

In other news, I don't give a toss about a 90 day limit on travel in Europe because I climb on Kalymnos for two weeks a year.

E

Good o.  You weren't the OP though, so your needs are irrelevant to everyone but you.

So?  Not everything is about you.

Can't see the insults you refer to, but I personally prefer direct insults to the cowardly passive aggression you tend to resort to.

I wish you would.

Fair enough if you say so. Sorry, I perhaps wrongly assumed that it covered the usual travel stuff like BMC do.

Yep. You're the sort of poster that made me turn off "The pub" forum (been turned off since this Brexit bullshit started and have never missed it...). If you can't see that having medical insurance across Europe included as a fact of life is a benefit and worth having, then there's not much point in "contributing" to this thread is there. Paying £140 rather than having everything you need included in the posh bank account you have which includes travel insurance is a pain in the bum. It's £140 I cant spend on beer and chips. It's half the cost of a ski pass. It's a weeks worth of Pizza. Or the cost of a small rental car. But whatever, as long as you're happy that your side "won". Let us know how you get on...

It's a benefit, clearly, but like, say, the fish thing (a tiny part of our economy) it's not a very important benefit and can easily be lived without, at the expense of making foreign holidays (which are optional, not essential) slightly more expensive.

I'm sure the banks will still offer it, it'll just go up a bit per month.  I'm sure banks in the US offer it, for example.

Those who will find it more of an issue are people who have severe pre-existing conditions e.g. cancer who can presently travel (though at small risk of having to pay for medical repatriation, as EHIC doesn't cover that) but in practice will not be able to at all because they will be uninsurable.

If I understand you correctly you're saying losing reciprocal benefits is not important enough to warrant staying, what about decimating the Automotive industry. Which is most definitely larger than fishing. Without tariff free trade, Brexit will and already has decimated the last remaining automotive manufacturers in this country. Many high tech parts generally come Europe, with a tariff added it just doesn't make sense for major manufacturers to remain in the UK. And likewise it makes any high tech parts manufacturers in the UK obsolete. Health cover is a minor benefit, you're right. More than a million in employment with all the associated knock ons provided by that one industry alone is a major benefit.

I was using it as an example of the way people on both sides have pretty much throughout shouted about minor side benefits (of which EHIC is one, as is our fishing which is a tiny part of the economy) in order to try to argue in favour of remaining or leaving as applicable.

The car industry is certainly a larger issue, but has been largely ignored - again by both sides.

It strongly frustrates me (as someone who sees valid arguments on both sides, but voted Remain as a pragmatic "better of the two options") that the arguments on both sides[1] have been so poor all along, and indeed I partly blame the Remain campaign for being so utterly useless (by arguing such minor points) for the situation in which we find ourselves.  Of course Leave did the same (blue passports, anyone?[2]), but Leave effectively had an easier job.

[1] As mentioned above I am in favour of a pan-European trading bloc with some element of freedom of movement, so basically the EEA/EEC as it was originally planned per the 1970s referendum.  I'm not in favour of additional levels of Government above Westminster because they are a waste of money and add complexity - I'm not "small Government" in a right wing sense, I'm pro tax-and-spend, but I'm very much in favour of "delayering", e.g. very strongly in favour of unitary local authorities - that is, we need to minimise waste to have that tax money benefit the "grass roots" population as much as it can.  But practically there is no way to go back, so the choice is "in or out", hence Remain, because there are more benefits to staying than going.

[2] I also blame the Government (collectively, both parties and over many years) for not using aspects of our EU membership that we could have used to resolve issues that led to Leave, such as those relating to immigration, and indeed retaining blue passports - because clearly some people *do* care - which we were allowed to do!  Not all EU passports are burgundy, if I recall.

Likewise I get frustrated by posters who go about just spraying Brexit bullshit (on both sides). I came to this thread because I thought it might be important as I have been a member of AAC and used its insurance. Losing what is a great, low cost insurance which is as effective as AAC, would be a great loss, especially for those on a limited budget, like students. A simple fact which Baron with his patronising post has ignored. It's his "well I'm all right Jack" tone which annoyed me. Infact this entire thread has been basically become pointless in the space of 5 posts...

It's easy to dismiss each minor point as unimportant, however, when combined the effect is huge.  This is a difficulty with supporting a remain campaign, be it for the EU for Scotland or whatever.  There are myriad small benefits each of which alone sound trivial.  By contrast arguing to leave is easy - a few vague big things (sovereignty, no-more foreigners, money, Ra Ra!!) sound great, until reality bites

You really are bitter and twisted aren’t you?

Why do you feel the need to take me explaining how I deal with my personal circumstances as a ‘f*ck you’ to everyone else?

There were several posters on this thread who had a misunderstanding of what AAC insurance covered. Someone stated that issues with renewing AAC cover was due to there not being reciprocal health care after Jan 1st but didn’t provide any evidence for that statement.

I suggested that a normal travel insurance policy would eliminate the problem of non reciprocal health care.

You decided to post your extremely witty ‘El Cap’ post and then go off on one of your anti Brexit rants before resorting to insults.

You’re going to make yourself ill with all this anger.

Nice to see you bringing nothing to another thread, as usual.

Has this even been confirmed? Possibly cover dependent on having EHIC.  

I would have thought AAC would want to get something similar in place otherwise they are going to lose 10.000 odd UK members, although that seems to be faulty logic on anything to do with Brexit.  Good news for BMC and their insurance?  

Did you actually read what I wrote?

Anyone who travels should consider an insurance policy that covers them for those things not provided by the state.

So even with your reciprocal health care and AAC cover you still stand to be at risk.

If you are happy to roam around the world underinsured then feel free but don’t start whining when you come unstuck.

As for your point about the financial cost of insurance, well, if I was the person you portray me as, I’d tell you to get a better job.

I'm glad some people are non-plussed about the loss of the European Health cover.

But if you're older and if you have any sort of pre existing health issues it's a massive loss. The cheapest I've been able to find for the six months per year that we're now only allowed to go to Europe, is £1000 each for the same level of basic medical insurance we used to get for free.

Because the worldwide insurance policy includes Europe presumably the risks to the insurer will increase to much the same extent as more restricted policies, and so all premiums might be increased by a similar amount in the future?

I would imagine that insurance companies would use any excuse or reason to increase premiums.

So assuming that there isn’t a new reciprocal health care agreement negotiated in the future it is probable that insurance premiums will indeed  increase.

There is no guarentee (yet) that reciprocal health cover will end on dec 31st. like many things, its still up in the air, but there is no reason why it cant continue after brexit if a deal is done. switzerland and norway are not in the EU but are both covered by the EHIC. Like many things, its in both sides best interests to agree a deal which involve some level of reciprocal rights, and its in neither sides interests to oppose one.

its a pain in the ass not knowing the details of anything until the 11th hour (more like the 13th....), but lets not all loose our shit yet, it might not be as bad as everyone fears.

In reply to Jim: AAC cover was never dependent on having the EHIC, AAC cover is worldwide. the assumption was that you would exhaust the cover of the ehic in any incident before dipping into the AAC cover, but it was never a legal requirement to hold an EHIC.

If the EHIC is no longer valid after dec 31st, then the way i see it, if making a claim in january, you will first maximise the EHIC cover (which will be zero), and then move onto your AAC cover for the rest (so 100%). we entered into that contract under those terms when we signed up last year, as far as i am aware there was no post brexit clause (but i cant claim to have read the small print...), so in my understanding they will have a contractual obligation to fulfill that promise. as to what happens to our new policy after brexit, i fully expect there will be changes, and premiums will no doubt cost a bit more, but i dont think it will be catastrophic. 

a.k.a. It may not be that shit.

That's the level of unfounded optimism we're reduced to now in virtually every aspect of Brexit outcomes. And still they lie about it being a good thing.

Thanks for that. I see it's in the AAC FAQ's on insurance, which I should have read before posting. 

a perfectly valid brexit argument to have, however it has nothing to do with this thread. this thread is purely about whether we will lose our aac cover after brexit, to which, the answer like so many other things atm, is we dont know...

it is perfectly valid within the scope of this thread to point out that even if we lose reciprocal rights under brexit, its not the end of the world in terms of AAC cover. AAC cover has always only really been rescue cover, not full travel insurance. it points out in the policy that many will chose to take out other travel insurance policies to make themselves fully covered. 

To sum up your input to any Brexit discussion:

• "So what if your premiums go up? I'm not fussed. We won, deal with it."
• "So what if you can no longer easily live, study, and work in Europe. It's not something I want to do. We won, deal with it."
• "So what if your job is gone. Mine isn't. We won, deal with it."
• "So what if you cannot retire in Spain anymore. I didn't want to myself. We won, deal with it."
• "So what if your food is more expensive? I can afford it. We won, deal with it."
• "So what if people that have lived in the country for decades are used as pawns in a negotiation? I'm not one of them. We won, deal with it."
• "So what if things are generally shittier than before? They are not gonna be *that* shit. We won, deal with it."

I'm sure this list can continue to encompass any subject.

Do you often make things up to prove your point?

Whatever point it is that you’re trying to make.

That's my boy!

My point is pretty obvious. The list is blatantly not made up of actual quotes, but it is not particularly exaggerated.

Your post is a complete simplification and misrepresentation of my numerous posts about Brexit over the years.

I hope you weren’t hoping for me to address your points one by one?

No, I said many people who have a slightly posher bank account are covered by travel insurance which is included in their monthly bank fees. I'm not roaming around uninsured because I have one of those accounts. With the removal of reciprocal rights that insurance cover will now have to start covering it which means it goes up. Seeing as I pay for that yearly subscription because it covers all sorts of things, it is effectively very low cost currently. The removal of EHIC basically means either I have to buy additional insurance, or hopefully the banks insurance will be extended to cover it, most likely at additional cost.

Your points seem mainly politically motivated and it's quite obvious when you look at you profile at the number of posts you make on Brexit that you are one of those people who go around spraying about it. It doesn't add anything to this thread, infact it just stifles (along with other people whinging about us leaving) any chance of facts being associated with the thread. The simple fact is we are speculating whether EHIC will be removed (I think it's very likely in a no deal scenario), what the reason AAC is struggling with due to Brexit (it could be nothing to do with EHIC), whether it's even an insurance issue (it doesn't say so in the quoted excerpt)... instead we're banging on about insurance, El Cap, our personal opinions about the method of UK government... mentioning Brexit is like mentioning the Nazis in a thread - it stops all rational discussion and it descends into bollocks.

The industry bosses may be feeling ignored but the workers are getting exactly what they asked for.  It's very generous of them to vote to offshore their own jobs without even needing to be asked.

Having studied my posts you will identified that -

I comment on many topics on this forum not just Brexit.

I am one of the few Brexit supporters who still post on this forum.

Any Brexit post of mine tends to receive many replies from numerous others which I try to reply to.

In fact, it’s not unusual for a non Brexit post of mine to receive a Brexit orientated reply.

Thus my Brexit post count is high.

If you wish I’ll stop replying to posters on Brexit threads - that’ll make for a balanced debate.

I don’t think I introduced Brexit into this thread, did I?

No, don't just keep it to Down the pub, where politics belongs. Both sides of the debate are antagonistic and it destroys the thread if its actually about something else. I walked past this thread a couple of times but it got to the point where you were replying over and over trying to hammer home your point that I thought I'd say something.

Nope but you seem determined to finish it.

The paradox of Brexit is that the people who voted for it are the people who, mostly, will lose the most from it.

Who exactly are "the people who voted for it"  that you are referring to?

With regard to AAC cover.  I don't know if it's been said but it only covers rescue and repatriation.

Al

They were given fair warning.

If it does cost more to insure ourselves after Brexit all that means is that until now someone else has been bearing the cost of us swanning around the Alps. Is that fair?

They haven't as such.  It was a reciprocal agreement, so the idea is that it balanced out - for every tourist to the UK going and walking up Snowdon or wandering around London, there's a British one going and doing some VF in Italy, or whatever.

If we lose it that ends, so each has to take their own insurance.

Angry because after 15 years hard work establishing a lifestyle on mainland europe our lives were suddenly thrown into turmoil and uncertainty so the next 4 years were spent jumping through hoops trying to stabilise things when all that energy could've been spent on the business and family............... the fact that you simply "don't get this" explains every single comment you've ever made on a UKC Brexit thread.

E

Maybe I just don’t care?

you've shown many times that you don't care, do you take pleasure in making others suffer ?

Go on Doug,

give me some examples of my not caring.

Since you say that I’ve shown it many times it shouldn’t be too difficult.

But don’t worry if you cannot because I’m fairly sure that somebody else will do it for you.

That's always been my understanding. AAC membership provides mountain rescue cover sufficient to get you to hospital when EHIC takes over (or did, prior to Brexit). I've always considered that a sufficient add-on to the normal travel insurance I already have for Alpine climbing in Europe . The problem we now face is that with EHIC about to go we will need our travel insurance to cover the medical care bit. Normal travel insurance will fail if the medical care results from a mountaineering accident. So it's over to the BMC I suspect. No problem with that except that AAC membership has always been cheaper than BMC insurance - and includes reciprocal hut rights.

I wonder if the steady accumulation of these small extra costs and inconveniences will lead any Brexit voters to regret their decision.

Martin

A BMC survey from around 2003 found that 58% of climbers claimed to be alpinistes.

Which is higher than I would have guessed.

So I presume there’ll be quite a few  Brexiters among them and a few of those who will regret their decision.

Are there really many climbers who will have voted for Brexit? Very few show themselves on here and, because climbing is generally a sport enjoyed by relatively well educated people, I would have thought the proportion of Brexiter climbers would be pretty small compared to that of the general population.

I obviously have no idea how many climbers voted for Brexit but I’ll give you top marks for the barely concealed dig at Brexiteers and promotion of remainers although I’m sure that was accidental.

It isn't at all barely concealed. It's an expression of utter incomprehension.

Wow, so many generalisations & assumptions, therefore lies the real problem with the vote been given  to the uneducated masses, the result could never be predicated.

Anyway, back on topic.

Relying on the AAC for health care really did highlight that the small print & terms & conditions had never been read. Relying on the EHIC in previous years as an add on to the membership, would be gambling especially if partaking in alpinism.

There Is a solution, join the CAF, surprised this has not been mentioned already, receiving both the rescue & health care benefits in one policy although at a more realistic price & definitely giving piece of mind.

Yeah, I know exactly how little you think of Brexiters and their actions and I obviously didn’t manage to convey a sufficient level of sarcasm in my post.

You do realise you get a lot of flack because you just come across as cruel?

Flak? That’s a poor description for the insults that get hurled around this forum on a regular basis.

You’ve supported a policy that has made us all poorer and is putting a lot of people’s livelihoods at risk. In return you get called a few choice epithets, but nothing I’d say was too outrageous. 
 

But regardless of this asymmetry, you are clearly a very sore winner and treat other posters with a degree of cruelty which is unpleasant to see. 
 

How about this?

You and your fellow remainers compile a list of all my cruel posts.

I, alone and unaided, will compile a list of choice epithets, used towards me, none of which could be considered outrageous, of course.

Then we can compare notes.

Deal or no deal?

Edited to add - I must surely admit to treating one poster on this forum with extreme and undeserved cruelty. For which I can offer no excuse and for which I will be forever ashamed.

Luckily for me, the recipient of my shameful action is a better man than me and was graceful and kind enough to accept my apology.

I have a better idea. Why don't you compile a list of all the posts that you demonstrate that you are a functioning human being. It'll be much quicker.

A functioning human being?

You do know what forum you’re on, don’t you?

It was your posts on this thread which prompted my comments. But there have been other threads.

You’ve won, you’ve got what you wanted. Where’s the magnanimity? 

Doesn't that rather depend on how drunk Boris can get Ursula tomorrow over dinner?

I find it strange that you feel the need to lecture me on the nature of my posts.

You’re not short of a sharp word or two when it suits.

As for winning and being magnanimous,well that’s the problem with a binary choice, isn’t it?

Someone wins, someone loses and unfortunately with Brexit there’s not a lot of room for compromise before Brexit becomes BINO.

I can have all the empathy in the world but it won’t mean anything to those who will lose out under Brexit and I’m not sure that any empathy I show would be taken as anything other than patronising.

So I guess I ‘ll have to go on being the Brexit bogeyman, at least it will give people someone to shout at.

😀

And you wonder why very few show themselves on here

Will the illegitimate child be English or European, after enduring the long evening of his company and succumbing to his irresistible charms?

Voting Brexit, voting tory and watching pornography. Three things that more people do than are prepared to admit to. 

Went to renew mine today and discovered this.  That sucks. Hopefully not a sign of things to come.

FWIW I know people who have used AAC insurance for rescue and it was totally sound.  If you need to be heli-rescued from a mountain patched up and sent home it does the job.  If you need compensation for a delayed airplane, medical bills settled because of an upset stomach or a new camera because it fell off your lilo into the pool then you need something else.

It also covers medical treatment costs including for illness (with limits and extra hoop to jump through if no EHIC) as well as some liability and legal cover. 

nah - I love a bit of porn, thats what WFH is all about.....

Though presumably post-Brexit, if our EHICs weren't valid, the situation would just be the same as if we hadn't bothered to get one, i.e. apply the "hoops" and "limits"?

Really?  It did not cover my medical costs when I broke an ankle on Kalymnos.  I had to pay for medications and crutches and was also asked to make a contribution to Nurses/Doctors salaries. The Doctor said that he was waiving the fees for the operation, implying that he could have charged me. AAC would not repay me these costs.

Their repatriation service was however superb.  !st class flights and taxis back to my home with a medic supporting me all the way to Birmingham Airport.

Al

Yes - paid for me in Switzerland no problem.  I did need to reclaim it with receipts but not argument after that.

That's interesting.  I submitted all my receipts but to no avail. They would not reimburse those items.

Al

Did they say why? They're not going to pay for voluntary contributions, and there is a 70 EUR excess for out-patient treatments.  

No, simply that these items were not covered. It wasn't a significant amount so I didn't push it so it's entirely possible that the excess cancelled out the claim but they did not say that.

Al

I know lots of people who climb and very few of them show any interest in posting on UKC. I think the 80/20 rule applies on the off belay forum. 80% (probably more) of the the posts, posted by 20% (probably much less) of the site members. Most of the posters including yourself can be described as privileged white males, or bourgeois, who live on the European mainland, or in relative luxury in the UK, lamenting the failure of the British masses in following the middle class agenda. You are aware it was mainly the working classes who voted for Brexit? People vote for where they see solutions to their problems and in the case of Brexit supporters, the partnership with the EU had broken down where what they saw included mass immigration,  hospitals and schools overwhelmed,  people turning up in the UK having never worked here claiming benefits that other people have worked hard and paid taxes for many years to contribute towards. So what if you lose your right to AAC membership. Go to the BMC instead and if its too expensive then maybe you should curtail your activities to suit. 99.9% of the population really couldn't give a shit. And before you and your fellow emigrants start to flay me for being a Brexiteer, I voted remain and think Brexit is/was a bad idea but am prepared to work hard and make some sacrifices if it helps it become successful eventually. What are you doing about it other than crying about your travel insurance premiums.

A curious reply. Given that I've not mentioned travel insurance, or even vaguely referenced it, I'll not comment on those parts of your rant. The rest of your post seems to me to be implying that "working class" people may have been justified in voting for Brexit, having seen several indicators suggesting EU membership was contributing to their difficulties. In that I'm tempted to agree, except that they'd be wrong to do so. The indicators you say they will have been responding to, such as long hospital waiting lists and reports of immigrants claiming benefits, were overwhelmingly not in any way caused by EU membership but rather by UK government policies. Nor would leaving the EU have any positive effect on the majority of such people's lives, according to just about every study ever published. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't have been voting in good faith, genuinely believing they were making a positive difference. It's the people who were lying to them that I would have issue with.

My point about educational attainment was simply joining the dots between two established facts: that educational attainment was the factor most strongly correlated with voting Remain, and that climbers and mountaineers are generally disproportionately highly educated compared to society as a whole.

I was referring to the post in general rather than you specifically. I should have made that clear.

The rest of your post seems to me to be implying that "working class" people may have been justified in voting for Brexit, having seen several indicators suggesting EU membership was contributing to their difficulties. In that I'm tempted to agree, except that they'd be wrong to do so. The indicators you say they will have been responding to, such as long hospital waiting lists and reports of immigrants claiming benefits, were overwhelmingly not in any way caused by EU membership but rather by UK government policies. Nor would leaving the EU have any positive effect on the majority of such people's lives, according to just about every study ever published. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't have been voting in good faith, genuinely believing they were making a positive difference. It's the people who were lying to them that I would have issue with.

Isn't everyone's view of the world shaped by external factors and influences. We believe what we chose to believe. 

People who have had the benefits of a quality education can't live in isolation from the rest of society. Everybody is intertwined one way or another. The middle classes depend on the working classes for many things not least their labour so in my view the Brexit vote was a 2 fingers to the UK establishment as much as it was towards the EU.

As for your final point, maybe that says more about the limited opportunities to get into climbing for the masses than it does about climbers per se.

youtube.com/watch?v=HMvwNkPgwgg&

But that simply begs the question as to what causes us to choose one thing over another. Education is certainly a big factor, but so too are malign influencers working hard to achieve the desired goal of people choosing to believe they want things that most certainly are not in their best interests. Turkeys in the run-up to Christmas.

Well said John.

As for the working class argument: manual skilled, unskilled and unemployed workers, make up 46% of the adult working-age population, but they composed only 41.7% of the leave vote. The impression comes from C2/DE retired workers who voted for such a large margin for leave. A lot of wealthier higher socio-economic classes supported leave: less than a quarter of the adult population counted for over a third of the leave vote. 

I agree with Wanderer that many people in large leave majority areas felt left behind, but they were fooled into blaming the EU for UK government policy and poor planning. Overrun Schools and Hospitals was certainly a planning and support problem as EU continental citizens paid more tax than UK citizens. A lack of lower paid immigration control was a choice the UK made under EU rules as we desperately needed minimum wage workers for industries like the service sector,  farms and care homes. When the sovereignty argument popped up it seemed almost entirely wish fulfillment, away from libertarian ideals, as there were never any serious concrete examples the majority felt were terrible. 

I've spoken out about some remain voter accusations of stupidity of most leave voters (being duped in a democracy is normally for reasons way more complex than IQ). Sadly there were a small but significant minority of racists who almost all supported leave (possibly more than the winning margin).

In reply to Wanderer100:

What should I be doing to make it a success?

Making sacrifices and working harder?

In the state of affairs we are in I'm biting the rag while feeling the strokes baron and his pals are vigorously thrusting up my behind, without my consent.  Life looks a bit grim

I like to think of Brexit of a family dispute over their home. Brexit is where someone burns the house down when everyone is out for the day. Then, when you come home, you’re expected to help build a new house.

I quite liked the house the way it was. It could’ve done with a bit of decorating, but it was comfy, safe and warm. So when I’m asked to help build? My response? Stuff that, I’ll move. Build it yourself.

Sounds a little selfish to me. Whether we like it or not its happening and if the majority of the population pull in the same direction, the transition to an independent trading nation will be a lot smoother than if we follow your analogy and bail out or kick up a fuss at the first sign of a problem. 

Please tell me what we're going to trade that we haven't traded whilst being in the EU. And who we are going to trade with?

Selfish? What could be more selfish than burning the house down? As for all that ‘pull together’ baloney? That’s just disguised nationalist nonsense.

We will trade British goods and services and we will trade with the rest of the world? I'm sure you already know that so why ask?

Jeez, where do people get this vacuous crap from?

Give me one example of the kind of goods or service that the UK will be able to trade that it couldn't do pretty much as well, or better, while in the EU.

North Korea, Iran? Or some other trade-embargo countries (by EU). Albeit I think it is not EU that set the embargo, rather the UN. But bailing the UN is also an option .

To be less tongue in the cheek. UK will continue to trade with the exact same things and exact same counterparts. There will be need for trade negotiations though, as the EU negotiated trade pacts will no longer be valid.

But in order to trade with the EU, all the same requirements that the EU has set need to be fulfilled. So not much change of trading on "UK" terms.

And yes, it'll be a complete cluster fvck for the automotive industry. A lot of parts are (or were?) manufactured in the UK and then delivered to the factories on the mainland EU. And also the other way around, albeit I do recall that there might not be as much full on assembly of cars in the UK as there were in the past. I recall that a lot of EU car manufacturers/factories have been already searching for alternatives to UK produced parts, which is understandable as if the trade negotiations don't go smoothly, then importing the very same parts will be a lot more time consuming, expensive, and perhaps even impossible.

Did you specifically ignore the "that we haven't traded whilst being in the EU", or just deem it not important?

That’s one of the key questions, isn’t it. They just seem to think we can magically ‘tough it out’ with some good old bulldog spirit. Although give Wanderer100 his dues, he did vote Remain. 

Reading some of the things on here, the naivety of brexshiteers never cease to amaze me.

Sorry, if you don’t give me an idea what it’s about I can’t be bothered clicking on your link.

We've been doing that for years. Why is it going to be better now we're out of the EU?

Cheer up! Some people pay good money to have things shoved up their bum. At least you’re getting it for free!

I'm not arguing it will be better than what was done whilst a member of the EU. Who has said otherwise? But it can be done independently of the EU and the EU know that and that's why both sides are in a stand off as to a free trade agreement. Hopefully common sense will prevail and a deal will be done to the mutual satisfaction of both sides.

It’s worth it

And that’s Jenga 

The majority of the population have no say whatsoever in the negotiation of trade arrangements and are subject to the competence or otherwise of those in charge. As it is, we have the least competent government I have witnessed, currently throwing away the best set of trading arrangements we have with our biggest trading partner. 

In this context, what does 'puling together' mean?

At this point I probably should remind you of the question to which you were replying:

"Please tell me what we're going to trade that we haven't traded whilst being in the EU."

Your glorious new world of international trade possibilities sounds like the usual 'It might not be that shit' we're all getting far too used to.

There's no such thing as an 'independent trade deal' - by definition they are at least bilateral. And it isn't a question of approaching say, Canada, saying please can we flog you some cars, or aircraft, or whatever. They will say, yes certainly, but we must agree safety standards, environmental standards, working practices, and we must agree who will arbitrate in the event of disputes. And then we will go to Japan, and have a similar but different response. And then we'll go to... you get the idea.

The issue here is that is is simply not possible for an 'independent, sovereign country' like the UK to get trade deals as advantageous as those we enjoyed as part of the EU. This isn't something that can be overcome, or skirted round; it's a simple inevitable fact. Add to that the fact that all the countries the swivel-eyed loons like IDS and JRM think we can increase our trade with, patently they haven't look at a globe very much, or perhaps, flying everywhere first class courtesy of the tax payer, they just don't get it: Canada and New Zealand and Australia are a frigging long way away. For a farmer in Hereford to flog apples, or Honda to flog cars, it was always going to be qualitatively easier to sell them to a country 20 miles away than countries 15,000 miles away.

This is very true. Also, there is our trade in services. If you want a lawyer, you want one in roughly the same time zone. Have you ever tried to do any kind of work project with someone in Australia? It's almost impossible, as you aren't at work at the same time, so decision making can take days and days. There's just no point. Or maybe you hired a London-based ad agency and it's fine working remotely most of the time, but once every month or so you want to meet in their office to see what they've cooked up for you. If you're in Sydney, or Vancouver, that is simply impractical in a way that it isn't if you're in Paris or Berlin.

That'll be the Honda that are closing their UK plant next year, best not mention Ineos either.

I'm still waiting for anyone to come up with a benefit to B****t

This won't be much help to most people here, but prompted by this thread i checked what the deal is with the EHIC business and it seems the card will still be available to a range of people after the New Year.

UK pensioners living in the EU, and EU ctizens living in the UK, both doing so before the end of the year are 2 groups that can get a new card valid from emasculation day forwards.

Thought i'd mention it as i didn't know it myself

Nothing like putting your words in other peoples mouths. Nowhere have I mentioned independent trade deal. You made that up and then used it as a justification for a load of condescending bullshit. 

If you had bothered to read what I said you would have seen "independent trading nation".

Thanks for that.  

So EU nationals in the UK get one but most UK nationals don’t.

Bloody hell, that’s so unfair!

It’s almost enough to make me vote leave!

People are worried about losing their jobs, businesses and rights - but it's all just a bit of a laugh, innit!

And you wondered why I said you were cruel.

To be fair, you still haven't answered my question, which was: "Please tell me what we're going to trade that we haven't traded whilst being in the EU. And who we are going to trade with?"

I mean, can we have some advantages please?

It’s not only a bit of a laugh, it’s ironic.

Ironic that for years it’s been stated that the EU has negotiated in good faith while the UK was using people as negotiating pawns yet here we have an example of how that good faith actually works. The Uk guaranteed the existing rights of EU nationals but the EU chose not to reciprocate in full.

Strangely enough I don’t lay the blame for this situation at the door of the EU but with whatever crack negotiator the UK employed.

Seeing as you’re still banging on about cruelty , what’s your opinion on the EU’s EHIC stance for UK nationals - cruel or not?

This post comes with the caveat that I haven’t read the fine details of the EHIC agreement and I stand prepared to  be corrected.

Just for the record, there is no such thing as EU national... There's French, Italian, Swedish nationals and so on. And as nationals of a country that belongs to the EU nothing has changed for them.
 

But UK nationals living in UK... well you left, leave yer EU things at the doorway.

Yes I am, because it's important. Do you want to be seen as a cruel person, or one whose devotion to a political ideology has made him cruel?

As for the EHIC card, the information I've seen is ambiguous. According to the BBC:

"EU nationals living in the UK before the end of 2020 will be able to continue using the NHS for their healthcare while in the UK.

"But unlike UK citizens, they will also be able to continue using their UK-issued EHIC after the end of the transition when they travel to another EU country."

The first is reasonable, as they are either tax payers or students. As for the second, what's wrong with EU citizens using an EHIC card in other EU countries? Presumably the card needs to be registered to their home address, which is in the UK, so it needs to be a "UK card". Looks like a work-around to me given that the EU clearly wants its own citizens to still receive these benefits, whilst acknowledging that there are millions of its citizens living in the UK. I assume UK nationals still in the EU can get cards from their country of residence and are covered as tax payers in that country.

That looks to me like the EU is protecting the rights of its citizens. You seem to forget that many Remainers/Rejoiners view the EU not as benign, but powerful, and that we would rather have that power working for us and influenced by us.

Your getting it wrong. After Brexit, EHIC get's ya nothing in UK. But if you're a resident of UK, then you're entitled to the same treatment as UK nationals living in UK. Just like all the UK nationals with permanent residency in EU countries get to keep their privileges there.

Now, how would a tourist be treated. That remains to be seen, perhaps the UK and EU wrangle out a deal similar to what it was, or perhaps not.

Like I said I haven’t read the fine print but as I understand it - all EU nationals living in the UK have all their existing rights protected. Not just their EHIC but all their rights.

As far as the UK and EHIC is concerned only people retired in an EU country and some students will be covered.

I don’t have a problem with the EU getting the best deal it can for its citizens, why wouldn’t it? But I am amazed that they, the EU, didn’t see the need to extend the same cover to UK nationals resident in the EU.

Maybe they assumed the UK nationals wanted to be free from the EU?

Not quite.

Depends on the European country & length of time as a resident in that particular country.

I haven't applied for an French EHIC card yet but as I now have a French social security N° (equivalent to a NHS N° in many ways) I assume I'm eligible. But with Covid I've barely gone out of our valley this year, much less out of France, so little point in applying for the moment. I suspect its up to individual countries rather than the EU to organise.

That is very useful - as my wife is German it may reassure her a little when she visits relatives.  Our sons have German passports so I think they will be covered.  As I have pre existing health conditions I'd be clobbered beyond my means if I ever get abroad again so will have to risk being uninsured alone I guess.

Unsurprising response from one such as you. If you can't play with the sandcastle you bulldoze the whole beach.

Have you got a link to this info?  Would be useful as I am Irish (when convenient).

It's towards the bottom here in the gov page, https://www.gov.uk/guidance/uk-residents-visiting-the-eueea-and-switzerland...

Also explained a bit more in news articles as it seems it's a recent announcement.

Thanks

For a farmer in Hereford to flog apples, or Honda to flog cars, it was always going to be qualitatively easier to sell them to a country 20 miles away than countries 15,000 miles away.

Sorry to be pedantic, and I fully agree with most of what you say, but where exactly are these countries 15,000 miles away?

Martin 

‘One such as you’?

What is that supposed to mean?

You mean the EU is made up of separate countries who have sovereignty to make their own laws and decisions? And they didn't have to destroy their country for the priveledge??

They don't need to. If you're resident in another country (and I am) you pay taxes and contribute to the welfare state in that country, and thus get to employ it's privileges.  I have a Norwegian EHIC and will continue to have one. 

Thanks for that.  

It will be good news for all those UK nationals who are residing  in EU countries.  

Now there’s just the business people and tourists travelling between the EU and the UK (and from the UK to the EU)to sort out.