EU Referendum

[websaway]

Talk about scaremongering, here's Leave.eu's latest poster...

Wrong, on so many levels! Regardless of whether you're "remain", "leave" or still "undecided", I hope we can at least agree on that.

Don't think the official out campaign should use this, but.
If you don't think it's a threat you must be living on a different planet and by the time people like you recognise the threat it will be too late.

 

[bonusmedia]

The simple solution is to implement a points-based system for the native population and deport those who don't have useful skills or lots of money to a third world warzone. We will rapidly become the most highly skilled and richest nation on earth. It might mean splitting up some families but probably no-one I know so that's ok

 

[websaway]

How much immigration is "enough"?

The Leave camp have been reaching out to those of Commonwealth descent by suggesting that post-brexit there could be room for more non-EU immigration because EU immigration will be limited. However, last year, there were already over 180,000 non-EU migrants.

So how can Leave promote more non-EU immigration (i.e. by definition, that figure of 180,000/year will go up) while simultaneously attacking Remain/the Tory party for not getting immigration down into the tens of thousands?

Those are two completely irreconcilable and contradictory positions, like saying "We're going to let you drive 150Mph rather than 130Mph, and how dare the Government not drop the speed limit to 50Mph!"

(Andrew Neil tried to tackle Nigel Farage on the above in his interview the other day, but N.F. huffed and puffed for about five minutes without actually saying anything until A.N. was forced to move onto another topic)

You can not set a target on immigration until we leave the EU .
But if you have any concern about numbers then you will know that if we stay in, those numbers are going to be unknown and the people who come in will be unknown also, and it could easily be 500,000 per year. So calculating numbers will be as inaccurate as your projections on the effect on the economy.
The better off the country gets the more people come, the better the government treats it's citizens the more people come. The more houses we build , the more jobs we create , the more schools we build, the more hospitals we built, the more people will come. It's a total drain on resources and the road to ruin.

 

[bonusmedia]

You can not set a target on immigration until we leave the EU .
But if you have any concern about numbers then you will know that if we stay in, those numbers are going to be unknown and the people who come in will be unknown also, and it could easily be 500,000 per year. So calculating numbers will be as inaccurate as your projections on the effect on the economy.
The better off the country gets the more people come, the better the government treats it's citizens the more people come. The more houses we build , the more jobs we create , the more schools we build, the more hospitals we built, the more people will come. It's a total drain on resources and the road to ruin.

 

[VSC]

Way I see it, everything will carry on as it is. Look at Norway, Austria, Turkey, all major trading partners with the EU,

While Norway & Turkey are not members of the EU they are members of the EEA which has to agree to the four freedoms, i.e. the free movement of goods, services, persons and capital, as well as competition and state aid rules, among others ...

So not really a good comparison as one of the main issues that "leave" want is to restrict free movement.

Austria is a member of the EU.

 

[Edwin]

While Norway & Turkey are not members of the EU they are members of the EEA which has to agree to the four freedoms, i.e. the free movement of goods, services, persons and capital, as well as competition and state aid rules, among others ...

So not really a good comparison as one of the main issues that "leave" want is to restrict free movement.

Agreed. So far nobody in the Leave camp (that I've seen) has acknowledged that the alternative models being pushed such as the Norway or Switzerland models also require the free movement of people as an absolute precondition. There are no existing models in use by any country that protect both the type of trade deals that EU countries, Switzerland and Norway enjoy yet also allow an opt-out from the free movement condition.

And the rest of the EU would be shooting itself very vigorously in the foot if it allowed the first ever exception to be the UK (for whatever pipe-dreamy reason you armwave into existence) since there are plenty of other EU countries that would quite fancy the cake (great trade deals) without the unappetising heap of boiled cabbage (free movement of people) that goes with it, and they'd be queueing up to leave...

This is why I'm convinced that Cameron will (sensibly and logically) quit very, very quickly if the vote goes the "Leave" way. His position will be like that of an airline pilot being required to keep the aeroplane in the sky after random components and bits of wing have been knocked off. History will remember him unkindly for having called such a foolish referendum, so why would he want to compound the humiliation by presiding over the fall-out too?

 

[AlistairM]

Agreed. So far nobody in the Leave camp (that I've seen) has acknowledged that the alternative models being pushed such as the Norway or Switzerland models also require the free movement of people as an absolute precondition.

As I've heard many times it won't be a Norway or Switzerland, or Canadian model, it will be a British model. Also Norway and Switzerland have a combined population of about 13 - 14 million so I think we've got a bit more scope for a better deal, and the Canadian model doesn't involve the free movement of people.

 

[AlistairM]

How much immigration is "enough"?

The Leave camp have been reaching out to those of Commonwealth descent by suggesting that post-brexit there could be room for more non-EU immigration because EU immigration will be limited. However, last year, there were already over 180,000 non-EU migrants.

So how can Leave promote more non-EU immigration (i.e. by definition, that figure of 180,000/year will go up) while simultaneously attacking Remain/the Tory party for not getting immigration down into the tens of thousands?

Those are two completely irreconcilable and contradictory positions, like saying "We're going to let you drive 150Mph rather than 130Mph, and how dare the Government not drop the speed limit to 50Mph!"

(Andrew Neil tried to tackle Nigel Farage on the above in his interview the other day, but N.F. huffed and puffed for about five minutes without actually saying anything until A.N. was forced to move onto another topic)

You can hear a bit more of what NF has to say on immigration from about 7minutes and 30 seconds if you haven't seen it.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[websaway]

Agreed. So far nobody in the Leave camp (that I've seen) has acknowledged that the alternative models being pushed such as the Norway or Switzerland models also require the free movement of people as an absolute precondition. There are no existing models in use by any country that protect both the type of trade deals that EU countries, Switzerland and Norway enjoy yet also allow an opt-out from the free movement condition.

And the rest of the EU would be shooting itself very vigorously in the foot if it allowed the first ever exception to be the UK (for whatever pipe-dreamy reason you armwave into existence) since there are plenty of other EU countries that would quite fancy the cake (great trade deals) without the unappetising heap of boiled cabbage (free movement of people) that goes with it, and they'd be queueing up to leave...

This is why I'm convinced that Cameron will (sensibly and logically) quit very, very quickly if the vote goes the "Leave" way. His position will be like that of an airline pilot being required to keep the aeroplane in the sky after random components and bits of wing have been knocked off. History will remember him unkindly for having called such a foolish referendum, so why would he want to compound the humiliation by presiding over the fall-out too?

That's contradictory if we vote out it will mean the majority of voters want to leave the EU, so how could it be a foolish referendum.

Of course there are no existing models, an economy like ours with it's own currency has not escaped.
Switzerland population 8 million
Norway population 5 million
both equal very little clout.

Other EU members are in a currency union we have a floating currency , we are more free to leave.

You are talking to adults on here so please don't treat us like children.
Your defeatist attitude does not hold much water with adults, I do though think it will work on younger people who of course, without experience, will be more receptive to scare tactics about, for them anyway, the unknown.

 

[martin-s]

So how can Leave promote more non-EU immigration (i.e. by definition, that figure of 180,000/year will go up) while simultaneously attacking Remain/the Tory party for not getting immigration down into the tens of thousands?

I imagine most of that number are students who are *supposed* to go home afterwards (or at least apply for a tier-1 visa).

To be a working non-EU immigrant, you need to earn a salary of £23,000+ (ish) and have a company hire you before you arrive. And the job has to be on a list of those that are under-resourced locally. Long story, but I had to look into it once.

The company have to jump through a lot of hoops to sponsor that tier-1 visa and hire non-EU migrants with skills that are in need. For EU migrants, they can come without a job, without any (or at least any specific) skills, and stay as long as they like.

Non-EU migrants are also not eligible for any benefits at all as far as I know. Indeed, they have to prove funds to get their visa.

 

[websaway]

Gordon Brown said today legal immigration is not a problem.
Not if you live in Scotland it's not.

I wonder if he mentions to his listeners that he works as an advisor
to Pimco, one of the worlds largest asset management companies and sits on the board with the former Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke and the former president of the European Central Bank, Jean-Claude Trichet .

 

[VSC]

Your defeatist attitude does not hold much water with adults, I do though think it will work on younger people who of course, without experience, will be more receptive to scare tactics about, for them anyway, the unknown.

Actually I think it is the reverse ... the "younger people" have a more idealistic view of the future, they have hope, and the hope may be that people united can achieve more than people divided ... similar to the thoughts when the "project" was conceived and started.

May be unrealistic to many, may be unrealistic in fact ... I personally hope they can prove us old fogeys all wrong and succeed where some of us failed and see in a future that is more about compassion and sharing rather than division and fear.

At the end of the day we will all make up our own mind about remain or leave.
We will all choose to interpret the "facts" as we want to, to match our pre-conceived values and ideals.
There are a large group of people who are undecided ... and very confused by the mis-represented statistics and statements by both sides - since when has politics professed to be all things to all people.

BUT, just because someone has a valid (to their opinion) and different point of view to you, don't start demeaning your own point of view with petty statements about not being an adult ... it's not very adult.

 

[websaway]

Actually I think it is the reverse ... the "younger people" have a more idealistic view of the future, they have hope, and the hope may be that people united can achieve more than people divided ... similar to the thoughts when the "project" was conceived and started.

May be unrealistic to many, may be unrealistic in fact ... I personally hope they can prove us old fogeys all wrong and succeed where some of us failed and see in a future that is more about compassion and sharing rather than division and fear.

At the end of the day we will all make up our own mind about remain or leave.
We will all choose to interpret the "facts" as we want to, to match our pre-conceived values and ideals.
There are a large group of people who are undecided ... and very confused by the mis-represented statistics and statements by both sides - since when has politics professed to be all things to all people.

BUT, just because someone has a valid (to their opinion) and different point of view to you, don't start demeaning your own point of view with petty statements about not being an adult ... it's not very adult.

There is no value in an opinion that promotes us losing our freedom and sovereignty, I care little about anyone's opinion on this matter where it incorporates the continual erosion, with the ultimate intention of surrendering it . So while I appreciate your concern for the way I conduct my post , it doesn't change my view .

 

[websaway]

Interesting article in the DM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...t-travel-freely-Britain-2009-EU-citizens.html

 

[VSC]

There is no value in an opinion that promotes us losing our freedom and sovereignty, I care little about anyone's opinion on this matter where it incorporates the continual erosion, with the ultimate intention of surrendering it . So while I appreciate your concern for the way I conduct my post , it doesn't change my view .

Freedom ...
Freedom is a construct that we elect politicians to decide for us.

I do not trust that many politicians will have what I regard as the best interests of the majority of people should we leave the EU. Many regulations in the areas of workers rights, living wages, health & safety, green energy, etc had to be introduced to the UK because of the EU ... My belief is that many of these will be dismantled to the detriment of the most vulnerable in our society.

Sovereignty ...
Would the UK regain it's Sovereignty? What concessions would have to be made to get those trade deals that everyone talk about? What concessions would have to be made to countries to be able to "return" the over 1 million illegal non EU migrants in the UK (which seems as an objective of the leave campaign). Outside of the EU we just couldn't expel EU migrants we didn't like back either - we would have to work out a "deal" with the countries concerned - we couldn't just ship them off there. Yes, we could repeal and enact some few laws that we cannot currently ... but some would have to be tempered by economic and other considerations.

Sovereignty doesn't exist as it did decades ago - the world is much smaller, the UK is smaller.

 

[BeachLife]

Interesting article in the DM

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...t-travel-freely-Britain-2009-EU-citizens.html

If you want anyone to consider your arguments, let alone value them, you really need to stop quoting the Daily Mail and the Express.

 

[bonusmedia]

There is no value in an opinion that promotes us losing our freedom and sovereignty, I care little about anyone's opinion on this matter where it incorporates the continual erosion, with the ultimate intention of surrendering it . So while I appreciate your concern for the way I conduct my post , it doesn't change my view .

The one thing you make clear is the corrosive effect of tabloid bullshit on the national psyche

 

[VSC]

Interesting article in the Independent

http://indy100.independent.co.uk/article/10-myths-about-the-uks-migrant-crisis-debunked--bJiNkKwaml

 

[websaway]

Freedom ...
Freedom is a construct that we elect politicians to decide for us.

I do not trust that many politicians will have what I regard as the best interests of the majority of people should we leave the EU. Many regulations in the areas of workers rights, living wages, health & safety, green energy, etc had to be introduced to the UK because of the EU ... My belief is that many of these will be dismantled to the detriment of the most vulnerable in our society.

Sovereignty ...
Would the UK regain it's Sovereignty? What concessions would have to be made to get those trade deals that everyone talk about? What concessions would have to be made to countries to be able to "return" the over 1 million illegal non EU migrants in the UK (which seems as an objective of the leave campaign). Outside of the EU we just couldn't expel EU migrants we didn't like back either - we would have to work out a "deal" with the countries concerned - we couldn't just ship them off there. Yes, we could repeal and enact some few laws that we cannot currently ... but some would have to be tempered by economic and other considerations.

Sovereignty doesn't exist as it did decades ago - the world is much smaller, the UK is smaller.

Yes tell America that sovereignty doesn't exist
You talk about what we could not do.
Look if you have immigration controls anyone who likes cannot just walk into your country and take up residence.
Border controls will be a deterrent so immigration will stabilise .
The current situation will mean endless amounts can come to the UK
Any rights you wish to preserve outside the EU will be the decision of a democratically elected UK government.

 

[VSC]

Okay, last for today (off to watch Sewing bee with better half) ...

Something that I found amusing ...

The etymology of the word Sovereignty has it's roots in old French ...