I don't just don't think we have the upper hand here like you do.
Brexited | the worst threads live the longest
- Thread starter Silva
- Start date
It's mainly the rest of the world that goes there.
Yeah of course. Scotland might save us yet
Because we have a reciprocal arrangement with Germany! If Australia wants to give Britons an automatic right to live and work in Australia and strike a comparable free trade deal to the EU, then I'd give them the same rights as Germans to live in Britain.
How is that not answering your question?
That is one of the criteria which could be used but I made a point earlier that we might have had the opportunity to help more Syrian refugees if the government wasn't forced to be 'tough' on them. The point is that the government can choose, and be scrutinised/held to account if it doesn't deliver the right policy.
Sunday People: 500,000 migrants heading to Britain
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Well thats what they voted for
HBO: Game of Thrones won't suffer from Brexit
For any of you GoT fans:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The Aussies can help too, and the yanks but guess what... they don't. And they don't have free movement, and they have much much larger countries.
I'm amazed that after this referendum you think the UK public would be happy with any large number of muslim refugees.
Expanding free movement should be the future we as a World are trying to move towards, not even more point systems to help the privileged have even more privilages.
That's fair enough and understandable, but this is why we have to realize that if the organization that we've served for 40 years wants to destroy us for a democratic decision, we never really did belong in this organization.
That agreement is in the process of being fundamentally re-evaluated. I'm saying that what I believe should be in place is a policy that ultimately treats them (and all countries) equally. My whole point is that that is what I would wish to see, something completely impossible while in the EU. No-one has yet told me why that system would not be desirable. Difficult to implement now, maybe, but not undesirable.
come on now..
I can imagine Sturgeon turning on a revolving chair like a Bond villain saying "Ahhh, we've been expecting you."
Yes I have.
We are all citizens of the World, the more we move towards that the better, and freedom of movement is essential to that.
You may want to treat all countries identically, but I guarantee they don't all want an identical relationship or immigration/ visa rules with Britain. Inter-country relationships are a two way thing, we don't just dictate them to the rest of the world.
If we had the same relationship with every country then I'd agree with you. But in a world where we have varying agreements and relationships with different groups of countries, it is completely right that we have to tailor our immigration rules.
Well I can only speak for myself, I want people to come to the country who contribute positively. I couldn't care less what their religion is or where they come from.
There's a difference between the organisation wanting to destroy you, and it wanting to secure a good deal for itself rather than bending over backwards to accomodate a nation that seemingly believes it's a detached dictatorship that's flooding it with migrants and has leaders that want to destroy it (e.g. Farage, Gove and Johnson have all said they either want the EU gone or it's failed).
1) £350m a week for the NHS
Nigel Farage disowned Vote Leave's '£350m for the NHS pledge' hours after EU referendum result, telling ITV's Good Morning Britain:
No I can’t [guarantee it], and I would never have made that claim. That was one of the mistakes that I think the Leave campaign made.
Farage is not a member of the current government and therefore is in no position to guarantee it. Hence not a u-turn. Vote Leave (remember it is made up of Conservatives, Labour, UKIP) is not the government, I personally would expect a national newspaper to realise the difference.
4) There's no rush
In the same message, Vote Leave had said they would not "rush into" Brexit preparations, saying: "The day after the referendum, nothing changes legally. We will talk to our friends in Europe and discuss the best way to agree a new UK-EU relationship. When we do make changes we will make them carefully."
The day after the referendum, the President of the European parliament Martin Schulz, the President of the European Council Donald Tusk, European Commission president Jean Claude Juncker and President of the European Council, Mark Rutte issued a joint statement saying the UK needed to leave "as soon as possible, however painful that process may be."
The Independent has managed to confuse what the EU wants the UK government to do (leave immediately) with what it actually will do (take its time). Hence there is no rush and no u-turn.
I can see that, but be realistic about what a huge proportion of the population wants.
I'd also argue that the migration of so many Polish has been very positive, they work hard and pay taxes and in return the receive a better life.
You should also be aware that EU law doesn't just mean you can go and live anywhere and sponge off the system, you still have to have money and a job. This does however require better "policing".
EU free movement is curtailing migration to the UK from non-EU states!
Free trade, and control of our borders. Anything other than that is unacceptable, otherwise Johnson and Farrage have utterly failed. If the EU says no, there has to be a standoff, or we cancel trying to leave.
Let's not beat arround the bush, the majority of voters for the leave campaign did so on the understanding that we would have more control over immigration, and so if this can't be achieved under any circumstances, we have to respond with tough counter negotiations, or the British public have voted for a lost cause.
was thinking the same.Sadly yep. My missus works in hedge funds and is very worried about her job.
As an aside, would've been a nice gesture if AJ had euro flag gloves on.
By 'control of our borders', do you mean stopping the principle of freedom of movement with EU states? There's pretty much zero chance you'll get that while being allowed to remain in the single market. Sorry, you've been sold a lie.
Fair comment, but as I've said previously I think it's likely we'll come into the EEA which will entail free movement anyway (my guess is it'll be that plus an 'emergency brake') but Brexit means that if a change does need to be made then it can be unilaterally. I have genuinely tried to think long-term here, a remain vote would have bound us for (at least) another 40 years.
That is not the way it works. Young nurses and teachers are not the elite, for a start.
Slightly a silly discussion this though given that I agree with you and am pro free movement. I am not pro ever closer union or the necessary accession of every country in Europe purely because of their geographical position.
All the more reason for more free movement agreements to be made between nations.
Not less!!
Let's be honest, you can have all the rational discussions in the world about leave or remain; but the fact remains that a significant portion of the people who voted leave, didn't understand any of the relevant complexities to this move.
These people voted on emotion, followed the crowd, or had more nefarious motivations. This was always going to be a disaster from the start, and it is obvious that the argument from Leave was always paper thin at best. There is absolutely no strategy whatsoever on what to do now, and the leaders of the leave campaign are already going back on half the things they campaigned on.
I'm embarrassed and ashamed at how our country has acted these past few months. I hope to God that sense can prevail and we an salvage something from this debacle. Whatever positive outcome is achieved, it will despite Leave rather than because of them.
These people voted on emotion, followed the crowd, or had more nefarious motivations. This was always going to be a disaster from the start, and it is obvious that the argument from Leave was always paper thin at best. There is absolutely no strategy whatsoever on what to do now, and the leaders of the leave campaign are already going back on half the things they campaigned on.
I'm embarrassed and ashamed at how our country has acted these past few months. I hope to God that sense can prevail and we an salvage something from this debacle. Whatever positive outcome is achieved, it will despite Leave rather than because of them.
I do actually agree with this, especially in the short term, but I think there will be some concession like an 'emergency brake'.
They can be sincher, depends who you are comparing them too.
If Britain can't build enough houses to accommodate the amount of immigrants flooding into the country, to where house prices have risen to where it's extremely hard to buy a house, there are a lot of people who will have a voice saying that something has to change.
So we should expect a treaty beyond what anyone else has? You do realise we haven't been a major global power since the 1950s?
Concessions are now less likely than before. The meaningful (and they were) conditions that Cameron had secured in February are now out of the window.
Ok, so we'll get a good deal. Fine.
So now we will see what will happen. It will totally fail in your eyes and you will blame the politicians for it even though they have no chance of achieving what you want.
Perhaps the only hope here is that we will get a better government. Labour need to find a better leader pronto.
There is something between "getting a good deal" and "trying to destroy"..
Cameron actually managed to secure an emergency brake on in-work benefits for new migrants. As you say, it's probably out the window now.
That's fine to say that if that's how you see it, but if the leave option is activated, are you going to accept what the EU tells us?
Are you happy for Britain to try and reverse it's decision and get in line with what the EU says?
Not probably. Already declared.