[Politics] Brexit

[Hamilton]

If the EU Referendum was today.

Osbourne's telling us the housing market and house prices will fall ,i still had a good nights sleep though
regards
DR

That's because you live with your mum.

Seriously, they will be affected.


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

 

[Bladders]

I don't think I said we could stop law-abiding EU nationals from entering the UK.

Can you point to the passage in my post where I have said this and then I can edit it.


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

You said we have control of our borders , having to to let in law abiding EU citizens whether we want to or not isn't controlling our borders is it.

Anyway you try to spin it (a possible future career path for you?) it's not control

 

[Bladders]

I haven't read the threat yet, so until I do I can't comment.


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

He said the EU would make your life a misery .

Thoughts?

 

[beorhthelm]

... Predictions is what the Bank of England is basically for,

actually no, they are there to govern the money supply. it has been a long source of contention from the BoE that their forecasts are overanalysed and mis-used in economics and politics to say things the banks not necessarily agreeing with. just because of their expertise, and more so those at the Tresuary, we shouldnt follow the headline quotes blindly, because a) they cover themselves in caveat and caution and b) start from a whole raft of base assumptions and conditions. they talk in terms of risk and probablities not absolutes. and 3 months later they revise the numbers and assumptions, so the base line was incorrect, and the new forecasts are changed to accomodate. so why all of a sudden should we take their 15 year forecasts as accurate when no takes their normal reports as anything more than informed guidance?

 

[Bladders]

If the EU Referendum was today.

Listen to the banks?

You mean the bankers that nearly broke us for good and we're still paying for their utter botch up?


Mmmm, that's a good idea

 

[portslade seagull]

The 1 million figure includes 750000 refugees who did not ask or want to move. Will we help them return to their homes or will we turn our backs on them.


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

Maybe you could put a few up at Hamilton towers seeing as your so pro immigration. But I can see it now not in my own backyard but anywhere else will do

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

That's because you live with your mum.

Seriously, they will be affected.


Sent from my iPhone in a non-Calde world :-(

maybe for the better if you're a first time buyer, the housing markets a closed shop unless mummy or daddy can give you a loan
regards
DR

 

[Bladders]

[MENTION=225]Hamilton[/MENTION]

I thought we could stop convicted EU criminals at our controlled borders ?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ss-52-year-old-man-d-never-met-threw-bus.html

 

[GoldWithFalmer]

My opinion is that an in or out vote won't make much difference. Any changes to the law need to get through parliament and parliament has a majority of MPs who want to be in and on good terms with our neighbours.

If the population vote out (which I don't think they will) the government will negotiate a settlement with the EU. The MPs and government will want the settlement to cause as little disruption as possible. Therefore, initially at least, the settlement will be almost identical to the current situation. Free movement of people will remain, we will become part of the European Free Trade Association. Day to day life will remain the same as it is now - except that provisions for withdrawing from the European Parliament and Council will be enacted. The scare stories are put about by those who think that the "outers" will inexplicably have a majority in parliament if a vote for leave occurred: they won't, the politicians will remain the same, the politicians and negotiators will be in favour of the current arrangement.

It's not in the interests of either side - the UK or the EU - to do much to disrupt the arrangement above. I would expect the current EU funding in the UK would be matched by the government to ensure continuity and a stable economy.

When the next election comes in the UK, the parties will set out their positions. Labour, the Liberals, the Nationalists and probably most of the Conservative Party will not want to suggest disruption to people's lives - they will want to remain in EFTA and MPs with those views will form the majority of parliament. Certainly UKIP MPs wouldn't have any influence, if any such MPs exist. The only difference will be that the UK's influence in Europe - approx 8% of the vote there - will no longer be in place.

I think the scare stories about leaving, and the idea that things would change much, are both equally wrong. In whose interests would it be to cause any disruption? Which politician would want to head towards uncertainty and economic problems? Whenever a decision presented itself, parliament would chose the path of least disruption and not much would actually change.

I do think the UK will vote to remain and the above won't be tested. But I suspect a UK ten years after leaving the EU would look very similar to one that stayed in.

A fair post and some reasoned points,also i suspect the UK if it stays in the EU will look very different to the one it does today...not necessarily for the better.

 

[pastafarian]

On immigration, we are not part of Schegen and so can check every passport of any EU national wishing to enter the UK. This way we can prevent those with criminal records entering the UK or we can monitor them whilst they are here.

This is all utter bullcrap.

You dont even need a passport to enter the UK if you are a EU national, a recognised ID card will suffice

Criminal records are not held on EU passports.

you may be flagged amongst other things if there is a warrant out for your arrest or on bail or you are flagged for terrorist activity.

but your passport does not say if you are a convicted burglar or a previous rapist

please stop these lies,no wonder you believe the myths we control our borders

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Let me answer these questions.

EU treaties are designed to ensure closer cooperation across member states. That is there point. There is no point in having a treaty that is designed to create disharmony. An example would be the Treaty of Rome which included proposed legislation on equality at work and working conditions across Europe.

On immigration, we are not part of Schegen and so can check every passport of any EU national wishing to enter the UK. This way we can prevent those with criminal records entering the UK or we can monitor them whilst they are here. We have one truly open border and that is with Ireland. Ireland is also not a member of the Schengen area. Now, is immigration a bad thing. In all likelihood no. Studies have shown time and again that the net contribution of immigrants to this country far outweighs the costs. Immigrants are required for two reasons: to shore up the critical skills shortage gap, and to fuel our economy. At present, we simply do not have enough native Brits to fill all the roles that exist in the UK (for example, we will need 70,000 nurses to deal with the ageing native population, and those skills are not available amongst the population as it stands - this is just one industry.)

The argument then goes that we should stop immigration and hand all jobs to the native population. This is a short-termist view. As I have said, the ONS statistics show a surplus of jobs to those out of work. The issue is that many of these jobs are low-paid and low-skilled. It is not in the long-term interests of UK plc to direct its combined workforce into filling low-pains and low-skilled work. This is not going to boost the GDP of the country, it will suppress. If we suppress our GDP, then we have less money to spend on the infrastructure of the country - less money to spend on schools, hospitals and vital public services. As I have mentioned, we are an ageing population, so we have to find the growth to cater for our needs.

We therefore must invest in hi-tech industries; in pharmaceutical research; in finch (financial technology); in mechanical engineering; in design. All of these industries are less likely to be replaced through artificial intelligence or automation as they require human beings. They are high value industries we can export. We will not be able to do this unless we embrace immigration and welcome those that can both help us develop these industries and, crucially, fill other roles right through the economy. This is the macro-economic picture we face.

So, do we want to control immigration? Yes, we want to keep the bad apples out - and we can do that - but much wider than that, no, we need immigration.

Now, to your last question, how can we reform the EU to our liking. The EU by its very nature is a partnership. It is not a partnership of equals, but it is a partnership. In the South East we have around 16 MEPs. This number is determined according to the size of population in the South East. So, we have more MEPs than say Wales for example. Similarly, the number of MEPs the UK has is predicated on the size of our population. Therefore we have more MEPs than Austria, but less than Germany. All these MEPs are responsible for shaping legislation inside the EU. By working together, they are able to fashion laws that are in the interests of all Europeans. That's a tall ask, as there is always going to be someone who feels hard done by. They also influence the Commission. Now the Commission desperately needs reforming. It is wasting taxpayers money and can be far more efficient. However, it is responsible for negotiating on matters like TTIP and therefore acts as a civil service in negotiating deals for EU member states. All EU members can influence appointments within the Commission, but the more involved a nation is, the more influence it can have. We have seen that our attitude to Europe has not been that positive over the past 40 years, so we really should not be surprised that the more proactive and willing participants are probably more influential.

European Commissioners can, as well as MEPs, draft legislation and laws. There is one Commissioner for each EU member state. As this is a partnership, that seems fair at this point. The more populous the more MEPs, but each member has one Commissioner. One could argue that here there is room for some reform. Should more populous nations have more than one Commissioner, but looking back down the system, MEPs should and are drafting the lion's share of legislation and here there is proportionality. Laws are ratified by EU member states i.e. Dave, Angela etc.

So, can we reform the EU to our liking? No, but we can reform the EU to the benefit of all Europeans and by default the benefit of the UK.

As I have said many times, this is not a polar debate i.e. all good/all bad. There are many things that need to change, but the UK will not prosper outside of the EU. We need to work with all Europeans; we need to learn to turn immigration to our advantage; we need to celebrate the fact that people want to come and work here, not because of 'easy money', but because the country is admired, it rewards work, it is tolerant and fair. And we ourselves need to do two things - decide what role we want in Europe and play an active part (don't return a UKIP MEP that by very definition just wants to smash things up and slow things down), and secondly, hold our own MPs at Westminster to account. Don't let them lie to us that it is the EU that is stopping them from passing policies that are in the interests of the UK. The Living Wage is controlled by UK MPs, the NHS by UK MPs, Schools by UK MPs, Trident by by UK MPs, zero contract hours by UK MPs, franchises for train operating companies by UK MPs, HS2 by UK MPs, HMRC and corporate tax dodgers by UK MPs.

I hope I have addressed some of the issues you [MENTION=277]looney[/MENTION] [MENTION=12825]cunning fergus[/MENTION] and others raise. I understand where concerns come from, I do. I think many are emotive and not real, and I think there is scaremongering on both sides, but on balance, I believe we must remain.

Good points very well made.

 

[Bladders]

Good points very well made.

Shame most of it is bollocks.

Lot of typing that was

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

This is all utter bullcrap.

You dont even need a passport to enter the UK if you are a EU national, a recognised ID card will suffice

And a "recognised ID card" is the important page of the passport on a single laminate. You can't get in by flashing your driving license or similar.

 

[pastafarian]

Good points very well made.

dear lord.....good points?
you believe as well criminal records are held on EU passports.

what on earth are they teaching you in EU central......more importantly who is spreading the lies and why are you so gullible

 

[portslade seagull]

Good points very well made.

Are you the same person

 

[pastafarian]

And a "recognised ID card" is the important page of the passport on a single laminate. You can't get in by flashing your driving license or similar.

but you can get in with a recognised ID card instead of a passport which is what i said

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

This is all utter bullcrap.

You dont even need a passport to enter the UK if you are a EU national, a recognised ID card will suffice

Criminal records are not held on EU passports.

you may be flagged amongst other things if there is a warrant out for your arrest or on bail or you are flagged for terrorist activity.

but your passport does not say if you are a convicted burglar or a previous rapist

please stop these lies,no wonder you believe the myths we control our borders

he's a geniune threat to our national security, people like him need to give their heads a wobble
regards
DR

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Good points very well made.

Did you wipe his arse this morning
regards
DR

 

[pastafarian]

i was struggling to understand why the remain lot thought we controlled our borders.
Turns out they thought every EU national entering the country had their criminal history embedded in their passport ,even though an authorised ID card will do and the police at dover(and everywhere else) were checking and stopping bad criminals from getting in.

talk about dropping a bollock

this is the level of clueless security these people are asking us to trust them with.........i dont think so

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

but you can get in with a recognised ID card instead of a passport which is what i said

True. But there's no material difference.....so what's your point?