[Politics] Brexit

[Herr Tubthumper]

Are you the same person

It is possible for two people to share similar views and erudition.

 

[portslade seagull]

Well according to the remainers none of us will have any money .The third world war will start. It will not be worth owning your own house as prices will slump. Everybody can come in criminals especially welcome knowing they will not be deported as the EU will not allow it. We will all be this mystical £4300 a year worse off but with nothing to back it up. My god thankful I'm voting out as that lot seem very depressed

 

[portslade seagull]

It is possible for two people to share similar views and erudition.

Must be twins then

 

[pastafarian]

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

one is a passport one is a separate ID card

you have just confirmed as a "good point very well made" that criminal records are held on passports,which is not true.......if they are no different as you claim are criminal records held on ID cards as well? or not if you want facts

 

[Bladders]

It is possible for two people to share similar views and erudition.

It is, though one comes across as game but a bit deluded

The other an arse licking sycophant

Which one do you think you are?

 

[Hamilton]

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

So let's say I was to agree with you. Even arguing on your side I would be on tenuous ground.

I would be arguing that the EU legislation exists but the technology and cooperation does not yet exist. So therefore we should walk away from the very technology and cooperation that can improve the system. That is short term thinking. And that is me arguing on your side.

This is just one issue in the debate on immigration. Perhaps you can address all the others points - the need to access wide ranging skills for example.

Please let's not reduce this down to a single issue debate. Let's look at a balanced argument. This is why raising stories about individual criminal cases is very unhelpful.

I'm interested in the reasoned arguments that Leavers have and I have always stated that the EU needs reform.


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

 

[Hamilton]

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

I could t agree more. The housing market needs readjusting. I don't believe crashing the economy is the right way to do that though. Perhaps an increase in the housing stock - something UK government has committed to, but not delivered on. Let's hold our UK MPs to account on that.


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

 

[Pretty Plnk Fairy]

The Desmonds in the EU wont allow me to put pips in my blackbery jam for health and safety

Ive got 36 jars at £2.50 a pop going to waist as artisan market needs Eu approval

Theyll be stopping me selling them in glass jars next in case one breaks

Regards

DR

 

[Westdene Seagull]

So let's say I was to agree with you. Even arguing on your side I would be on tenuous ground.

I would be arguing that the EU legislation exists but the technology and cooperation does not yet exist. So therefore we should walk away from the very technology and cooperation that can improve the system. That is short term thinking. And that is me arguing on your side.

This is just one issue in the debate on immigration. Perhaps you can address all the others points - the need to access wide ranging skills for example.

Please let's not reduce this down to a single issue debate. Let's look at a balanced argument. This is why raising stories about individual criminal cases is very unhelpful.

I'm interested in the reasoned arguments that Leavers have and I have always stated that the EU needs reform.


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

I'm not aware anyone in the thread has reduced the debate to a single issue ?

From both sides ( either for or against each point ) it's about :

> Being able to decide ourselves which laws to enact
> TTIP
> Jobs
> The economy
> The fact the EU is bloated
> Democracy
> Accountability
> The freedom to trade with those outside the EU on our terms
> Immigration
> Preventing a great rush to a federal superstate
> The fact that we agreed to joining a trading block and that the EU has morphed into something entirely different. It would be the same as me joining a football supporters club, paying my fees and the club being turned into a golf supporters club.
> A European Army .... or not

 

[JC Footy Genius]

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.

No one has claimed we are in the Schengen zone. Yes as I said previously we can check passports of EU nationals then we have to wave the vast majority of them through. You are completely wrong we cannot deny an EU citizen entry just because they have a criminal record.

Measures taken on grounds of public policy or public security shall comply with the principle of proportionality and shall be based exclusively on the personal conduct of the individual concerned. Previous criminal convictions shall not in themselves constitute grounds for taking such measures.
The personal conduct of the individual concerned must represent a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society. Justifications that are isolated from the particulars of the case or that rely on considerations of general prevention shall not be accepted.

See the figures on how many EU citizens are denied entry compared to non EU citizens relative to the number allowed in. In addition some EU countries do not have or share the relevant data. Yet another example of the EU only being as strong as the weakest link. See numerous cases of EU citizens entering the UK with serious criminal convictions and committing further crimes.

Studies have not shown time and time again that mass immigration to this country produces a net benefit there are a mix of studies showing varying projections some showing a large net cost to the UK. Once again no one is saying immigration is a bad thing but they are saying mass immigration causes numerous problems and that it is dangerous and unsustainable. Controlled immigration would still give us the freedom to hire nurses or other types of skilled workers if needed but would restrict the mass free for all we have now.

The argument only goes 'we should stop immigration' in your head. The list of straw man deliberate misinterpretations continues! It is not in the best interests of the UK to flood our Labour market with foreign workers while having 1.6 million of our fellow citizens unemployed. It is not in our interests for this influx to displace/undercut UK workers driving down some of their wages. It is also not good for accessing local services, schools, housing and the NHS in many areas. It is also not good for social cohesion in some places. It is also not good as it is impossible to plan for future needs re population size in the short and long term. It is also a disincentive for our government to adequately fund skills programs to address shortfalls as jobs are filled by foreign workers. It is also not good for anyone who becomes a victim of crime because an EU citizen with a history of criminality cannot be automatically denied entry to this country. Yes we want something we haven't got now .. controlled EU immigration for all of the above reasons and some that you mention.

Next time just post a link to 'how the EU works' it will save you some unnecessary typing. At least we agree about something we cannot reform the EU to our liking. We are a 2nd tier member up against an inbuilt ever closer union 1st tier Eurozone majority. An ongoing failing rearguard action comprising of opt outs and rebates will not change the EU's direction of travel it never has and never will.

Not a Polar debate yet you often dress it up as a black and white issue using numerous straw man arguments. Speaking of all good/bad, of course the UK can prosper outside the EU just like the vast majority of countries around the world do. Even the Chancellors-treasury mickey mouse forecast said we would. You should have a bit more faith in your country and of course we will continue to work with our European partners but we will regain self governance and controls in numerous areas.

The very things you correctly identify as admirable traits of this country are threatened by continued EU membership. Do you really think the public's major concerns on immigration will dissipate as mass immigration continues at unprecedented rates. As we look across Europe with the rise of extremist parties and numerous ongoing crisis, tolerance and fairness aren't two words that readily spring to mind. Time to leave.

 

[Triggaaar]

Osborne has said house prices will fall if we leave the EU.

That's great news, vote out!

 

[Soulman]

Osborne has said house prices will fall if we leave the EU.

That's great news, vote out!

Demanding the UK builds hundreds of thousands of new homes


A new European Union (EU) report demanding the UK builds hundreds of thousands of new homes has 'come to light'.


“Housing demand continues to outstrip supply and this is reflected in high and rising house prices,” asserts the [unelected] Commission’s report. Adding: “New supply is currently at around 150,000 units per year. According to the UK government’s official projections for medium-term demand … an average of 220,000 households would be formed per year between 2012 and 2021. “Population increases may… add to upward pressure on demand,” it warned, before urging the UK to “take further steps to boost housing supply.” Downing Street immediately attempted to play down figures that showed EU workers in the UK are at a record 2.1 million. [Then there's the undocumented and the illegal migrants in big numbers too]


Mr. Grayling argued that only EU migrants with secure jobs should be allowed into the UK: “What we have is the EU telling us we are not building enough houses and yet telling us also that we have to accept unlimited migration from elsewhere in the European Union.

www.breitbart.com/london/2016/05/21/eu-demands-uk-build-150000-homes-year-house-eu-migrants/



If the unelected EU commission is so concerned it can pay for it with French and German money.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Osborne has said house prices will fall if we leave the EU.

That's great news, vote out!

I think this may backfire on Osborne.

Wavering youngsters, probably more likely to vote 'Remain' who currently can't get on the housing ladder suddenly see their chance of being able to afford a property increase.

 

[Deleted member 22389]

I think this may backfire on Osborne.

Wavering youngsters, probably more likely to vote 'Remain' who currently can't get on the housing ladder suddenly see their chance of being able to afford a property increase.

It needs to happen anyway, it is sickening the cost of property in this country. I would love to see young people being able to get on that housing ladder, I'm in my early 40s now, and was probably in that last generation who managed to get a house. I would take falling house prices for coming out of the EU, it doesn't bother me in the slightest, it has got too greedy anyway.

 

[yxee]

Osborne is talking nonsense again, he put all his chips in one basket on this one.

 

[Triggaaar]

It needs to happen anyway, it is sickening the cost of property in this country.

Whatever do you mean? This nice 3 bed terrace could be yours for just £1million.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-58144154.html

I would love to see young people being able to get on that housing ladder, I'm in my early 40s now, and was probably in that last generation who managed to get a house. I would take falling house prices for coming out of the EU, it doesn't bother me in the slightest, it has got too greedy anyway.

Exactly. I'd be happy if prices halved, we'd still have our home, but our kids would at least have a chance of buying somewhere in the future.

So thanks George, out it is.

 

[melias shoes]

That's because you live with your mum.

Seriously, they will be affected.


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

Seriously you are talking out your arse. House prices may fall but it will have nothing to do with leaving the EU. Nothing.

 

[GT49er]

Whatever do you mean? This nice 3 bed terrace could be yours for just £1million.

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-58144154.html


Exactly. I'd be happy if prices halved, we'd still have our home, but our kids would at least have a chance of buying somewhere in the future.

So thanks George, out it is.

100% this. I might even be able to help mine with something towards the deposit if that happened. I'm looking to downsize soon, so falling prices wouldn't bother me at all. So, George you prat, that bit of scaremongering has done f--- all to help your case.

Polls are baffling at the moment: huge derision at call-me-Dave's scaremongering that Brexit could result in future wars in Europe, a vast majority believing that his 'reforms' that he negotiated aren't even on a par with smoke and mirrors, and another majority believing that remaining will not help in any way to reduce immigration. Yet still, roughly, on average - and I'm not going to argue numbers with any twit from either side here - a small majority - in spite of all those negatives - still want to vote, sheep-like, to remain.

 

[GT49er]

Seriously you are talking out your arse? House prices may fall but it will have nothing to do with leaving the EU. Nothing.

Well, yes, he usually does. Hadn't you realised that yet?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Just noticed that the poll stats are in Palarse colours. It must be a plot, but who is behind it?