Off Topic The Politics Thread
- Thread starter Stroller
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Very good, durbar!
A PROMINENT Labour MP and key ally of Jeremy Corbyn shared a social media message telling victims of sickening sex abuse to shut up for “the good of diversity.”
Naz Shah retweeted and liked a post on Twitter by an account parodying left-wing writer Owen Jones which said: “Those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths. For the good of diversity.”
Naz Shah retweeted and liked a post on Twitter by an account parodying left-wing writer Owen Jones which said: “Those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths. For the good of diversity.”
If it was irony, why did she withdraw it so fast? This is the woman that was suspended from the Labour Party for anti semitism, and then had Champion sacked for pointing out that it was Pakistani men that were preying on young white girls.
May clears the way for Norway deal with the no 'direct' role for ECJ announcement. Norway etc have the EFTA court overseeing their membership of the single market. The EFTA court ensures that EU/ECJ rules and regulations are adopted, and can overrule the highest national court.
Well, it's not 'direct' is it?
Meanwhile, when the Home Office, May had a paper drawn up by M15 and M16 on the security implications of Brexit. It concluded that Brexit would make the UK less secure from 'terrorism, criminality and illegal migration'. She declined to publish the report.
Well, it's not 'direct' is it?
Meanwhile, when the Home Office, May had a paper drawn up by M15 and M16 on the security implications of Brexit. It concluded that Brexit would make the UK less secure from 'terrorism, criminality and illegal migration'. She declined to publish the report.
We're a long way from a Norway option - Norway has compulsory immigration of EU citizens, is compulsorily directly subject to a large number of EU laws and is a member of Schengen. None of those would be acceptable to the UK electorate.
What's currently being proposed for the UK is an arbitration to replace the ECJ (which was described by REMAINER Dominic Grieve as inherently predatory) where the UK and the EU each appoint an arbitrator and agree on the appointment of a third. Can't fault it.
Even I don't claim to talk for anyone but myself Goldie.........your faith in the competence and honesty of the people you may or may not have voted for is quite touching.
Norway here we come! Or possibly Switzerland.
Are you off for a walking holiday!?
Your post implies that you think the UK electorate will be satisfied to maintain the unalienable legal right of the 700 million-odd EU citizens to come and live in the UK, Stan. Personally, I think you're deluding yourself. Apart from anything else, the Tory Government could make themselves unelectable for years to come by agreeing to this - and we all know a Tory's skill for self-survival.
Switzerland is a difficult comparison because of the plethora of bilateral treaties that underpin current arrangements. At some point the EU will have to get off their high horse and think about a tailored solution for the UK to get the cash it needs badly and smooth trade that is vital to some of the EU member states including Germany.
We already have access to the Single Market - so Monsieur Barnier, take it from there...
Last edited:
Err, the population of the EU, including 65 million British, is 510 million. And they don't have the right to come and live here, they have the right to come and work here, if they don't find work we can kick them out - it's just that we have never used the powers we have under Maastricht. Here is what it says:
- Freedom of movement for workers shall be secured within the Community.
- Such freedom of movement shall entail the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the Member States as regards employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment.
- It shall entail the right, subject to limitations justified on grounds of public policy, public security or public health:
(a) to accept offers of employment actually made;
(b) to move freely within the territory of Member States for this purpose;
(c) to stay in a Member State for the purpose of employment in accordance with the provisions governing the employment of nationals of that State laid down by law, regulation or administrative action;
(d) to remain in the territory of a Member State after having been employed in that State, subject to conditions which shall be embodied in implementing regulations to be drawn up by the Commission. - The provisions of this article shall not apply to employment in the public service.
Perhaps the British electorate (or, let's be honest, some of them) simply don't understand the rules and how much their own governments inaction has led to their discomfort with the number of foreign languages they hear.
Sorry, bad source on the number (Google how many people in the EU and you'll see the figure I quoted). I don't think even the most hardened Brexit voter wanted no immigration from the EU. Most I've heard wanted those EU citizens we need, probably mostly skilled, perhaps unskilled on a temporary basis for seasonal work. Perhaps on that basis the Swiss model might work. I have to confess, I'm no expert on Switzerland, so did a bit of research. As I said in my earlier post, it relies on a huge number of bilateral treaties because Switzerland is not a member of the EEA. Three reasons why Switzerland might not be suitable for the UK (lifted from an article) are:
1. As the model has evolved organically over time, it is not one single agreement but a collection of complicated interconnected agreements. The EU authorities reportedly do not like this and so would be unlikely to replicate it .
2. The model does not allow Swiss companies and financial institutions unrestricted access to the European market in services. For this reason, many Swiss firms establish offices and subsidiaries in EU member states to bypass these rules. As an economy that relies on services exports for a large proportion of its income, the UK should aim to have better access to the EU services market than is currently enjoyed by the Swiss.
3. Immigration. The EU said no more than 8000 immigrants could be expected into Switzerland - instead, 84000 came in.
Nevertheless on immigration, the "priority to nationals" might be a way forward in the UK. It is one more option.
Breatheless excitement as Amber Rudd prepares to rule that foreign students should not be included in the immigration figures. Taking these 140,000 pa out will bring the government quite close to hitting its 'target with no deadline' of below 100,000, without actually doing anything other than an accounting change! ****ing genius! It also means that we don't have to worry about freedom of movement etc, because suddenly we don't have too many immigrants!
Already another massive government success with the latest migration figures showing a fall of 81,000 in net migration, 51,000 of which is accounted for by EU citizens, in the year to March, getting net migration down to 246,000. Again, without actually doing anything at all! All you have to do is make your country a less attractive place to live and work and the ****ers stop coming! Brexiters rejoice!
Already another massive government success with the latest migration figures showing a fall of 81,000 in net migration, 51,000 of which is accounted for by EU citizens, in the year to March, getting net migration down to 246,000. Again, without actually doing anything at all! All you have to do is make your country a less attractive place to live and work and the ****ers stop coming! Brexiters rejoice!
Last edited:
May be Brits in high immigration areas will be able to get a doctor's appointment before Christmas, or their children get into the local primary school
Nobody is being forced out, but it's a net change, including all those who return home, or at least leave the UK. There has been a drop in the numbers coming, but a big increase (to 46,000) of EU nationals leaving, especially to Eastern Europe, where governments are lobbying their citizens to return home.
So, apparently 97% of people on student visas leave the country when their visa expires. So they probably shouldn't be included in the overall figures, which would take the net inward migration down from 246,000 to 107,000, and makes a mockery of the allegedly neutral Migration Watch's claim that half a million arrive annually and we need to build a city the size of Birmingham every two years. May has spent years claiming that there are 100,000 overstayers on student visas, when today both the ONS and the Home Office say it's more like 5000.
Eurozone economy now growing at twice the rate of the UK so doubtless trend will continue, delighting everyone until the consequences become clear.
Last edited:
You can throw around as many statistics as you like Stan. Net immigration is still huge and unsustainable. The jet-setting, cosmopolitan elite has to grasp that.