You seem to have trouble understanding simple sentences. The government of the day will have all the information at the time and will be able to judge. They will participate and contribute as and when they deem fit, very simple. One thing is certain any UK negotiator found with defeatist ideas will be left making the tea.
The government will know at the time, but SH doesn't even have an opinion. Blind faith and fingers crossed as I said before.
The officials the government chose to negotiate will thankfully be more able than me and certainly much more able than you.
With respect, SH, this seems a bit confused an argument as in when to trust those in power to make decisions in our best interest. Aren't government officials the ones you don't trust to make a decision on whether we leave Europe or not?
In terms of the border controls between here and France or the UK, in over 20 years of living on the island, I've only been stopped once - and that was here. and we're not members of the EU - what does that say about the border controls in all 3 jurisdictions?
We were once stopped in the late 90's by UK police /customs at Dover whilst moving to France in a car stuffed to the top. After they ordered us to pull into their special bay they informed us they were going to search the vehicle. We immediately said something like 'you must be joking you'll never get everything back in' they relented and just let us drive on. They either realised I was a 'nice guy' or it was time for their tea break!!
No confusion on my part. I trusted the MP's to arrive at the correct decision when they trusted the British people to make the decision for them. Even Her Majesty's official opposition has come to its senses today by announcing it recognises the validity of the referendum and will not oppose the decision of the British people. Labour realised it would have lost the trust of even larger numbers of its traditional supporters in the North. The much hoped for opposition against evoking article 50 will be limited to the opportunistic SNP and a few oddballs.
Given how poorly informed, or more accurately 'misinformed', the public were by the politicians, the vote should never have been the responsibility of the public. I accept there wasn't a huge outcry before the vote from us on here. I think it's a bit like when your child says they're going to stamp their feet until they get their way - knock yourself, you think, stamp away! But if you then notice their stamping has precipitated a crack in the wall of your house and it may fall down as a result, you can get ratty! Whilst I agree with the left of the Labour vote (actually it's the view of the majority of the country) to renationalise things like the railways and the utilities, and this would not be allowed under current EU rules, I am disappointed with this latest development.
I'm sure that someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that EU rules actually prohibit nationalisation. As far as I was aware, the rules merely require that contracts for the services in question be opened up to competition, and state-owned entities can still tender . The only problem those entities in the UK face in that scenario is a government hostile to the idea of nationalised industries, which has led to some questionable decision-making in the selection of winning tenders.
I think that you will find that this is one of those Euro myths spread around by the leave campaign to attract Labour voters Andy. There are many forms of nationalization which are not touched by EU. Law - such as taking utilities into municipal control, as is often done in Germany. EU. law wouldn't prohibit the sort of nationalization proposed by Jeremy Corbyn. EU. Law respects the right of member states to nationalize industries - Art. 345 TFEU ''The treaties shall in no way prejudice the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership''.
The country voted for Brexit, there will be Brexit which means the UK being a non member of the single market and the customs union. This will enable the UK to set up individual trade deals with non EU countries. The government seem to have the inconvenience re: evoking article 50, well sorted with either a victory in the Supreme Court or a three line bill which would be bomb-proof against amendments. Merkel has commented today that the rules on free movement of people should be looked at, perhaps the German industrialists are starting to assert some pressure? It looks fairly certain the Tories will govern until at least 2020, probably until 2025. If this is the case then ideas of any re-nationalization would be well off the agenda in the UK.
Sorrowfully, yes, if you're correct. Of course there have been surprises in recent history of pollsters not judging the popular vote very well...
What Merkel said was that people should be able to come looking for jobs, but not think that they can work for a short time and then claim lifelong benefits in another EU. country. This is perfectly reasonable and falls far short of questioning freedom of movement - don't try to twist her words to suit your own agenda.
C'mon own up, which one of you remoaners is responsible for the 'suspicious package' at the Daily Mail, eh?
When boarding the Eurostar you have 2 sets of passport controls, baggage control (like in an airport) passports are scanned and the British have the right to refuse entry to any EU. citizen whose passport number appears on a 'wanted' list or who has been guilty of any of a certain number of specified crimes. Britain has the power to deport in certain cases. What more do you want ? Britain does already control its borders. What it cannot do is to deny a legal EU. citizen entry, at the point of entry. What more do you want ? Do you want to see all law abiding German, French, Dutch or Belgian tourists or language students having to have a visa before coming over - what do you envisage happening to London's tourist trade in this case ? And do you want to have to obtain a visa before travelling to France ? Don't forget also that many tourists from non EU. countries (eg. Canada, the USA etc.) only come to Britain because they can do so on an EU visa.
I had my car thoroughly searched when boarding Eurostar last month... they even swabbed me and the handles etc. When travelling by car ferry from Ouistreham I have never seen such levels of security... for the first time.... armed police and soldiers all car boots opened... .all lorries fully searched...
The UK would like to control the numbers of EU citizens who wish to relocate to the UK. We would like to pick and choose on the basis of need, so highly skilled personnel would be welcome. Having to take all comers prevents the UK taking better skilled options from non EU countries. We will simply be able to choose worldwide scientists instead of Romanian gypsies. I think foreign students should not be included in the numbers as long as they leave or apply to reside under normal rules. I remember it has been mentioned previously that tourists are obviously unaffected. I wouldn't worry about the numbers wanting to visit the UK, they will increase due to the lower value of sterling.
How are you going to take back control over borders without tourists being affected, if that is not a stupid question ? Do you think that every person coming through passport control has a sign around his neck saying 'I am a tourist', or 'I am looking for work', and there are roughly 20 of the former to every one of the latter. You can start controls after entry, but that is a different thing - you can start issuing residence permits (or not) to people who try to get jobs, or who try to get a formal residence, or open a bank account - but then Britain has such an ineffective way of registering people (this is why numbers are just rough estimates in Britain's case) that you are simply inviting an increase in illegal work in Britain. There are already over a million people in Britain who have outstayed their visas (nobody knows where they are) are you trying to add to that number ?
