Re: Brexit
 

Make no mistake I have the balls but I prefer to stick to the forum rules.

Re: Brexit
 

Then don't try and play the clever man when you have no intention of following it up.

Hugs and kisses x

Re: Brexit
 

You can’t expect Old Boy to present a reasoned argument. He has a set of beliefs and must be right at all costs.

It’s easily verifiable listening to the broad range of leave arguments before and after the referendum, of varying quality, some ranged from ending freedom of movement and maintaining a close relationship with the EU to all out WTO exit and wait for the EU to come back on their knees with a better deal.

One cannot deny that to be true any more than deny the earth to be round.

Re: Brexit
 

That old magic money tree has suddenly appeared again it seems.

Re: Brexit
 

£1.6bn over seven years. You could probably get more out of a rounding error on Chris Grayling’s calculator.

Re: Brexit
 

The headline is OTT but the diagram does show why what people were expecting when they voted leave is not as black & white as some would have it.

https://www.cableforum.uk/images/local/2019/03/1.jpg

Re: Brexit
 

Another one of Margaret Thatcher's legacies dead and buried; the reputation of the Conservatives for fiscal responsibility.

Re: Brexit
 

Mmm, contrast that to over £5billion of EU funding every year.

Re: Brexit
 

That’s amazing. :)

Re: Brexit
 

It certainly is, oh . . I just noticed it's according to May & Corbin


Maybe not so amazing after all then . . unless you hang on their every word :p:

Re: Brexit
 

So whose word do you hang on ? Garage, Bozza or the Hon. Member for the 19th century?

Re: Brexit
 

They do claim it’s the will of the people, do they not?

Re: Brexit
 

Get with the program, EU doesn’t fund shit in this country, it’s our money, they’re giving back to us !!!

---------- Post added at 21:10 ---------- Previous post was at 20:57 ----------

What an absolute load of rubbish - there is no way on Earth of accurately measuring how and why 17.4 Million people voted to leave. I do not care what that image says, it's utter bollocks.

It is irrelevant anyway - we had a referendum, where the largest Democratic mandate in history took place regardless how many times you erroneously keep bringing up pointless figures, trying to include people ineligible to vote or could not be arsed to, it utterly pointless because it does not matter after the result has been made, the country voted to leave, there will not be another referendum, no matter how many times the democracy abusers spit their dummy out.

Re: Brexit
 

'they' who?

all I see is an image on a forum, no hint of where it's from, no link back to its origin (one wonders why that is), it could be anything . . or nothing ;)

1.37/10 must try harder

Re: Brexit
 

They as in Jeremy Corbyn and Theresa May. Do keep up.

Re: Brexit
 

Love the way the graph includes foreign residents, UK nationals who have made long term decisions not to play an active role in national life and children who have never voted in any general election. Talk about stacking the deck.

Re: Brexit
 

Yes, I can see what the image says, I just wondered if they know their names are being used on an unsubstantiated image of dubious origin :D

Re: Brexit
 

They regularly describe Brexit as the will of the people, as it’s a generally accepted turn of phrase for the victorious outcome in an election.

Some of those figures are reasonably easy to verify from electoral rolls, census data, etc.

Re: Brexit
 

Here's a hyperthetical question.

The anti Brixit MPS force another referemdum and there are 3 option on the ballot paper and the results are as follow

35% - Remain in the UK.

33% - Leave with no deal

32% - Leave with Mays deal

Would the Remainers say they've won?

Re: Brexit
 

Quite possibly they are, but as Chris says above, totally irrelevant to the referendum vote result and just mischief making

You never did say where the image came from either . . go on, tell . . we won't laugh, honest ;)

Re: Brexit
 

OB, you need to calm down. It really is simple. Let me try and explain:

some people voted Leave voted as you did i.e. to leave a political arrangement they have a ideological hatred of. Fine no problem so far.

some people voted Leave having researched the pros and con and concluded they were better off out. Again no problem. No quite the same but again no problem.

some people voted Leave as a protest and actually did not wish to Leave only to make a point.

some people voted Leave because they were persuaded by the Leave campaign that they would be better off and this was a win-win situation for them.

some people voted Leave because they do not like foreign people coming here and working in the UK

some people voted Leave because they had listened to the media they subscribe to and believed the lies told to them over decades of misinformation

some people voted Leave because they believe the promises of the post-brexit low regulation, low tax, free market economy sold to them by the Tories (they are wrong btw)

some people voted Leave assuming that they would not be worse off financially and would not face any hardships

some people voted Leave happy to see an economic downturn and job losses as a price worth paying. Worth noting that these people are, almost without exception, the people that will not be impacted by said consequences.

Are you seeing a pattern here? It is a pattern of people voting Leave for many different reasons .. reasons that include valid ones, xenophobic ones, stupid ones, and deceitful ones.

Welcome to the Pleasuredome! Now pass me that Mallet of Loving Correction :)

Re: Brexit
 

jfman didn't post that graphic, Angua did.

Re: Brexit
 

I think in that scenario more work would need to be done. We’re in this mess because the electorate were presented a binary choice.

The issue of leaving the EU is far too complex to be put into a binary or choice of three. In my opinion how to leave and what to prioritise merits a vote or multiple votes.

What should we prioritise? Free movement? A trade deal with the EU? Other trade deals unknown? Reducing our net contribution to the EU? Fish?

If one of those things is far more important than the rest the Theresa May deal isn’t awful. (Note I did say “if”).

Re: Brexit
 

Richard, you have found the Elephant in the room! The amount a city might get is far less that they have lost in the years of Tory austerity.

If any poor Labour MP smuck falls for this con trick, they would be a laughing stock.

---------- Post added at 22:24 ---------- Previous post was at 22:14 ----------

Wrong again. The 1975 Referendum on the European Community (Common Market) had a bigger mandate:

17,378,581 voted yes out of an electorate of 40,086,677. This equates to approx 43% of the electorate versus. 37% for the 2016 referendum

Re: Brexit
 

Nope

Re: Brexit
 

And 17.4 Million beat that Yes count by a small margin.

So - Yes it is biggest mandate issued by a Democratic process!!!

Couple of issues which totally negates your point above, totally:-

• Six Million more people were eligible to vote in 2016 than in 1975.
  
• The EU in 2016, as it is known as, vastly different to what it was 41 years earlier. People were not voting for the same things because they were not the same!!!
  
• 37% is an erroneous figure.
  
• 52% beats 48%
  
  Approx, 13 Million people who were eligible to vote in 2016 EU Referendum, but did not because they did not care either way or just could not be arsed to, completely blows the crap out of that 37% figure rubbish.

The UK did not get a choice on joining what the EU came to exist as today, we can thank John Major for that, for signing the Maastricht Treaty and basically giving the EU more powers over their laws than our British laws.

As with the EU gaining more powers since then, came the total corruption from within the EU.

The British people made the correct choice to leave such a corrupted establishment but they had to wait nearly 24 years to get a chance to say no, we do not want to be in this corrupted club, which is what it is!

---------- Post added at 02:35 ---------- Previous post was at 02:06 ----------

Only you have not corrected anything... Just insulted in a pathetic, patronising way. Talking of mallets - Do I need to start swinging my ban mallet/hammer ???

Now, where were we...

You have not asked all 17.4 Million people why they voted to leave, so your reasoning behind why they did, as displayed in the quote above, is Remainer driven illogical and insulting nonsense.

Perhaps I can vouch why I voted to leave the EU and still would (And I don't doubt for one second, other Brexiteers are with me on this), because I do actually want to leave the EU!

I was not misguided, I did not follow any misinformation.

I do have a pair of eyes and I can see for myself just how corrupt the EU is.

It's not xenophobic, it wasn't stupid, it was not ideological hatred, although I do actually legitimately hate the EU, it's not ideologically driven hate, I just cannot stand being in a corrupted con job club, which is exactly what the EU is.

We pay vast sums, in which they take a cut and then pass back to us, they are not funding us, when it's our money they're passing about and I am sick of these funding claims being made by some of you Remainers. The EU does not fund shit in the UK, we are a NET Contributor. We hand the cash to them, they hand some of it back and tell us what to spend it on.

---------- Post added at 02:55 ---------- Previous post was at 02:35 ----------

Missed this earlier - Absolute rubbish, none of those require to be in a union to gain such benefit.

Cheap holidays, don't need them, I get them going to other places in the world, at a reasonable discount - clue, the world is a much bigger place than any other country in the EU. :rolleyes:

Re: Brexit
 

Less fortunate people than you are grateful for cheap holidays in Spain and to be able to work and live on the Continent.

Re: Brexit
 

Oddly enough, a lot of Leave voters were ex pats living in Spain. Not really going to make a huge difference to the numbers, but I suspect they were expecting things to carry on much as they are after leaving the EU.

Re: Brexit
 

And of course, you are not at all opinionated and equally, you are always right.

Except that leave means leave. Nothing you can say will change that although no doubt you and others on here will continue to argue that black is white.

Re: Brexit
 

Yes we all know leave means leave.... but don't think its going to limit the right for one to voice a opinion that might be disagreeable to some on here because it won't as l myself accepted the result but that does not mean l or anybody else will keep quiet on a good many issues involving Brexit because we won't and if some don't like it well that is tough luck for them.

Re: Brexit
 

“Leave means leave” is one of the most pointless and useless contributions Theresa May brought into the discussion.

It once again ignores the broad range of outcomes that all satisfy the definition of leave. All the way from Brexit in name only to crash out on WTO terms.

You have your vision of what you want leave to look like. However in conveying it to the forum it’s impossible to claim it represents the opinion of 17.4 million people. Which is exactly what you claimed it did - then denied it!

Re: Brexit
 

:clap:

Re: Brexit
 

I think you successfully persuaded Old Boy to change his mind. ;)

Re: Brexit
 

You are still wrong I am afraid. The definition of a democratic mandate is not the absolute number that voted but rather the percentage of the available electorate that voted for the motion. The UK has a larger population than in 1975 so the electorate is larger in numeric terms.

By your simplistic definition, the USA is "more" democratic than us because more people voted a particular way in the election.

Your approach to this issue, like others, mirrors the Leave campaign and all that led up to it. Take a fact and re-spin it into an alternative "fact" and then shout it from the rooftops, endlessly, as the "truth" until enough people start thinking it really is the truth.

Again, incorrect. In 1975, we were told about the increased political union:

UK Voters knew the 1975 Referendum was about both an ‘economic & political union’ with the rest of Europe

On what grounds?

Re: Brexit
 

Mick, you really don't need to be so condescending or patronizing. I'm quite aware how big the world is, i travel a lot of it for work. I'm merely listing some of the things the EU has given, and whilst you're correct that you don't need to be in a union to achieve them, being in a union make it a damn site easier to achieve.

Re: Brexit
 

You don't like the term 'leave means leave' because it is so straight forward, simple and easy to comprehend.

We are not going to be cowed by remainers who deliberately try to complicate matters, which I have to say they have done with great success. 'Leave means leave' effectively leads to the disintegration of these remainer arguments.

The Norway solution does not mean leave. The EFTA solution does not mean leave. Another referendum would at the very minimum delay leave, as would a General Election. Corbyn's solution which would require us to remain in the Customs Union does not mean leave.

We were clearly told that if we left the EU, we would be able to forge our own trade deals. Only a clean break would achieve this.

In the end it boils down to a clean break with trade deals being negotiated with other countries including the EU or a withdrawal agreement which acts as a bridge between where we are now and where we want to be (that is, with trade deals including the EU). Those are the only real leave solutions. All the others you talk about are half-baked neither in nor out arrangements or barefaced cheek attempts to overturn the democratic result.

We see right through it and in the end, it won't work. We are going to leave, end of.

Re: Brexit
 

Not in the way you believe.... that I'm willing to bet.

Re: Brexit
 

Don't tempt providence! He could impose sanctions because you are way off topic. This debate is about Brexit. You are advocating that we stay in. That's not Brexit. :D

---------- Post added at 10:04 ---------- Previous post was at 10:01 ----------

We'll see about that! A deal which gives us a legal means of getting out of the backstop will ultimately be agreed by the EU and finally, finally, Parliament will vote it through, because the majority in Parliament does not want a 'no-deal' Brexit. However, those are the only two options, so don't put any money on that bet.

Re: Brexit
 

Woo, completed my export training Yesterday as I sometimes need to ship things back to our regional warehouse elsewhere in the EU. Previously, I needed to complete the shipping information for our courier which consisted of;

• Delivery address
• Size of package
• Hazardous/Non-hazardous goods declaration

Plus I needed to notify our trade compliance team for Intrastat declaration though the UK rarely goes over the £250,000 limit.

I now have a 'no deal' shipping checklist;

❑Title: Commercial/Customs Invoice
❑Language required by importing country
❑Seller/Shipper’s name, address, ship-from country
❑Purchaser/Importer of Record name & address
❑Intermediate consignees (ideally forwarder location)
❑Ultimate consignee & Delivery address
❑Clearing agent’s name & phone #
❑Contact name & phone #
❑Date of invoice
❑Invoice number
❑PO or reference number
For each item on the invoice:
❑Unit Quantity, Value & Currency
❑Part Number & Description of items
❑HS code of items
❑Weight of items (gross &/or net may be required)
❑Country of origin (manufacturing country)
❑Applicable preferential origin status of goods
❑Use of trademark/licensing requirements
❑INCO term + place + port + address
❑Payment term (i.e. 30 days net or LC)
❑Freight cost
❑Subtotal & currency
❑Total cost including freight
❑Any preferential origin item status & shipment declaration requirements
❑Special marks (i.e. edible, temporary/permanent import, import license number, unique identifier/serial #)
❑Applicable export controls numbers/requirements
❑Mode of transport: air/sea/road (optional)
❑Port of entry into importing country (optional)
❑Bank details of exporter (optional)
❑Packing details (dimensions, capacity, weight, type of packaging) or refer to separate packing list
❑Signed with name, title and position of signatory

Marvelous!

-------------------
Just to add as I have been looking through the list, there are dual use technologies too for extra fun!

Re: Brexit
 

But the Union is totally corrupt, why do we have to stay or be in such a corrupted power hungry union?

You even got France’s President Macron now insisting the EU needs to change, not to fall in the Brexit trap, i.e avoid the high Eurosceptism.

The EU does not want Brexit to succeed, for they don’t want other countries dropping out.

Re: Brexit
 

I don't disagree that the EU is not without it's significant faults, but, i also believe that to be the case in any government globally including our own.

In my opinion i believe that we should continue to try and change that from within. however hard and frustrating that may be. In a world whereby globalization rightly or wrongly becomes closer and closer every day to me distancing ourselves from other nations in any degree seems odd

As i said earlier negotiating from a perspective of 66 million as opposed to part of a bloc of 500 million places us at a significant risk of being used and abused.

If/when we do leave the EU I'd love nothing more than to see than you/Old Boy and other people who want to leave being right. that we will survive and prosper. Unfortunately I haven't seen one shred of evidence that supports this yet. I think we'll see those in society already suffering hit further again.

Re: Brexit
 

Which Union is corrupt ? Not saying the EU is lilly white, but sometimes I wonder why we think politicians are so brilliant and trustworthy, and johnny foreigner is much worse. Events have proved otherwise. Remember cash for questions, MPs expenses, outright lies during the referendum. We want to give these people more power ?

Nothing is as simple as good/bad, winners/losers, as much as you'd like it to be.

Re: Brexit
 

No I am not wrong. I stand by what I say. The EU Referendum was the largest Democratic Mandate this country has ever seen. You work in % all you like, the actual physical numbers speak otherwise and they disagree with you.

I am not re-spinning anything, a fact is a fact, the number of voters beat the tally in 1975 for staying in the ECC, so it is the biggest mandate, the ECC, as it was known as in 1975, it certainly was not the EU as it as known as today, it is vastly different, exceedingly more corrupt and power hungry and becoming a heavy dictatorship entity.

Nope again, I am not incorrect. I think we should just agree to disagree.

You look up when the EU as it is known as was formed, you will see 1992, 1993, when the Maastricht Treaty was signed, is when the EU became to be.

From Wikipedia:

I never said I was, I was asking a rhetorical question, you was or seemed to be being quite insulting with your post earlier on describing your illogical reasons why folk voted to leave, however, it was harmless material, quite weak, seen before.

But let me make this abundantly clear. As much as we fundamentally disagree with each other on this issue. You're safe. I don't ban people willy nilly or because I simply don't agree with them, hell, this forum would be a dull place if we all agreed with each other. :erm:

If this was my M.O, you and others would have been long gone by now. In reality, I've banned just two people outright in the last couple of years and only because they were really really abusive to me personally, swearing and using derogatory language. Noone should tolerate this, I don't think you would, in my position. As one of the owners, this forum, this virtual place, partly belongs to me, so I am not going to stand there and take any disrespectful shit from anybody and it would be the only reason, and cross my grounds checklist to ban somebody, so, like I said, you're safe. :)

---------- Post added at 11:42 ---------- Previous post was at 11:09 ----------

The whole process of delivering the Brexit I voted for, I have absolutely no confidence in this current government to deliver it, hell, we got a Prime Minister, former Home Secretary, in direct conflict with the Met Chief over the reduction in Police officers, with the PM saying the increase in knife crime is not linked to reduction of officers and the Met Chief today saying there is a link with the reduction in officers and the increase in deaths from stabbings and knife crime. I think May needs to go. She has made a right mess of everything she's had her hands on or in.

Re: Brexit
 

You see it as simple because for you it’s a matter of ideology, not of reality. Which is fine, appropriately simplistic, but fine.

The fact you conclude with “we are going to leave, end of” shows that your blind belief in ideology has clouded your judgement. There’s a long way to go in the race to March 29th and you’ll almost certainly be disappointed.

Re: Brexit
 

I wouldn't bet money on that if I were you, although that date could potentially slip by a few weeks to permit implementation.

---------- Post added at 12:08 ---------- Previous post was at 12:04 ----------

David Cameron tried that, and look where it got him. Had he won the crumbs he was seeking to achieve, the referendum would never have happened. The EU is totally inflexible, and in your heart, you know that.

Macron is only saying now that something has to change, but that's all thanks to Brexit.

I don't see Brexit as distancing ourselves from other nations. On the contrary, we want to forge new trade deals with the rest of the world, including with the EU.

Re: Brexit
 

Can I just check which of the May deal or No Deal you expect Parliament to approve?

Re: Brexit
 

Again we're in agreement to a degree. (this is starting to get disconcerting) May has made an absolute mess of much of her premiership. But the mess she has made around Brexit is hers to own, it's not due to parliament trying to subvert democracy or remainers trying to force a new referendum it's because of her incompetence.

The question now begs do we want to try and hold, take stock, perhaps delay whilst we attempt to recover from the damage that Mays incompetence has led us too, Or, is being out that important that we're willing to potentially risk the country and peoples future livelihoods.

There will be some of us on this board for whom regardless of the option that we take that may be able to support themselves and ensure they ride out all but the worst case scenarios. In the wider population i have my doubts that people can do the same.

---------- Post added at 12:18 ---------- Previous post was at 12:10 ----------

Thats why i said continue to try regardless of how frustrating it is, we should not simply give in because something gets too hard.

We're distancing ourselves because we're going to limit in certain circumstances the workforce that we need (see earlier posts regarding fruit picking/migration) for just one example.

And it's not just about how we view Brexit and our leaving of the EU it's how the rest of the world views it. With a couple of exceptions it's almost entirely viewed as a bad move on our part. (I'd also wager that the countries who are pro us leaving have ulterior motives and are licking their lips)

Re: Brexit
 

Last nights Inside Out London had an interesting report about Eastern Europeans living rough and how, since the EU said it went against Freedom Of Movement regulations, for over a year Westminster council has been powerless to move them on or send rhem home.

It's the first segment of the programme and lasts about 9 minutes if anybody wants to watch it:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episodes/b0071mkv

Re: Brexit
 

It is part of the EU rules that if someone moves to another country under Freedom of Movement of Workers, and don't have a job in 3 months, they can be sent home - the fact that our Government doesn't do this isn't the fault of the EU.

Re: Brexit
 

A point conveniently ignored by many!

Re: Brexit
 

I think you have lost the plot slightly if you think what had posted is not related to the UK leaving the EU. :p:

BTW, I know you are joking .. ;)

Re: Brexit
 

Perhaps they came here under freedom of movement rather than freedom of movement for workers.

Re: Brexit
 

Can you point out the EU directives or legislation that creates a distinction? If such a distinction exists what rights does one have, that the other doesn’t?

What restrictions (on either group) can a Government choose to implement but ours doesn’t?

Re: Brexit
 

Surely you're not saying that Freedom of Movement grants higher status than Freedom of Movement for workers? Just to make sure you understand please see the below

Originally, the EU gave free movement rights only to people who moved to another member state to seek work there or become self-employed. Once an individual is in employment and satisfies certain conditions, he or she has the same rights as nationals of that country to access benefits such as health care, education, and incapacity benefit. Workers and self-employed EU citizens may also bring their family members, who have access to the same benefits as nationals of the host country.

Free movement rights have been extended to other categories of EU citizens who are not workers or self-employed. However, these citizens have fewer rights because they are not contributing in the same way to the host country’s economy.

Any EU citizen can move to and remain in another EU country for up to three months. EU citizens who are students may remain for the duration of their studies, but must show that they have sufficient financial support for their period of study. Other EU citizens who wish to stay longer than three months must have comprehensive sickness insurance and prove that they have financial resources to support themselves.

Because finding a job from abroad is often difficult, EU citizens who are job seekers can move to another EU country and claim the same out-of-work benefit (but not other benefits) available to nationals of that country while they are looking for employment. This means that the point at which EU job-seekers can access this benefit will depend on each country’s rules for its own citizens. This varies between EU member states.

In some countries job seekers can only claim out-of-work benefits if they have previously worked (e.g., Austria and Belgium); in others a waiting period of several months is imposed (e.g., France and the Netherlands), and in some countries there is immediate entitlement to out-of-work benefits (e.g., the UK, Germany, and Ireland). However, a job seeker must prove that he or she is actively looking for a job and stands a real chance of being given employment.
Why is freedom of movement important in an open society?

The European Union embodies many principles of an open society. The EU’s overarching aim is to “promote peace, its values and the well-being of its peoples.” These values include equality, respect for human rights, democracy, and the rule of law. Member states have recognized that they are interdependent and use the EU to cooperate to achieve a greater, collective good.

Freedom of movement is an important part of this cooperation, encouraging tolerance and understanding among people of different cultures. This can help to break down harmful stereotypes and prejudices. It can also help to build solidarity between people and governments of different countries. This will make EU countries more likely to pull together to solve shared problems, such as the Euro crisis.
Why are some governments calling for freedom of movement rules to be changed?

In April 2013, four EU governments called on the EU to change its rules on free movement to make it harder for EU citizens to claim benefits when moving to another member country. These governments argue that higher standards of living and a generous system of state benefits in their countries have attracted large numbers of EU citizens from the newer EU member countries (in particular, the eight Central and Eastern European countries that joined the EU in 2004).

UK Home Secretary Theresa May has claimed that these citizens are “benefit tourists.” That is, they are not workers or self-employed, and have come merely to access public services and the host state’s benefits system.

These governments also argue that this problem is likely to become significantly worse once restrictions on free movement for Romanian and Bulgarian nationals are lifted in January 2014. However, there is no evidence to back these claims.
What impact will restricted freedom of movement have in the European Union?

The existence of a mobile workforce has allowed workers to relocate to fill job vacancies in different EU countries. The OECD estimates that free movement has lowered the average unemployment rate across Europe by up to six percent.

According to the European Commission, between 2004 and 2009 free movement from newer member countries increased the GDP of the old EU member countries by almost one percent. Restricting free movement rights may slow economic recovery, making austerity last longer and weakening the overall economic power and influence of the EU. This in turn will undermine the EU’s ability to promote open society values in its relations with countries outside Europe.

Research also shows that free movement has not had a negative effect on the employment rates and wages of nationals of the host country. Workers from the newer EU countries generally take lower skilled jobs in sectors such as agriculture, care services, catering, cleaning, and construction. In practice, this puts them in competition for jobs with lower skilled workers from outside the EU, rather than nationals. Restricting free movement could lead to a shortage of workers in certain sectors.

Free movement rights have not only been used by citizens from newer EU member countries. Research shows that free movement is a two-way street. The top five EU countries with nationals living in other EU member states are: Romania (2.3 million), Poland (1.9 million), Italy (1.7 million), Germany (1.5 million), and the UK (1.4 million—with around 800,000 living in Spain alone). Any new restrictions will disadvantage EU citizens from all over Europe.

Re: Brexit
 

Don't put words in my mouth I merely pointed out a difference which exists.

Re: Brexit
 

Which has no relevance at all to the conversation.

Re: Brexit
 

Where, in legislation, does it exist? What rights do one group have, but not the other?

Re: Brexit
 

Westminster council are saying that, up until just over a year ago, they, the police and immigration officials could move them on or send them home. They say that since this EU ruling all that they can do is ask them to go home. This rarely achieves the desired result.

The relevant section of the programme explains this, i'm sure that if what you are saying was doable that they'd use this to achieve their aims.

---------- Post added at 14:25 ---------- Previous post was at 14:24 ----------

That's out of date eg it talks about 2014 as a future point in time.

Scrapping freedom of movement need not affect anyone wanting to come here to do hard to fill vacancies or to work in skill shortage areas. It's their right to come here that is so objectionable.

Re: Brexit
 

Good, I was a bit worried when I read your first paragraph!:)

Re: Brexit
 

I love a good joke, not enough humour on here ! Brexit is of course the biggest joke ;)

Re: Brexit
 

Which EU ruling?

Watching the programme, it was the English High Court that decided it was against the EU Freedom of Movement rules, not the EU.

The Danish still remove foreign rough sleepers, and they were willing to share their legislation with London (as shown in the programme).

Re: Brexit
 

I have a horrible feeling that the peace being part of the EU has brought over the last 40 years is part of the problem.

People seem to be itching for a fight, becoming increasingly angry over the slightest thing. Racism is growing, whilst methods of reducing it are missing the point. Silencing critique of ideas with spurious labels, rather than facing them and admitting problems. Society becoming more polarised is not helping.

Re: Brexit
 

Great, show me the superseded version then please? If you're that knowledgeable it shouldn't take you long to find !!

Re: Brexit
 

https://news.sky.com/story/bmw-may-s...rexit-11655739

Re: Brexit
 

In a Channel 5 programme from 2015, which was repeated a month ago, there was a Slovakian Roma couple who came here(to Rotherham) with TWENTY-TWO children and grandchildren. Only one of them employed, all of them housed, given benefits etc. It was said that there were an estimated 6,000 Slovakian Roma just in Rotherham.



Link.




---------- Post added at 16:11 ---------- Previous post was at 16:03 ----------

The EU was only formed in 1993, and there are countries that are in the EU now, but weren't then and before. Before then, were they at war? NO, they weren't. So nearly 40 years of peace, BEFORE the EU was formed.

Re: Brexit
 

Once again, up to the U.K. Government to ship them back - can’t blame the EU if we don’t enforce the rules...

Re: Brexit
 

The EU may have been officially formed n it's current iteration in 93, but the founding ideology and principals began way back in 1950. Now, what ceased only a few years earlier?

---------- Post added at 16:40 ---------- Previous post was at 16:39 ----------

I'll take the lack of reply as an inability to provide any evidence to the contrary and that despite the age of the above it still holds true

Re: Brexit
 

The first European elections were held in 1979. The EU did not suddenly spring into existence in 1993, it grew over time from the seed of an idea following WW2. The peace that began, spread to a united Germany, Poland out from under the yolk of the USSR, along with all the other eastern countries joining the EU.

Peace & unity are great things to work towards. Just sad that xenophobia seems to be getting too much air time.

Re: Brexit
 

We were shipping them back.


---------- Post added at 16:55 ---------- Previous post was at 16:46 ----------

It was the European ECONOMIC community before 1993.
The fact remains that countries that are now in the EU, were at peace when they were outside it.

Re: Brexit
 

Nissan now warning about production decreases

https://news.sky.com/story/nissan-co...urces-11655931

Re: Brexit
 

The drip drip is increasingly becoming a flood..

Re: Brexit
 

"uncertainty" refers to a decision not being made, NOT what the decision is. The "uncertainty" is a result of the Remain side obstructing a decision.

Re: Brexit
 

On the contrary. It’s the lack of a single vision of the leave side. Is it May’s deal? No deal? Something else?

A single clear vision of Brexit would win the argument surely. After all 17.4 million people knew exactly the type of Brexit they were voting for.

Re: Brexit
 

The "deal" is NOT a deal, it is just interim arrangements. Doesn't matter how clear or otherwise a vision is, when there are so many people determined to sabotage the democratic vote.

No deal better than uncertainty, says head of German industry

Re: Brexit
 

No disagreements from me. I’m quite sure Germany will be better off in the event of no deal Brexit. I agree with the head of the German equivalent of the CBI.

Re: Brexit
 

That’s like saying since I got new window locks, high security doors, new alarm system, and CCTV, I haven’t had any burglaries, so it was pointless getting them...

Re: Brexit
 

They narrowly missed out on being in recession on the difference of there being an extra day in the reporting period.

Re: Brexit
 

However once there is no deal there will be a flight of our financial sector to Frankfurt. Tariffs on UK goods and services can only be a medium-long term gain for an economy like Germany.

Re: Brexit
 

That quote is regarding the cancellation of the x-trail production in Sunderland.

The line going from three shifts to two is for existing models.

Nice try though....

Re: Brexit
 

People with all those still get burgled. If you didn't get burgled BEFORE all those were installed, you can't claim those measures prevented burglaries afterwards.

Re: Brexit
 

You can claim that they played an additional level of deterrent however

Re: Brexit
 

There really is no need to interact with the use of snide/sarcastic comments. Nothing to do with inability, more to do with me only just returning to the forum and not being prepared to be your unpaid researcher.

A further example of how the article is out of date is that it says that EU nationals can come here and claim Jobseekers Allowance whilst looking for work. They can't. What they do to get round this rule has been previously posted.

If you're going to supply a link to reinforce your statements, it would be a good idea to use up to date information.

Re: Brexit
 

I haven't been burgled since i bought a beer fridge :shrug:

Re: Brexit
 

Oh no no you don’t, you implied it wasn’t valid due to the age of the article either post the evidence to support it or agree you have nothing substantive on which to base your claims

Stop trying to twist on 21

---------- Post added at 20:57 ---------- Previous post was at 20:57 ----------


Too drunk to notice ? ;)

Re: Brexit
 

I was involved in the last riots in a minor way due to my job and it's not something for the faint hearted, people are fools to even contemplate it, you're out of your depth in no time and being led by events

So that's reason to allow it to happen is it and no they haven't always gone together either, democracys inventors had a novel way to ensure their politicians remained honest, the state would burn their house down if they were caught telling lies, perhaps we can learn something from our enlightened ancestors

They don't want much do they, I see what they're getting, what do we get in return, a part from the chicken? This deal will kill UK farmers, flooded with cheap crap they can't compete with and unable to sell to the EU because our standards have been lowered. Seems like a good way to take back control, surrender your food production to a third party, bozo the failed mayor will probably come out with something pithy like let them eat fish

---------- Post added at 03:56 ---------- Previous post was at 03:51 ----------

Be fair he has got the faroe islands in the bag so at least we'll get cheap fish, anyone who fancies anything other than fish for a while might be out of luck though

---------- Post added at 04:02 ---------- Previous post was at 03:56 ----------

There was a leave. EU leaflet that came through my door saying they'd negotiate a better deal before triggering article 50, obviously it was only an aspiration as we all now know they didn't have the power to offer anything more than dreams despite their grandiose claims, so even their vision of leaving wasn't one of walking away without a deal and therefore different to w hats been stated here and they were the ones campaigning

---------- Post added at 04:06 ---------- Previous post was at 04:02 ----------

John major did for that...

---------- Post added at 04:08 ---------- Previous post was at 04:06 ----------

Leaving the UK is now an option, I'd vote for that, bye Scotland

Re: Brexit
 

Interesting article on what happens to Northern Ireland when we exit the backstop.
https://flipchartfairytales.wordpres...-go-from-here/

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

Here's your options.
https://flipchartfairytales.wordpres...carousel-11459

Before anyone says no-deal

Re: Brexit
 

Link was pretty boring (to me) really, nothing new being spouted . .

Did think this part in one of the comments was well worth my time though :D

"If Brexit is cancelled, I say let’s go full-in for total immersion into the EU, and let the Remainers crow about it. Bring on the full Schengen, abolish the Union Jack and prosecute anyone who dares fly it. All armed forces to be signed over to joint control with the French and Italians (fit some reverse gears to all tanks), and let’s get on with adopting the Euro currency and the whole 9 yards of EU wonderfulness, (or as we’ll have to say, the whole 8.2296 metres). We should drive in kilometres, switch sides of the road, ban pints in pubs, yards on football pitches, and anyone who dares mention the war should be tied up in piano wire and shot.

Enough of being half-in / half-out. It’s boring".

Thanks for the chuckle Andrew ;)

Re: Brexit
 

Agreed - it is quite amusing :D

Re: Brexit
 

I have no interest. Your historic posting style appears to revel in discourse and antagonism, I don't come on here for that.

Re: Brexit
 

Ah so you have no evidence to counteract, you could have just said would have been much easier !!

Re: Brexit
 

'Evidence' haha

Seems to me that evidence on here . . by both sides of the argument . . often comes down to a link to a (biased? ) social media/Blog site , a polling site (skewed, not big enough sample), random articles thrown out in gay abandon by the media, articles by Professors and Experts (in the field of furthering their career), excerpts from Political (sometimes 'leaked' ) documents (who trusts politicians? ) and press releases by large (foreign owned) companies making threats and demands.

Many of the above contain the words could, may, might, possibly, potentially etc etc . . . which (to me) is the equivalent meaning of that well known phrase 'up to' :D

We're all being led a merry dance, nobody is right, nobody is wrong, the only 'evidence' we can trust is that which we see and hear ourselves . . which is in itself classed as 'hearsay' and inadmissible as evidence anyway ;)

Every argument has a counter argument, we believe what we want to believe, and the real truth often hides in the silent void of the unspoken.

. . carry on while I pour another :beer: ;)

Re: Brexit
 

But when we talk about a 'no deal' we are referring to the withdrawal agreement. Nobody has suggested we shouldn't have a trade agreement with the EU.

Re: Brexit
 

Have you got a link to that :tiptoe:

Re: Brexit
 

Haven't looked.

Re: Brexit
 

Re: Brexit
 

Well, trade deals take ages to sort out even when countries are on good terms so even best case scenario would see us with no trade deal with the EU for some time.
But Parliament won't allow no deal so fortunately theoretical.

---------- Post added at 11:46 ---------- Previous post was at 11:44 ----------

You misspelt drink. :D

Re: Brexit
 

:nono:

Re: Brexit
 

Mentioned earlier in this thread, but reminder for anyone who has less than six months to expiry on their current passport, or carried over some months from their previous passport (in my case, I renewed my passport in May 2009*, but the expiry date was September 2019 because of the previous passport's expiry date of September 2009); the expiry date on your current passport will be 10 years after the issue date.

https://news.sky.com/story/brexit-mi...snt-sf-twitter *I needed to have more than six months left on my passport to travel to India in 2009