Post-Brexit Thread

Originally Posted by Damien

I think we need more clarity on how we can kick people out before Brexit. Does she mean well legislate in preparation for Brexit, do we not care about consequences from the EU or was this always a possibility we simply didn't use until now.

No reason why we can't boot them out now .We deport plenty of criminals back to their original country but stopping them returning has always been an issue simply because they are EU citizens and can move freely around the EU

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Anypermitedroute

You will also find we could have done alot of things already without leaving

Agreed. Europe would intervene tomorrow if we went against EU legislation.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Agreed. Europe would intervene tomorrow if we went against EU legislation.

and do what ,threaten to kick us out .

To be clear we have always deported criminals back to EU countries but we cannot stop them returning after they serve their time while we are still in the EU .Now we can and there is no reason why we shouldn't give new guide lines to the courts immediately

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Damien

Why is she saying she wants UK firms to operate inside the single market after saying we're leaving the single market. The desired deal seems to change rather drastically...

I don't know if it's a case of:
1) You tell people different messages according to what they want to hear and hope no one compares your messages.
2) You realise that being outside the European single market is seen by the markets as a poor idea...so you apply a swift handbrake turn.
3) You realise that being outside the European single market is seen by the markets as a poor idea...so you pretend to Sky News that you don't want to leave the single market knowing that a week is a long time in politics let alone 2.5 months!

---------- Post added at 19:05 ---------- Previous post was at 18:57 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

and do what ,threaten to kick us out .

We certainly don't want to annoy EU member states if we want them to agree our Brexit conditions and future trade terms.

Originally Posted by martyh

To be clear we have always deported criminals back to EU countries but we cannot stop them returning after they serve their time while we are still in the EU .Now we can and there is no reason why we shouldn't give new guide lines to the courts immediately

That's incorrect. Since David Cameron's negotiations we can prevent anyone who's a threat from a threat from returning and I link to an independent fact-checking website to show this.
I don't know what the agreement states for not complying with EU legislation. Presumably there's a sliding scale starting with fines. and ending with expulsion. David Cameron's deal made it far easier to deport EU criminals and to prevent anyone who was a threat from returning to the UK. .https://fullfact.org/europe/explaini...eu-immigrants/

---------- Post added at 19:16 ---------- Previous post was at 19:05 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

No reason why we can't boot them out now .We deport plenty of criminals back to their original country but stopping them returning has always been an issue simply because they are EU citizens and can move freely around the EU

That's a UKIP myth, see above post.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

That's incorrect. Since David Cameron's negotiations we can prevent anyone who's a threat from a threat from returning and I link to an independent fact-checking website to show this.
I don't know what the agreement states for not complying with EU legislation. Presumably there's a sliding scale starting with fines. and ending with expulsion. David Cameron's deal made it far easier to deport EU criminals and to prevent anyone who was a threat from returning to the UK. .https://fullfact.org/europe/explaini...eu-immigrants/

David Camerons negotiations mean didley squat.He only negotiated them early this year and besides that we voted to leave so now his supposed better deal is meaningless

---------- Post added at 19:25 ---------- Previous post was at 19:24 ----------

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

[/COLOR]That's a UKIP myth, see above post.

What is ?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by martyh

David Camerons negotiations mean didley squat.He only negotiated them early this year and besides that we voted to leave so now his supposed better deal is meaningless

We're still in the EU till March 2019 so it's only common sense that we implement them which is what we're doing.

Originally Posted by martyh

What is ?

The myth that we can't prevent EU criminals from returning to the UK. Per the independent fact-checking website I linked to https://fullfact.org/immigration/imm...ecific-groups/

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

We're still in the EU till March 2019 so it's only common sense that we implement them which is what we're doing.

It's not common sense at all it's ridiculous to keep implementing rules we are going to ditch .Think of how many of our criminals we can jail if we kick out the thousands of foreign criminals we jail.

The myth that we can't prevent EU criminals from returning to the UK. Per the independent fact-checking website I linked to

If we couldn't prevent EU criminals from returning to the UK why did Cameron make such a big play of trying to get the ability to prevent EU criminals entering the UK . To be clear ,EU citizens have the right to live and work in any EU member state ,full stop ,it's the very basis of the single market and the European Union.Camerons supposed negotiations giving us all these changes to our membership was all hot air and so full of holes as to sink at the first test ,that's why we voted out

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by martyh

It's not common sense at all it's ridiculous to keep implementing rules we are going to ditch .Think of how many of our criminals we can jail if we kick out the thousands of foreign criminals we jail.

I'm confused. If we implement Cameron's agreement then we can repatriate these EU criminals. If we don't, we can't. And as I explained earlier, we need to keep the EU member states on board if we're to get a good settlement with them and trade deals afterwards. It's called diplomacy or common sense.

Originally Posted by martyh

If we couldn't prevent EU criminals from returning to the UK why did Cameron make such a big play of trying to get the ability to prevent EU criminals entering the UK . To be clear ,EU citizens have the right to live and work in any EU member state ,full stop ,it's the very basis of the single market and the European Union.Camerons supposed negotiations giving us all these changes to our membership was all hot air and so full of holes as to sink at the first test ,that's why we voted out

If you can grab a couple of minutes to read that fact-checking website you should find it useful. It concludes "These changes don’t deliver on the Prime Minister’s previous proposals for “tougher and longer” re-entry bans for foreign rough sleepers, beggars and fraudsters. But they do qualify as “stronger powers to deport criminals and stop them coming back”.
I'm afraid that fact-checking websites are rather dry and less of an interesting read than UKIP tabloids like the Daily Express. But their findings are accurate and that's what's important...whatever your opinion of EU membership.

---------- Post added at 21:01 ---------- Previous post was at 20:38 ----------

Britain slips down to become the sixth-largest economy in the World.

Financial Times At the start of the week, the prime minister, chancellor, foreign secretary and Brexit secretary all boasted that Britain would get a good deal in EU talks because Britain was the fifth-largest economy in the world. At that stage their words could be justified with sterling worth €1.16 at the end of last week.

The paradox of the tough talk — with suggestions that Britain will leave the single market and clamp down heavily on immigration — has been to pull the rug from under sterling, leaving it at a post-Brexit low of €1.14 on Wednesday and below the point at which it is the fifth-largest economy.

https://www.ft.com/content/7508bf1e-...7-e7ada1d123b1

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Anypermitedroute

The language is getting really worrying IMO

They are acting like it was a clear majority, 48% did vote for no change they may want think about that.

More people didn't vote for it than did in other words

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by martyh

and do what ,threaten to kick us out .

To be clear we have always deported criminals back to EU countries but we cannot stop them returning after they serve their time while we are still in the EU .Now we can and there is no reason why we shouldn't give new guide lines to the courts immediately

We aren't a Donald Trump business, there are consequences to unilaterally breaking treaties that go well beyond our relationship with the EU.

Until we leave our businesses and people continue to have the same privileges while we have the same responsibilities. Really not worth threatening our economy for the sake of something so minor. We start leaving diplomacy behind we basically force the EU to retaliate and everyone loses even more. A bad exit deal will cost many jobs and tens of billions to the economy.

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

I'm confused. If we implement Cameron's agreement then we can repatriate these EU criminals. If we don't, we can't. And as I explained earlier, we need to keep the EU member states on board if we're to get a good settlement with them and trade deals afterwards. It's called diplomacy or common sense.

If you can grab a couple of minutes to read that fact-checking website you should find it useful. It concludes "These changes don’t deliver on the Prime Minister’s previous proposals for “tougher and longer” re-entry bans for foreign rough sleepers, beggars and fraudsters. But they do qualify as “stronger powers to deport criminals and stop them coming back”.
I'm afraid that fact-checking websites are rather dry and less of an interesting read than UKIP tabloids like the Daily Express. But their findings are accurate and that's what's important...whatever your opinion of EU membership.[COLOR="Silver"]

FFS..... your right you are confused

Camerons agreement doesn't mean a thing ,we have voted to leave so all of his supposed deals are useless and meaningless,the choice we had was to vote to leave or remain with a renegotiated deal with the EU we chose the former because the latter didn't happen and apart from that even if we had voted to stay he ONLY NEGOTIATED IT THIS YEAR so that means for years previously we have had trouble deporting criminals and powerless to prevent them entering the UK.The biggest criticism Cameron got after his return from the negotiating table was that his deal was ineffective and meaningless ,that is one reason why we voted to leave

[Anypermitedroute]

Originally Posted by martyh

FFS..... your right you are confused

Camerons agreement doesn't mean a thing ,we have voted to leave so all of his supposed deals are useless and meaningless,the choice we had was to vote to leave or remain with a renegotiated deal with the EU we chose the former because the latter didn't happen and apart from that even if we had voted to stay he ONLY NEGOTIATED IT THIS YEAR so that means for years previously we have had trouble deporting criminals and powerless to prevent them entering the UK.The biggest criticism Cameron got after his return from the negotiating table was that his deal was ineffective and meaningless ,that is one reason why we voted to leave

Put Cameron deal to one side

We already have the power to deport criminals regardless of nationality

As we are not part of schengen, we have control to restrict who comes in if we feel the need to on good reasons such as strong criminal record, we show a passport leaving/entry

That is available today regardless of leaving EU, and despite what others have said

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

We aren't a Donald Trump business, there are consequences to unilaterally breaking treaties that go well beyond our relationship with the EU.

Until we leave our businesses and people continue to have the same privileges while we have the same responsibilities. Really not worth threatening our economy for the sake of something so minor. We start leaving diplomacy behind we basically force the EU to retaliate and everyone loses even more. A bad exit deal will cost many jobs and tens of billions to the economy.

None of which has anything to do with kicking criminals out of the country.We get to dictate our terms now not Brussels

---------- Post added at 21:48 ---------- Previous post was at 21:40 ----------

Originally Posted by Anypermitedroute

Put Cameron deal to one side

We already have the power to deport criminals regardless of nationality

As we are not part of schengen, we have control to restrict who comes in if we feel the need to on good reasons such as strong criminal record, we show a passport leaving/entry

That is available today regardless of leaving EU, and despite what others have said

I know ,i said that earlier ,we have always deported criminals back to EU countries it's stopping them getting into the UK that's the problem because we cannot stop EU citizens entering the UK and those good reasons you speak of are so complicated and heavily conditioned as to be pointless.Even the 'special deal' Cameron negotiated was riddled with conditions and caveats

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Minor issue that we import most raw materials and the energy to process them as we have an inadequate supply at home. These tend to be hedged in advance, but the hedging eventually runs out.

Be interesting to see how we strive for that balance and cost effectiveness alongside Liam Fox's assertion that we'll be a bastion of free trade.

A useful analysis here regarding the exchange rate.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...-fall-further/

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by martyh

FFS..... your right you are confused

Camerons agreement doesn't mean a thing ,we have voted to leave so all of his supposed deals are useless and meaningless,

As I and others have tried our very best to explain - the UK can't suddenly decide to stop complying with EU legislation. So, nothing to be lost putting into effect the concessions that Cameron won.

Originally Posted by martyh

he ONLY NEGOTIATED IT THIS YEAR so that means for years previously we have had trouble deporting criminals and powerless to prevent them entering the UK

Agree with you except that we have not been totally powerless to prevent them re-entering the UK. Our powers in this area have been strengthened by Cameron's negotiations as the Factchecking article showed, which incidentally is worth a read when you get a chance.

Originally Posted by martyh

The biggest criticism Cameron got after his return from the negotiating table was that his deal was ineffective and meaningless ,that is one reason why we voted to leave

Agreed, that was the biggest criticism he got. It wasn't valid criticism but Cameron failed in presentation by showing his hand first, a mistake Theresa May is keen not to make.